3 ms·

I agree with you. The older I get, the less and less tolerant I become of the concept of zoos and aquariums.

by ysavir 2y ago

Night_Thastus 2y ago
The better ones take really good care of the animals within. And I think they serve an important and not-irreplaceable purpose - exposure. They help show ordinary people, many of whom live in cities with no exposure to real nature, just what out there is worth protecting. I think it helps build public support for things like reducing waste, better fishing and hunting practices, the importance of parks and preserves, wildlife crossings, etc. Sure, you can see them on your phone. But the result is completely different than seeing them with your own eyes.
- riffraff 2y ago
  They ma provide good care, but how good can care be? A large animal would probably roam vast distances all the time and there's no way a zoo can allow that. Plus climate. Polar bears at the zoo on plastic ice may be the saddest thing I've seen in my life, but how are you gonna provide tons and tons of ice for miles in a warm climate?
- ysavir 2y ago
  So it's okay to have some animals live in terrible circumstances in order for people to not have to put effort into being empathetic? They might take "really good care" of the animals, feed them well, give them the best veterinary care, etc, but that's not a good life for an animal. When they have so little space to roam, so little engagement or interaction with other groups of the same species, no agency over their food or other aspect of their life, and all the while having humans gawk at them whenever they aren't hiding away. It's just a pitiful existence for the benefit of tourists. I can't buy into that.
  - Night_Thastus 2y ago
    Animal behavior and stress is a little more complicated than that. Not having to worry about predators, be low on food, or get sick/injured also significantly reduces stress. Some animals need a lot of territory to roam and don't do well in captivity, some don't really care. I'm not saying zoos are perfect, but well-run ones are far from evil either. Calling it 'terrible circumstances' is too broad. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.

I agree with you. The older I get, the less and less tolerant I become of the concept of zoos and aquariums.

by ysavir 2y ago

I agree with you. The older I get, the less and less tolerant I become of the concept of zoos and aquariums.

The better ones take really good care of the animals within. And I think they serve an important and not-irreplaceable purpose - exposure. They help show ordinary people, many of whom live in cities with no exposure to real nature, just what out there is worth protecting. I think it helps build public support for things like reducing waste, better fishing and hunting practices, the importance of parks and preserves, wildlife crossings, etc. Sure, you can see them on your phone. But the result is completely different than seeing them with your own eyes.

riffraff 2y ago
They ma provide good care, but how good can care be? A large animal would probably roam vast distances all the time and there's no way a zoo can allow that. Plus climate. Polar bears at the zoo on plastic ice may be the saddest thing I've seen in my life, but how are you gonna provide tons and tons of ice for miles in a warm climate?
ysavir 2y ago
So it's okay to have some animals live in terrible circumstances in order for people to not have to put effort into being empathetic? They might take "really good care" of the animals, feed them well, give them the best veterinary care, etc, but that's not a good life for an animal. When they have so little space to roam, so little engagement or interaction with other groups of the same species, no agency over their food or other aspect of their life, and all the while having humans gawk at them whenever they aren't hiding away. It's just a pitiful existence for the benefit of tourists. I can't buy into that.
- Night_Thastus 2y ago
  Animal behavior and stress is a little more complicated than that. Not having to worry about predators, be low on food, or get sick/injured also significantly reduces stress. Some animals need a lot of territory to roam and don't do well in captivity, some don't really care. I'm not saying zoos are perfect, but well-run ones are far from evil either. Calling it 'terrible circumstances' is too broad. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.