Oct 14, 2022 22 min read Articles

Should I feel bad about going to the zoo? Should I keep going to them?

Growing up, I visited zoos many times. As a child, it was a fun place to see and learn about animals. As a teenager, visiting the zoo became more educational and a little less exciting, but still interesting enough. I could absorb more information about the animals that I was interested in, and sometimes there were interesting shows with animals to watch. Now as an adult, I am no longer interested in going to the zoo. I find them all very similar and see them as more of a tourist attraction than anything else. I always feel bad for the animals trapped in their cages, however "nice" they may be. When I walk through the zoo, I joke to myself that they are all animal convicts, and I think of what each one would be convicted of. That is probably just a way to make myself feel better while I am there. I am not sure if my new feelings that I have developed about zoos are justified. I have heard both positive and negative things about zoos from other people, but I have never looked into them myself. I do not want to go on with these negative feelings about zoos if there is nothing to back them up, and my curiosity about the subject is just about at its peak. The stars seem to be aligned, so I figured now is as good a time as any to look into the matter for myself.

A short history of zoos

Zoos, otherwise known as zoological gardens or parks, are [1]:

"facilities where living, typically wild animals are kept especially for public exhibition."

The history of zoos turned out to be more interesting than I expected. A great resource that I found to learn about their history is a book called Zoo and Aquarium History Ancient Animal Collections to Zoological Gardens by Vernon Kisling [2]. The book goes into great depths of how humans have been collecting animals over the past 5,000 years for many different reasons such as [2];

"symbols of power and prestige, as luxury and diplomatic gifts, as objects of personal pleasure, for recreational use, for educational purposes, to increase zoological knowledge, and for conservation purposes."

The book is quite long, going through the history of zoos on many continents in great detail, however the first chapter gives a great short overview of their history. In the coming paragraphs of this section, I will summarize the main points of the first chapter and what I learned from it [2]. For those who are interested in more details, I would highly recommend reading the book for yourself.

Humans have had and still have both an emotional and scientific fascination with collecting animals, and see them as the ultimate collectible. Early animal collecting cultures kept their animals in a natural setting, trading them with each other, since rare species were very much desired for those who could afford them. They collected plants as well, since they were medicinally useful and useful in other ways. They were also easier to transport and maintain, compared to animals. The difficulty and expenses associated with keeping live animals was another reason why they were considered to be more exclusive and more desired. Collecting animals in ancient times was more common than one might think. The wealthiest individuals were able to acquire enough land to have enough for their own personal animal parks. Such wealthy individuals could basically spend their time doing whatever they pleased, which often involved collecting animals, building reserves and parks, and creating large gardens. As urban areas evolved and differentiated from rural areas, people living in them suddenly felt the need to connect more with nature. This fueled the need and demand for wealthy people to recreate natural environments and keep wild animals within urban areas. As ancient civilizations rose and evolved all over the world, animal collections followed suit. The Mesopotamians, ancient Egyptians, Asian civilizations, Greeks, Romans, Persians, Arabs, Medieval Europeans, Aztecs, and Incas all had a wide variety of animal collections.

As Europe evolved during the Renaissance, their animal collections grew, becoming menageries. As Europeans explored the world, the menageries began to house animals from Asia and Africa. With all of the new animals and fauna being discovered, classifying all of them was becoming a problem. A problem which involved more than description and taxonomy, and which could only truly be solved by collecting and having live animals. As animal collections grew, there was a realization that having a collection consisting of all species was out of reach, so having a "postage stamp" collection (animal collections consisting of animals representing each taxa) was the new goal. As scientific knowledge grew into specialized disciplines, and as shipping and transportation improved over the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the popularity of animals and number of animal collections increased, eventually leading to the nineteenth century when [2]

"everything in nature was deemed worthy for someone to collect and study."

When the Americas were discovered, the interest in new animals was so high that Columbus' expedition carried live animals back to Europe with them.

Eventually in the eighteen hundreds, animal collections started calling themselves zoological gardens, zoological parks, or zoos. At the time it was a fashionable name which implied that the gardens were more professionally managed, which was not always the case. However, the transition was being made from menageries, into more of an institution for more emphasis on education and scientific study, instead of mainly entertainment. Within the same century, self containing and sustaining aquariums came into existence.

Finally, the last two paragraphs of the first chapter, wrap it up nicely [2]:

"Zoos and aquariums continue to evolve. Their roles as cultural institutions are changing in many ways. At the same time they remain true to their traditional commitments concerning recreation, education, research, and conservation. How these roles and commitments were met in the past was determined by the state of knowledge and technology, as well as societies’ expectations. How these roles and commitments will be met in the future will be determined by the same factors."

"The world has become a megazoo, with parks representing scattered ecosystem “exhibits”. Zoological gardens are becoming small parks and parks are becoming large zoological gardens. Some parks are already centers for the rehabilitation of endangered species and their management programs deal with populations that can no longer survive on their own. The zoo and aquarium story continues to reveal itself. To understand the changes now occurring and those yet to come requires an understanding of the changes past generations have experienced and the reasons they occurred."

Types of animal enclosure facilities

As is true with most things in life, there is a spectrum of types of animal enclosure facilities. There are:

roadside zoos - These are usually found in small remote locations in the Americas, such as gas stations. Animals are usually kept in very small enclosures here and sometimes have been trained to perform tricks. These types of facilities are usually less regulated, and where animals seem to have the highest chance of being treated poorly [2].
petting zoos - These usually have "gentler" animals for children to pet and are usually located in cities or just outside of them [3]. Animals here are usually kept in pens or smaller enclosures, similar to those on farms.
urban and suburban zoos - These are usually located in or just outside cities. If they are located in the city, there is usually a very limited amount of space for each animal's habitat. If they are located outside of the city in the suburbs, there is typically more space for each animal's habitat, but only to a certain degree.
safari parks - Here people can drive their cars through larger enclosed areas, where the, usually non-native, animals are kept [3].
animal theme parks - These are basically a combination of an amusement park and an urban or suburban zoo.
game reserves / reserves - These are large enclosed areas of land, where the enclosed animals are protected and are allowed to roam freely within the limits of the enclosure. Sometimes hunting is allowed [3].
aquariums and marine mammal parks - These are zoos for aquatic animals and marine mammals.
aviaries - These are enclosures specifically for birds.

Although there are all of these different types of animal enclosure facilities, the rest of this article is going to focus more on urban and suburban zoos specifically.

Accreditation

While reading through a few articles, I found out that zoos can be accredited by different organizations. After looking around a little bit, I found a great article titled How To Understand Zoo Accreditation, by Rachel Garner [4], which I will reference for this entire section.

Apparently there are organizations consisting of experts, either people with a lot of experience in animal management, in veterinary science, or conservation, who give accreditation to all types of animal enclosure facilities and zoos. Different accreditations have different fulfillment requirements, depending on the type of accreditation given and from which organizations they come from. With these accreditations, zoos and other types of animal enclosure facilities can show some of how their facilities are being run, and what rules they abide by. As a potential visitor, checking the zoo or animal enclosures accreditations before you visit can be a great way to decide if you would like to support their business or not. There can of course be reasons why good facilities may not want to be officially accredited.

There are many accrediting organizations around the world. Some of the main ones are:

The Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA)
The Zoological Association of America (ZAA)
The Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries (GFAS)
The Alliance of Marine Mammal Parks and Aquariums (AMMPA)
The International Marine Animal Trainers Association (IMATA)
The World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA)

It should also be noted that these accreditations seem to apply mainly to zoos and animal enclosure facilities in first world countries.

Rachel goes into much more detail about the topic in her article. If you want to read more, check out her article.

How To Understand Zoo Accreditation, by Rachel Garner

Now that we have enough background information about zoos, it is time to find out what some of the good things and bad things about them are. As is the case with many questions, there are a lot of great resources for answers on the good old world wide web. I found a few good articles with some great arguments for how zoos can be both good and bad. One article in particular, titled 19 Advantages and Disadvantages of Zoos, by Keith Miller [5], had a bunch of great arguments which I agreed with and documented. Another great article on this topic was found near the end of my research. It is a New York Times opinion article titled Modern Zoos Are Not Worth the Moral Cost, by Emma Marris [6]. I would highly recommend reading it and will leave a link to it. Of course other resources were used as well.

Modern Zoos Are Not Worth the Moral Cost, by Emma Marris

It should be noted that, the following points are the opinion of the author, as to if they are bad or good things. Some people may have differing opinions, more information to the contrary, and so on. Don't be afraid to be curious yourself.

Good things about zoos

Modern zoos, at least in first world nations, no longer source most of their animals from wild captures [5].

Now most animals that are in first world nation zoos, come from zoo breeding programs. These animals often get moved between zoos for various reasons. Some of the animals are a part of endangered species programs, however some species are not endangered. For example, this is the case at The Zoological Society of London (ZLS), however the word "most" is important to note here because they have exceptions where they still do capture animals from the wild [7]:

"In some very special circumstances we do get animals from the wild."

Another example of this that I found was on the The Zoological Society of Milwaukee's website. They say [8]:

"Today, many of our new animals come from other zoos. Through a mutual commitment to conservation, zoos work together to protect the growing number of endangered animal species."

Again, the word "many" is worth noting. They do not mention the other methods they have of acquiring the animals.

In general, I see this point as a step in the right direction, however in my opinion continuing zoo breeding programs should only be done with the intention of eventually getting that species back into its natural environment and no longer needing them to be in captivity.

It can be argued that zoos are good educational tools for people to learn more about animals and conservation [5].

It should be noted that there is some debate about how effective zoos are at educating. The European Association of Zoos and Aquariums (EAZA) argues that education at zoos and aquariums helps share knowledge about the natural world, and informs people about conservation efforts and how to get more people involved in them [9]. This in turn also raises a lot of money for animal conservation efforts. Zoos have the advantage of enabling first hand encounters with animals from a safe distance, creating a more impactful educational experience. I would personally also argue that animal and conservation education could also be done in the classroom, online, through videos and books, and even simply by going out into nature to see the animals in their natural habitats.

Zoos help to conserve and revive endangered species populations [5].

According to Taronga Conservation Society Australia, the following ten animal species have been saved from extinction because of zoos; Arabian Oryx, California Condor, Przewalski's Horse, Corroboree Frog, Bongo, Regent Honeyeater, Panamanian Golden Frog, Bellinger River Turtle, Golden Lion Tamarin, and the Amur Leopard [10]. In most of these cases, the reasons listed for how the animal species were endangered in the first place, were due to hunting, poaching, loss of habitat due to human intervention, and similar human causes. In these cases it is great that humanity is trying to correct their mistakes. Of these listed animals, only the Corroboree Frog was going extinct due natural causes (a fungus disease). Whether or not humans should have stepped in, in order to stop an animal species from going extinct due to natural causes, i.e. evolution, is debatable. I was unable to find much information about exactly how many endangered species have been successfully revived back to healthy numbers with the help of zoos, or their success rate.

Animals receive veterinary and specialized care at zoos, which can help them live longer and improve their health [5].

This is especially the case if the animals obtained are injured or sick.

Many larger zoos invest in university degree programs, in order to improve the quality of their caretakers, veterinarians, and of their overall animal care [5] [11].

If their initiative helps get more people to study animals and their environments, then this will positively affect our overall knowledge of them.

Bad things about zoos

Animals born in captivity become dependent on humans and are often very sheltered [5], making reintroduction back into the wild difficult for some.

For example, a study called The effects of captive experience on reintroduction survival in carnivores: A review and analysis [12], statistically examined previous reviews and data, in order to find out how captivity affects the survival of carnivores which have been reintroduced into the wild. They found [12]:

"...that wild-caught carnivores are significantly more likely to survive than captive-born carnivores in reintroductions; that humans were the direct cause of death in over 50% of all fatalities and that reintroduced captive-born carnivores are particularly susceptible to starvation, unsuccessful predator/competitor avoidance and disease."

Interestingly enough, when they investigated the causes of death of the re-introduced animals, in their review [12]:

"Regardless of the success or failure of a reintroduction project, the most common cause of death for both wild and captive animals was by human means (this included shooting, poisoning, automobile driving accidents, and other related incidents). Starvation, interspecies aggression (e.g. reintroduced wild dogs killed by lions) and disease (such as rabies and distemper) were also prevalent causes of death for captive animals. Recapture was measured as death, since individuals were only removed in cases where they would not otherwise survive."

If you would like to read the full review for yourself, I found it in the following article [13]: Captive-breeding reduces reintroduction survival in carnivores, by Lia Schlippe

This is the case for carnivores, however the situation is very similar for other complex mammals, according to an article from BBC Earth, titled Can captive animals ever truly return to the wild?, by Zoe Cormier [14]. The reasoning behind why captive animals have a harder time returning to the wild is because they lack the teachings and instruction of their parents and other members of their species, with whom they would grow up with and learn from, amongst other reasons.

It should be noted that just because reintroduction is difficult for complex mammals, does not mean that it is difficult for all species. According to the same article [14], reintroducing fish, reptiles, and amphibians can be quite the opposite experience. Such animals have an easier time returning to the wild, even after being bred in large numbers together in a confined space, like a laboratory.

Keeping some animals in enclosures can have negative effects on their health, lifespans, and behaviors [5].

Orcas are a good example of animals who do not do well in captivity. A National Geographic article titled Orcas don’t do well in captivity. Here’s why, by Natasha Daly [15], went into detail about the topic. Daly interviewed Naomi Rose, a marine mammal scientist at the Animal Welfare Institute, a nonprofit organization based in Washington, D.C, about why orcas do not do well in captivity. Rose gave an informative answer and explained why other animals may not do well in captivity either:

“It’s basic biology,” Rose says. A captive-born orca that has never lived in the ocean still has the same innate drives, she says. “If you have evolved to move great distances to look for food and mates then you are adapted to that type of movement, whether you’re a polar bear or an elephant or an orca,” says Rose. “You put orcas in a box that is 150 feet long by 90 feet wide by 30 feet deep and you’re basically turning them into a couch potato.”

"Rose explains that a primary indicator for whether a mammal will do well in captivity is how wide their range is in the wild. The broader their natural range, the less likely they are to thrive in confinement. This is the same reason some zoos have been phasing out elephant exhibits."

Sometimes animals do not cope with confinement well, which can understandably result in them being stressed, acting out, pacing around, being distressed, getting aggressive, and so on. This often leads to zoos prescribing them medication, in order to manage them, calm them down, and keep up appearances [16]. It should be noted that animals are prescribed medication for other reasons as well, such as for illnesses and mating purposes.

Keeping some animals in solitary confinement, especially those who normally live or travel in groups and normally socialize with other animals of their kind, can have negative effects on them.

An example of this would be for a chimpanzee, which is an extremely social animal, to be held in isolation as opposed to being with others of its kind. I found an example of this exact situation while reading through a few articles. One such article is called Iris, the Chimp Who Spent the Past 3 Years Alone in a Zoo, Finds Love in Her New Sanctuary Home by Kate Good [17].

Check it out for yourself: Iris, the Chimp Who Spent the Past 3 Years Alone in a Zoo, Finds Love in Her New Sanctuary Home by Kate Good

When zoos struggle to stay profitable, it causes them to focus more on profits, and less on the animals.

This can have negative impacts on the quality of care and conditions for the animals. For example the animals are negatively impacted when a zoos staff is layed off or certain amenities are cut back. Low funds at a zoo can also lead to the zoos "cutting exhibits", i.e. getting rid of animals [18]. In order to get rid of the animals, they may sell them, move them to other zoos, or even have them euthanized. Euthanization of animals happens more than one might think [19].

Zoos often take advantage of animals, having them perform tricks for guest entertainment.

I do not believe that I have to cite types of animal shows at zoos for this point, since many of you have probably already seen them in person, and if not they can easily be found online. In my opinion, doing this seems unnecessary for the wellbeing of the animals, and is mostly done to keep visitors coming back. Seeing wild animals up close is already pretty special and should be enough.

What do experts have to say about the ethics of zoos?

Not being an expert myself, I searched for interviews with people who are, or at least seem to be, in order to see what their opinions are.

I found a great article by Marc Bekoff titled Zoo Ethics and the Challenges of Compassionate Conservation: A comprehensive interview with Jenny Gray, CEO of Australia's Zoos Victoria [20]. In the article and interview, Gray gives her expert opinion about zoo ethics and why she believes that it can be okay to keep animals in cages [20]:

"In writing Zoo Ethics, I learned that there is no single knock out argument for or against zoos. Rather, each ethical framework (welfare, rights, consequentialism, virtue and environment ethics) provides a way of thinking about animals and our relationship with animals. I would encourage people to read and think deeply about the duties and obligations that we have to animals."

"I think that is it morally acceptable to house animals in captivity when it can be shown that this is in the interest of the individual, the species or the environment. Captivity may be in the interest of an individual when the alternative is death or suffering and where the captive conditions provide predominantly positive welfare states. The judgment of zoos and aquariums is based on all the things they do, there is no single argument that either justifies or condemns zoos."

It should be noted that since she is the CEO of a zoo organization, her opinion is biased towards being pro zoos. Nonetheless, the article and interview was a great read for anyone interested: Zoo Ethics and the Challenges of Compassionate Conservation: A comprehensive interview with Jenny Gray, CEO of Australia's Zoos Victoria, by Marc Bekoff

Another interesting resource I found was from a book titled Wild Mammals in Captivity: Principles & Techniques for Zoo Management by Devra G. Kleiman , Katerina V. Thompson, and Charlotte Kirk Baer [21]. The first chapter titled Ethics of Keeping Mammals in Zoos and Aquariums written by Michael D. Kreger and Michael Hutchins (found here [22]), was a gold mine for information on the topic. The authors go through the history of zoos and humans collecting animals, and how in the nineteen hundreds zoos started focusing more on conservation and education, which is still an ongoing process today. They explain that there is a range of ethical perspectives that people have when it comes to animals. The ethical views on the extreme ends of the spectrum are [21]:

"the abolitionist view of no animal use (including as pets, for food, and in zoos)"

"the extreme utilitarian view in which humans are free to use animals regardless of the cost to the individual animal."

Within this spectrum, there also exists a spectrum of ethics when it comes to the keeping of wild animals. The authors explain that there is an animal rights view, which is more of an absolutist view. On this extreme end of the spectrum, animal rights activists argue that animals should be given the same moral considerations and rights as humans, or at least similar to humans. Their view is that if the being can feel pain, or in other words is sentient, then they must be fully morally considered.

Then they explain that there is also an animal welfare view, which is more utilitarian. From this end of the spectrum, the view is that animals can be used by humans. This view is usually held more by zoos. The idea behind the view is that both humans and nonhumans benefit from the existence of zoos through education, conservation, and the idea that the animals have a better life in captivity with humans overseeing them. There are other definitions of the animal welfare ethical view as well that the authors go through. As science and knowledge about the animals and their needs improves, so does the state and quality of animal welfare. With these improvements, comes an ethical dilemma where zoos have to find a compromise between the captive animals' health, safety, and welfare, while providing an interesting and appropriate quality of life for the animals. The dilemma lies within the balance of risk for the animal and providing them with an environment where they can exercise more of their normal behaviors.

The book goes into much more detail and many more ethical views and considerations. I would highly suggest checking it out if you are interested in the topic: Wild Mammals in Captivity: Principles and Techniques for Zoo Management by Devra G. Kleiman , Katerina V. Thompson, and Charlotte Kirk Baer [21].

My conclusions

So, I believe I have gathered enough information about zoos, to be able to answer my original questions. Should I feel bad about going to the zoo? Should I keep going to them? Answering these questions is not as straightforward as I originally thought they would be. At this time, there is such a large spectrum of zoos and types of animal enclosure facilities, and within them there is such a large range in quality of care of the animals and their living conditions. So much so that generally saying that all of them are good or bad is not really possible. The answers to my questions are going to depend on many things, especially where I fall within the spectrum of the ethical views of animals and the keeping of wild animals.

Looking back on what I have learned about the history of zoos, I have come to the realization that their shift to focusing more on education and conservation in the nineteen hundreds, and their shift to no longer sourcing most of their animals from wild captures (at least in most first world nations), is extremely recent. Especially considering how long humans have been collecting wild animals for. Although the treatment and quality of life of the collected wild animals seems to have been pretty rough over the vast majority of the history of humans collecting wild animals, I see this recent change of focus as a step in the right direction.

To me, ideally a zoo should work more like a hospital works for humans. It should be a combination of an animal hospital, a zoo, and a reserve, where the animals would be able to live in habitats extremely close to those of their natural environments, while being protected. If any are especially sick or injured and require closer care, then more confined environments would be okay, however only if the goal is to minimize the time necessary in such confinement. Humans could still visit to observe the animals from safe distances using protected vehicles and technology, however entertainment would not be a main goal. I believe that it is okay to keep, care for, and rescue animals who have been abused or injured by other humans, and that it is okay to keep endangered animals in order to revive their populations, if the endangerment was caused by humans. In the case of natural endangerment, I believe that nature and evolution should be allowed to take its course, however this may require deeper thought. In my opinion, the goal of zoos should be to get the animals back to their natural environments as quickly as possible, while learning things about them along the way.

Although modern zoos have made some recent positive changes when it comes to the keeping of wild animals, I have come to the realization that I do not support how most of them keep their larger and more complex animals, as they are confined to very small environments, compared to those of their natural habitats. Being a complex being myself, I think of what it would be like to be in their shoes. Although smaller and less complex animals may have more space in comparison, their captivity bothers me in a similar way. In general I am not in favor of keeping animals in captivity, unless it is necessary for the survival of their species, their environment, and in some cases for the survival of humans.

Should I feel bad about going to the zoo?

After doing some research and considering my personal thoughts on the matter, yes I should feel bad about going to zoos or animal enclosure facilities, whose goals are not focused around the wellbeing of their animals, eventually releasing their captive animals back into their natural environments, and who keep their more complex mamals, who are not in need of constant close intemate care, in confined spaces.

Should I keep going to them?

If the zoo or animal enclosure facility’s main goal is focused around the wellbeing of the animals, giving them as close to as much space as they would have in their natural environment as possible, and eventually releasing their captive animals back into their natural environments, then yes. Otherwise no. Going to these places means supporting their business. I believe that if you have a choice, you should try to support the businesses that you really believe are doing the right thing. Especially when it comes to handling life.

These are just my thoughts on the matter. Don't be afraid to look into the matter for yourself, have your own thoughts, and establish your own stance and opinions. Be the curious sheep of the flock.

Other Opinions

After publishing this article, Vox published a new video about very similar questions [23]. Check out their take on it:

[23]

Sources

[1] Merriam-Webster. “Definition of ZOO.” Merriam-Webster.com, 2019, www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/zoo. Accessed 21 May 2022.

[2] Kisling, Vernon. Zoo and Aquarium History Ancient Animal Collections to Zoological Gardens. Crc Press, 2000.Kleiman, Devra G. Wild Mammals in Captivity: Principles and Techniques for Zoo Management. Chicago, Ill., Univ. Of Chicago Press, 2013, p. Chapter 1.

[3] National Geographic Society. “Zoo.” National Geographic Society, 9 Oct. 2012, www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/zoo/. Accessed 21 May 2022.

[4] Garner, Rachel. “How to Understand Zoo Accreditation.” Why Animals Do the Thing, 4 July 2016, www.whyanimalsdothething.com/how-to-understand-zoos-accrediation. Accessed 28 Sept. 2022.

[5] Miller, Keith. “19 Advantages and Disadvantages of Zoos.” FutureofWorking.com, 3 July 2019, futureofworking.com/6-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-zoos/. Accessed 28 Sept. 2022.

[6] Marris, Emma. “Modern Zoos Are Not Worth the Moral Cost.” The New York Times, 11 June 2021, www.nytimes.com/2021/06/11/opinion/zoos-animal-cruelty.html. Accessed 29 Sept. 2022.

[7] The Zoological Society of London. “Where Do Our Animals Come from and Where Do They Go?” Zoological Society of London (ZSL), www.zsl.org/education/where-do-our-animals-come-from-and-where-do-they-go. Accessed 28 Sept. 2022.

[8] Schwantes, Brianne. “How New Animals Come to the Zoo | Zoological Society of Milwaukee.” Zoopassapp.com, 2020, https://zoopassapp.com/About/AcquiringAnimals.php. Accessed 29 Sept. 2022.

[9] The European Association of Zoos and Aquaria. “EDUCATION» EAZA.”, www.eaza.net/conservation/education/. Accessed 28 Sept. 2022.

[10] Taronga Conservation Society Australia. “10 Endangered Species Saved from Extinction by Zoos.” 10 Endangered Species Saved from Extinction by Zoos | Taronga Conservation Society Australia, 2012, taronga.org.au/news/2017-05-22/10-endangered-species-saved-extinction-zoos. Accessed 28 Sept. 2022.

[11] Association of Zoos and Aquariums. “Education Programs for Zoo and Aquarium Careers.” www.aza.org, www.aza.org/education-programs-for-zoo-and-aquarium-careers?locale=en. Accessed 29 Sept. 2022.

[12] Jule, Kristen R., et al. “The Effects of Captive Experience on Reintroduction Survival in Carnivores: A Review and Analysis.” University of Exeter, Animal Behaviour Research Group, School of Psychology,Washington Singer Laboratories, Perry Road, Exeter, Devon EX4 4QG, United Kingdom, 2007.

[13] Schlippe, Lia. “Captive-Breeding Reduces Reintroduction Survival in Carnivores.” European Wilderness Society, 27 May 2021, wilderness-society.org/captive-breeding-reduces-reintroduction-survival-in-carnivores/. Accessed 30 Sept. 2022.

[14] Cormier, Zoe. “Can Captive Animals Ever Truly Return to the Wild? | BBC Earth.” www.bbcearth.com, www.bbcearth.com/news/can-captive-animals-ever-truly-return-to-the-wild. Accessed 30 Sept. 2022.

[15] Daly, Natasha. “Orcas Don’t Do Well in Captivity. Here’s Why.” National Geographic, 25 Mar. 2019, www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/orcas-captivity-welfare. Accessed 28 Sept. 2022.

[16] Laidman, Jenni. “The Blade.” The Blade, 2017, www.toledoblade.com/frontpage/2005/09/12/Zoos-using-drugs-to-help-manage-anxious-animals.html. Accessed 3 Oct. 2022.

[17] Good, Kate. “Iris, the Chimp Who Spent the Past 3 Years Alone in a Zoo, Finds Love in Her New Sanctuary Home.” One Green Planet, 31 Mar. 2015, www.onegreenplanet.org/news/rescued-chimp-finds-love-at-new-sanctuary/. Accessed 1 Oct. 2022.

[18] Fountain, Henry. “Budget Cuts Are Forcing Zoos to Make Tough Decisions.” The New York Times, 17 Mar. 2009, www.nytimes.com/2009/03/19/arts/artsspecial/19zoo.html. Accessed 2 Oct. 2022.

[19] Barnes, Hannah. “How Many Healthy Animals Do Zoos Put Down?” BBC News, 27 Feb. 2014, www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26356099. Accessed 29 Sept. 2022.

[20] Bekoff, Marc. “Zoo Ethics and the Challenges of Compassionate Conservation.” Psychology Today, 18 July 2017, www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/animal-emotions/201707/zoo-ethics-and-the-challenges-compassionate-conservation. Accessed 3 Oct. 2022.

[21] Kleiman, Devra G. Wild Mammals in Captivity : Principles and Techniques for Zoo Management. Chicago, Ill., Univ. Of Chicago Press, 2013, p. Chapter 1.

[22] Kreger, Michael D., and Michael Hutchins. “(PDF) Ethics of Keeping Mammals in Zoos and Aquariums.” ResearchGate, www.researchgate.net/publication/258207166_Ethics_of_keeping_mammals_in_zoos_and_aquariums. Accessed 3 Oct. 2022.

[23] youtube.com, and Vox. “How Do We Fix the Zoo?” www.youtube.com, Vox, 20 Oct. 2022, www.youtube.com/watch?v=05nDoxdSzwY&list=WL&index=17. Accessed 21 Oct. 2022. Elizabeth Scheltens (Producer), Kim Mas (Editor and Animator), Adam Freelander (Story Editor), Joey Sendaydiego (Art Director), Arsh Harjani (Archival Producer), Tanya Pai & Caitlin Penzeymoog (Copy Editors).