Arguments Against Zoos

There’s more to zooo then what you know
Zoo existence all around the world. In the article, Arguments for and against zoos by Doris Lin she explains “zoos help rehabilitate wildlife and take in exotic pets that people no longer want or are no longer able to care for. (Lin)” They highlight a variety of animals and wildlife, but in a closed and confined setting. Each animal has it’s designed area that they can freely roam, but once they move past or attempt to they get struck down. Be it by a sleeping dart or by a real gunshot resulting usually in death. Yet, this result can be avoided if they were to be treated as a normal household pet. Exposing wild life to new setting allows for change, and the expansion of knowledge. So, if humans were to take exotic animals as pets there would be more benefits bought from it. People should be allowed to keep exotic animals such as kangaroo as pets, because of the revenue created by them, the overall life expect would increase, and animals like kangaroos are non-aggressive creatures.
The government revenue will increase, because the cost to take care of the animals is taxable. If a person wanted to get an exotic animal …show more content…
They might say that they are wild, bloodthirst beasts and keeping them as a pet would be illogical. Yet, kangaroos are one of the most passive animals. Within the article Living with Kangaroos they state, “several thousand people seek medical attention each year for injuries from domestic pets, while fewer than five people in NSW (New South Wales) are treated for kangaroo-related injuries (Living the Kangaroos).” A dog or a cat would be more dangerous, then a kangaroo would be. Another drawback might be that people are not responsible enough to keep them as pets. The cost to obtain one as a pet greatly over shades the cost to keep a dog, more reasonable people would spend the money to obtain and maintain them as their