Animals planning war

Animals are the living ornaments of the wild arena. They have dwelled fearlessly in the wild outstriks of the courtyards. Predators or prey the ecological bisector is rather forsaken or imbalanced without them. Animals and their captivation has been globally lampooned henceforth it has become a more serious issue rising in MUNs and and forestry NGOs. The contradiction is rather on the safety and amusement of mankind and the freedom of wildlife which however is now to its very end clinging to the edge of extinction. My inscription will however revolve around the captive versus wild animals that are either waging war against captivation or agreeing to incarceration as the only term to survival.

Animals do not belong behind iron rods, they are the rulers of the jungle. To my observation; birds in cages have a 40% chance of survival compared to the birds born in a nest and learned in the wild who can survive in the sky of rivalry for approximately 90% … why? The answer to my why is rather rational intelligence and observation, captivated birds adopt a different way of living. They are however unaware of the dangers of the sky or the land as result when left to  fly are victimized by either big birds, natural disaster or animals. On the contrary the birds that live in the wild are aware of the dangers and solely educate themselves to deal with any situation.

I believe that wild animals in zoos suffer physically and mentally as their complex social, behavioural and physical needs cannot be met in unnatural man made environments. Many animals in zoos show signs of distress, such as pacing or rocking backwards and forwards repeatedly. Experts say that this abnormal behaviour is caused by the stresses of being held captive.Presenting animals to zoo visitors as living exhibits children that animals can be manipulated in order to fulfill our own curiosity about them. It suggests that animals have no right to be treated as individuals who think and feel for themselves. It fails to recognise that animals have their own needs to be met, for their own purposes.

Yet the debaters argue that animals in zoos particularly are for either entertainment or research in other words, the preservation of various species, claiming that without their efforts, certain species would become extinct. However, if they were truly concerned with the preservation of species, they would instead work to preserve animals’ natural habitat. For it is in fact humans who are eroding the natural habitat of numerous species through pollution, rangeland degradation, topsoil erosion, crop and groundwater contamination, and other harmful processes. Moreover, while zoos generally claim to take in only the neediest of animals, most of the animals in zoos are not endangered, orphaned, or injured at all. Many are captured from the wild. Those that are in breeding programs seemed destined for a life in captivity, for they are accustomed to an artificial environment where food, shelter, and protection from predators are provided for them. Natural conditions such as climate, habitat, and feeding cannot be properly recreated, and zoos lack sufficient space to reproduce a natural environment, provide a normal social equilibrium of the species, or maintain a healthy gene pool ordered by natural selection. Zoos thus compromise captive animals’ chances of successful introduction into the wild. Additionally, there may be no wilderness left for zoo-bred animals, as humans are destroying their natural habitat at such an alarming rate. The only way to realistically stop extinction is to preserve the world’s habitat and ecosystems.

With regards to animal captivation there is major difference between captivation and animal rescue which is condemned because of various issue due to the misconception of zoo and sanctuaries as twins.Unlike zoos, animal sanctuaries are non-profit rescue centers that provide shelter for abused, unwanted, neglected, and orphaned animals. They advocate spaying and neutering and attempt to find suitable homes for animals. Also, many attempt to teach others about compassionate living and most care for animals until the latter die of old age. Zoos, on the other hand, sometimes sell aging animals. Whereas sanctuaries generally house animals in need of care with other members of their species, zoos frequently remove animals from the wild and force them into a life of captivity, one that all too often involves isolation from other members of their species. Some are abused or neglected; most are kept in a prison-like environment. Unlike animal sanctuaries, the zoo’s focus is not on what’s best for the animals. Furthermore, In addition to circuses, there are a number of circumstances whereby wild animals are used in other types of events or performances which pose the same or similar concerns for animal welfare and ethics, whilst falling outside of the definition of a circus.Animals are reported to exude from the zoo into the natural environment. The main reason for this is unsuitable climate and living facilities that these animals cannot survive in . they are subjected to stress and diseases eventually dying every year therefore wildlife freedom is emphasised upon. Animals should be where they belong just live humans. Can we humans live in a cell? Of course not we are living creatures and we long for open air and scenery similarly animals belong to the jungle. Towards the conclusion my statement will again mention that zoology is worth the wild not the pavements and artIficial arrangements.