Are zoos necessary?

The Hindu

12-07-2025

Merriam Webster defines zoo as 'a facility with usually indoor and outdoor settings where living, typically wild animals are kept especially for public exhibition'. Cambridge dictionary defines it as 'an area in which animals, especially wild animals, are kept so that people can go and look at them or study them'. Oxford Learner's Dictionaries define it as 'a place where many kinds of wild animals are kept for the public to see and where they are studied, bred (kept in order to produce young) and protected'.
All the modern day definitions about zoos centre around them being used as facilities for studying animals and their public exhibition. Proponents of zoos often cite the crucial role zoos play in conservation. While this may be true, it is hardly unlikely that the countless zoos around the world are involved in the conservation efforts of an endangered species. Most exist as centres of amusement and fascination, a recreational facility you walk in and leave.
So what exactly are zoos? In the modern day world, as human consciousness and empathy evolve, how should we approach zoos? Are they ethical? ​We dive into the big debate—do zoos do more harm than good?
A brief history
Also called zoological garden or zoological park, a zoo, in modern day definition, has been used to house captive animals for study, research, recreation and conservation purposes. But how did it all start?
Humans have always been fascinated by animals and their charisma. Long ago, we are talking about centuries here, zoos were created as private collections by the wealthy. These were called menageries, representations of which can be seen in the wall carvings in Egypt and Mesopotamia. Other civilisations such as China, Greece, and Rome also had zoos. Then during the 18th Century, during the Age of Enlightenment, modern zoos became centres of interest for the scientific community, where people could research and study animal behaviour. The first modern zoo thus opened in France, in 1793.
Earlier, animals were kept in cramped cages. Over time, with people advocating for the rights of animals, zoos started incorporating wild-like environments, natural habitats and allocating more space for the animals that are in captivity. But are these measures enough?
In defence of the zoo
According to the advocates of zoos and some conservationists, zoos play a huge role in saving endangered species, educating the public and helping them develop an appreciation of other species.
Let's look at the animals that could be saved by zoos after they became extinct in the wild. For instance, take the case of the Arabian Oryx which was hunted to extinction in the wild. It was following the conservation efforts by the Phoenix Zoo and other organisations that this animal could be reintroduced back into the wild. The Przewalski's Horse is another, which could be saved after it went completely extinct in the wild. The same applies in the case of the majestic bird California Condor, or the antelope Bongo or the golden Lion Tamarin. It is the captive breeding programmes in zoos and other organisations that helped save these species.
A study published in the journal Conservation Letters in 2021 cites that '...the extinction of at least 28–48 bird and mammal species was prevented between 1993–2020, and of 11–25 bird and mammal species between 2010–2020'.
It is argued that zoos not only educate people but also serve as a person's first introduction to wild animals. Maybe it is by locking eyes with a tiger that a kid might take an interest in studying zoology or want to grow up and become a wildlife conservationist.
Seeing animals at close quarters can make it an extremely personal experience, which could impact one in more ways than one. But do these human-animal experiences and other positive outcomes justify keeping wild animals against their will—away from their natural habitats, instincts, and kin? Not to mention commodifying wildlife?
The dark side of zoos
If you were to ask any animal on its willingness to be kept in a cage, we all know what the answer is going to be. Incidents of animals escaping their enclosures tell us what we really want to know. No one wants to be restricted; freedom is important to all beings, human or nonhuman. And zoos cannot simulate the conditions of the wild. Several researches have proven how animals kept in captivity exhibit signs of distress and stress. These include repeated motions, pacing, swaying, bobbing of head etc. This is called zoochosis. These psychological stressors and symptoms get exacerbated due to what is referred to as the 'visitor effect' –the stress a visitor contributes, due to their presence and loudness.
The economics of zoos cannot be ignored. Come any holiday season, zoos always witness an influx of people. For most people, zoos are centres of recreation, where you go to gawk at animals. The breeding of charismatic animals is also one of the ways zoos try to increase footfalls, as cute animal babies always draw a crowd. But captive breeding programmes can also lead to inbreeding, following which the babies could end up with deformities and health problems.
This human-nonhuman relationship hasn't always been in the best interests of the animals. Take the case of Marius. Some 11 years ago, Marius was all over the news. The 18-month-old healthy giraffe was considered useless for breeding by the Copenhagen zoo which decided to kill it. Despite protests and petitions and even zoos and agencies offering to take in Marius, he was shot dead and dissected in front of a large crowd, which even included children.
Can a mindset shift help?
Next time you visit a zoo and stare at any of the charismatic animals, take a moment to reflect as to how (and if) watching the animal in the confines has enriched your perspective and understanding about animals. Or did it just remind you of the stark reality these animals face on a daily basis, of waking up and pacing about in the restricted, human-made area, where people like you and me regard them as cute artifacts, and fated to live a life devoid of even the quiet freedoms we enjoy?