Zoos do more good than harm

First, I would like to say that she wanted to be called "IT" to conceal gender, oops... and saying owned noob does not have to do with this at all, it's an inside joke! In a refutation my opponent stated that I contradicted myself, do not see how this is true because my points that you brought up are in accordance with one another. 2. My opponent stated that wildlife reserves cost more money and receive less revenue: People, we have to decide to do what's better for the animals, or what's better for our wallets, my opponent also stated that it's less money to help the animal, but why would you need a lot of money to "help" the animal if "helping" it is imprisoning it, feeding it fancy foods, and giving them special care? An animal can take care of itself, so obviously a wildlife reserve is far better than a zoo! 3. Zoos have ALWAYS made animals do tricks! At the SF zoo, i watched on youtube as a keeper held a peice of meat over a wild-cat's head as it tried to jump and get it. At the NYC zoo I watched as penguins did tricks through hoops. How is this "helping animals"? It's simply reaping the benefits of wild animals that were unfairly caught and imprisoned! Refutations to my opponents refutation to my main points: 1) Zoos may spend their revenue to help the animals, yes this is true. But zoos also have to pay their employees. Zoos are BUSINESSES they run for the money, they have to pay their zoo keepers, mascots, food sellers, and the bosses and everything else that costs money, when it comes down to the animals, they get a tiny share! 2) In fact a zoo IS a prison, the size and conditions of the jail cell do NOT matter. According to mermiriam webster dictionary- A jail is defined as "a state of confinement or captivity". So if the jail cell is a pond, a large forest like area, a cave, or a glass chamber, these are jail cells, and the zoo is a prison. 3) One more think- you have only stated a few sources, it is KCBS, china news, OK those are reliable but it's only a few, and I HAVE stated sources by the way. =============================================================== To refute my opponent's points~ 1) "You don't get a zebra running wild in the US: FOR GOOD REASON! Zebras are native to some parts of Africa! Even in the town I live in right now, there are wild boars running around that are native to Spain! It is not right to have foreign, exotic, animals in the US! 2) Bald eagles and pandas need to be saved, yes, but isn't it also true, we take he pandas into our zoos, but we keep destroying their habitat! We KEEP cutting down the bamboo forests and we repeatedly tresspass on land dedicated to pandas just for economical means! The human race is being hypocritical if we do a good action like saving pandas, then take away their land! It's like just moving them out of the way! 3)- Refuted above 4) Yes, but dictionary.com defines recreation as "a pastime, diversion, that offers enjoyment. " Lets get something straight, exotic, rare, and endangered animals should not be "A diversion that offers enjoyment" if enjoyment is watching an animal do tricks then yes, it's recreation. Let me restate my points: Point 1: Mistreatment of Animals 1.According to "animal-rights.org", "Zoos often mistreat animals, keeping them in small pens or cages. This is unfair and cruel. The natural instincts and behavior of these animals are suppressed by force. How can anyone observe wild animals under such circumstances and believe that one has been educated? Point 2: Don't preserve Endangered Species 1.According to the North County Times of San Diego, "Zoos are built for human entertainment and don't seriously consider the animals' quality of life, animal advocates said. They said the elephant euthanized June 19 should have been sent to an animal sanctuary instead and that the park's mistreatment of the animal was what caused her foot problems and degenerative joint disease. "The zoo is not a sanctuary," said Florence Lambert, founder of the La Jolla-based Elephant Alliance. "On the contrary, it's a prison."" Point 3: We should Preserve Nature Instead 1.If nature was appropriately preserved, we would not need zoos. Michael Fox, Sierra, November-December 1990 - "Zoos are becoming facsimiles - or perhaps caricatures - of how animals once were in their natural habitat. If the right policies toward nature were pursued, we would need no zoos at all." -=VOTE CON=- http://dictionary.reference.com... http://www.merriam-webster.com...