The two articles in this package had entirely different opinions that contrasted one another greatly. In the first article, the author stated that zoos need to improve their ways or shut the whole zoo down, whereas the second author, Hutchins, said that we should pay zoos more attention and provide more enthusiastic support. While Hutchins provided good points and examples, I agree more with Laidlaw’s article. I support Laidlaw’s statements more because I don’t think that Hutchin’s claims and supports apply to a lot of zoos. I think that while some zoos do genuinely care about their animals and treat them well, many zoos exploit animals for financial gain and to benefit themselves.
Laidlaw claims that most zoos fail to live up to their propaganda of wildlife conservation, public education, and animal welfare, and I agree with that. According to research, once the animals have outlived their usefulness, they kill these animals. This fact proves that most zoos don’t care about their animals and only use them for their own gain, that once they have “outlived their usefulness,” they are killed. Furthermore, Laidlaw says that viewing animals in cages may be counterproductive educationally by conveying the wrong kinds…show more content… I agree with this statement as well. Even though most zoos don’t keep their animals in cages, they’re still kept in enclosed spaces where they are used for entertainment purposes which contradicts their point of animal welfare and public education. Rather than getting to be free,
