In my perfect world, we would establish perhaps four national zoos of unimpeachable quality and close the rest of them.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
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.
Zoos should concentrate more on the preservation side of things.
We're in 'Jurassic Park' territory. If we go to the zoo in the future, we'll have zoos for extinct animals.
Zoo: An excellent place to study the habits of human beings.
What's the reality of being inside a zoo, for the animals and for the people who love and care for those animals? There's a lot of joy, and there's a lot of loss.
I've never really been able to tolerate zoos.
I am personally not against keeping animals at zoos, as they serve a huge educational purpose, but treating them well and with respect seems the least we could do, and with 'we' I mean not just zoo staff, but most certainly also the public.
Biodiversity can't be maintained by protecting a few species in a zoo, or by preserving greenbelts or national parks. To function properly, nature needs more room than that. It can maintain itself, however, without human expense, without zookeepers, park rangers, foresters or gene banks. All it needs is to be left alone.
We're feeding all these zoos. And that's getting bigger and bigger.
Zoos have always fascinated me. What child hasn't wondered what would happen if all the animals escaped from the zoo? Or what would happen if they got caught in an enclosure?
No opposing quotes found.