Both Wonderful Husband and Bestest Daddy thought I didn’t make my point well enough in my article: Freedom is Priceless, it’s true – work is taking away valuable blogging time and the article suffered as a consequence.

So I’m trying again.

I’m trying again to convince people that zoos are not built for the animals, but rather for the money they can make from the animals. 

Deep breath. Here we go…

I received a lot of feedback on Freedom is Priceless (version one), mostly saying that only some zoos were bad and that most of them actually cared about the rehabilitation of animals. However my argument is even in the ‘best’ zoos, animals are taken into captivity and suffer as a consequence. 

Zoos are incredibly misleading. Working under the guise of helping animals whilst actually keeping them in cages. Genius. 

Here’s an example… Screen Shot 2018-10-02 at 07.24.49

The ZSL Whipsnade Zoo in England has a Rhinos of Nepal exhibit (they even call it an ‘exhibit’!). If the Nepalese Rhino was in danger of becoming extinct then maybe ZSL Whipsnade Zoo could be seen as trying to save the species (although transporting rhinos from Nepal to England doesn’t sound that great to me). However in 2015 it was reported that the number of Nepalese rhinos had dramatically increased because the Nepalese army and anti-poaching associations in Nepal had been successful in deterring poachers. Nepal had made a fantastic effort to protect their rhinos, in their natural environment, without putting them in zoos and yet ZSL Whipsnade Zoo have stated

‘The captive population in zoos is now stable and viable as an insurance policy in case of extinctions of the wild populations.’

Oh so now it’s ok to pull animals from their natural environment, plonk them somewhere random, earn money from them, keep them in captivity for the rest of their life JUST INCASE they go extinct. Well that’s ok then!

You’re getting my sarcasm, right? Now here’s another example of businesses claiming to care for animals…

Below is the same picture as the cover photo above, it’s a bird’s eye view of SeaWorld in San Diego (you can find it on Google Maps). The blue outline represents the whale enclosure and the yellow outline is the carpark. A simple drawing like this gives us the very obvious, dark feeling that SeaWorld care more about finding space for customers to park, so that those customers can spend their money and watch the whales that live within the tiny confines of the blue line, far more than the actual whales.


Now people may argue that SeaWorld do great things for animals and they use all the money that they make from their parks to rescue more animals. However, imagine an adoption association that needs money to help the children they care for, so they take a very small proportion of their children and make them work in factories. Then the adoption agency takes the children’s wages and uses it to help the rest of the children. Would this be ok?

I genuinely hope you’re saying ‘no’.

Zoos are businesses that make money from exploiting animals under the guise of helping many more animals. This isn’t ok. And for the people that say some zoos are good… I challenge you, name me one. I look forward to hearing about the zoo that doesn’t keep animals captive, outside of their natural environment, whilst making money from them.

Thanks for reading 💚