Writing Academic Task 2 Band 6.0 Example

Some people argue that zoos are requisite to preserve wildlife, while others say that they are inhumane and should not be operated. While various wildlife programmes, functioning across the world help to uplift the population of endagered species, i believe the unnatural environment and poor conditions in which animals are held captive should be unacceptable. A conservation label alone does not resolve those concerns.

The case for closure begins with the conditions of captivity. An enclosure may restrict movement and prevent animals from following patterns of behaviour they would display elsewhere. A visitor's enjoyment is not, by itself, a sufficient answer to that concern. If a facility keeps animals mainly as attractions and gives little attention to their needs, the fact that it calls itself educational does not make the conditions acceptable.

Supporters respond that some facilities can contribute to protecting threatened species. Carefully managed breeding and specialist care may have a purpose beyond entertainment. A zoo may also help visitors understand why habitats need protection. These possibilities explain why supporters do not regard every institution as equivalent. The relevant question is what a particular facility actually does, not whether its publicity uses the language of conservation.

There are limits to this defence. Preserving an animal in captivity is not the same as protecting its natural habitat, and a breeding programme is not automatically a route to successful release. Resources directed towards a collection should be assessed against other conservation options. Facilities should therefore provide evidence of their work and suitable conditions rather than expect the public to accept a broad claim of usefulness.

My view is that welfare should be a condition of operation, not a benefit to be traded away for ticket income. Where good care and genuine protective work can be shown, retaining a facility may be justified. Where they cannot, closure and responsible arrangements for the animals are more appropriate. This avoids assuming either that all zoos are cruel or that all zoos protect wildlife.

In conclusion, I favour closing zoos that keep animals in unsuitable conditions. Possible conservation benefits cannot justify retaining a facility that fails to provide acceptable care.