According to the Endangered Species Act, the definition of an endangered species is “any species that is at risk of extinction throughout all or a big portion of its range.” Zoos are widely regarded as guardians of endangered species, so why do animal rights activists claim the zoos are abusive and cruel? Now, we are going to talk about the right of animal.
Endangered Species and Animal Rights
Endangered species are an environmental issue, but not essentially an animal rights issue. From an environmental perspective, a blue whale is more deserving of protection than a cow since blue whales are endangered and the loss of every blue whale might impact the survivability of the species. The ecosystem is a network of interdependent species, and once a species becomes extinct, the loss of that species in the ecosystem could threaten different species.
However, from an animal rights standpoint, a blue whale is no more or less deserving of life and liberty than a cow since both are sentient individuals. Blue whales ought to be protected as they're sentient beings, and not only for the species is endangered.
Animal Activists Oppose Keeping species in Zoos
Individual animals have sentience and so they have rights. Nevertheless, the complete species has no sentience, so it is a species has no rights. Keeping vulnerable animals in zoos breaks those individuals’ rights to freedom. Infringing the rights of people as its benefits is wrong because a species is not an entity with its own rights.
Endangered plants are kept equally in captivity, however, these programs don't seem to be disputable since plants are widely believed to not be sentient. Vulnerable plants haven't any need to rove and thrive in captivity frequently, unlike their animal counterparts. What is more, plant seeds may be kept in storage for many years into the longer term, for the aim of “release” into the wild if their natural environment ever recovers?