The captivity in zoos is a subject of controversy for many people. The animals are caged and deprived of their freedom, it is the opinion of some. For others it is a show and the important thing is to see wild animals up close.

​

And well, for me it is not something very good or very bad. Zoos have great potential and can help in the conservation of many species. It is not a generalization that zoos are good or help in this, there are zoos of all kinds; there are zoos whose interest is merely economic, while others are very involved in conservation plans.

​

They are a tool unfortunately necessary for some cases, in which to preserve a species, it is necessary to implement an ex-situ program (that is, outside its habitat), in which they try to breed a species in captivity for the subsequent release of specimens in their natural environment. It is also used in cases in which species are in a bottleneck (genetic variability has decreased so much that it jeopardizes the survival of the species).

​

But it is also another reality that some zoos are focused on economic benefits, and others have totally stopped breeding programs (often because the conservation plans of threatened species have to be coordinated between several zoos and genetic crosses must be carried out in such a way as to benefit the species as much as possible), which is not beneficial for animals.

​

And finally the facilities and enrichment programs: it is something that I find crucial to continually review and demand more appropriate restrictions, since there are animals that need a larger habitat than they currently have, or that need more stimuli (environmental enrichment) so they can live in a healthy way despite living in enclosed spaces. Fortunately, many zoos do work in these conditions, although in most of them there are facilities that are very adequate in some species and inadequate in others.