Every big city will set up, so is the zoo for people or for animals?

I think it's mutual, animals can satisfy people's curiosity, make children interested in the world, and people spend money to better let animals have a good living environment.

Nowadays, most zoos are for people, making money by buying tickets and feeding animals. But I think the purpose of the zoo is to serve the animals, protect the animals, and provide a comfortable living environment for the animals.

There are all of them, the zoo can be used by people to visit, observe and understand the animals, and also provide a living environment for some animals, and solve survival problems for some animals.

The zoo is for people, because people are tourists inside, they create economic benefits for the zoo, and animals are in cages for people, and they also provide a service for people.

Serve the people, because the zoo is for humans, and humans can go there to visit and relax.

Zoos are serving both people and animals, giving people more access to animals and providing a better place for animals to recuperate.

Zoos are for people, mainly for people to see, but they are a bit cruel to animals.

I think it's about serving people, so that people in the city can understand the habits and living conditions of animals.

Zoos are naturally for people, and although zoos raise many animals, zoos are designed to meet the needs of human beings.

It is to serve animals, mainly because many animals can be reasonably protected in the zoo, and it is also to let people participate in the corresponding income to improve the quality of life of animals.

It's for people, because these zoos are open for people, in order to make people know more about animals.

Hello, there are several animals for me. I'll give you an example below to see which animal is best suited for you.

One:Honey bee -Bees never rest, they always make everything perfect.

Two:Ants- Ants have a leader, a lot of labor, and each ant has its own responsibilities, three:Lioness- Do everything for the sake of the family.

Four:Beaver- Good builders.

Five:Worms- Farmers of nature tomorrow morning. The worm ploughs the soil, forming an entire tunnel. The tunnels left by the worms fill the soil with moisture and air.

In conclusion, I would like to say that everyone can find him like that kind of animal according to their work.

Summary. Kiss, Safari: A real safari park refers to a zoo where animals are not restricted by walls, and visitors can get in close contact with animals.

This type of zoo was built on the outskirts. In fact, such a zoo should not stand on its own, but should be part of a normal zoo. The above name is a wildlife park, but there are some safari parks, like our forest safari park in Qingdao, not all of the above mentioned are not all of them, and there is no car to watch.

Such a zoo is called a safari, I don't think it's very accurate. Some of the big cities have safari parks, which are new. However, it is expensive.

Difference Between Urban Zoo and Safari Park.

Kiss, Safari: A real safari park refers to a zoo where animals are not restricted by walls, and visitors can get in close contact with animals. This type of zoo was built on the outskirts.

In fact, such a zoo should not stand on its own, but should be part of a normal zoo. The above name is a wildlife park, but there are some safari parks, like our forest safari park in Qingdao, not all of the above mentioned are not all of them, and there is no car to watch. Such a zoo is called a safari, I don't think it's very accurate.

Some of the big cities have safari parks, which are new. However, it is expensive.

Hello, dear. City Zoo: A zoo built in the city, the history is relatively old, but it is very familiar to people in the city.

For people in the urban area, it is convenient to get around and do not have to run to the suburbs. It's also cheaper than a suburban safari, and the animal species aren't necessarily worse than a safari. It is found in almost every prefecture-level city, and there are also some county-level cities.

Provincial capitals and municipalities have more famous urban zoos and more animals. It is very likely that this kind of zoo will also be moved to the suburbs in the future, and the land will be vacated for other purposes. Beijing Zoo and Qingdao Zoo all wanted to move out, but they didn't succeed.

Things like Dalian Zoo have already moved.

Zoos are first and foremost for animals, not for people, do you agree? I very much agree with this concept, because the zoo was originally called a zoo, so it should first serve animals, not serve people, just to watch animals, then our first service is animals rather than people, although they can't speak to animals, but they are also spiritual, we treat animals like people, don't treat them differently, zoos are places where animals live, then it should be given priority to animals, and they should be treated preferentially, so that they are worthy of them. Whether it is an animal or a human, it must be treated equally. <>

In fact, it is said that it is called a zoo, so it should be given priority to serve animals, rather than serving people, and live here for a long time, so people just come to watch, so it is said that it is the most correct way to give priority to the animals, so that animals will have more nature to survive here, and they will survive here for a long time, so we should first serve animals, not people, and the first service is animals rather than people. <>

Animals are also spiritual, I believe that animals are also spiritual, so we should first serve animals and animals will remember, so the zoo, go first and serve the animals, instead of serving everyone just to travel here, not to live here, then the animals have lived here for a long time, then we should give priority to serving people, so it is called a zoo, not called any other park, the zoo is the home where the animals live, then we should serve the animals first. <>

In general, so our zoo prioritizes serving animals rather than people, because the zoo is a home where animals live, and we should not give priority to serving other people and animals, which is the most correct choice, feeling that this is our own home rather than being a guest from afar.

Disagree. Because if no one goes to play, there is no ticket revenue, and it can't function properly, so I don't agree with this statement.

I couldn't agree more. I think the existence of the zoo is mainly to give the animals a home, and the second is to allow people in the city to go to the zoo to visit and learn about all kinds of animals, not to say that forcing animals to perform for humans is unfair to animals, and it is also very cruel.

Of course, because if we don't take good care of the animals around us, they will disappear and die out over time.

The zoo is to provide a place for animals to be protected, hoping that animals can be better protected here, so that more people can learn about them. A zoo is not a place for people. Normally, you have to pay for tickets to go to the zoo, and people feel that they are getting the service they deserve when they spend money.

Actually, this is not the case, we should just use this way to understand these animals and understand their habits. Many zoos will have such a part of animal performances, sometimes even many performances a day, without considering whether the animals can endure such a long performance, just want to use this way to earn money. In addition, many people may just find it funny, ignoring the rules of the park, and randomly feeding the food to the gifts, which may cause discomfort to the animals.

These are not the most important behaviors that zoos should have.

Of course I agree. After all, there are many animals in the zoo, and the most important thing a zoo should do is to take care of the animals, which is its job.

I agree with this view because, first of all, zoos are the homes of animals.

I agree. Zoos should have a high level of respect for animals. Animal-based.

First of all, a personal opinion, zoos are an old and outdated thing. Zoos originally emerged to satisfy human awareness of different animals. Later, with the development of science and technology, there were many sounds of various animals, and the role of zoos was small.

Secondly, the zoo has the function of protecting the species, giving specific animals daily food and basic medical help. The aim is to maintain the diversity of species. Speaking of which, I will complain a few words, in my Greater China, as long as you can eat it, it will definitely not be a cherished animal, and vigorously promote artificial breeding, which is definitely stronger than zoo protection.

Now, the role of zoos is very small, especially after zoos become private, and the operators of zoos have impure intentions for animal protection, which leads to a lot of chaos. The best way for humans to protect animals is to establish nature reserves.

This is also related to the living space of human beings and other issues. Back to the question itself, is a zoo built for the good of animals? This question was a denial from the very beginning, and the establishment of a zoo is for the sake of human beings themselves.

Human beings have changed nature so much through the use of tools that the living environment of many animals has changed dramatically in just a few hundred years, and they have no way to adapt to this change, and in evolution, they are failures, they are eliminated. But these animals have discovered and undiscovered uses that humans need, so we must protect them.

From the point of view of profit, this is the purpose of human beings, for themselves.

From an emotional point of view, people rely on their reverence for life and protect the eliminated lives for the good of animals.

Thinking about animal moods? It's a philosophical question, can animals have such complex thinking?

If so, the question of whether to choose race to live or die is esoteric.

Animals face reality, it is death. Suppose that humans are used instead of animals, aliens of advanced civilization are humans, and the earth is replaced by animal nature reserves. Do you want to be able to eat, drink, and be cured every day in the zoo, or do you want to do your own work in the nature reserve, or do you want to be unfree and die to the people who look like you?

In fact, you can choose to kill yourself, but animals can't, and the current general understanding is that animals commit suicide with their minds. Even the wolves exiled from the pack only starved to death and died of disease and were killed, and did not commit suicide. A text called Impala Flying Crossing is only sacrificed to survive.

If animals had such complex thoughts, then the existence of the animal population itself would be shattered, and racial infighting would be a reality.

So the question is, how does the animal distinguish reality, does it have the ability to distinguish reality, even if it distinguishes reality, does it accept, even if it accepts, how is it prepared to face it?