True, also the fact that they are not making part of the ecossistem now doesant mean that they are not going to be in the future, botom organisms such as bacteria, fungus,etc are allways present and ready to fullfil their roles. But bigger organisms need help if we are to preserve our planet biodiversity. If we are so narrow minded to allow animals and other organisms to go extinct just because they are no longer in the wild then we are going to lose allot of species and that can be a big treat to our lifestyle, well being and even survival. Many simply have nowere to go anymore. Animals are OK if we give them space, food and the logistics to trive, all the inibicions are in our head because we think about animals like we would about ourselfes and we cant do that, they are animals not people and even in the wild all species face natural barriers to their range. Now that can be easier or harder depending on the species. In the prospects we face now I beleave that keeping animals like elephants in captivity should be widely limited to facilitys with the means to allow family formacion and free ranging in a large scale, much like a safari park and no like your comon roadside zoo. Many animals are unfornatly much neglected by zoos and thouse animals such as many snails, butterflies, small reptiles and amphibs do depend on private folks to keep them alive on the planet untill zoos wake up and start keeping them. If it wasnt for the recent amphib crisis zoos would still be ingnoring them.EricIvins;3452417; said:
If it wasnt by these eforts we wouldnt be lucky enough to see today owesame animals like the Pere David deer, the pretswallski horse (hope Im spelling rigth), the rosed pigeon or the european bison and now all of thouse are being reintroduced in areas of their former range wille some populacions are kept in captivity as a insurance, the best cenario
