How Do Teams Decide How Much Money To Trade For An Athlete's Services?

iraqireporter.us

Do you think that right now you could sign a $100 million contract with a professional sports team? Probably not, because you likely don’t have the skills that the team would consider worthy of such a contract. Teams take many factors into consideration when deciding how much money to pay an athlete. Assistant professor of Sport Management Corinne Farneti explains in a video that a number of factors such as the athlete’s past performances and the team’s salary cap help teams decide a salary for a player.

Age can have a tremendous impact on whether a team would be willing to trade for or sign a player. If a player is young and shows great potential, the team would be more likely to trade for him because he would most likely help that team for many years to come. If a player is old and injury-prone, a team would have 2nd thoughts about trading for him because if he has the wrong injury, his time in the league could be over. Older athletes are also generally more injury-prone, so even if the athlete doesn’t have much injury history, the simple fact that he is getting older automatically increases the risk of injury, so teams may seriously contemplating trading for him, but they usually don’t mind trading him.

An athlete in the prime of his career with many terrific past performances may spark the interest of many NBA teams because they know that if they trade for him, he can easily assimilate into their system and make an immediate impact on the team. Many teams who haven’t made the playoffs in years and are looking for an established star rather than trying to develop a young athlete which could take years will try this method to instantly improve their team. An example of this happening in the NBA is the Los Angeles Clippers signing star point guard Chris Paul who at the time was in the prime of his career, and the Clippers were looking for help so they could win a championship. Teams decide whether they want to make an immediate impact or wait a few years and then be good, and they make decisions based on these prior decisions.

NFL General Managers

https://www.google.com/search

      General Managers in the NFL have one of the hardest if not the hardest jobs in the NFL. They have to do a number of things like, sign players, draft players, scout players, and sign coaches. The second they mess up they get fired. So there job is extremely stressful and it is important for a GM to make the right moves. For example, figuring out if a player fits the scheme that there team runs and is worth signing/drafting.
     An example of a general manager making the right move is John Schneider, general manager for the Seattle Seahawks. Schneider is well know for drafting players late in rounds. For example Richard Sherman, Kam Chancellor, Russell Wilson, and KJ Wright. All have been drafted in the third round or later and all have had enormous amounts of success in the league since being drafted. Also signing Doug Baldwin and  Jermaine Kearse as undrafted free agents, both becoming NFL stars.
     However, not all general managers have succeed like Schneider. For example, Mike Tannenbaum, general manager for the Miami Dolphins. He has tried to trade for good players but has failed in all the ways possible. For instance, trading for Bryon Maxwell and Kiko Alonso. Both players have performed poorly and both have enormous contracts. Also Tannenbaum has overpaid players like Ndamukong Suh whose making over $114 million on a 6-year deal. To put it in perceptive, Suh is making more money than Aaron Rodgers.

Future Research Question: How do certain players effect a particular team? 

How To Get High Without Drugs

http://www.runnersworld.com

Lots of people believe that the only way to get “high” is by using drugs or chemicals, those people aren't runners.  All runners know about the euphoric feeling known as the runners high. The rush of endorphins top the brain due to vigorous physical activity that gives feeling of peace and happiness.  In Runner's World article “how to achieve a runner's high” it addresses the famed feeling and how and why it is achieved.  Runner's World is the foremost online resource for running related news and information. They and I both argue that the runner's high feeling is primary factor that leads people to running.

This article focuses on the role of certain bodily chemicals in the process of achieving runners high, specifically endorphins.  When talking about endorphins the article suggests that the chemical is like “Nature’s home-brewed opiates.”  essentially endorphins are our body's natural healthy way to mimic some of the most addictive drugs on the planet, endorphins act like natural painkillers, they are released when the body is in state of discomfort, which is easy to achieve while running.  So the fact that this conditions for endorphin release are prime during running and that when endorphins are released it feels euphoric, people are continually drawn back to running in hopes to experience this high again.

Now we have covered both the physical side and the emotional side of why runners choose to run, in the next post we will examine the social factors that lead people to choose this sport.  What type of community is set up around running and why is this community draw people in?

Fish Are Food... But Also Friends

source: thefisheriesblog.files.wordpress.com

In my last post, I talked about some of the worst fishing methods for the health of the ocean. But fishing isn’t all bad. The oceans can sustain certain fishing methods like midwater trawl, harpooning, traps/pots, jigging, longlining, and trolling. I used Monterey Bay Aquarium’s Seafood Watch and the Active Sustainability website to list and describe just a few of the most important fishing methods.

• Harpooning-- a fisherman throws a long metal spear into the fish and pulls it onto the boat

-the fisherman must identify the fish before throwing the harpoon so bycatch is not an issue

-the fisherman must be skilled to use this method and can only catch one fish at a time so

overfishing isn’t as big of a concern

• Traps/Pots-- a wire cage is baited and sunk to the ocean floor

-smaller fish are able to escape through doors designed for this purpose

-little to no damage is done to the ocean floor

• Jigging-- a grappling hook (the jig) is attached to a long submerged line and yanked around by fishermen to attract fish; often done at night and baited with lights

-it’s a very targeted method of catch so bycatch levels are low

-because it’s usually done at night when seabirds, turtles, and other marine animals aren’t active,

there is little concern that something will get hooked unintentionally

If fishermen stuck to these methods and other like them, we wouldn't have have such a large issue on our hands. However, commercial fisheries are still using unsustainable methods because they are easier, more efficient, and sometimes less costly. So the question still remains: How can we, as the consumers, encourage the fisheries to use more sustainable methods? I will be exploring this question in my next post.

Combining Habitats

                                                            https://steemit.com


It would be impossible to just get rid of every zoo in the world because where would we end up putting the animals who were born and raised in captivity. Those animals would have no idea where to go or how to survive on their own. That would be like putting a group of people with no survival skill on an island with no supplies.

From the benefit of enlarging zoos it would create a more natural habitat, but it would also give the animals more room for daily exercise, which in current habitats they lack a lot of. Some could argue that it would be unwise to keep animals in same pens, since there are the chance of them hurting each other, but in hindsight you would only group herbivores together and keep vicious animals away from each other.

Google's History and Size

Google, a single company built from the ground up, owns a variety of other well-known companies that you may have not known about. Two articles, one from BBC and the other from Business Insider, who are both very respected news sources, go into detail about Google’s history and what they have acquired. Overall, Google has a long history of growth and, through that time, have bought out various other companies.

Source: http://techchunks.com/

Google is one of the most valuable companies in the world; being estimated to be “worth nearly 520bn” (Hooker). This success can be originated to its two founders, Larry Page and Sergey Brin, and the company’s history. “Pulling together $1m from family, friends and other investors, Mr Brin and Mr Page launched their company on 7 September 1998” (Hooker). After that, Google has grown steadily to become the corporate giant we know today. They have gone on a spending spree and according to Mark Bergen of online technology publication Recode, “Google's executives are driven by wanting to have start-ups... they want to have a portfolio of start-ups” (Hooker). This incentive ensures that the company will grow even further.

The many companies Google has acquired has led to billions of dollars in growth, and it may be surprising to know the companies they do, in fact, own. “Since its launch in 1998, Google has acquired more than 170 companies” (D’Onfro). Their biggest acquisition ever was Motorola; costing about 12.5 billion. Next on the list is Nest: a company which makes smart thermostats and smoke detectors. This cost 3.2 billion. The list goes on, including companies like Youtube (1.65 billion) and Waze (966 million). Altogether, Google’s acquisitions make them a constantly growing company; having strong incentives for start-ups.

Future Question: What are the arguments against the regulation of Google?

How do student loans affect students post-graduation?

7 out of ten students graduated with student loan debt in 2014 and the total debt of collective students is over 1 trillion dollars. That is higher than credit card debt and is second only to mortgage. Part of the problem is when the average tuition of colleges has gone up by 28% since the 2007-2008 school year.

Most students will have to work for years to even make a dent in their student loan debt, which is a huge problem because that is money they could potentially save for retirement or college funds for their kids. Student loan debt follows students for many years after they graduate because there is no way to get rid of it. These schools will always find a way to take their money.

Another huge problem is For-Profit colleges. These colleges account for about 30% of student loan debt, and yet they only account for about 13% of student population. The cost of going to one of these schools is about 6 times more expensive than going to community college and twice the price of a 4-year university. You might be thinking that most of this goes back to the students by way of better professors, better equipment, and better facilities. However, you might be surprised to know that about 25% of all profits from the school go to advertising. These colleges prey on many veterans and uneducated to pay absurd amounts of money for an education that is equivalent to that of a community college, which I mentioned before is much cheaper to get.

Decoupling

Can the economy still grow with a decrease in greenhouse gas emissions? For centuries, the U.S. economy and economies around the world have grown steadily, but so have greenhouse gas emissions. While the economy occasionally drops, greenhouse gas emissions generally  have not. Now that carbon levels are way past the environmental capacity a change has to happen in order for future generations to live healthily in a world with nature. For a while, the question has been: can a decrease in greenhouse gasses and an increase in the economy coexist? But what we really should be asking is can climate stabilization actually drive economic growth?

It wasn’t until roughly 2009 when GHG emissions in the U.S. began to decline. This is largely due to President Obama’s Climate Action Plan, reducing GHG emissions by 17% of the 2005 level by 2020 if other countries agreed to reduce emissions as well. There was a lot of backlash and doubt about what the state of the economy would be  like when reducing emissions but clearly, it had been working and the economy has thrived since then.

The Clean Power Plan concept, drawn up by the U.S. Energy Information Administration, project a continued growth in GDP with reduction of emissions in coming years. The plan will actually boost the industry of power’s revenue. By 2020 the Clean Power Plan will show a .78% increase of $/MBTU (dollars per million British thermal units, used to measure energy of natural gas) over the current course.

This reduction in GHG emissions and rise in GDP is referred to as decoupling. 20 countries, including the United States, experienced this decoupling from 2000-2014 proving that it has potential to prevail everywhere. Projections of the Clean Power Plan will further boost this decoupling. They project that, with the CPP, between 2020 and 2025 Carbon Dioxide emissions from U.S. energy will drop by 6% while GDP will rise 13%.

Classifications of Artificial intelligence ( AI )

When People think of AI ( artificial intelligence ) they think of the Terminator, Star wars, and space odyssey.  While some people see AI as “polite and helpful butler servants” others, especially in Hollywood view AI as “ world destroying super robots” AI is a broad topic, It can be as simple as the programming that runs your TV or that shows you recommended people to follow or even a video game.

source : www.i.ytimg.com

Calalber 1: Caliber 1 AI is called Artificial Narrow Intelligence ( NIA ). This type of AI is the most commonly seen. Well most of the time it isn't seen. What i'm talking about is the AI that makes everything in your house run. From your freezer noticing you don't have ice to your thermostat automatically telling your heater to turn up the heat because the house is getting cold. These types of AI are designed to do one task and complete it flawlessly every time. A great example of this is a computer programmed to play chess. Chess is a game that has strict rules and there can be no creativity in this game. Therefore a computer can access the situation and will 99% of the time.  “It can’t simulate flight paths or predict a better way to store data as it was programmed only to play chess, which it does extremely well”

Caliber 2 Caliber 2 AI is called Artificial General Intelligence ( NGA) NGA is very rare in today's society but ever prominent. NGA is an AI that is capable of doing everything a human can with the same difficulty. No easier and no harder. They can not think for themselves but they are programmed with a mimicking tool. What is they you ask? Well it takes information that it receives and mimics it. Therefore it has primitive leaning. The only public instance of this is IBM's Watson computer that destroyed every jeopardy contestant it faced.

Caliber 3: Caliber 3 AI knows as Artificial Super Intelligence (  ASI ) is the scariest form of AI imaginable. This AI is 10,000 smarter than the smartest human. It is“an intellect that is much smarter than the best human brains in practically every field, including scientific creativity, general wisdom and social skills.” Currently none of these machines exist due to the sheer cost of quantum computers. The AI needs a brain to operate and a Quantum computer is the best solution to the problem. But the only problem with ASI is it is great at learning. So good at learning it is predicted that within 1 hour of being activated it will gain consciousness and become a litters god. Being able to process Immense amounts of data giving it Infinite knowledge. If such a AI could be controlled then the human race would be propelled forward 100 fold. But just like terminator if the AI deems us as useless then it will have in limiter to completely insulate us as a human race.

Next research question Quantum Computers

Dez Bryant's Past

The Background Check 

The people in the NFL draft take into consideration a lot more than we know.  They weigh in many little factors besides just stats and numbers.  They look at the background of each player and try to understand them.  Players are not simply judged based on how they perform at a college level.  Nor are they simply judged based on how they performed in the combine. On NFL.com they discuss the background checks they go through for players.

When people try to predict the players to be drafted, they are more often than not, dead wrong.  The people making the decisions are looking at every single detail about the players.  Not just combine stats.  Scouts want to draft players that they can trust on their team.  They don’t want players who are known for getting into trouble all the time, or that had a bad rep.  At the same time they are able to see the golden boys for their team.  They see players that grew up from nothing and had to work their way to the top.  People who really are respectable and great players.

Dez Bryant, a wide receiver for the dallas cowboys, is known to be quite the emotional player.  They talked about his background check as one of the worst they had ever seen.  “Bryant was raised by a single, often-absentee mother who spent 18 months in prison for selling crack cocaine. He grew up impoverished and without direction, which explains his “lack of life skills" and ignorance of basic adult responsibilities entering the NFL.” Seeing this really stands out to scouts.  Dez Bryant appeared to have a bad background, but in reality he never got into any trouble himself.  He was a clean cut kid and did well.  Sure he is emotional, but that is probably from his tough life growing up.  It is really amazing that Dez was able to rise to the top from so little.  

What should people know before joining the military?

Source: http://index.heritage.org 

The Military is nowhere near to being all fun and games. Obviously to join the greatest fighting force on the planet, there are numerous things to consider. This is a reliable source because it was written by a former soldier, who can provide first hand experience on this issue. Before joining the military, one must first know exactly what they are getting themselves into be prepared to completely change their lifestyle.

First and foremost the first thing that you should know is that when you sign up, you can’t quit for a certain amount of years. “When you join, you sign an enlistment contract for a specified number of years. Once you sign the contract and take the oath (it's actually a pretty amazing experience), that's it, you're in”. There is no opting out. This is probably the most important thing to know and you should be 100 percent sure that you are willing to commit yourself to to the government. Another thing to know is to have knowledge on each branch and be completely sure that the one you are signing up for is the one for you. “The benefits are identical for all of them, but each one is unique in what you can expect”. Know that you are no longer a civilian, but government property. “As a member of the US Armed Forces, give your heart to whatever God you believe in, because your ass belongs to Uncle Sam. You will be required to stay in shape, wear your hair according to policy, and obey all standing orders relating to your personal health”. The government owns you and you must follow a very strict code of rules .

Once you enlist, the Constitution no longer applies to you. “Once you enlist, the constitution (the document that gives you your rights as an American) no longer applies to you. While serving, you fall under the jurisdiction of the U.C.M.J. (the Uniform Code of Military Justice)”. Now this isn’t too much of a difference, however there are some rights that you get as a civilian that you don’t get as a service member. “No free speech/press/assembly in the Military You still have freedom of religion, but the availability of religious personnel might not suit your needs. You have no right to privacy (implied or otherwise). You have no right to protection from unreasonable search”. If you are someone who is nitpicky about their rights, then maybe the service isn’t right for you. Now there a countless other things that a different but probably one of the other main one’s are, you are expected to kill, and expected to know that you can be killed. “America has real enemies. Enemies who will kill you if given the chance. They don't care about who you are, or where you're from, all that matters to them is that you are their enemy.” Some of our enemies would stop at nothing to kill you and post it on the internet for the whole world to see. Even if your job isn’t direct combat, if the military needs you to go fight, they will send you to way and there’s nothing you can do about it. “ Whether it's prepping ordinance (bombs) for use in combat, or taking part in small arms gun battles, you're not trying to "wound" your enemy, you are trying to kill him”. If you see yourself on the battlefield, the military expects you to have a certain mindset. Kill, or be killed. Are you prepared to take someone else’s life?

Why College Athletes Should Be Paid

The NCAA is a “nonprofit organization” that rakes in billions of dollars every year. This organization is cruel and mistreating their employees to an extreme extent. A video titled The NCAA by John Oliver of the talk show last week tonight, which gives credible evidence on all 100s of political and economic issues explains this topic well.

John Olivers video clearly explains that NCAA athletes should be paid because the NCAA can more than easily afford to pay them and has extremely strict regulations to prevent this, and these athletes live a harsh and cruel life.

Source:nocoastbias.com/ncaa-athletes-paid/

When you officially choose to become a college athlete the NCAA makes sure they own you from the start. The first thing these athletes have to do is sign a 440 page manual of rules. And if you chose not to sign it then you don’t get to play. Once you are forced to sign this handbook you are officially owned by the NCAA, If you break any of the thousands of rules in this handbook you could risk losing your scholarship. One of the reasons they do this is to make sure athletes have no say in anything that they do, especially when it comes to money. The NCAA is one of the richest organizations in America. “ On average March Madness brings in over a billion dollars in revenue every year.” This is simply one month's worth of profit, not to mention the other 11 months of football, basketball and other sports. You might say well if this is true where does all the money go? The fact is many colleges intentionally spend there money wastefully to make it look like they aren’t wealthy. Have you ever wondered why college stadiums are often bigger than NFL stadiums? Because they can afford it due to not having to pay their players. Also many college coaches are paid more than NFL coaches.  “The average NFL coach makes $4.9 million while Alabama's Nick Saban makes $7 million.”Clearly the NCAA can afford to pay these players but chooses not to.

It is not only that the NCAA can play there players, it is also that there are serious reasons to why they should pay their athletes. When you are a college athlete many times it is because you cannot afford your own college, so when you become an athlete your sport is your job that is paying for your education. This means that these athletes cannot have a job that pays them money, there job pays them an education. These athletes are broke, “Sometimes there are hungry nights where i'm not able to eat, where i go to bed and i'm starving” -Shabazz Napier. This is absolutely unacceptable for a player for a player that is working harder than anybody to have to suffer from hunger. Many may argue that it will all be worth it once they go pro and make millions all there hard work will pay off. Well according to Ncaa statistics,“1.6% of NCAA football players go pro, and 1.2% of NCAA basketball players go pro.” So for the remaining 99% of college athletes their career stops after college. In the end these college athletes work harder than anyone else only to get completely ripped off by the NCAA and suffer all for an education that is often very bad.

Future Question: Should athletes of more and less popular college sports be compensated differently?

What are the Incentives Already Offered for Preserving the Environment?

     The natural incentives should be enough of a reason to help recycle and save energy. By being wasteful and harmful to the environment we basically are ruining it for future generations and ourselves. However, as I found in my last post, most people don't see the effects in their daily lives, so therefore they don't see it as a big problem in their lives. The incentives  that are in place set by the government and recycling companies do not seem to be working. Incentives at all levels from government to individual small recycling plants are available to everyone.

Source: http://www.greenerpackage.com

      There are a variety of incentives for preserving the environment that people can take advantage of from large government programs to small recycling companies.  In a USA Today article from 2010 called "Getting paid to save energy, recycle? Incentives expand," author Wendy Koch writes," A growing number of private and public programs are offering cash, gift cards and other rewards such as cupcakes and massages for eco-friendly behavior." The article goes on to list some possible incentives that are available. CVS for example gives customers $1 to use in the store when they skip using a plastic bag four times. The Company Earth Aid has registered people in all fifty states who have the ability to earn points that can be used in certain stores when these people save on their utility bills. The Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy has a list of Energy incentive programs both public and private in every state. In Illinois, one possible incentive for businesses and companies is the New Construction program, which gives grants to buildings that go beyond code requirements in energy efficiency. 
     People need to understand the possible consequences of not helping to preserve the environment. Although many people may not be directly affected by immediate consequences like pollution, they still should understand what could happen to the next generation. There are so many incentives to preserve the environment both substantial and non-substantial, but somehow most people just do not seem to care.


UP NEXT:  What new incentives could or should be implemented in the U.S.? Can the United States use incentives that other countries around the world have put into place?

Virtual Reality Usage in the Military

Post #4

Virtual Reality Usage in the Military

Source: www.vrs.org

Virtual reality is even beginning to become implemented into the military for training purposes. VR headsets are able to effectively train members of the Army, Navy, and Air Force by safely putting them in situations similar to what they might encounter in the future.

Virtual Reality Society (VRS) has a website that shares the latest news regarding virtual reality and how it continues to be implemented into different industries. According to the VRS article “Virtual Reality in the Military,” flight simulating, battlefield combat training, medical training, and vehicle training are starting to be accomplished using VR technology. Flight and vehicle simulations through VR are not only safer, but more cost-efficient than training via actual aircrafts and vehicles. Soldiers are able to participate in parachuting simulations, combat or medical training, war simulations, and even virtual boot camp. Not only this, but VR is used as a method to treat PTSD in former members of the military by providing them with coping strategies to adjust to normal life. I think that the military will continue to implement virtual reality due to its realistic feel, safety, practicality, and effectiveness. VR has the potential to revolutionize military training while saving time and money at the same time.

Future research question:

How will virtual reality be utilized in the medical field?

Player salaries based on a teams income

How a teams income affect player salaries

The players are the reason the game of baseball even exists.  In its entirety, teams salaries are the basis for how much a player is paid, but it can be fluctuated based on the player itself, and their personal skills. I looked at commercial appeal,  which is reliable, because it uses statistics and is very updated based on what is happening in the MLB today.  This can be seen through how much an overall team’s income is, in relation to how much they pays each player.

cdn1.thecomeback.com

The statement that the more money a team has overall, they can pay their players more and they can get better players all around can be supported by a lot of teams, such as Los Angeles Dodgers, who are highest paid team with a $277 million payroll, and they pay Clayton Kershaw one of the highest salaries in MLB, with $31 million per year. So it goes to show that a team with more money is able to pick up better players, as well as keep them with very high salaries, which can lead them into the postseason, to be more successful as a team.  Just like the New York Yankees, with the biggest net worth in the MLB, $32 billion.  They can pick up more big name players which keeps their revenue up, keeping them at the highest net worth for years.  This goes to show how teams who have much more money are able to put that money into finding more players, without making a huge dent in their annual income, which can lead them to better teams overall.

On the other hand, teams who don’t make as much, or even the lowest net worth/overall salary can still afford to pay players and pick up talented players that bring more wins for their team.  Looking at the Miami Marlins for example, they have the lowest payroll of only $61 million, it’s difficult to understand why Giancarlo Stanton of the Miami Marlins, who signed in November 2014 for $325 million over 13 years, can be paid and promised so much money from a team who has such a little amount of money to pay their players.  The Los Angeles Angels, with a salary that doesn’t exceed the top 10 in all of salaries,  it’s hand to grasp the concept that they can pick up such highly paid players, like Mike Trout, Albert Pujols, and Josh Hamilton, along with Jered Weaver and CJ Nelson, all with annual salaries over over $20 million.  This goes to show where a team puts their money, and what they believe will be giving them the biggest profit, as well as more wins over losses to advance them in the MLB.

Next Blog post: if teams aren’t winning, what do they do to gain profits?

Are Zoos Beneficial to Us?

Question I'm addressing:

Is visiting animals in captivity really benefiting us?

Source: Alpenof Petting Zoo

Did you ever go to the zoo as a kid? If you did you probably enjoyed it. Imagine your kids never being able to enjoy a trip to the zoo. With recent incidents in zoos, it’s hard for regulations to justify keeping zoos open. Zoos make the argument that they are beneficial to humans, but there are others that also have strong points in opposition to zoos. Zoos provide us with an appreciation and wonder for animals that you can’t obtain without seeing them. With regards to the knowledge zoos provide, I think there is lots of room for improvement. However, I do recognize that there are bad zoos and bad individual exhibits, that I want to exclude from my support for keeping zoos open.

Marc Bekoff, professor at the University of Colorado, Boulder, one of the world's pioneering cognitive ethologists, informed me well on this topic in the article, "Do Zoos Really Teach Visitors Anything?" 

STATEMENT: Zoos are an educational, fun, family activity that should remain open despite recent incidents because they indeed do outweigh in benefits rather than costs.

DISAGREE

People who oppose zoos mainly focus on the lack of knowledge people obtain and how biodiversity conservation is not well taught. There were “More than 6,000 visitors to over 30 zoos and aquariums across the world took part in this landmark study. Participants filled out pre- and post-visit surveys to evaluate their biodiversity understanding and knowledge of how to help protect biodiversity. The study found there was an increase from pre-visit (69.8%) to post-visit (75.1%) in respondents demonstrating some positive evidence of biodiversity understanding." Critics of this study take away that only a small 5.3% increase is not worth all the harm animals are put through mentally and physically by being locked up in large cages. They attest that it’s not worth it unless people are learning about biodiversity conservation. However, learning about some about the lives of the animals who are locked up in cages, without learning about the "need for biodiversity conservation," doesn't convince me that zoos are really doing much good. They believe that there needs to be an increase in education about what not to do or what to do to conserve energy, biodiversity, and for animals. Without that increase, they believe zoos are pointless, and the negative effects override the positive majorly. Could zoo visitors gain the same knowledge in others ways rather than at the expense of the animals who are kept in zoos?  Probably, but I believe if the zoos were able to afford the new educational signs or possibly interactive games then it would be a win-win for both sides.

AGREE

My family & I were frequent zoo visitors, we even had an annual membership. As a kid, my favorite animal to see at the zoo was the polar bears. I loved to watch them and would always ask my mom to read the informational sign about them aloud to me. After my first visit to the zoo I would do lemonade stands on the busy corner outside my house and donate the money I raised to World Wildlife Funds which would help the polar bears because they are an endangered species. Sure, I wasn’t making or donating much money but over time and as I visited the zoo more, I brought people and made them aware of the beauty of these bears and told them how if we don’t do something they might not always be here. This is an example of what a zoo did for me. It made me appreciate and care about the lives of these animals. As many critics state that they aren’t teaching things such as biodiversity conservation, but they are, indirectly. When you go to the zoo you see these animals and appreciate their beauty and find new respect for nature, which makes you less likely to drive your car into grassy meadows, with fear of running over a rodents habitat or ruining the peaceful grass. You’ll be less likely to throw your cans in the ocean thinking of the dolphins you saw at the zoo. You will indirectly be aiding conservation of biodiversity.

Many people see zoos for only the bad exhibits and only the freak accidents that happen. People need to take a closer look on how zoos effect the visitors. The visitors are gaining an appreciation and love for animals and nature, which will indirectly allow them to treat the earth and animals with more respect. Opposition argues that it’s not worth it unless they teach conservation of biodiversity, which I agree with. Zoos do teach basics of biodiversity conservation, not necessarily the term, but they could do a better job of informing more specific ways to help the environment. That’s something that they need to work on but for the most part good zoos should stay open because of all the benefits they provide for animals and humans. I say “good zoos,” because I’m completely aware that there are bad zoos that need to be shut down.

Next blog post: I have many great ideas on how to better zoos in every way. I would like to look into the costs and actual work going into to carry out these ideas.