Zoos represent a clear case of semantic and conceptual transformation. What we now see as zoos in Iran and many parts of the world has strayed far from the original concept and purpose of their establishment. These centers have largely devolved into cages for holding wildlife species, offering visitors the chance to view them up close—an experience that may appeal to many.

Originally, these centers were established to acquaint urban populations with other living beings who are our strategic partners in survival within the grand order of nature—biodiversity. The absence of these organisms is tantamount to the extinction of humanity itself. Today, ecologists firmly recognize the reality that human survival is impossible without the survival of other living beings and the fundamental life cycles they form, from insects and aquatic creatures to birds and our close relatives—the mammals.

Biodiversity is fundamentally the cornerstone of life on Earth, and disrupting its natural order poses a severe threat to human existence. However, the widespread migration from rural areas to cities and the concentration of over 70% of the global population in urban settings have made it challenging for modern humans to grasp this reality. For many, biodiversity has become a fanciful idea rather than a pressing concern—a danger that may even surpass the loss of biodiversity itself.

In its true sense, a zoo can transform the mechanized human experience of life forms, allowing individuals to witness the critical role these organisms play in sustaining biodiversity. Zoos can turn what might seem unnecessary into a serious concern. Yet, humans have always faced challenges in embracing and propagating new concepts, and this issue is no exception.

Zoo operators today—particularly in Iran—have reduced the noble purpose of educating people about biodiversity and providing firsthand experiences of various life forms. They often ignore the truth that without our ecological partners, humanity cannot sustain the largest and most sacred economic enterprise of nature: the possibility of life itself. Instead, modern zoos have turned into businesses. By breeding popular species and selling them to nouveau-riche buyers, they have created a market that undermines this critical purpose and ultimately endangers humanity’s survival.

Although the space here does not allow for a full elaboration of the connections between the arguments presented, the growing public awareness about the environment and biodiversity conservation has generated optimism among activists and stakeholders in this field. We must remember that the laws of nature existed long before humans imposed their unwise rules on living, and deviations from these natural laws have always taught us painful lessons.

Legally addressing violations by zoo operators, requiring them to create educational platforms—particularly for children, the torchbearers of future generations—and transforming zoos into scientific and research centers for studying behavioral patterns in valuable species or establishing live gene banks can pave the way for redefining zoos both conceptually and legally.

In this process, we must avoid emotional recommendations and criticisms based on moral propositions that are incompatible with nature and the wild world. Excessive or extreme approaches can lead to missteps. Any opportunity to improve the situation of wild species that cannot return to their natural habitats should be seized. At the same time, we must not sacrifice technical and scientific educational facilities to purely moral considerations.

In this manifesto, fighting wildlife trafficking, closely monitoring zoos to prevent violations, and eliminating modern misconceptions are seen as more urgent priorities than the extreme moral arguments presented earlier. Promoting and expanding such violations is more dangerous for zoos, as they offer hidden profit margins and greater appeal to those involved, making their future darker than their opposites.