Magazine, website & books written by teens since 1989

A Modest Proposal: A Satirical Solution for Caging Animals in Zoos

Custom User Avatar
More by this author


It is a melancholy object to: see the animals that are all caged in zoos, struggling for survival, and do nothing about this problem. If we do not help the caged animals, they will become increasingly destructive and destroy the planet, eventually. -exaggeration. This is an exaggeration because the statement is jumping to conclusions and thinking of the worst possible outcome.

I think it is agreed by all parties that the life-threatening occurrence: of zoo animals being caged is so dangerous, that it simply should not be allowed any more! I do believe, and hope that every party agrees as well,  that caging animals should be illegal, because every species is harmed by doing so. -verbal irony. This is verbal irony because instead of trying to find a solution to the problem,  it is expressing the creation of another problem.  Someone needs to offer a solution quickly, because this problem is increasing by the minute, and whoever does so deserves a reward, because they will have saved the world from the angry zoo animal.

But my intention is far from being confined to provide only for the betterment of: the zoo animals. It not only helps them, but will help us as humans as well! The best part of my solution is that it helps everyone and everyone will be satisfied by it. My solution will save our planet. -exaggeration. This is a form of exaggeration because it is acting as though they solution will solve every problem in the world, which it will not.

As to my own part, I have studied the proposals of other projectors, and concluded that they are not nearly as efficient as they claim to be: as useful as this solution will prove to be. There are many previous solutions used to solve this problem, one of which is the Animal Welfare Act. This act outlawed the caging of animals, but specified only a certain type of animals, so this was not helping most of the animals. Also, the law is not reinforced strictly enough, and there are still private businesses caging animals. Another current solution is the World Animal Foundation, which helps encourage everyday people to donate and conserve materials to help the animals. These solutions are both excellent ideas and are working; however, they are not working quickly enough. The animals need a solution that will work quickly and effectively.

I will now present my own idea, which I hope will not be subject to any disagreement.

I humbly offer it to public consideration that humankind as a cohesive and cooperative unit, should: The new idea is to release all animals into the wild. We can let them roam free, and they can travel to find the habitat best for them. We can even allow the animals to use the highways and expressways for travel. I feel certain that they will follow the rules of the road. -sarcasm. This is sarcasm because obviously animals are not people and they will not follow the rules of the road, because they don't know how to.

In this scenario: Animals get an opportunity to travel the world, which everyone deserves.  Having the animals released is the best of both worlds! One can look outside and perhaps find a zoo in their backyard! There would be no cost to go to the zoo, and the cost of confinement to the animals isn’t present either. -semantics. This is an example of semantics because the word, “cost”  is used in two different ways; to describe the literal cost, or payment, of going to the zoo, and the cost, or wear, on the animals of being confined.

Of course: This would cause many changes in the U.S. and all over the world, perhaps even more change than the election will bring! -exaggeration. Obviously the election is a big deal, and the phrasing of these words downplays it.  However, it is all good change. The animals would eventually settle in whatever areas they please, and to the humans, this would bring new pets and possibly no need for lawnmowers anymore! -sarcasm. This is an example of sarcasm because it is targeting a specific group (humans) and making fun of them by downplaying the concern of wild animals wandering. Also, there would be so many animals roaming about, this might decrease the use of automobiles. After all, why would you travel by car when you can travel by elephant? -verbal irony. This is an example of verbal irony because the statement is actually saying that riding elephants is a feasible form of transportation, but in reality, it is not.

These drastic and sudden changes: may bring chaos to the world. Implementing so many wild animals is a big change. -understatement. This is an understatement because obviously bringing so many animals to the world is huge change.  However, there’s no need to worry,  because the animals  understand what this will do to us, and they will be mindful as we get used to their presence. -sarcasm. This is an example of sarcasm, because the animals are not human and do not have enough human characteristics to “understand” that their presence is slightly overwhelming and be mindful of us, because animals do not have the same mental capacity as humans do.

I can think of no valid objection that may be introduced to antagonize this proposal: however, some may say that it is crazy and ridiculous to have wild animals roaming the country. However, we will get used to it, and soon realize that it is what’s best for the country and the animals: we get free entertainment, constantly, and the animals do not feel trapped! -understatement. This phrase is an example of understatement because the phrase glosses over the many problems that would arise if animals were released into human society.

Again, no one should dare to suggest these notions to me until they have a small spark of hope that these actions may be implemented.

It is not that I do not respect the input of others on the subject of solutions to this topic, but simply that: I have done an immense amount of research and put many hours of thought into this problem, and the best solution is the one right in front of you. There are virtually no negative outcomes to releasing wild, untamed animals into the streets with people; nothing could go wrong! -verbal irony. This is an example of verbal irony because the statement is saying that letting animals into the streets is a good idea that will not cause any problems, and in reality, releasing wild animals into the streets will cause many problems and is potentially very dangerous.  This solution is better for both the animals and the people involved, and will work for years to come.


Post a Comment

Be the first to comment on this article!

Site Feedback