Throughout the past twenty years, the role of the modern day zoological garden has changed. While it used to be all about selling tickets at the entrance, today sustainability and nature preservation have become primary goals. Green consumerism sparked by drastic climate changes has made knowing how to communicate about conservation important. But what is the best way to communicate sustainability and nature preservation? In this thesis, nature preservation mission statements from two zoos, one from Denmark and the other from the UK, will be analyzed to answer the following questions: • “How is conservation communicated by Aalborg Zoo and Marwell Zoo in their conservation mission statements online?” • “What is the connection between the linguistic choices they make, and the cultures they represent?” From the vantage point of the hermeneutic and constructivist traditions, the thesis will perform comparative rhetorical and genre analyses on the two mission statements. These analyses will determine what characterizes the mission statement and how rhetorical strategies are used to support the purpose of the texts. The cultural dimension in the communication of the texts is analyzed using Gadamer´s theories of horizon and pre‐understanding. Analysis of the move structures of the two texts found that the two zoos use the similar rhetoric strategies to communication conservation although at times in slightly different ways. Marwell Zoo uses a scientific discourse in a well defined move structure. Aalborg Zoo, on the other hand, uses a more direct and personal approach in communicating conservation. By using engaging graphics and borrowing goodwill from other organizations, Aalborg Zoo seeks to enlighten the reader of the mission statement and provoke them into acting on the communication. Marwell Zoo tries to convince the reader that they have the best conservation projects and that they are trustworthy proponents of the conservation issues by using logical arguments and a language riddled with positive connotations. While there definitely seems to be a connection between the linguistic choices made by the zoos and their cultures, it is difficult to points out exactly how it works. The inductive method of trying to conclude which culture a certain language use belongs to has been far from successful. It is easier to establish and prove the relationship the other way around, that a certain culture uses a certain language.