Good stuff, thanks for the reply Michelle.

Just for the sake of discussion, not to argue...as we are in agreement that zoos and using animals in entertainment are wrong..I wanted to touch upon your statement about racism. Understanding unfairness/injustice is one thing and truly caring/empathizing/standing up to injustice are two very different things.

Oh, I don't mean to dismiss the emotional impact that compels people to change. History's recounting of past injustices can serve as emotional triggers to fortify preexisting values. Zoos will too one day exist only in history as examples of human oppression against other species just like we did/do for race and other morally irrelevant criteria. As far as the zoo experience goes for the people who don't (accidentally) come away with a new found empathy I fear get their culturally instilled speciesism reinforced. Zoos are inherently contradictory this way by encaging the very animals they claim to advocate on behalf of. These animals aren't even domesticated to live comfortably in human created environments, they are wild and innocent. Animal-using apologists could at least make the domestication argument of farm animals but here they would be grasping at straws. That is why zoos are on the forefront of animal rights* and should be the first institution to fall before we know we are making any real change.

Now, when I created this thread I was under the misconception that veganism equals animals rights or has a strong foundation of that component but I now believe that to be false. Veganism is simply "not using animals" and the reasons given for that vary wildly. I don't see veganism as an answer to animal oppression but it's a personal decision to disengage from contributing. That can be a form of advocacy in itself but more and more I'm coming to think veganism does not have a monopoly on advocating for other species. But that's a whole different topic for another day.

[*for lack of a better term]

Put me in with the folks for whom zoos contributed to a path to veganism and so forth. I love animals, and I love seeing many different kinds of animals. If there weren't something, I think the list of animals I've seen would be pretty small. I think it would be sad to be like one of those inner-city kids that a cartoon version is more real than the wild beastie.

I think seeing in the wild is best, but if there were some sort of wild animal park that would be acceptable to me as well. Especially for animals that need room to roam, like big cats and wolverines and stuff. Some animals do ok in smaller spaces, like frogs and stuff.

There are some other options. With bats especially you can go to certain well-maintained caves or the bridge in Austin and see millions of them every night. There are similar situations with deer in Nara, Japan; macaques in Kyoto; rats in Deshnoke, India; and elephant seals in Año Nuevo, CA. I can't see this working well for all animals, but that should be higher on the priority list.

And another captive animal situation I almost went to see in India is a monkey jail in Patiala. I figured it be good to visit them. I suppose it would be like a wild animal rehabilitation place, though perhaps stetching the definition of rehabilitation. There was a good place i remember from living in SF for marine mammals in Marin, CA that one could visit.

I am thinking we should start supporting the places in the wild, and then the rehab centers, and then zoos, which are still better than seeing animals at the Field museum.

Does anyone know of any local places on the >zoo side of things? I still don't know the area too well.