Alligator mississipiensis navigating on green, calm swamp waters at Audubon Park, New Orleans - Louisiana. The National Audubon Society is a non-profit organization with the purpose of conservation of birds and other wildlife and healthy ecosystems. I had a chance to visit Audubon Zoo at New Orleans, last week. Surely, we always want animals and birds held into captivity to be properly taken care of and also for good reasons (e.g., drastic population decrease and, even worse, threaten of extinction). The problem here, for me, is drawing the very line of what can be considered good/proper treatment and what cannot. There’s in fact a very long time discussion/debate on the role and the very ‘need for existence’ of zoos. I believe that, to state my opinion very shortly and clearly here, there are both bad and good zoos; and that the existence of bad zoos shouldn't imply on stopping the support for good zoos, pehaps in the same way that just because some police is corrupt it doesn’t mean that we should not have law enforcement at all (this last example taken from an article at The Guardian on this subject). Good zoos (i.e., responsible ones), and their big brothers, namely, the conservation parks, are to be supported for many reasons, I think. I also know that this topic is hot, very sensitive, and that both sides (supporters of good zoos and those opposing the very existence of any zoo) have always a multitude of viewpoints to defend their ideas, but it is (for me) undeniable the good role a good zoo can play, even in the case when/where improvements are necessary and welcome.