Defending Zoos

http://www.carr.org/~scottr/2004/06_04/images/zoo%20sam%20and%20tiger.jpg

I have read Life of Pi before and I wish not to ruin any of the later parts for anyone, but I remember the book being a unique journey involving an Indian kid named Pi and a Bengal tiger. However, I do not remember how extensive the introductory section of the novel in which Pi explains his religious beliefs and background of his family's zoo. But knowing what happens later in the novel, this makes sense and is absolutely necessary to understanding the character of Pi and his situation.
I can't help but marvel at Pi. His religious beliefs are eclectic, cosmopolitan, and unique to say the least. He confidently takes lessons from different religious teachers, even if he refuses Mr. Kumar's sound advice: "Reason is my prophet and it tells me that as a watch stops, so we die" (Martel 35). If you ask me, his religious beliefs are almost zoo-like. They encompass aspects of many religions, much like a zoo encompasses creatures of all different kinds.http://www.houstonmuseumdistrict.org/default/images/Main%20Entry-0041.jpg

There is one main difference in my character from when I first read this book to now. I worked at the Houston Zoo two summers ago, specifically the bird section. I fed, cleaned, cared for, and gave up my time for hundreds of birds for an entire summer. I understand how zoos (good ones at least) work and the attention that these animals receive. I can't really account for other sections of the zoos, but I can personally attest to how well the birds were taken care off and the amazing ex-situ conservation work the zoo was participating in.
Because of this experience, some of Pi's arguments about zoos are fascinating. In particular, his arguments about the flight response of animals are noteworthy. To be honest, I find it somewhat frustrating that he has such strong convictions about animal behavior when there is so much we don't know. Just like detractors of zoos may use, he brings up unreliable examples that must prove his arguments. For instance, he argues that the leopards that could easily have escaped their enclosures did not because "simply they had no reason to" (Martel 51). To me this is making an unfair conclusion about animal behavior. And by doing this, it makes his arguments a little weaker.
Regardless, it is interesting to read someone's positive arguments about zoos and animal welfare, even if the very length of Pi's arguments could possibly show a sign of possible doubt in his own argument.