Zoonotic disease control often involves uncertain decisions in which public health, animal welfare, human agency, legal duties, environmental protection, and social vulnerability may conflict. This exploratory study presents the Ethical Map, a visual deliberative tool intended to support transparent ethical reasoning in field situations involving possible animal euthanasia. The tool complements, rather than replaces, the ethical matrix by translating stakeholder-based, One Health, public health, and veterinary ethics into a practical visualization of lawful options. In an in-person workshop, 27 veterinarians discussed rabies-related exposure, severe feline sporotrichosis, and highly pathogenic avian influenza scenarios. Participants assessed legally plausible interventions before and after structured deliberation. The process required identification of stakeholders, expected benefits and harms, uncertainty, justice, proportionality, human agency, and proxy representation of animal interests before positioning action cards on the map. Responses were analyzed descriptively using a four-point ordinal scale and paired Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Participants favored home observation in the rabies scenario, accepted euthanasia more in severe refractory sporotrichosis, and preferred isolation, monitoring, disinfection, and movement restrictions over large-scale euthanasia in the avian influenza scenario. The Ethical Map appeared to support collective justification and visualization of value conflicts, but requires further validation, usability testing, reliability assessment, and real-world application.