Baby rhinos killed in South Africa, staff injured : http://africageographic.com/blog/rhino-orphanage-attacked-please-help/ It is becoming increasingly important wild animals to be secured in zoos, because wilderness and orphanage centres are far less secure than zoos. This should also sent message to Association of zoos and aquaria to soften their standards in regards to smaller non-member zoos, wich potentially present additional space for expanding of population of zoo animals and bringing in new threathened species. It is good to have European Association of Small Zoos and Aquaria (non-EAZA members), wich will better presents them in order to get more EEP and ESB species or SSP species in America, or in other regions with their respective programmes.
Though the article is definitely sad, the answer is not to say that we should take as many animals as we can from the wild. It's also not right to say that private, non-accredited zoos should become AZA worthy. Because there are a lot of places that want AZA accreditation, but the question is should they? And right now there are a lot of private zoos who's care for their animals I wouldn't want to be seen by the AZA, and would be rejected by the AZA for that care.
Yes I agree definitively. I just want to say that despite some small zoos are providing satisfactory husbandry practices and good enclosures for their zoo animals, they can't become members of larger (and most important) associations because they are small (with low species diversity) and because they do not fully satisfy other requirements like doing adequate research for example. And want to say that zoos should get ''smart'' additional number of animals of certain species, for greater security of captive populations.
