Im sure some of you remember the past thread (which I was unable to find) describing how a Tortoise Sanctuary was reclassified as a Zoo by the Council. Describing the Tortoise as Wild Animals, not domestics. Well, this has ultimately caused the closure of the Sanctuary, link below: BBC News - Zoo licence row closes Cornwall tortoise sanctuary Thanks Nisha for the link.
Damn animal welfarists and zoo inspection teams. If they are so hell-bent on changing category status of the Cornwall rescue service than allow for a period enabling the institution to comply with the guidelines. Well who will pay the ferryman? Not the Council, whom single-handedly has made a mockery of all CITES or regulatory rules on rescue and rehab centers involved in combatting illegal or inadequate animal management by the general public and at no cost to the tax payer. For your information: providing animal welfare by the State after confiscation or relocation to a rescue center IS a public service sector job and if contracted out to 3rd parties must involve the financial and facility support to the rescue centers involved. This is plain bureacratic stupidity and pass-the-buck agenda by an UK Council.
Can they apply for full or partial exemption under 14 1(a) of the zoo licensing act (small number of type of animal kept)? Did I read that there an option to be classified as a private club - i.e. visitors pay to join the 'Tortoise Club' or suchlike and revisit as members? Surely it should be receiving some sort of inspection, if only for its own good. What do places like Donkey Sanctuaries get? I don't know myself. The owner claims it would cost £250,000 to be licensed - what would this be spent on? If it's stuff like education & conservation they would clearly be exempt.
The Owl Sanctuary in Ebbw Vale have had to do something like this, It used to be free, but some law has been brought in, i think it may be this one. But now they ask people to become members, free of charge.
A dispensation for a small zoo means the license fee would be a few hundred pounds not thousands. Unless of course the place is so bad it would need to make alot of improvements. There is no provision in UK law specifically for sanctuaries and while many do excellent work some are badly run and however worthy there aims have poor welfare which should be regulated. Anywhere keeping 400 animals and getting 12,000 visitors a year is, in english law, by definition a zoo.
A zoo is defined in the Act as being 'an establishment where wild animals are kept for exhibition ... to which members of the public have access, with or without charge for admission, seven or more days in any period of twelve consecutive months'. The wide scope of this definition means that licensed zoos range from traditional urban zoos and safari parks to small specialist collections such as butterfly houses and aquaria. The Act recognises this wide range of establishments by allowing dispensations to be granted for small zoos. Dispensations for these types of collection reduce the number of inspectors to a reasonable level for a small establishment, and do not in any way weaken a zoo's obligation to achieve the levels of animal welfare and modern public safety set out in the Secretary of State's standards. The Act does not extend to circuses, or to pet shops, both of which are covered by other legislation.
Thanks for the clarification Gentle Giant. However, I am still not contend that the Act serves out correctly in this particular case. What I brought up and bring in again that it remains a public service duty to provide adequate care for confiscated or abandonned wild animals. In this particular case, either confiscated turtles/tortoises from the illegal wildlife trade or unwanted pets. IMO the UK government itself is failing to provide adequate care for illegally kept wildlife at cost ....! Alas this holds true of many EU/European countries where relevant authorities dump these on zoos and rescue centers without providing adequate financial recompense to do so). I would appreciate all you forumsters opinion on this issue. Same for: what is your general opinion on said sanctuary (briefly)? K.B.
"An animal sanctuary is any facility which seeks to admit and care for displaced, injured or unwanted animals on a regular basis, whether companion, farmed, wild or other animals, with a view to either re-homing, rehabilitating or providing long-term care for them." For example: Letters: National Parrot Sanctuary & Zoo
Under prevailing climatic conditions in Britain, most species of non-native reptiles and amphibians require a controlled environment for survival in captivity. Some of these environments may require water. Animals may be kept in fully controlled vivaria, or in open enclosures inside a larger controlled climate space. Some species may be comfortable outdoors during periods of good weather. Controlled environments must provide all of the animal’s needs for heat, humidity, light and photoperiod, air and water quality. Because of high environmental temperatures, attention to hygiene and disease control are especially important.
The Tortoise Garden breeds tortoises which doesn't to my mind sit well with a sanctuary "We do it [breeding] purely as a conservation project". They also say that "We wanted to retire in Cornwall so we decided to move again ... The amount of interest we were receiving was huge so we decided to open it to the public and see if we could get enough donations to generate a self-sufficient tortoise garden." Source BBC - Cornwall Uncovered - Story Meet Cornwall's surviving dinosaurs Making a hobby 'self-sufficient' is actually running a business, unless you're a charity, which the Tortoise Garden don't appear to be. Are they breeders, a zoo, a farm (in which cases they need to be registered as a business and receive some sort of licensed inspection) or private pet keepers (in which case they can't admit the paying public by definition). They have to be something, they can't be neither fish nor fowl.
If you are going to collect revenue for exhibiting your collection of animals, it seems logical that the collection be classed as a zoo. If the collection has few or no animals that would require a dangerous wild animals licence if kept privately, then a massively-reduced rate would seem appropriate, too. I'm not up to date with zoo licencing, but maybe there are health and safety issues, or disability discrimination issues connected to having a zoo licence which might explain why the owners feel they would not be able to afford the changes.
Generally a Zoo Licence includes obligations to provide an on-site Education Service , Veterinary facilities and support of Conservation projects , amongst others . I do not know what exemptions from this are available to smaller collections , but these requirements could be very expensive .
Defra keeps a list of zoos operating in England which is based on information supplied by local authorities. The list will be reviewed annually. http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-pets/zoos/documents/zoo-list.pdf
That's an interesting list - could become an itinerary if I had more free time :-( Can anyone enlighten me as what the dispensation column means - that is what they are dispensated (?) for or with.
It refers to section 14 of the Zoo Licensing Act - basically it's to do with size of zoo & number of different species kept, and what types of inspection are necessary in relation to those facts. http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1981/cukpga_19810037_en_3#v00031-pb4-l1g25 Somewhere like Mousehole Wild Bird Hospital and Sanctuary (to take a random example) rates 14.1.a which presumably means they are exempt from the details of the Act.
