Over the last couple of months I’ve been thinking about this. Many zoos I’ve been too are updating and the AZA brought forth new policies regarding elephants at zoos. What are some new policies that you would like to see brought forth for the better enrichment, and well being of animals at zoos. Here’s just a few that I thought of * Animals who generally live in warmer climates that are held at zoos in colder climates must have indoor exhibit space. The exhibit space must allow the animals to roam and based on the species dictates the size of space. Holding pens and small craps corners with all concrete floors do not count as indoor exhibit space. (This can also be the reverse for colder animals in warmer places) * Polar bears/ bears can not have concrete and water exhibits only. There needs to be a variety in soils and and space for them to exhibited in.
I totally agree with these. I would add: 1. Dolphins cannot be kept in featureless tanks. Their tanks need an attempt at mimicking an undersea feature. 2. Raptors must not be pinioned or wing clipped. Seeing vultures sitting on logs covered with excrement or hopping around an enclosure is so unpalatable to me. 3. A small area of the zoo should contain local fauna. Zoos are generally in cities so it is beneficial for residents to also see species that may be found not far from their home.
Here are mine: * Big apes, elephants and cetaceans must require an extra permission to take proper care of them. * Zoos must breed and reintroduce as much as humanly possible. * Much stricter control of visitor misbehavior.
Heavier fines for visitors caught banging on glass Ban on animal rights activists protest within five metres of zoo grounds
First up, I'm not sure calling for a protest ban is a 'good look' for zoos. Or society.... Secondly, why five metres? There will already be regulations that prevent the protests from obstructing entrances and exits which would already have this effect.
There is literally no functional way to enforce this rule. As a general rule (and to my knowledge most facilities enforce this quite strongly), legally protesters can not protest on grounds owned/rented by whatever zoological facility they are protesting on without express permission of the land owner/renter. However, if they protest on land just outside of that boundary (so generally on the publicly owned sidewalks/roadways leading into the zoo), there is legally nothing they can do about it whatsoever, assuming the protesters aren't doing anything generally illegal (blocking roadways, actually assault, etc...). As for protesters that sneak into a facility, its the same thing. They are always removed by security and dealt with accordingly. Not to poo-poo on it or anything, it its a rather null-point sort of a rule to wish for.
What about reading this forum and checking whether some of these policies (like polar bears) maybe are law since several years?
While a good idea I don't like that as a requirement. Most urban zoos are a haven for local wildlife (raccoons opossums even foxes are common) I think signage pointing that out and landscaping to attract more wildlife are more appropriate
I think it'd be nice if facilities housing cetaceans would put barriers in between the guests and the glass so that stupid guests can't bang on exhibit windows
Some zoos attempt this; the Barcelona zoo's Aquarama (now sadly due to be demolished) had an iron railing separating the guests from the windows. However, lots of kids either sneaked under the bar or parents let them through... -_- And if my memory doesn't fail me, they have the same for the Beluga whale and walrus pools in the Oceanografic, in València. Actually, maybe ALL glass-windowed enclosures need to do this... It's sad, because it's really nice for animals and people to only have 5cm of glass separating them, but if people are unable to behave, what are we going to do about it?
Although people knocking/banging on glass are annoying for me too, I'm against the suggestion to put barriers between guests and glass. Why "punish" serious/decent people who can behave theirselves? Also, mostly the glass is that thick nowadays, that there is only a minimum of noise for animals and/or visitors (except when an animals like a gorilla or a lion is jumping towards it).
The glass that encloses any tank for cetaceans is so think (multi-layered and laminated) that I wonder how much vibration from some fool banging on it reaches the animals.
What is meant by "exhibit"? What is meant by "roam"? A minimum number of square meters? Acres? All the zoo accreditation associations have standards for indoor holding. How do you decide when enough space is enough space? How is that number decided? What about animals who cannot go outdoors for ten days per year due to outdoor conditions? What is the minimum indoor restricted time that brings these regulations into effect?
I think that these are great questions and something that many of the AZA facilities need to take a look at. Several zoo though meeting some of the requirements, many seem to be still exhibiting animals in less than ideal environments. Recognizing that many AZA facilities are transforming to the new criteria and standards, some seem to still be stuck in the old concrete exhibits. So the question is how do you meet the changing requirements in a timely fashion with the knowledge that we have now, thats different than when many of the exhibits were built. By understanding that, I feel will help to shape the future of animal care. As for animals who are found in warmer environments that are being housed in colder environments should we as a body take a look and providing the same care to designing their indoor enclosures as we do the outside? If the animals are to spend several months/ days inside due to weather condition should their indoor enclosures be similar to their outdoor, maybe not in full size and design but similar in ways that it provides more enrichment? Again it comes back to several of the questions that were ask and defining terminology.
Yes, all important. It must be recognized that as understandings of improved animal care change it is a slow process to raise the funds and reorganize a facility's land use to build new improved (and usually larger and more complex) buildings There is another consideration: each zoo makes its own decisions about when outdoor weather conditions are ok to allow animals outside. The design of the outdoor enclosure may also extend the suitable season or shorten it. As Curators change these decisions may change. So designing/budgeting for exhibit complexes becomes complicated
I agree, however I haven't heard the AZA put into place similar requirements like they have with the elephants to other species. Is it time for associations to start putting deadlines on animal care in order to remain in good standing with them. This is not to punish zoos but to jump start the process.
I have heard that other species requirements (similar to elephants) are indeed being discussed. Not surprisingly, because of the huge costs and disruptions involved, these things are slow to gain sufficient support among zoo directors and Boards.
I agree it's not ideal but I think several facilities have become complacent. I think a divide is happening that isn't that good for the overall health of the organization(s). The zoos that seem to be in a constant state of updating even small updates between larger ones are becoming more respected while the other ones are being pushed to the sidelines. Maybe new species requirements need to happen in order for the spark rejuvenation of facilities.
