{"id":140763,"date":"2019-08-19T12:00:40","date_gmt":"2019-08-19T11:00:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=140763"},"modified":"2019-08-17T09:57:31","modified_gmt":"2019-08-17T08:57:31","slug":"hundreds-of-zoos-and-aquariums-accused-of-mistreating-animals","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2019\/08\/hundreds-of-zoos-and-aquariums-accused-of-mistreating-animals\/","title":{"rendered":"Hundreds of Zoos and Aquariums Accused of Mistreating Animals"},"content":{"rendered":"

Many “gold-standard” zoos and aquariums worldwide let visitors pet, feed, and take selfies with animals, a new report finds.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\"\"<\/a>

In a new report by the organization World Animal Protection, the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums is criticized for not holding member and affiliated facilities to high enough standards of animal welfare. Here at Avilon Zoo, in the Philippines, an orangutan dressed in human clothes is used as a photo prop for tourists. Photograph Courtesy World Animal Protection<\/p><\/div>\n

15 Aug 2018 – <\/em>In a new report, an animal welfare group has flagged hundreds of zoos affiliated with the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA) for mistreating animals, including making big cats perform in gladiator-style shows, elephants play basketball, and diapered chimpanzees ride scooters.<\/p>\n

WAZA<\/a>, founded in 1935, is a global organization of zoos and aquariums that promotes conservation and animal welfare. Unlike the U.S.-based Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA), which requires its members to undergo an accreditation process, WAZA is a member organization that doesn\u2019t require accreditation.\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

According to Gavrielle Kirk-Cohen, WAZA\u2019s director of communications, the organization relies on its accrediting member associations to enforce their standards among their member zoos and aquariums. Becoming a WAZA member requires filling out an application, submitting letters of support from two other WAZA members, and paying a fee. Zoos, for example, must pay 2,500 euros, or nearly $2,800.<\/p>\n

According to the report<\/a>, by World Animal Protection (WAP), an international nonprofit organization that promotes welfare and humane treatment, 75 percent of WAZA\u2019s 1,241 members\u2014including those defined by WAP as \u201cindirect\u201d members (zoos or aquariums that belong to WAZA-member associations)\u2014offer at least one animal-visitor interaction. WAZA, which doesn\u2019t recognize indirect members, claims only 400 members worldwide. Such contact, the report notes, can be damaging for animals\u2019 mental and physical well-being and often requires training methods such as premature separation from mothers, physical restraint, and pain- and fear-based conditioning.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Coup De Main Magazine<\/p><\/div>\n

\u201cZoos have this almost sacred kind of role in conservation,\u201d says Neil D\u2019Cruze, WAP\u2019s global wildlife advisor who contributed to the report. \u201cIt\u2019s time for [WAZA] to take a step back and take the leadership role that we as visitors, let alone WAP as an NGO, need them to take.\u201d<\/p>\n

D\u2019Cruze says WAP included indirect members in the report because it believes WAZA should, at a minimum, outline a code of ethics and animal welfare policy for those zoos and aquariums, which it doesn\u2019t now.<\/p>\n

The report\u2019s researchers identified a dozen venues of particular concern, which they visited alongside researchers from the animal advocacy organization Change For Animals Foundation. These venues include African Lion Safari in Canada, Cango Wildlife Ranch in South Africa, and SeaWorld San Antonio in Texas. WAP considers SeaWorld to be an indirect member because it\u2019s accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA), which is a member of WAZA.<\/p>\n

The WAP report criticized African Lion Safari, which also features other African animals, for offering elephant rides.<\/p>\n

Representatives from African Lion Safari did not respond to a request for comment.<\/p>\n

The report said Cango Wildlife Ranch \u201coffers visitors the chance to pet cheetahs and servals in an enclosed yard, taking selfies with the animals under the supervision of staff members.\u201d<\/p>\n

Tammy Moult, assistant director of tourism at Cango Wildlife Ranch, said they \u201cwere absolutely broken\u201d at Cango\u2019s inclusion in the WAP report. \u201cWe started doing substantial research on [WAP] and found a lot of scorned and unhappy ex-employees, donators, contributors, and many cracks and holes in the organization became clear without much effort,\u201d she said in an email. \u201cThe \u2018facts\u2019 are grossly unfounded and irresponsible.\u201d<\/p>\n

WAP notes that SeaWorld San Antonio offers shows and opportunities to swim, pet, and pose with dolphins, which respond to commands from trainers.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Animals like Leena are abused and mistreated by their human captors so they can be broken down and trained to perform in front of humans. iSpot.tv<\/p><\/div>\n

In an emailed statement, SeaWorld San Antonio spokesperson Suzanne Pelisson-Beasley wrote, \u201cAccredited zoos and aquariums like SeaWorld play an important role in raising the bar on animal welfare practices, advancing vital conservation efforts, and facilitating marine mammal rescues.\u201d<\/p>\n

The AZA, of which SeaWorld San Antonio is an accredited member, says the facility meets or exceeds their accreditation requirements. \u201cAccredited facilities, like SeaWorld San Antonio, hold themselves to high standards and are still only a fraction of facilities that hold and display animals,\u201d AZA president and CEO Dan Ashe wrote in an emailed statement.<\/p>\n

In a statement, WAZA said WAP\u2019s report was incorrect and that the organization takes animal welfare seriously. \u201cWAZA is in accord with WAP that such practices have no place in a modern zoo or aquarium,\u201d the statement<\/a> says. \u201cUnfortunately, the report contains a number of inaccuracies, including naming institutions which are not WAZA members and thus which WAZA has limited jurisdiction over.\u201d<\/p>\n

Two of WAP\u2019s venues of concern\u2014Dolphin Island in Singapore and Jungle Cat World in Canada\u2014are not WAZA members, according to Kirk-Cohen. Jungle Cat World lost its WAZA membership last year after it resigned from Canada\u2019s Accredited Zoos and Aquariums (CAZA). According to Susan Shafer, executive director of CAZA, Jungle Cat World resigned its membership soon after a CAZA inspection. She couldn\u2019t comment on the inspection\u2019s findings, which are confidential. Kirk-Cohen says it\u2019s unclear if Dolphin Island was ever a WAZA member.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Deborah Meaden – World Animal Protection<\/p><\/div>\n

D\u2019Cruze says Dolphin Island<\/a> and Jungle Cat World<\/a> were members when WAP compiled their report earlier this year and are listed as members in WAZA\u2019s 2017 annual report<\/a>\u2014the most recent available report. Dolphin Island<\/a> still has the WAZA logo on its website.<\/p>\n

Pointing fingers<\/strong><\/p>\n

Of the 1,241 venues WAP surveyed, 940 were, by its definition, indirect members. The main point of contention between WAZA and WAP is over these indirect members. According to Kirk-Cohen, zoos and aquariums WAP listed as indirect members in the report are not members, and WAZA can\u2019t impose its ethics standards on non-members.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt is misleading to state that the remaining seven [of the 12 venues of particular concern] are \u2018indirect WAZA members,\u2019\u201d she says. \u201cWe\u2019re quite limited in capacity in what we can do, especially when it comes to non-members,\u201d she says.<\/p>\n

But D\u2019Cruze insists that WAZA has a responsibility toward these indirect members and that they can punish direct members who accredit unethical indirect members. \u201c[WAZA] might not be able to enforce change in an indirect member venue, but they have set themselves up as the gold standard\u2014as such, surely they have a responsibility to proactively state what the red lines are for wild animal-visitor interactions,\u201d he says. \u201cIt has a critical role that it should not shy away from.\u201d<\/p>\n

CAZA\u2019s Shafer says quibbling over membership technicalities is not the answer here. \u201cThe big issue is not what label one organization has or another organization has,\u201d she says. \u201cIt\u2019s can we learn something from this to help improve the conditions of the animals?\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Elephants in chains – boyeatsworld<\/p><\/div>\n

WAZA\u2019s code of ethics and animal welfare<\/a>, which is binding for members, states that if they use wild animals in presentations, they must \u201cfocus on natural behavior\u201d and \u201cnot demean or trivialize the animal in any way.\u201d Non-compliance can result in suspension or expulsion from WAZA, Kirk-Cohen says. She says that during the past year three members have had their WAZA membership terminated after losing accreditation with their regional or national association.<\/p>\n

D\u2019Cruze says these standards are a step in the right direction but also that they\u2019re not specific enough.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt\u2019s really great, and there\u2019s some really positive language in there that helps set the scene, but where\u2019s the specifics?\u201d he says. \u201cWhat actually constitutes unnatural and demeaning?\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cConsidering the vast range of species our members take care of,\u201d Kirk-Cohen says, it\u2019s not possible to provide a list of unnatural or demeaning behaviors, but they\u2019re ones animals wouldn\u2019t exhibit in the wild, Kirk-Cohen says. WAZA relies on accrediting associations to set more specific standards.<\/p>\n

Stressful experiences<\/strong><\/p>\n

World Animal Protection\u2019s report describes venues that offered encounters where visitors can stroke, kiss, and cuddle with big cats, shows where humans \u201csurf\u201d on the backs of dolphins, and performances in which elephants paint pictures with their trunks. The most common interaction was petting\u2014offered by 43 percent of facilities, most often with mammals and reptiles. About a third offered walking or swimming through an enclosure, 30 percent had performances involving wildlife, and 23 percent had hand-feeding experiences, in which tourists can provide food and water for captive wild animals, which brings them into direct\u2014potentially dangerous\u2014contact with them.<\/p>\n

These experiences are inherently stressful for animals, says Nancy Blaney, director of government affairs for the Animal Welfare Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit.<\/p>\n

\u201cSome facilities just kind of bill this as wildlife tourism, and it\u2019s really nothing of the sort,\u201d she says. \u201cWildlife tourism is the kind of thing where you go and you see wildlife in their own environs, in their own milieu\u2014not where you go and you get to take your picture with the tiger, or you get to interact with a monkey that\u2019s dressed up in street clothes, or kissing an orangutan, or something like that. That is not wildlife tourism; that\u2019s exploitation.\u201d (Read National Geographic<\/em>‘s investigation on the dark truth behind wildlife tourism<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

Wild animals belong in the wild, but in some instances\u2014for example, when an animal\u2019s been a rescued from a roadside zoo\u2014that\u2019s not possible, D\u2019Cruze says. The problem, he says, is when an organization \u201cslips over into commercial use and entertainment.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cGetting [animals] to the point where they\u2019re completely safe around people involves a whole level of different training and breaking of the animal\u2019s spirit,\u201d D\u2019Cruze says. \u201cThere\u2019s a difference between a domesticated species like a cat or a dog that\u2019s been changed over thousands of years biologically and behaviorally to be around people, and an animal that\u2019s been broken to be tame.\u201d<\/p>\n

____________________________________________________<\/p>\n

Wildlife Watch is an investigative reporting project between National Geographic Society and National Geographic Partners focusing on wildlife crime and exploitation. Read more Wildlife Watch stories here.<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

Rachel Fobar is a National Geographic Society wildlife trade investigative reporter, covering wildlife crime and exploitation for Wildlife Watch<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n

Go to Original \u2013 nationalgeographic.com<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

15 Aug 2018 – In a new report, an animal welfare group has flagged hundreds of zoos affiliated with the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums for mistreating animals, including making big cats perform in gladiator-style shows, elephants play basketball, and diapered chimpanzees ride scooters.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":140768,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[170],"tags":[229,786,619,570,232,120,840,857,651,109,287,647,831,991,126,75],"class_list":["post-140763","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-animal-rights-vegetarianism","tag-activism","tag-animal-justice","tag-animal-rights","tag-animals","tag-capitalism","tag-conflict","tag-cruelty","tag-exploitation","tag-justice","tag-politics","tag-power","tag-slavery","tag-veganism","tag-vegetarianism","tag-violence","tag-world"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/140763","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=140763"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/140763\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/140768"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=140763"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=140763"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=140763"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}