AZA accreditation

[zooman]

With the discussion on Lowry Park Zoo.

Quote okapikpr "its ethical practices. Namely those of its director and animal collection manager"

This is the reason for loosing its accreditation.

So how efective are they with the standards of enclosures. Have they used there "power" for the protection of animals in sub standard enclosures? In City zoos?

Examples?

 

[okapikpr]

This is what the AZA requires of its member institutions regarding animal exhibits:

The institution must have copies of all approved AZA Animal Care Manuals (ACMs) for species within their collection, and ensure that all animal care staff have access to them. Explanation: It is recommended that institutions regularly review the guidelines and suggestions within the ACMs, and tailor their animal care programs and exhibits accordingly.

Animals should be displayed, whenever possible, in exhibits replicating their wild habitat and in numbers sufficient to meet their social and behavioral needs. Display of single specimens should be avoided unless biologically correct for the species involved.

Institutions which include elephants in their collection must follow the AZA Standards For Elephant Management And Care. (See pages 27 - 36 of these standards for further information.)

The animal collection must be protected from weather detrimental to their health. Explanation: Animals not normally exposed to cold weather should be provided heated enclosures. Likewise, protection from excessive heat should be provided to those animals normally living in cold climates.

PHYSICAL FACILITIES
► Good housekeeping must be regularly practiced.

Explanation: Rodent control, proper drainage, clutter in work areas, and other housekeeping activities require continuous attention. Animal food must not be stored in the same area as animal drugs. Animal food and human food must not be stored in the same location (refrigerators, freezers, etc.) Cadavers awaiting necropsy must be stored in a dedicated storage area.

► Critical life-support systems for the animal collection, including but not limited to plumbing, heating, cooling, aeration, and filtration, must be equipped with a warning mechanism, and emergency backup systems must be available. All mechanical equipment should be under a preventative maintenance program as evi¬denced through a record¬-keeping system. Special equipment should be maintained under a mainte¬nance agreement, or a training record should show that staff members are trained for specified maintenance of special equipment.

Explanation: Facilities such as aquariums, tropical rainforest buildings, or other exhibits which rely on climate control for life-sustaining conditions must have emergency backup systems and a mechanism for warning if those systems are malfunctioning.

► Alarms for fire, security, and other safety alerts must be in place and in working order. Routine maintenance records should be kept, detailing safety checks of the equipment.

► Lighting must be sufficient in all indoor facilities, including night houses, so that maintenance can be accomplished and animals can be observed. A means for emergency lighting must be available.

► Lighting in public areas must be sufficient for the safe maneuvering of the visiting public.

► All walkways must be kept in good repair.

► All animal enclosures (exhibits, holding areas, hospital, and quarantine/isolation) must be of a size and complexity sufficient to provide for the animal’s physical, social, and psychological well-being; and exhibit enclosures must include provisions for the behavioral enrichment of the animals.

The AZA has denied accreditation to zoos (Micke Grove, Birmingham, Topeka, Moorpark, etc) for having inadequate exhibits and no future (financial) plans to improve/rebuild. The inspectors are volunteers, often managers and veterinarians of other zoos. The AZA understands that rebuilding ageing facilities takes time and money...and that you just cant close the exhibit and dump those animals on the humane society or rescue center. So the AZA strongly believes in a solid financial future (ie. endownments and tax support) that can always provides for the animals need and proper management of the zoo's physical plant.

Above, there is mention of animal care manuals, most SSP animals and all taxa have basic reccommendations of how animals are to be housed and cared for. And it should be mentioned that the only power the AZA does have is accreditation, they have no legal power to "punish" its members.

Here is a link to the AZA's accreditation standards:
http://www.aza.org/Accreditation/Documents/AccredStandPol.doc

 

[zooman]

Interesting reading, AZA are actually not what l had imagined. Stafed by volunters no real authority except for accreditation. I do apreciate that accreditation is highly regarded.

So l know you thought the Lowry Park Zoo example was worth being made aware of. Was this in part due to it being very unusal for zoos to loose there accrediataion? Has it happened before, if so often?

 

[Zooplantman]

It seems to me that some important zoo loses accreditation every few years. I remember years ago when the Atlanta Zoo lost its'.

Zoos can also be put on notice that their accreditation is at risk, as happened to the National Zoo (Smithsonian) a few years ago. This is a more frequent event then losing accreditation.

I suppose that lately one of the AZA's biggest requirements was increasing the standards for elephants. Zoos must comply or lose their accreditation.

Without accreditation, it becomes very difficult to obtain animals. Whenever a zoo is re-accredited (every five years) it is big news in that city. One can make the case that a group like AZA would hesitate to ostracize one of its own. But a case could also be made that accreditation is all the AZA's got. If they do not maintain certain standards they become irrelvent and powerless. So you'd think someone has to be made an example from time to time (you don't have Power you don't exercise).

Association of Zoos and Aquariums

 

[zooman]

I suppose that lately one of the AZA's biggest requirements was increasing the standards for elephants. Zoos must comply or lose their accreditation.

Interesting, a reflection of the publics attitude to zoos? What they are willing to accept or more from actvist.

 

[okapikpr]

So l know you thought the Lowry Park Zoo example was worth being made aware of. Was this in part due to it being very unusal for zoos to loose there accrediataion? Has it happened before, if so often?

I like to post American zoo related news on things I feel are significant (and there is much that I consider so) enough for zoochat members to learn about and to see if anyone might know more or have an opinion. Obviously, any zoo loosing its AZA accreditation is a big deal, like zooplantman said. Especially for a zoo like Lowry Park. The city of Tampa, which owns the animals and land but allows the zoological society to operate the zoo, requires that the zoo be AZA accredited. And like zooplantman mention, almost every year there is at least one zoo that does or is threatened with loosing its accreditation. Since this is the AZA's only real "power" with its members, it sends a signal to other zoos to pay attention and see if they need to make changes of their own.

Did you know that the Georgia Aquarium did not get accredited the first time they applied for membership?

I've also noticed as a trend that AZA inspectors as a whole tend to focus on certain specific issues at times...and its seems that they do this to send a message to all accredited facilities. For example, with the elephant standards and quarantine/medical facilities...those zoos that dont match up to expectations loose accreditation. And the process is always evolving, standards are becoming tougher and it weeds out the facilities that arent quite keeping up.

Interesting, a reflection of the publics attitude to zoos? What they are willing to accept or more from actvist.

Exactly, zoos dont need negative feedback...if there is a problem, especially when the whole mission of zoos are questioned, zoo managers take the time to see what needs to be changed if there is something to be changed. Managed captive breeding programs really didnt come into effect after the Endangered Species Act and CITIES became functional. Zoos realized that they really couldnt import animals anymore and they needed to maintain captive populations just to exist. And from this public environment awareness movement also came about immersion exhibits, too.

 

[zooman]

I like to post American zoo related news on things I feel are significant (and there is much that I consider so) enough for zoochat members to learn about and to see if anyone might know more or have an opinion.

Its contributions like yours that maintain a high level of zoo authenticity.

Did you know that the Georgia Aquarium did not get accredited the first time they applied for membership?

Really!! I would imagine that suprised the hell out of them!!! For what reasons?

And from this public environment awareness movement also came about immersion exhibits, too.

I would have guessed immersion exhibits came about from zoos being more theatrical and entertainment based.

 

[okapikpr]

The theatrics and entertainment followed after Disney's Animal Kingdom was built. This movement can easily be compared to the effect Hagenbeck's Tierpark had on the zoo world at the time of its opening.

 

[reduakari]

Actually, immersion exhibitry was "officially" begun as a complete antithesis of the "zoo as entertainment" model. At Woodland Park in Seattle, David Hancocks (sorry Allen N., he really did start the concept!), working with local landscape architects Jones and Jones (then including Jon Coe), first coined the phrase "landscape immersion" and began to build a zoo based on bringing people into exquisitely-detailed replicas of natural habitats. They bulldozed the carnival rides and puffer trains and built miniature savannas and rainforests, which today remain some of the best examples of landscape immersion anywhere.
Unfortunately, today the word "immersion" is used to describe any exhibit that is surrounded by a moat or contains a lump of crappy artificial rock. And, much of the zoo world has decided that the public is bored by "just" experiencing animals and naturalistic landscapes, and are returning to the entertainment mode epitomized to the ultimate degree by Disney. It's a sad fact that that public never really caught on to the idea of having to search for animals and accept that they might chose to hide in the lush vegetation....and at Woodland Park the carousel came back after 30 years of being banned from the home of landscape immersion.

 

[Zooplantman]

@okapikpr and @reduakari - I think you are both correct. In late 19th & early 20th centuries, zoos mixed animal display and other entertainments (pony rides, elephant rides, dog carts, Native American encampments, pygmies. carousels, band concerts, even Opera) as zoos were considered cultural destinations. Hancock and Jones & Jones tried to re-define zoos with the consciousness of the environmental 70s. It worked for a time, although the public has remained divided about it (for everyone who loves "immersion" there are others who regret that the toddlers have no place to run). But times have changed and by the 90s zoos were having trouble surviving. Jon Coe would be the first to point out that few zoos want the kind of experience he can really create.
Where once zoos counted on governments or philanthropists to keep them afloat, that source was dwindling. They needed other revenue...meanwhile society had other entertainments that competed with the zoos for family time. A sociological perspective might include that the environmentalism of the 70s was eventually overwhelmed by the Me and My Kids concentration of the 90s and since. So zoos added back the family entertainment they had eliminated. In short, zoos just follow the social and economic times. They do not lead in any substantial way.

We can talk all we like about what zoos ought to do and what they ought to be, but the zoos themselves worry about staying alive. And while some here advocate a simple enclosure offering the simple pleasure of animal viewing, (while others decry the remaining older exhibits at so many zoos) neither complaint addresses the reality of running a zoo today. Zoo directors have been charged by zoo boards to pay for themselves. Ought does not do it. Zoos cannot survive simply by pleasing people like ourselves.

I have known zoo directors who wanted to take on human population growth but feared the economic consequences. A couple of years ago, the Tulsa Zoo actually had to defend itself ($$$) against a visitor who objected to the Hindu-themed exhibit and demanded a Christian exhibit.

I am not saying that only Disney attractions can do it, but you can understand that the commercial success of DAK was very attractive to hungry zoo directors. Many of whom had their own reservations about the message it sent. This issue is as hotly debated among zoo directors as it is here.

 

[Zooplantman]

As fate would have it, here is a news article that, I believe, touches on this issue:

Tautphaus Park Zoo Consulted on Master Plan to Generate More Revenue

 

[zooman]

ought [/I]to do and what they ought to be, but the zoos themselves worry about staying alive. And while some here advocate a simple enclosure offering the simple pleasure of animal viewing, (while others decry the remaining older exhibits at so many zoos) neither complaint addresses the reality of running a zoo today. Zoo directors have been charged by zoo boards to pay for themselves. Ought does not do it. Zoos cannot survive simply by pleasing people like ourselves.

I am not saying that only Disney attractions can do it, but you can understand that the commercial success of DAK was very attractive to hungry zoo directors. Many of whom had their own reservations about the message it sent. This issue is as hotly debated among zoo directors as it is here.

As usual totally agree wth this zooplatman.

The future of all zoos is NOT to appeal to people like "us".
We are such a small portion of gate takings! In fact l have read and belive allot of people on here. Look at free entry into a zoo is something to be proud of. There will always be plenty of takers!

Although l do appreciate that Melbourne zoo has 70,000 or more FOZ members who are fully paid up that do make a big differance.

Very soon l belive zoos will be targeting the 13-24 male. As hollywood does with most of its blockbusters. It will be just interesting to see how they do this. Obviously rollercoasters at DAK and many other zoo/theme parks reflect this.

The challenge will be to make that atraction a pure animal exhibit. The drive through lion feeding cages may make a comeback. They were hugely popular here at Bullens.

PS the origions of "immersion exhibitry"

 

[ANyhuis]

Actually, immersion exhibitry was "officially" begun as a complete antithesis of the "zoo as entertainment" model. At Woodland Park in Seattle, David Hancocks (sorry Allen N., he really did start the concept!),

Wow, how did I miss this -- I was personally addressed! OK, I don't deny that Hancocks WAS a real hero in the Zoo world. But what is he today? Take a look at how he literally attacked the Los Angeles Zoo and their efforts to build the new Pachyderm Forest. He was working directly with the IDA and other anti-zoo activists.

Just an interesting story from American history: In the early days of the Revolutionary War, General Benedict Arnold was a real American hero! He was George Washington's right-hand man, his most trusted confidant. But today there are no statues of Benedict in the USA, and noone considers him a hero. Why? Because he betrayed his country, outright siding with and fighting with the enemies of America.

Just a thought. But as I said, I do NOT deny the good things Hancocks did early in his career. His mark is still on Woodland Park and ASDM.

working with local landscape architects Jones and Jones (then including Jon Coe), first coined the phrase "landscape immersion" and began to build a zoo based on bringing people into exquisitely-detailed replicas of natural habitats.

Isn't it interesting, by the way, that Jones & Jones actually built many of the best animal attractions at Disney's Animal Kingdom, as well as the San Diego Zoo, Detroit's acclaimed "Arctic Ring of Life", and even Miami's new "Amazon and Beyond".

They bulldozed the carnival rides and puffer trains and built miniature savannas and rainforests, which today remain some of the best examples of landscape immersion anywhere. ....and at Woodland Park the carousel came back after 30 years of being banned from the home of landscape immersion.

Let's not ignore what happened at Woodland Park after they got rid of the carousel, train ride, and pony ride -- attendance went way down! And it went down despite the great new revolutionary exhibits.

And, much of the zoo world has decided that the public is bored by "just" experiencing animals and naturalistic landscapes, and are returning to the entertainment mode epitomized to the ultimate degree by Disney. It's a sad fact that that public never really caught on to the idea of having to search for animals and accept that they might chose to hide in the lush vegetation.

Maybe it's NOT that they're "bored", but that they have CHILDREN with them, children with limited attention spans. It's a very, very rare child who can stand there for more than a few minutes, looking for a gorilla that's hiding in an exhibit's many "hiding places". And whether or not you like it, zoos are full of children! In fact, one recent AZA report said that over 3/4 of all zoo visitors are either children or their accompanying adults. It's a business fact -- zoos HAVE TO cater to this majority of their visitors!

But times have changed and by the 90s zoos were having trouble surviving. .... Where once zoos counted on governments or philanthropists to keep them afloat, that source was dwindling. They needed other revenue...

We can talk all we like about what zoos ought to do and what they ought to be, but the zoos themselves worry about staying alive. And while some here advocate a simple enclosure offering the simple pleasure of animal viewing, (while others decry the remaining older exhibits at so many zoos) neither complaint addresses the reality of running a zoo today. Zoo directors have been charged by zoo boards to pay for themselves. Ought does not do it.

WOW! That is my whole message!! I couldn't say it any clearer!

Zoos cannot survive simply by pleasing people like ourselves.

Exactly! We (the zoo fanatics like me and you who read ZooChat) have to realize that we are NOT like the general public, and we are not like the typical zoo visitor. While we may want "our zoos" to be devoid of things like carousels and train rides, the vast majority of zoo visitors (read: paying customers) disagrees with this viewpoint. Woodland Park learned this the hard way. They built fantastic immersion exhibits and bulldozed the kids' rides -- and what happened?

 

[Arizona Docent]

Why was Lowry Park disciplined?

The start of this whole thread talks about Lowry Park losing accreditation. I have not heard this before. Why??? Their exhibits are excellent overall and it is in fact one of my favorite zoos. Are they still unacredited, or did they get it back?

 

[mstickmanp]

The start of this whole thread talks about Lowry Park losing accreditation. I have not heard this before. Why??? Their exhibits are excellent overall and it is in fact one of my favorite zoos. Are they still unacredited, or did they get it back?

Here is the link to the thread that will answer your questions: http://www.zoochat.com/22/zoo-looses-aza-accreditation-52384/

 

[ANyhuis]

The start of this whole thread talks about Lowry Park losing accreditation. I have not heard this before. Why??? Their exhibits are excellent overall and it is in fact one of my favorite zoos. Are they still unacredited, or did they get it back?

As Mstickmanp just pointed out, the controversy is due to the unethical actions of their former Director, who resigned from the Zoo in mid-December. I agree with you, Arizona Docent, in your fondness for this Zoo. While no Zoo is perfect, this one is making great strides to present itself as a real tourist attraction. It's perhaps the best place to view and study manatees, and its many fun and education children's rides led to the Zoo being named "the nation's best zoo for children" by Child Magazine.

 

[okapikpr]

Accreditation isnt always about the zoo's exhibits...