Definition of a zoo

birdsandbats

birdsandbats

Well-Known Member
5+ year member
This has been debated a lot on this site. I think it would be interesting if everyone listed their definition of a zoo. We could also MAYBE use this to set "official" standards for this site.

Here are my requirements:

  • The facility must be open to the public for at least three months of the year.
  • The primary purpose of the facility is to exhibit captive animals OR to teach about nature via captive animals.
  • The facility must display at least 3 species, at least two of which must be exotic (non-domestic) species.
  • You must be able to visit the facility without a guided tour.
  • The primary purpose must not be too sell animals. The facility may still count if it does sell animals, as long as it is not the primary purpose.
  • The facility must be permanent and be at a fixed location.
 
I visited this "Family Fun Farm" in England a few years ago. It had all the standard domestics along with a few Red-Necked Wallaby, Greater Rhea, Red Fox and a small selection of Birds of Prey for a show. Its open more than three months of the year, and is in a fixed Location. So does this classify as Zoo then under your requirements, because in my book It doesn't.
I agree with all your points but I would change the third point to:
  • The Facility primarily keeps exotic animals. The number of exotic species is greater than the number of domestic species.
I'd maybe also add that the primary focus of the facility is not to rescue animals and rehabilitate them for being released back in the wild.
 
birdsandbats said:
This has been debated a lot on this site. I think it would be interesting if everyone listed their definition of a zoo. We could also MAYBE use this to set "official" standards for this site.

Here are my requirements:

  • The facility must be open to the public for at least three months of the year.
  • The primary purpose of the facility is to exhibit captive animals OR to teach about nature via captive animals.
  • The facility must display at least 3 species, at least two of which must be exotic (non-domestic) species.
  • You must be able to visit the facility without a guided tour.
  • The primary purpose must not be too sell animals. The facility may still count if it does sell animals, as long as it is not the primary purpose.
  • The facility must be permanent and be at a fixed location.
Click to expand...
Would'nt a private collection of animals, not open to the public, still be a zoo?
 
This is what I considere a zoo (and I think that my definition matches with the one used by Zootierliste):
-It must be a public and permanent collection that includes at least some wild forms of species.

That includes:
-Public aquariums
-Butterfly houses
-Vivarium rooms in natural history museums
-Public hunting ranches with exotic species
-Nature interpretation centers that houses live animals

That excludes:
-Pet shops (non permanent)
-Animal fairs/exhibitions, Middle Age raptor shows, etc (non permanent)
-Private collections (non public)
-Farms (only includes domestic forms).
-Restaurants with aquariums holding the next dinner (non permanent)
 
§42 of the German Bundesnaturschutzgesetz (BNatSchG) defines a zoo as
(...) dauerhafte Einrichtungen, in denen lebende Tiere wild lebender Arten zwecks Zurschaustellung während eines Zeitraumes von mindestens sieben Tagen im Jahr gehalten werden.
= permanent institutions that keep live specimens of wild animals for the purpose of public exhibition during a time span of at least seven days in one year.
§ 42 BNatSchG - Einzelnorm

This is based on the definition mentioned in the EU Council Directive 1999/22/EC of 29 March 1999 relating to the keeping of wild animals in zoos:

(...) "zoos" means all permanent establishments where animals of wild species are kept for exhibition to the public for 7 or more days a year, with the exception of circuses, pet shops and establishments which Member States exempt from the requirements of this Directive on the grounds that they do not exhibit a significant number of animals or species to the public and that the exemption will not jeopardise the objectives of this Directive.
 
birdsandbats said:
  • The facility must display at least 3 species, at least two of which must be exotic (non-domestic) species.
  • You must be able to visit the facility without a guided tour.
Click to expand...
These two appear to be a bit arbitrary. Could you please explicate this?
 
squirrelmonkey said:
I'd maybe also add that the primary focus of the facility is not to rescue animals and rehabilitate them for being released back in the wild.
Click to expand...
I actually disagree with this one. A facility meant to rescue animals and rehabilitate them for release can be considered a zoo - as long as it has a permanent collection of non-releasable animals.

Batto said:
These two appear to be a bit arbitrary. Could you please explicate this?
Click to expand...
These are simply my requirements. A farm park with at least two exotic species is - in my opinion - a zoo. As for the other one, I just think that if it is only open for a guided tour, it can't really be counted as a public collection. (No offence to your facility, Batto).
 
Last edited:
birdsandbats said:
These are simply my requirements. A farm park with at least two exotic species is - in my opinion - a zoo. As for the other one, I just think that if it is only open for a guided tour, it can't really be counted as a public collection. (No offence to your facility, Batto).
Click to expand...
No offence taken ;). At least you reduced the necessary number of "required" species from three to two. ^^
 
I don't agree with the "without a guided tour" point. If it's fully private, that "might" not count. However, if you can view it through a guided tour, it count from my point of view.
 
Howletts zoo in the UK started as a private collection that then opened to the public. However, on one or two occasions I believe it was closed to the public by the owner due to disputes with government or local government regarding tax and health and safety. I can't recall the exact details but how would you classify Howletts? is it a zoo when open to the public and stops being a zoo when closed to the public? and how long a period must a zoo be closed to the public to stop being a zoo? does it cease to be a zoo at 17:00 hours and become a zoo again at 10:00?
 
birdsandbats said:
This has been debated a lot on this site. I think it would be interesting if everyone listed their definition of a zoo. We could also MAYBE use this to set "official" standards for this site.

Here are my requirements:

  • The facility must be open to the public for at least three months of the year.
  • The primary purpose of the facility is to exhibit captive animals OR to teach about nature via captive animals.
  • The facility must display at least 3 species, at least two of which must be exotic (non-domestic) species.
  • You must be able to visit the facility without a guided tour.
  • The primary purpose must not be too sell animals. The facility may still count if it does sell animals, as long as it is not the primary purpose.
  • The facility must be permanent and be at a fixed location.
Click to expand...
So a farm park with lots of domestics, and a pair each of Golden and Silver Pheasants, is a zoo?
 
FBBird said:
So a farm park with lots of domestics, and a pair each of Golden and Silver Pheasants, is a zoo?
Click to expand...

Absolutely - in UK law there is no distinction on number, or timing, or charging.

Simply - ANY collection which displays non-domestic animals to the public for more than 7 days in any calendar year, requires a licence under the Zoo Licencing Act and is considered a zoo. So one Golden Pheasant, or Wallaby, or Chipmunk, or Mandarin Duck, or Barn Owl would be enough. Once the farm park adds its first such pheasant (and requires a Zoo Licence on day 8), then it also requires planning permission for 'change-of-use' for its site, from agricultural land to a 'zoo'.

The Zoo Licencing Act is administered locally by the Environment Health Department of the local District Council, who can issue an 'exemption' not from the requirement for a licence or planning permission, but simply from the full multi-layer, multi-inspector inspection process. This does not mean that the establishment is not classed as a zoo, only that it requires a lower level of inspection - and would probably be the case for the farm park with its pheasant.
 
Andrew Swales said:
Absolutely - in UK law there is no distinction on number, or timing, or charging.

Simply - ANY collection which displays non-domestic animals to the public for more than 7 days in any calendar year, requires a licence under the Zoo Licencing Act and is considered a zoo. So one Golden Pheasant, or Wallaby, or Chipmunk, or Mandarin Duck, or Barn Owl would be enough. Once the farm park adds its first such pheasant (and requires a Zoo Licence on day 8), then it also requires planning permission for 'change-of-use' for its site, from agricultural land to a 'zoo'.

The Zoo Licencing Act is administered locally by the Environment Health Department of the local District Council, who can issue an 'exemption' not from the requirement for a licence or planning permission, but simply from the full multi-layer, multi-inspector inspection process. This does not mean that the establishment is not classed as a zoo, only that it requires a lower level of inspection - and would probably be the case for the farm park with its pheasant.
Click to expand...
Ornamental waterfowl on a park lake? Parrot in a pub?

On a slightly different tack, I got severely told off @ Monkeyworld for referring to it as a zoo. Which it is -- got a zoo licence!
 
FBBird said:
Ornamental waterfowl on a park lake? Parrot in a pub?

On a slightly different tack, I got severely told off @ Monkeyworld for referring to it as a zoo. Which it is -- got a zoo licence!
Click to expand...

Ornamental waterfowl on a park lake and pub parrot - yes, both certainly - there is no mention of the birds having to be resident, pinioned or not - simply non-domestic - >7 days - accessible to the public. So yes as long as the pub is a public bar and not a private members club of some kind.

Tropical fish tank in the dentists waiting room - unclear... as although many spp would be non-domestic, is it 'public' or for clients only?

Farm shop with a crocodile (yes!) - certainly...

Monkey World, or a farm park, or zoo farm, or rescue sanctuary is/are quite free to call themselves what they chose; but in UK law once they open to the public on that 8th day with their non domestic animal(s), they are legally a 'zoo', require a zoo licence, planning permission for zoo use of the land, and the whole package - save possibly the full inspection team, at DEFRA discretion. .

Three other pieces of legislation blur the edges -
'Performing Animals Act' - passed to control traveling circuses, so maybe the pub parrot? - it would be down to the publican to convince the local authority one way or the other.
'Pet Shop Licence' - if the parrot is for sale, and the pub rated as a pet shop,
'Dangerous Wild Animal Licence' which the farm shop would need for its crocodile (or any other DWA listed spp) for the first 7 days, and then a Zoo Licence from day 8 onward...

Most UK legislation is equally disjointed, even maybe more so.

But, it keeps the bureaucrats and their teams of 'experts' in work...
 
Andrew Swales said:
Ornamental waterfowl on a park lake and pub parrot - yes, both certainly - there is no mention of the birds having to be resident, pinioned or not - simply non-domestic - >7 days - accessible to the public. So yes as long as the pub is a public bar and not a private members club of some kind.
. . . . .
​
Three other pieces of legislation blur the edges -
'Performing Animals Act' - passed to control traveling circuses, so maybe the pub parrot? - it would be down to the publican to convince the local authority one way or the other.
'Pet Shop Licence' - if the parrot is for sale, and the pub rated as a pet shop,
'Dangerous Wild Animal Licence' which the farm shop would need for its crocodile (or any other DWA listed spp) for the first 7 days, and then a Zoo Licence from day 8 onward...

Most UK legislation is equally disjointed, even maybe more so.

But, it keeps the bureaucrats and their teams of 'experts' in work...
Click to expand...

This is not sensible. A parrot in a pub (or anywhere else) is not a collection. Waterfowl on park lakes are usually 'wild' birds, be they native or introduced species, or on the other hand, domesticated or semi-domesticated varieties (such as Cayuga mallards). To qualify as a collection, I would suggest that the birds would have to be deliberately introduced to the lake and prevented from leaving (probably by pinioning and fencing) and consequently fed and cared for by an appointed person. Most parks are owned by local authorities anyway, so there should be no problem about issuing a licence if the authority decides one is required after the appropriate formalities.
The other Acts mentioned cover very different situations: circuses, pet shops and private collections are different from zoos and so need different controls. There is no blurring at the edges, because the legislation clearly defines which Act applies in each case. There were some problems in the early days of system, and some animal shelters had to close to the public or close down completely. But I think things have generally settled down now.
 
gentle lemur said:
This is not sensible. A parrot in a pub (or anywhere else) is not a collection. Waterfowl on park lakes are usually 'wild' birds, be they native or introduced species, or on the other hand, domesticated or semi-domesticated varieties (such as Cayuga mallards). To qualify as a collection, I would suggest that the birds would have to be deliberately introduced to the lake and prevented from leaving (probably by pinioning and fencing) and consequently fed and cared for by an appointed person. Most parks are owned by local authorities anyway, so there should be no problem about issuing a licence if the authority decides one is required after the appropriate formalities.
The other Acts mentioned cover very different situations: circuses, pet shops and private collections are different from zoos and so need different controls. There is no blurring at the edges, because the legislation clearly defines which Act applies in each case. There were some problems in the early days of system, and some animal shelters had to close to the public or close down completely. But I think things have generally settled down now.
Click to expand...

Whether or not gentle lemur thinks it is 'sensible' makes no difference to the legislation - which contrary to what he states does not say how many specimens make up a 'collection' - does not differentiate between species which are native or introduced, or 'wild' - (it simply states that a Zoo Licence is needed if the species concerned is non-domestic and the public have access for 8 days in any year) - and does not give Local Authorities the right to treat themselves differently to any other applicant.

The situations covered by the other Acts are not always 'very different' at all, and there are numerous obvious instances where private collections have become zoos, as indeed have pet shops, farm shops, farm parks and circuses - involving the same owners, the same property, and the same staff; just a change of category. The reverse has happened too of course where a zoo has changed category and become a farm park. All that has to happen is for its golden pheasant to die, and it no longer needs its zoo licence....
 
Andrew Swales said:
Whether or not gentle lemur thinks it is 'sensible' makes no difference to the legislation - which contrary to what he states does not say how many specimens make up a 'collection' - does not differentiate between species which are native or introduced, or 'wild' - (it simply states that a Zoo Licence is needed if the species concerned is non-domestic and the public have access for 8 days in any year) - and does not give Local Authorities the right to treat themselves differently to any other applicant.

The situations covered by the other Acts are not always 'very different' at all, and there are numerous obvious instances where private collections have become zoos, as indeed have pet shops, farm shops, farm parks and circuses - involving the same owners, the same property, and the same staff; just a change of category. The reverse has happened too of course where a zoo has changed category and become a farm park. All that has to happen is for its golden pheasant to die, and it no longer needs its zoo licence....
Click to expand...
English words do not change their meanings when they used in Acts of Parliament. The relevant OED definitions of the word collection are 'a group of things or people' and 'a group of accumulated items of a particular kind'. One parrot is not a group. If birds can simply come and go from a lake there is no question of accumulation. Note that the Secretary of State's guidelines use the plural 'animals' with regard to zoos and explicitly state that a zoo can apply for exemption from the EU Directive (meaning the licensing process) on the grounds that they do not exhibit a significant number of animals or species to the public and that this exemption will not jeopardise the objectives of the Directive (which a single golden pheasant could hardly do).
Of course collections can change from one type to another. They may continue to have the same animals, staff, property and so on, but if the terms on which people visit them are changed, it is obvious that there must be different requirements and standards for animal housing, animal management, public facilities etc.
Please note that I did say that local authorities have to perform the appropriate formalities when they issue licences to themselves: zoo licencing always involves the Zoo Inspectorate and the application of these guidelines.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top