Zoo welfare reforms

It’s rather funny , these days if you get personal and label someone a conspiracy theorist you’ve practically lost the arguement as you don’t have any substance to your own arguement

Nope, you lose the argument when you make a claim that you cannot provide any further evidence or details for when challenged, as we have seen with the claims that multiple zoos are leaving BIAZA due to the reforms. Despite several people asking which zoos, those making such claims have so far failed to name a single one or provide any other evidence that it is happening.
 
Massively off-topic but I don't think that's true at all.
Yes. '50 or so other species common on social media' is enough to give the exotics an advantage because sadly I find it hard to image a British child naming that many native species.

It’s still in keeping with the topic of animal welfare but why do you disagree that the UK is not ahead of most of Europe when it comes to animal welfare?

I’ve said before but some of the very first laws in the world relating to animal welfare were passed in the UK dating back to the 19th century, as well as almost all the main global animal protection groups originating here, RSPCA etc.
 
Yes absolutely, the changes already made under the old requirements would be contradictory and opposing every THREE years, between one inspection and the next - even for the same zoo, with the same animals, the same staff and the same inspectors; with one team over-turning everything put in place by the previous one.
No industry can plan, invest, train and recruit (and survive) with these pressures.
The new requirements give inspectors more powers and this will increase not decrease. The discrimination resulting already, was a major arguement put forward by some zoos in the first round of consultations, but has been ignored by Government who did the opposite and deliberately made the situation worse.
If you ignore this, you are blinkered and naive. Go on dismissing the truth as a conspiracy will not affect the outcome. Time will tell. We have to live with it as there is no arguement and no appeal.

Agreed - but it’s something that governments do best it’s a drip by drip approach - if they were too radical they’d been uproar , but no doubt they will implement future legislation in decades to come.
 
Nope, you lose the argument when you make a claim that you cannot provide any further evidence or details for when challenged, as we have seen with the claims that multiple zoos are leaving BIAZA due to the reforms. Despite several people asking which zoos, those making such claims have so far failed to name a single one or provide any other evidence that it is happening.
This is not true. Any zoos leaving or planning to leave BIAZA are NOT due to the reforms which have come in regardless - any such decision would be down to the new BIAZA internal accreditation process. The two overlap in so many areas, that it is rather difficult to see why BIAZA needed to do this - unless they too can see that the Act itself is being administered so 'unevenly' by the Government inspection teams, that they needed a consistent set of standards for their membership that the Act failed (and still fails) to give.

It’s still in keeping with the topic of animal welfare but why do you disagree that the UK is not ahead of most of Europe when it comes to animal welfare?
The key point here perhaps is the word most. It would appear that the standards in a dolphinarium in Portugal may not be the same as those in a zoo in Denmark or The Netherlands, for example. To a degree this can be explained/excused by the different standards and cultures of different countries.
The standards in the UK are very variable too, perhaps to an equal degree, which makes the situtation worse, as it is supposed to be a 'United' Kingdom.
The zoo licence allows for that by allowing one team of inspectors to use different standards for one zoo, to those used for another - or even different standards every three years under the same regulations for the same zoo.
The recent changes have made this discrimination worse, not better.
 
Last edited:
[MODERATOR NOTE - the following is cross-posted from the Twycross news thread to provide required context for the ensuing discussion, and is a response to a question re: the likelihood of Twycross keeping Malayan Tapirs in the future, after ceasing to keep Lowland Tapir]

For now, no.
The issue is due to new legislations, Tapirs now require an indoor heated pool. Something Twycross cannot give to them.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For now, no.
The issue is due to new legislations, Tapirs now require an indoor heated pool. Something Twycross cannot give to them.
Well, that's great... at this rate, a lot of zoos will have to either move their tapirs across to other enclosures (to allow for an indoor pool to be added if they don't have one already) or just go out of the species entirely! :(

I can't say I'm that surprised to hear Twycross are phasing them out from their collection, but its still a shame as they used to hold both the Brazilian and Malayan tapirs for many years (even though I've only seen the latter at Chester)
 
With out reading into this new legislation surely the zoo industry should be allowed to have there current stock of animals live out there lives as per previous regulations. Given if that’s there are 39 holders of tapirs in this instance I would guess at least 30 of those don’t have heated indoor pools like Twycross and I am sure Chester, linton, jimmys farm and the tens of farm parks / small collections also don’t. And in those cases especially won’t be able to afford to build and run such. Where do they think these animals will go, given your probably looking at a min of two at each collection that’s at least 60 to rehome just in tapirs
 
With out reading into this new legislation surely the zoo industry should be allowed to have there current stock of animals live out there lives as per previous regulations. Given if that’s there are 39 holders of tapirs in this instance I would guess at least 30 of those don’t have heated indoor pools like Twycross and I am sure Chester, linton, jimmys farm and the tens of farm parks / small collections also don’t. And in those cases especially won’t be able to afford to build and run such. Where do they think these animals will go, given your probably looking at a min of two at each collection that’s at least 60 to rehome just in tapirs
They will be given a reasonable time period within which these amendments should be made.
 
They will be given a reasonable time period within which these amendments should be made.
Ok i get that but how many are able to make those changes financially given in most cases this would need to be not just pools but larger houses to accommodate this and much larger running costs. Given a larger collection such as Twycross has already given up on them these smaller collections where they are possibly there star attraction will be in a situation where as they can’t afford to do it / can’t afford not to
 
  • Like
Reactions: TNT
With out reading into this new legislation surely the zoo industry should be allowed to have there current stock of animals live out there lives as per previous regulations. Given if that’s there are 39 holders of tapirs in this instance I would guess at least 30 of those don’t have heated indoor pools like Twycross and I am sure Chester, linton, jimmys farm and the tens of farm parks / small collections also don’t. And in those cases especially won’t be able to afford to build and run such. Where do they think these animals will go, given your probably looking at a min of two at each collection that’s at least 60 to rehome just in tapirs
I am sure they will be able to export them to a country which does not require the same standards, if they do so quickly before the marked is swamped..
That is what this legislation is designed to do - not to actually improve conditions in the UK as the spin suggests (IF that is actually needed), just to shift the issues abroad and out of sight - whilst squeezing the edges of the UK zoo World to either kill it completely or get rid of small zoos.
Government inspectors are already on record stating that this is a personal campaign they are waging, using and twisting the legislation to their own personal end to get rid of 'small' zoos.
 
Last edited:
Not a bad thing if it means the zoos are properly catering to the tapirs needs!
It will make NO difference to the Tapirs, or potentially make it worse - the zoos will just send them to zoos abroad where the standards are already worse than here. I can well understand Twycross doing this sooner rather than later, whilst there is still some demand. Leaving it will mean less options and less good options.
The EEP does seem to have been very keen to place them out to any old farm park with a spare pig-sty and a bit of a field. Maybe this has provoked the recent changes?
Perhaps a shame they hadn't added Capybaras to the need for heated indoor pools too? - that might have stemmed the current trends. Slip that one in quietly next year perhaps.
 
Last edited:
With out reading into this new legislation surely the zoo industry should be allowed to have there current stock of animals live out there lives as per previous regulations.
This is VERY definitely NOT the case.
It is 2 years. Presumably starting in May last - so now 22 months and ticking?
This was imposed with no consultation, except with BIEZA and a small clique of big zoos. The rest were not consulted in the second round.
 
This is VERY definitely NOT the case.
It is 2 years. Presumably starting in May last - so now 22 months and ticking?
This was imposed with no consultation, except with BIEZA and a small clique of big zoos. The rest were not consulted in the second round.
Sorry E and A next to each other on a sticky key-board, and out of editing time.
 
Twycross have already started the ball rolling.
Maybe other zoos could dispose of them to private keepers. Farmers and small-holders might be interested, and could easily give similar accommodation to the farm parks and small zoos - or places like Ventura who dont need a zoo licence. A DWA licence would be needed, but that wouldn't necessarily need a heated pool - which has never been required before for tapirs, and they have been kept and bred in the UK quite well for quite a long time.
Quite a few options, as the legislation is quite inconsistent.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
New tapir standards might not in the best interests of maintaining the population. Are we going to see indoor heated pools mandatory for water buffalo next?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: TNT
I don’t think there is a massive issue for Tapir populations going on in the light of this move or wider legislative changes - zoos go in and out of animals all the time and Twycross has exited a number of species over time (leaving the zoo looking practically deserted in some areas for a while with old fence panels blocking stuff off and looking for all the world like a disused garden centre), though it seems to be going ahead with more positive changes now.
 
[MODERATOR NOTE - the following is cross-posted from the Twycross news thread to provide required context for the ensuing discussion, and is a response to a question re: the likelihood of Twycross keeping Malayan Tapirs in the future, after ceasing to keep Lowland Tapir]

For now, no.
The issue is due to new legislations, Tapirs now require an indoor heated pool. Something Twycross cannot give to them.
I must have missed it, but where in the new Standards of Modern Zoo Practice does it mention heated pools for tapirs?
 
Back
Top