Photo by If you care about animals, about the last thing you’d want to support would be what we call Mobile Live Animal Programs, or MLAPs. And yet, amazingly, a zoo-industry organization called Canada’s Accredited Zoos and Aquariums (CAZA) recently announced that it was “deeply disturbed” by amendments to City of Toronto bylaws that closed an unfortunate loophole related to MLAPs.[teaserbreak]
Toronto already prohibited a range of so-called “exotic” animals from being kept captive and taken to such facilities as schools, nursing homes, libraries, and shopping malls under the guise of “education,” but an exception was made if the facility in question was CAZA-accredited. Now, only the Toronto Zoo—not really a problem—is exempted.
The original situation allowed a number of CAZA-accredited facilities to conduct dozens, if not hundreds, of MLAPs in the City every year. Some specialize in reptiles, others use whatever exotic species they could buy and maintain, with seemingly little regard to the animals’ welfare and various needs—kangaroos, lynx, capybaras, hawks and owls, hornbills, penguins… whatever! These facilities present themselves as “educational” (one is even a registered charity), but most appear to be profit-driven.
One city councilor supported our effort to close the loophole when she saw a photo of a flamingo in her own ward, standing in a pie plate—its sole source of water. No matter, the bird was owned by a business that was CAZA certified.
Many MLAP animals are literally “warehoused” in buildings never designed to hold animals. And, many MLAP organizers would engage in particularly risky practices, such as allowing children to hold potentially harmful animals. Kids might be warned to wash their hands after touching a reptile, but not told that salmonella germs also can be transferred to people via anything the reptile has touched, and transferred to family members.
CAZA’s claim that it does not “support the use of animals in situations where their welfare is negatively impacted” indicates a very low bar for what they consider a negative impact.
CAZA’s reasoning for opposing the ban wanders into the realm of absurdity. They state: “The City’s decision to ban the use of prohibited animals in educational programming without increasing enforcement measures to regulate the underground market, has created an environment where black market unaccredited operations will thrive in the absence of accredited facilities conducting important educational initiatives to schools, camps, and medical centres.”
Quite apart from the fact that scientific research does not support the theory that exposing children to exotic animals imparts much, if any, education, by what category of logic can CAZA think that an industry dependent on publicity, promotion, and activities in public venues will thrive in secrecy? Can they honestly think that “schools, camps, and medical centres” will avail themselves of illegal sources? Do they really think storefront operations filled with reptiles will now move into hidden recesses and cut illegal deals in back allies with librarians, mothers planning birthday parties, and retirement home program directors?
This was a good decision by the City of Toronto, and should be applauded by anyone who actually does care about the welfare of animals.
Keep Wildlife in the Wild,
Barry