Despite America’s long-standing history of seeing animals in zoos and aquariums, there has been a shift in attitude regarding the treatment of animals in captivity. Visitors are becoming increasingly concerned with the welfare of animals used for entertainment. This has prompted zoos and aquariums to seek private accreditation, which signals to the public that they have voluntarily undertaken more stringent animal welfare standards. Netflix’s Tiger King: Murder, Mayhem, and Madness began to scratch the surface of some of the pressing welfare and conservation issues associated with roadside zoos. It displayed some of the welfare issues with captive breeding and public encounters with wild and exotic animals.
Although there are welfare concerns associated with all forms of captivity, there are meaningful differences impacting animal welfare between larger accredited zoos and sanctuaries and small, private, unaccredited ones. Small, unaccredited zoos, often referred to as “roadside zoos,” are often operated for profit and focus primarily on entertainment, rather than conservation and education. Larger facilities will try to copy the animal’s natural environment and will only have animals in enclosures for only part of the day, whereas roadside zoos will keep animals in the same cage or smaller enclosure with limited access to physical and psychological enrichment or opportunities for socializing.
Zoos, aquariums, and animal sanctuaries are subject to federal, state, and local laws. On the federal level, the Animal Welfare Act and Endangered Species Act protect captive animals at these facilities. However, these statutes only provide minimal welfare requirements and are limited in terms of scope and enforcement. Beyond these federal laws, there are laws that protect specific species and states have adopted their own laws further regulating possession and exhibition of wild animals. In addition to increased regulation, there have been a number of organizations offering accreditation for exhibiting facilities, holding these facilities to a higher standard of animal welfare than the minimum requirements set out by federal laws like the Animal Welfare Act.
The animal welfare standards of larger zoos that the public is most familiar with (name some big zoos we all know) and sanctuaries are controlled by private accreditation standards. In addition to standards set forth under the State laws and the Animal Welfare Act, exhibitors can choose to obtain certification through accrediting organizations. This is a form of self-regulation within the industry used by a small number of total exhibitors – usually larger, conservation-focused zoos, aquariums, and sanctuaries, and often sets more stringent standards for animal welfare. Private accreditation can help the public distinguish between more credible exhibitors and roadside zoos. However, there are a number of accreditors that adopt differing standards and different, sometimes conflicting missions. Thus, while accreditation can suggest that the exhibitor holds itself to higher welfare standards than non-accredit facilities, the differences among accreditors can create confusion and send mixed messages to the public. Private accreditation is voluntary, and does not bear weight or relation to compliance with federal standards under the Animal Welfare Act.
While there has been more regulation governing the possession and exhibition of wild animals, it is not clear if the situation has improved for captive animals. Today, there are approximately 2,400 zoos in the U.S. alone containing hundreds of thousands of animals, not all of which are given legal protection. One zoo alone can house over 30,000 animals. While all exhibitors must obtain a license and adhere to welfare standards set forth in the AWA, these welfare standards have criticized as insufficient to protect captive animals. Additionally, there are issues with inspection and enforcement of the federal laws, resulting in a number of repeat violators continuing to possess and exhibit animals despite the fact that they regularly do not comply with the laws. Because state and local laws vary in their scope, strictness, and enforcement, these laws do not always rise to fill the gaps left by the Animal Welfare Act. Only a small percentage of exhibitors have obtained private accreditation, and even some of these private standards have been criticized as insufficient to adequately protect animal welfare.