By Ari Burack
March 19, 2008
The San Francisco Commission of Animal Control and Welfare yesterday urged the Board of Supervisors to hold immediate hearings on animal welfare conditions at the San Francisco Zoo.
In a meeting at City Hall, commissioners voted to recommend that supervisors initiate a series of reforms at the zoo, including prioritizing animal welfare over visitor amenities at the zoo; reforming zoo management through a proposed Zoo Oversight Commission; and transitioning the facility into a rescue zoo for abused or abandoned species.
“The Commission has grave concerns for the future direction of the Zoo,” its letter to the board stated.
The letter noted that zoo management has spent millions of dollars on improvements aimed at zoo visitors, while there are “significant animal welfare issues concerning the living conditions and exhibits for many of the animals,” according to the commission.
The action comes after commission members’ recent visits to the zoo, a review of previous zoo audits and public testimony from residents concerned about conditions at the facility.Zoo management declined to take part in three public meetings held by the commission.
“There’s clearly interest in the community to deal with these issues,” said commission chair Sally Stephens.”I think that what we’re asking is reasonable,” she added.
Animal rights groups, as well as an international delegation of former zoo curators who visited San Francisco earlier this year, have claimed conditions at the zoo are inhumane, with some animals being observed pacing abnormally and exhibiting other aberrant behaviors in undersized, often drab enclosures.
“Nobody’s calling for closing the zoo,” activist Deniz Bolbol said before the commission. “This is about making the zoo a better place for animals.”
“Animals are indeed individuals which have their own needs, and intelligence and sensitivity,” said Dr. Elliot Katz, president of the San Rafael-based In Defense of Animals.
Dr. Elliot Katz
File photo by John Han
In its letter, the commission acknowledged “the dedication of the Zoo’s animal keepers who do what they can to enhance the lives and the well being of animals in their care.”
“Our concerns lie with the Zoo management’s priorities and ineffective oversight of the Zoo management,” the commission stated.
Zoo Executive Director Manuel Mollinedo responded that changing the facility into a rescue zoo would “really change the tenor of the zoo.”
“The zoo currently has “a much broader mission” that includes breeding and conservation programs, and already houses rescued grizzly bear cubs and a polar bear, Mollinedo contended.
According to Mollinedo, as a rescue zoo, programs such as the zoo’s bald eagle breeding program, or the recent birth of three Sumatran tiger cubs at the zoo, might not happen because rescued animals are often not fit for breeding, he said.
But Mollinedo deferred any possible changes to city leaders, who oversee the city’s partnership with the nonprofit San Francisco Zoological Society that manages the zoo.
“I think the idea of becoming a rescue zoo would really have to be a policy decision by the elected officials here in San Francisco,” Mollinedo said.
San Francisco Zoo Director Manual Mollinedo.
File photo by Luke Thomas
Among the zoo reform supporters at the commission meeting was a former employee who painted a picture of a facility plagued by infighting and poor management.
Lloyd Kraal, a former maintenance supervisor at the zoo, described the zoo’s African Savanna and Lemur Forest exhibits — two of the zoo’s “pricier” exhibits, he said — as “wracked with inefficiencies.”
“Just shoddily built and inefficiently designed,” he said.
He also claimed the exhibits had mechanical equipment that never worked.
Kraal, 51, said he was fired from the zoo in February 2007 after about six months on the job because “I was complaining about the animal care and the safety of the workers and the public.
“Management “cultivated this air of conflict between the animal staff and the operations (maintenance) staff,” Kraal contended.
“I have never seen a more dysfunctional workplace than the San Francisco Zoo,” he said.
The embittered Kraal, now a building contractor, described the zoo as “just a playground for rich Caucasians from the Peninsula.
“Mollinedo declined to discuss Kraal specifically, citing pending litigation, other than to say he disagreed “totally” with Kraal’s assertions.
In a separate development, zoo officials yesterday released the results of a report by a national zoo accreditation group on the San Francisco Zoo’s response to a Christmas Day tiger escape and fatal mauling of a zoo visitor.
The Association of Zoos and Aquariums report described the overall response by zoo staff as “impressive.”
The AZA did suggest some changes at the zoo, including modifications to the tiger enclosure, access to staff of zoo vehicles and weapons in the event of a dangerous animal escape, and training for seasonal and contract staff on emergency procedures — changes that have been implemented, according to Mollinedo.
“We did correct a number of things that resonated with the accreditation commission,” Mollinedo said.
Other changes include an emergency alarm system at the zoo, and functioning nighttime security lights and spotlights are in the works, he said.
“Under the circumstances, out staff did an incredible job” during the response, he added.According to Mollinedo, the zoo’s temporary closure after the attack and subsequent safety improvements have since cost the zoo “a little over $1.1 million to date.
“Since then and after a couple rainy months, attendance at the zoo has been up, added zoo spokeswoman Lora LaMarca, “We’re doing really well,” LaMarca said. “People are really supportive of the zoo.”
The Hunger Site
March 21, 2008 at 11:54 am
Great article. It is very interesting and informative!