Kampot Zoo Cambodia Zoo Review

Kampot Zoo, Cambodia – Zoo Review

The RIGHT-tourism Zoo Review is a quick but informed guide to the quality of places where the public can see animals, including zoos, dolphinariums and other attractions.

We’ve used a range of measures, taken from information available online, to judge how well the animals at the particular zoo or animal attraction are looked after. More than just a ‘review’, the results are actually a Quality Index which will allow tourists and the attractions themselves to judge how well the attractions are performing.

Please note, the information we use is taken from what we assume to be genuine and factually correct comments from reviews, blogs and news stories. If there are factual inaccuracies, please let us know and we will make the relevant changes.

RIGHT-tourism Zoo Review Rating for:

Zoo_Review_Stamp_Poor

Summary

Kampot Zoo (Teuk Chhou) was opened in 2000 and with its 23 hectares of land it is the biggest zoo in Cambodia. Many of the animals were rescued from wildlife traffickers. However in its short history the zoo has faced many difficulties, and unfortunately this troubled zoo is still in a sad state.

In 2011 the state of the zoo was in such bad conditions that it headlined the news with the title ‘Zoo of Horrors’. The Wildlife Alliance responded to their call for aid and for three months worked closely with the staff to educate them, made sure the animals received a sufficient amount of food and helped overhaul the zoo to improve the living conditions for all the animals. After this three-month period, the future looked a little brighter, however the trouble wasn’t over. Another NGO, Footprints, came to the rescue at a later point, but in February 2013 they pulled out due to a disagreement between the NGO and the owner of the zoo.

At the moment the zoo’s two elephants are now under the care of Elephant Asia Rescue and Survival Foundation (EARS), which means that EARS built them a better enclosure, ensures that they have a healthy diet and they employ a keeper to make sure that the elephants are living a good life. The rest of the animals unfortunately are still not looked after properly, hopefully this is more due to lack of funding and not neglect.

Kampot Zoo

Report Card

Section One: Social Media and News

This section looks at how the attraction is rated by people on key reviewing sites, and in blogs/the media. The reviews are often not concerned with animal welfare, so this section has a lower influence on the overall mark than other sections. However, it is an important measure of the way the attraction is viewed by visitors.

Number of negative TripAdvisor reviews

For the most recent 20 reviews which appear on the official TripAdvisor page for the attraction, how many mention animal welfare in a negative way. The score is worked out as a percentage (see method below).

Number of negative reviews: 2/7

Score: 2 Points

There were only 7 reviews in total on Tripadvisor, but they are all from 2014. Small cages and hungry animals were some of the negative remarks.

Number of negative Google reviews

For the most recent 20 reviews which appear on the Google search page for the attraction, how many mention animal welfare in a negative way. The score is worked out as a percentage (see method below).

Number of negative reviews: 0/0

Score: 2 Points

Zero reviews on Google at this point, so Tripadvisor is our only source of visitors’ feedback at this point, therefore the same amount of points will be awarded on this section as the one above.

Number of negative news articles and blogs
For the most recent 10 independent blogs or news articles for the attraction, how many mention animal welfare in a negative way. The score is worked out as a percentage (see method below).

Number of negative mentions: 3/4

Score: 2 points

It is difficult to find blogs or news stories from the last year, found just a few.

Total Score for Social Media and News Section:  6/10

 

Section Two: General Quality of Life

This section looks generally at how the animals, as a whole, appear to be treated. It is based on the internationally recognised Five Freedoms, which focus on key aspects of animal welfare including feeding, housing, health, behaviour and protection from fear/distress.

Each item is scored as either two points for a Yes, zero points for a No or one point for Possibly. (The Possibly category also includes situations where the answer would be Sometimes; or if the answer is unknown).

Absence of prolonged hunger and/or thirst

Score: No   0 Points

Being fed an appropriate diet based on their wild diet

Score: No   0 Points

Ease of movement within living quarters

Score: No   0 Points

Enrichment in living quarters (eg climbing frame, toys etc)

Score: No   0 Points

Absence of injuries or disease

Score: Possibly   1 Point

Absence of pain (eg being not being chained, or not being hit by staff)

Score: Possibly   1 Point

Ability to express natural and social behaviours in living quarters

Score: Possibly   1 Point

Good human-animal relationship with staff

Score: Possibly   1 Point

Absence of general fear/distress/apathy

Score: No   0 Points

Ability to seek privacy/refuge from humans and other animals

Score: No   0 Points

Total Score for General Quality of Life:  4/20

 

Section Three: Interaction with the Public

This section focusses on the way the attraction allows the public to touch, play with, photograph, feed or otherwise interact with the animals. The focus is on whether or not the interactions are causing harm or stress/discomfort to the animals, and if they could be dangerous to the public.

Each item is scored as either two points for a Yes, zero points for a No or one point for Possibly. (The Possibly category also includes situations where the answer would be Sometimes; or if the answer is unknown).

The interactions are not harmful in any way for the animal’s welfare
Score: Possibly   1 Point

The interactions are not harmful in any way for the public’s welfare (any previous history of dangerous incidents)

Score: Possibly   1 Point

You can come very close to most of the animals, they are all living in cages but many animals such as the monkeys can easily reach out. For some this might be exciting, but it can also constitute a risk.

The animals are not forced to interact with the public – they can refuse

Score: Possibly   1 Point

The public are not allowed to handle the animals and touch them

Score: No   0 Points

The interactions are supervised by staff and in an educational context

Score: No   0 Points

Total Score for Interaction with the Public:  3/10

Section Four: Conservation and Education

This section looks at whether or not the attraction has a focus on conservation – for example does it support animals in the wild through breeding programmes, research or donations; and education – are visitors informed about the animals so they are not simply seen as objects for human amusement/entertainment.

Each item is scored as either two points for a Yes, zero points for a No or one point for Possibly. (The Possibly category also includes situations where the answer would be Sometimes; or if the answer is unknown).

Are some of the animals part of international breeding programs?

Score: No   0 Points

Is there evidence of them having released animals into the wild?

Score: No   0 Points

Do they actively undertake scientific research into conservation/behaviour of their animals?

Score: No   0 Points

Does the attraction give money to conservation or animal protection programmes?

Score: No   0 Points

Does the attraction provide educational talks or written displays to inform visitors about the animals?

Score: No   0 Points

Total Score for Conservation and Education:  0/10

 

Zoo Review Final Score for Kampot Zoo:  13/50

Rating: Poor – it appears that significant improvement is needed in order to meet welfare standards

Do you agree or disagree with this Zoo Review? Please let us know in the Comments below.
If you are from this attraction and would like to comment on this Zoo Review, we’ll be happy to publish your response. Please email info@careforthewild.com or click here

Notes

1. This report was compiled on: 4th November, 2014 by MD. Find out more about our Zoo Review campaign here.

2. Zoo Review Final Score is given out of 50 as a sum of the four sections, then a RIGHT-tourism Zoo Review rating is awarded based on this score:

0-10: Unacceptable – the animal welfare at this attraction appears to be of a very low standard and a cause of great concern
11-20: Poor – it appears that significant improvement is needed in order to meet welfare standards
21-30: Average – the attraction scores well in some areas but improvements would be welcome
31-40: Good – Public opinion and animal welfare measures suggest that the animals here are looked after well
41-50: Best in Class – the welfare of the animals appears to be of a very high standard

3. TripAdvisor and Google scores are worked out by dividing the number of negative welfare reviews by the total (20) and multiplying by 100 to give a percentage, then giving a score out of 2.5 as follows:

0-19% negative 2.5 points
20-39% 2 points
40-59% 1.5 points
60-79% 1 point
80-89% 0.5 point
90–100% 0 points

3. News and blog scores are worked out by dividing the number of negative welfare reviews by the total (10) and multiplying by 100 to give a percentage, then giving a score out of 5 as follows:

0-19% negative 5 points
20-39% 4 points
40-59% 3 points
60-79% 2 point
80-89% 1 point
90–100% 0 points







Leave a Reply