Phnom Tamao Zoo Zoo Review

Phnom Tamao Zoo – 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: Phnom Tamao Zoological Park and Wildlife Rescue Centre, Cambodia

Zoo_Review_Stamp_Good

Summary

Phnom Tamao Zoological Park and Wildlife Rescue Centre is a popular destination for weekend travellers from Phnom Penh and other sites in Cambodia. It is mainly a haven for animals saved from poachers’ traps as well as animals which have been trafficked or are too sick or young to  survive in the wild.

Visitors to this centre seem to be mainly impressed by the care given to these animals and therefore recommend visiting this place. The visitors also mention the informative and educational tours it operates. This centre is considered as ‘one of the most unique and rewarding encounters with nature’ and ‘on the frontline of conservation’ by the visitors. Public opinion and animal welfare measures suggest that the animals in the centre are looked after well.

Phnom zoo elephant c Dan Koehl's blog

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: 3/20

Score: 2.5 Points

Notes: A few of the reviewers were concerned about the size of some cages.

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:  0/8

Score: 2.5 Points

Notes: There were only a total of 8 Google reviews available online and therefore ‘8’ is considered as the total number of reviews selected.

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: 0/10

Score: 5 point

Notes: All the bloggers seem to be very much impressed by the good care given to the rescued animals in this centre.

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

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: Yes    Points 2

Note: Most of the reviewers/bloggers write that the animals are well cared in this centre. It suggests that the centre does take care of the animals in terms of their dietary needs.

Being fed an appropriate diet based on their wild diet

Score: Possibly   Points 1

Ease of movement within living quarters

Score: No Points 0

Note: A total of 3 reviewers mentioned about the small size of the cages.

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

Score: Yes Points 2

Absence of injuries or disease

Score: Yes Points 2

Note: A few of the reviewers/bloggers mention that a few of the animals look weak and ill. Being a rescue centre, it is understood that the condition of the animals could be associated with their past history rather than the reason of this rescue centre’s carelessness. In fact, most of the visitors have praised the rescue centre as a good place for the rescued animals.

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

Score: Yes Points 2

Note: The reviewers are of the opinion that the centre’s main focus has been the well-being of its animals. There has not been any mention of animals being hit or chained.

Ability to express natural and social behaviours in living quarters

Score: Possibly   Points 1

Good human-animal relationship with staff

Score: Yes Points 2

Note: Most of the reviewers/bloggers highly appreciate the efforts of the staff in treating the injured animals. Many of the reviewers/bloggers write about the good care being received by the rescued elephant who was fitted with a prosthetic leg to help him walk normally again.

Absence of general fear/distress/apathy

Score: Yes Points 2

Ability to seek privacy/refuge from humans and other animals

Score: Possibly   Points 1

Total Score for General Quality of Life: 15/20

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   Points 1

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

Score: No   Points 0

Note: One of the reviewers write that s/he noticed that a monkey had escaped from its cage and others followed it. Although s/he was not harmed, it could have possibly caused harm for visitors. A blogger also mentions how monkeys came flying off tree branches and crash landing on their shoulders and heads.

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

Score: Possibly   Points 1

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

Score: No Points 0

The interactions are supervised by staff and in an educational context

Score: Possibly   Points 1

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 Points 0

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

Score: Yes Points 2

Note: A blogger mentions that the centre’s focus has been to rehabilitate animals and return them to the wild if these animals can survive.

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

Score: Possibly   Points 1

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

Score: Yes Points 2

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

Score: Yes Points 2

Total Score for Conservation and Education:  7/10

 

Zoo Review Final Score for Phnom Tamao Zoological Park and Wildlife Rescue Centre:  35/50

Rating: Good – Public opinion and animal welfare measures suggest that the animals here are looked after well.

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 December 2014 by Sangita Shrestha. 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

  1. 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

  1. 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

 





Your Name (required)

Your Email (required)

Subject

Your Message