ZooCheck in Singapore Zoo on 5 April!

On 5 April 2009, ACRES ZooCheck volunteer team conducted a ZooCheck on the Singapore Zoo.

We regret to note that no improvements had been made for the cougars and ocelots, despite the Wildlife Reserves Singapore Welfare and Ethics Committee agreeing in March 2009 that these enclosures "are smaller than the dimensions recommended by the various associations like WAZA and AZA" and that they will upgrade them.

We also observed species such as the ocelots, polar bears, jaguars and leopards pacing, a clear sign that the enclosures did not meet the animals' species-specific needs.

We will be uploading the videos of these pacing behaviours shortly.

Here are some comments from the volunteer ZooCheckers:

When I was younger, I loved the zoo. I liked to just watch the animals walk around or just laze in the shelter away from the heat. And I loved the animal show. It was not till the day I went with the ACRES team for the ZooCheck that I realised that everything I knew was a lie.

I started to see the animals suffering and not happy as I thought in my younger days. The reality of the animal shows I loved started to dawn on me that actually the performing animals were doing unnatural acts.

The Singapore Zoo disappointed me greatly and they showed that they are no better in taking care of the animals than any other zoos in Asia, where I’ve seen untreated wounds on lions and elephants.

I think if Singapore Zoo does not want to change their ways in treating the animals, then they should transfer those who cannot cope with our tropical weather or the small size of the enclosures, to a better zoo.

Without the ACRES ZooCheck Team, I would still be ignorant. I will do my best to fight for the animals.

Kellynne Liong


The ZooCheck was an eye-opener for me. We went through the various enclosures including that of the white tigers and the polar bears, identifying the things that contributed to a good enclosure. The enclosures in the zoo are mostly built such that the public has a good view of the animals at most times, which means the animals do not have many private areas.

This may be good for the visitors but gives unnecessary stress to the animals. It would be good if there are private areas for the animals for hide from each other and the public’s view if they wish to. Enrichment is present for the elephants, primates and polar bears, who were seen using it, but is absent in some enclosures such as that of the white tigers, who were observed lying in the same positions for the entire duration we were at the enclosure (~30min).

Apart from the elephant enclosure, the other enclosures we went to did not appear to have been equipped with sufficient enrichment for all animals to use. Perhaps more can be done so that the animals will have sufficient enrichment.

Shermaine Eng


We’ve been to the zoo many times. Being teachers, it’s one of the mandatory learning journeys that we have to bring classes of excited kids on. This was, however, our first time going to the zoo on a mission. By the end of the day, we had learnt more things than we ever had from all those other times at the zoo.

We went to the zoo and were briefed on what we would be looking at. Tigers, polar bears, cheetahs, lions, leopards, jaguars, sun bears, elephants and, lastly, a behavioural study on the ocelots and cougars.

We went through the ZooCheck checklist with each enclosure. It was a pretty detailed list that graded the enclosure on aspects such as substrates to shelter. After a couple of enclosures we realized that most enclosures lacked a decent shelter for the animals. During thunderstorms the animals evidently had very little space within their enclosures to seek shelter from the hard rain and lightning.

Each enclosure had little bites of information for us to digest on. And these bits of information were so ironic. In the cheetah enclosure, the board proclaimed the cheetah to be the fastest animal, that it could cover some distance in a couple of leaps. When we looked into the cheetah enclosure, it was evident that the cheetah would never be able to run like he should and that we would have to simply make do with them being absolutely bored and simply lazing around in a corner of its enclosure.

After a couple of enclosures we got the hang of it and got more confident filling the checklist up on our own. We went on to the polar bear exhibit where there had been some positive changes made. The presenter at the exhibit mentioned that there was an air-conditioned room inside for the polar bears that they could slip into whenever they wanted. However, on closer inspection, we realized that the bears would keep going to that corner but retreat back, like something was obstructing their entrance into the room. On hindsight, I suppose it was a Sunday and the zoo management probably wanted them to be out and about, in the full view of the audience. To see such majestic creatures, caught and confined to such a small space was pretty depressing. We also saw an animal pacing for the first time. It was just this senseless, pointless, walking up and down that seemed even desperate at times. How selfish human beings are to make another intelligent creature reduce herself to being absolutely pointless.

The behavioural study was also very interesting. We were delegated to do the ocelots. All we had to do was take down the animals’ behaviour at two minute intervals. It was hard to swallow, but for the entire hour, one of the ocelots, or Ocelot 1 as we called him, paced up and down, the whole way through. It was just unbelievable to see an animal reduce to pacing its day through. The ocelots were confined to this tiny cage and that’s where they did everything. Three ocelots sharing a tiny cage, trapped, unable to run, to hunt, only able to do the mundane and reduced to pacing their lives away was a terrible thing to watch.

Even though the animals deserve to be at home and nothing could replace their natural surroundings, we walked away from the zoo feeling that the zoo had done a great job in providing a clean, relatively decent home for the animals. However there are some aspects that can improved. Like better enclosures for the big cats, as well as ample shelters for the animals in their enclosures. We hope that the zoo strives to be a place for animals rather than simply for human entertainment.

Samuel Mok & Jessintha Sasayiah


We were the first batch of volunteers to participate in the ZooCheck on 5th April 2009. Upon entry into the zoo, we were given a list of enclosures to go to. At every enclosure, we were taught how to assess and check the enclosures. I learnt how to determine if the size and structure of an enclosure is suitable for housing a certain animal. We also looked at the animals to check on their physical health. Through the Zoo Check, I find myself looking deeper than just spotting these beautiful animals; their environment and surroundings play a part too.

Also, we were taught how to do behavioural studies. We had to note down the actions of the particular animal within the time frame of an hour. This requires a great amount of patience as we could only stand or sit around the enclosure and observe the animal. I felt that it was a good experience because when we normally visit the zoo, we hardly stay for more than ten minutes at an enclosure. The behavioral study has taught me how to really watch and admire the animals, and learn about their habits at the same time.

Though we were all tired at the end of the Zoo Check, I thought that I learnt a lot more about the zoo and the animals, and this is something that school textbooks can never teach.

Phylisia Loh

Wildlife Reserves Singapore Welfare and Ethics Committee responds

The Wildlife Reserves Singapore Welfare and Ethics Committee, who are responsible for ensuring that the welfare of the animals kept at the Singapore Zoo is not compromised, has responded to ACRES' report.

They agreed that several exhibits are smaller than the dimensions recommended by the various associations like WAZA and AZA and that they will be upgrading them, providing the animals a more spacious habitat than the current housing.

ACRES thanks the committee for responding positively to the concerns that we have raised.

We are pleased to hear that changes and improvements will be made and look forward to seeing the more spacious enclosures that will meet the species-specific needs of the animals.

We look forward to meeting up with the Animal Welfare and Ethics Committee to present our findings in greater detail!

ZooCheck on Singapore Zoo!

Back in September 2008, ACRES conducted a ZooCheck on Singapore Zoo! Here's a summary of our findings...

The Singapore Zoo claims on its website that it “is a model of the ‘open zoo’ concept” and that “oppressive cages which typify old zoos, are absent”.

ACRES, however, notes that the cougar and ocelots (see photos) are still housed in what can be considered oppressive cages which require urgent attention and improvements.

In addition, WRS, the parent company of the Singapore Zoo has a Policy and Guidelines on Animal Welfare & Ethics. Based on this investigation, it is clear that the Singapore Zoo has not adhered to this policy and guidelines.

The policy and guidelines state that “All exhibits must be of such size and volume as to allow the animal to express its natural behaviour. Enclosures must contain sufficient material to allow behavioural enrichment and allow the animal to express natural behaviours.” Based on the investigation, numerous animals at the zoo are unable to express many of their natural behaviours in their current exhibits.

The high incidence of abnormal behaviours, particularly stereotypic behaviours, among the animals observed was of great concern. Most stereotypic behaviours occur when animals have failed to cope with or remove themselves from stressful situations. The majority of species investigated displayed abnormal behaviours, including stereotypic behaviours, during the course of our investigation. Stereotypic pacing behaviours were displayed by species including the polar bears, Malayan sun bears, tigers, jaguars, leopards, ocelots and the cougars. The male polar bear also displayed stereotypic swimming behaviour and the female exhibited stereotypic tongue-playing behaviour. One of the elephants displayed stereotypic swaying behaviour.

Several of the animals, namely the polar bears, one Malayan sun bear, the Bengal tigers, jaguars and the leopard were highly inactive, indicating inadequacies in their living conditions and husbandry practices and the fact that their behavioural needs were not being fulfilled. They appeared to have reached a state of “learned helplessness”. In an effort to cope with frustration, boredom and other chronic stressors, animals may gradually close themselves off from their environment, rather than interact with it.

A major concern for all of the enclosures inspected was the lack of space for the animals. Although several of the enclosures were fairly complex and represented, to some degree, the animals’ natural habitat, in several cases the animals simply did not have enough space to engage in natural movements and behaviours. The jaguar enclosure was an example of an enclosure which was fairly complex, but far too small for the species, particularly for two individuals.

Some enclosures, however, were not only small, but also of totally unsuitable design. The polar bear enclosure was in the most urgent need of attention, followed by the cougar and ocelot enclosures. All of these enclosures are far too small for the animals, as well as being of unsuitable design and lacking in basic requirements.

The fact that the polar bear enclosure was open-air, in a tropical environment, was of major concern. Both bears were seen to be panting excessively and apparently trying to dissipate heat from their bodies. The enclosure was exceptionally small, especially for such a large, nomadic species, and was barren with little to occupy the bears. As such, it was no surprise that both bears were engaged in various stereotypies. The polar bear enclosure needs to be made larger and cooler as a matter of urgency.

There appeared to be insufficient enrichment devices in all enclosures, and very little ad-hoc enrichment was seen to be given at the time of our investigation. We recommend that more enrichment be provided for all animals.

The fact that the animals were given the token feedings at the same time every day was of concern. Token feedings can be a valuable enrichment tool, but only if the feedings are at random times of the day and therefore not expected. We recommend that token feedings are provided at varied times every day.

Another major concern was the use of elephants in shows in which they were made to perform unnatural and demeaning behaviours such as pretending to be ‘helicopters’, presumably to get a laugh from the audience.

This again goes against the WRS Policy and Guidelines on Animal Welfare & Ethics which clearly states that “presentations must focus on natural behaviour”.

The shows give a totally inaccurate impression of the true nature of elephants. The unnatural tricks the elephants were made to perform throughout the show were also of a welfare concern since training may involve force and cruel methods.

ACRES also notes that the ankus or elephant hook was used repeatedly during the shows, apparently to make the elephants perform. The use of the ankus is clearly unpleasant for the elephants and at times appears painful.

ACRES recommends that Singapore Zoo stops the use of the ankus and, ultimately, stops the elephant show.