Health and safety in zoos and wildlife parks is once again under the spotlight following the recent death of a keeper at Chester zoo. Tracey Khanna examines some of the proposals that have been put forward over the last few years in an effort to modernise the system.

Five years ago, Andrew Watts, principle EHO at East Hertfordshire District Council, wrote an article for Environmental Health Journal which examined the problems facing EHOs charged with inspecting zoos under the then-current health and safety and licensing legislation (EHJ, December 1995, page 280). At that time, zoos were firmly under the media spotlight following the death of a keeper at Howletts Wild Animal Park, near Canterbury, and there was an on-going court case against the now-deceased owner, John Aspinall, widely believed to have held unorthodox views on animal welfare and zoo management.

Since then, there have been two further well documented fatalities involving keepers at zoos in the UK. Early last year, Darren Cockrill was crushed to death by a female elephant at Howletts' sister wildlife park, Port Lympne, near Hythe in Kent and just over 12 months later, in February this year, experienced keeper Richard Hughes died following an attack by a female elephant at Chester Zoo (EHN, 23 February, page 2). Both these fatalities have prompted renewed concerns about the welfare of animals in captivity and, more importantly for EHOs, the health and safety management systems that are in place.

Leaving aside the ethical and moral arguments for and against animals being held in captivity in zoos and wildlife parks, the majority of experts in this field believe that, generally speaking, the health and safety regimes in the UK are very good, considering that people in certain situations are working with dangerous, unpredictable wild animals. However, individual approaches to animal management mean that some zoos practise free contact systems, while others favour more restricted contact between keeper and animal. Some experts believe that all keeping activities should be subjected to increased scrutiny and risk assessment, with written protocols that are strictly adhered to.

Over the last five years or more, the legislation, standards and guidance which cover the health, safety and welfare of animals, employees and the public have been under review. But have these steps to make such high-risk environments safer for all concerned gone far enough in solving the problems?

INSPECTION AND LICENSING
The Zoo Licensing Act 1981 came into force in 1984, and handed the responsibility for licensing in all establishments which exhibit wild animals to the public for more than seven days in any consecutive 12-month period to local authorities, with certain exceptions including circuses. While the Act requires that licensing is carried out by the relevant environmental health departments of District Councils, the inspection of zoos and the setting of detailed standards for zoo management falls to a DETR maintained list of zoo inspectors. The Act also sets the guidance for the health and safety of the public visitors.

In 1997, the Government issued a consultation document Review of the operation of the Zoo Licensing Act 1981, which sought views on a number of proposed changes to the zoo licensing system. The CIEH, after consultation with its members, submitted a response stating that it "welcomed any measures which further safeguard the health, safety and welfare of zoo animals and members of the public." In this response the CIEH laid out some of the practical difficulties and areas of concern which EHOs had encountered during their work. These included:

• difficulties in transferring licences;
• the implementation of a basic qualification of competency for animal handlers and keepers;
• the costs involved in employing zoo vets and detailed concerns over inspection for zoo licensing matters;
• the implementation of a code of conduct or code of inspection practice for zoo inspectors, such as EHOs apply during food inspections, to ensure consistency of approach; and
• clarification on areas of responsibility for enforcement of health and safety legislation, in particular a distinction made between the requirements which safeguard the public from "animal risk" and the risk from other sources.

In September 1999, the Government announced that a package of measures designed to help modernise the zoo licensing system would be implemented. The main changes promised included:

• an expert group led by veterinary specialist Dr Peter Scott, established to look at standards, resulted in the setting up of a new independent advisory body on zoo matters called the Zoos Forum. As well as having responsibility for reviewing animal welfare and the role of zoos in conservation, education and scientific research, the Forum has the remit to keep under review the operation and implementation of the zoo licensing system in England, Scotland and Wales;
• the review and updating of the Secretary of State's "Standards of modern zoo practice" taking into account the changes that have taken place since the initial introduction of the standards in the late 1980s; and
• a detailed review of the Zoo Licensing Act 1981 to bring it in line with the EU Zoos Directive. In March 1999, the European Council adopted this directive to provide a common basis for member states' legislation with regard to the licensing and inspection of zoos. This directive has to be implemented no later than 9 April 2002.

HEALTH AND SAFETY
Under the Zoo Licensing Act 1981, local authorities are not permitted to attach a licence condition which relates only or primarily to the health, safety or welfare of persons working in a zoo, as this is dealt with under separate health and safety legislation. The specific guidance for this comes in the form of the Health and Safety at Work Act (1974) Approved Code of Practice and Guidance Note: Zoos - safety, health and welfare standards for employees and persons at work (Acop).

This guidance note was written nearly 20 years ago and came into effect in 1985, and as such has been criticised as inadequate for today's zoos. Roger Wastnedge, senior EHO with Chester District Council's health and safety team, which is currently investigating the fatal accident involving Mr Hughes, feels that the Acop does not focus on specific issues and is too superficial. This sentiment is shared by the Health and Safety Executive, which is currently working with a group of experts on the preparation of new guidance. Dick Langridge, EHO at Canterbury Council who dealt with Howletts Zoo, is a task group member and says: "The aim is to make the new guidance more relevant to the modern zoo industry and therefore much more appropriate than the old Acop".

Sheila Patel of the HSE obviously feels that the 1985 Acop is outdated and says: "It does not include COSHH or manual handling and is very prescriptive. The only good thing about this guidance is that it gives specific description of enclosures and what materials are needed for constructing enclosures". Under the proposed schedule for the new guidance, HELA and the HSE policy groups will add their views before the document goes to public consultation in July this year, after which the HSE plans to approach industry to see if the old Acop can be withdrawn completely and replaced by the new guidance.

Thus, while the adoption of the EC Zoos Directive, the setting up of the Zoos Forum, the review of the model standards and guidance, and the re-examination of the Zoo Licensing Act 1981 have all helped to strengthen and improve the licensing system in zoos, the legislation and guidance covering the health and safety of employees, who are arguably most at risk in these environments, is still under examination.

Another issue is that of knowledge and resources within individual local authorities. EHOs are extremely reliant on experts when it comes to health and safety investigations in zoos which are inherently complex. There is no central information point at present from which officers can share information gained from completed cases. As Mr Wastnedge points out: "You only really look in any great detail at the business protocols, risk assessments and management when things go wrong."

According to Mr Langridge it would be useful when officers are carrying out inspections prior to the issuing or reissuing of licences to zoos to have a health and safety inspector on hand as an observer. He says: "This can help in identifying health and safety issues and ensure that conditions are in line with modern health and safety practice as staff/employer issues are excluded by virtue of the Zoo Licensing Act."

More information on the Zoo Licensing Act 1981, the standards of modern zoo practice and the Zoos Forum can be downloaded from the DETR website at: www.wildlife-countryside.detr.gov.uk