Pandemic impact on revenue loss and its relationship to animal welfare foranimals in human care
By Simon Marsh¹, Georgina Groves¹, Dave Morgan¹ and Karen Fifield MNZM²
1

Wild Welfare

2

Wild Welfare Trustee

Published: August 2021

Simple Summary: There are an estimated 10,000 captive wild animal facilities worldwide. Only asmall fraction of these facilities are governed by meaningful national animal welfare legislation and/or
national or regional animal welfare standards set by zoo and aquarium associations. Animal welfare
standards could be improved in a great number of these facilities. The outbreak of COVID-19 and thesubsequent pandemic caused national lockdowns and the temporary closure of many zoos andaquariums. The loss of revenue caused and magnified existing issues related to animal welfare
standards and the management and governance within many captive wild animal facilities. It is likelythat this has led to reduced animal welfare practices for potentially hundreds of thousands of animals.
This paper addresses these issues and gives recommendations for maintaining good animal welfare
standards during a crisis.

Abstract: During 2020 the COVID-19 pandemic caused the temporary closure of many zoos,
aquariums, and other animal related facilities and a subsequent loss of visitors and income. Unlike
many other businesses, zoos, aquariums, wildlife parks and sanctuaries have a limited ability to reduce
overheads and staff costs due to ongoing care of the animals. We explore the effects of temporary
closure and revenue loss on these facilities, the potential impact on animal welfare and existing internaland external factors and measures which could mitigate against a reduction in primary animal care.
How facilities with animals in human care are structured and managed, how enclosures are designed
and maintained, staff training and resources, and internal and external communication are factors
which can impact animal welfare during temporary closure. We end with a summary ofrecommendations which facilities should consider to mitigate against any reduction in animal welfare
during a loss of revenue.

Keywords: animal welfare; animal care; revenue loss; pandemic; COVID-19; zoos; aquariums; animal
sanctuaries

1. Introduction
With the outbreak of COVID-19 on the global stage in March 2020, the primary focus ofcommunities has been managing the social, financial, and political impacts of the pandemic. Whilst
these impacts on human societies are likely to be considerable, the significant and long-term revenue
losses experienced by zoos, aquariums, and related animal care facilities that are dependent upon
visitation, may have a knock-on effect on the welfare of animals under care. Potentially the number ofanimals impacted is substantial. The Association of Zoos and Aquaria (AZA) alone holds around
800,000 animals within its 240 members. With a conservative estimate of 10,000 facilities with wild
animals in human care worldwide, millions of individual animals could be impacted [1].
In this document we have classified the term facility to incorporate zoos, aquariums, wildlife parks,
and animal sanctuaries. These facilities may fall under the following: Private for profit – corporate orindividual; Private not for profit – trusts, foundations, societies; Private/Public enterprises – corporate
partnerships/local and national government; Government-funded – funded by government bodies.
Typical revenue sources for all these classified facilities are varied but can fall under the following broad
categories: Admissions – visitor numbers; Internal commercial activities; Promotions, events andconcerts; Subscriptions/memberships; Sponsorship/Donations and Subsidy. The percentage relianceon the different revenue sources depends on the facility classification and residing country.
Concern for animal welfare within facilities during the pandemic and consequent revenue loss has
mostly focused on access to animal food, however the impacts are numerous and nuanced. The ability
to provide adequate care is directly linked to the number and quality of animal care staff available andthe provision of suitably maintained environments or enclosures. Certain species and individuals underprescribed care require specialist and expert management. A loss of staff could mean the loss of animal
welfare standards and could result in acute or chronic welfare concerns. Most facilities ensure that there
is a daily and consistent pattern to animal management that optimises good animal welfare standards

and works for the animals they hold and the appropriately trained staff caring for them. Practices suchas environmental enrichment and the presentation of food that encourages natural feeding behaviours
may have to be significantly reduced. Similarly, positive reinforcement training sessions may not be as
frequent. A disruption in these practices could result in anxiety and stress for the animals [2].
The primary impacts that revenue loss have on facilities with animals in human care and therelationship of this impact on good animal welfare standards are considered below. This discussion also
considers how a facility which has certain good animal welfare standards already in place, mitigates
any future welfare impact a significant loss in revenue may have.

2. Document Assumptions
This document has been created to describe the relationship between revenue loss and a facility’s
ability to provide a high standard of animal welfare. For the purpose of this document, a number ofassumptions have been made.
Assumption 1 - Revenue loss is a result of a stochastic, unpredictable event that results insignificant and/or long-term financial loss. What might constitute ‘significant’ revenue loss will differ frominstitution to institution. For the purposes of this document we assume the facility completely loses its
visitation numbers and all associated revenue for a period of one month or more;
Assumption 2 - this revenue loss is national, regional and/or global and is occurring in the majorityof facilities with animals in human care within that region;
Assumption 3 - As a result of revenue loss, a facility must make exceptional overhead expenditure
cuts;
Assumption 4 - the facilities under consideration have an education, scientific research andconservation purpose and commitment.

3. Revenue loss impact on primary animal care
The main impacts of revenue loss on the ability of a facility with animals in human care to provide
a high standard of animal welfare are:
1) A reduction in available and expert personnel and finances that are needed to provide
appropriate animal care and;
2) Reduced maintenance of facility infrastructures that support animal care [3].

Under significant, long-term or forecasted revenue loss, income will be reduced. In some cases,
there may be government financial support that can mitigate the need to reduce staff overheads.
However, unlike many other types of businesses or organisations which may have the ability to deploy
government initiatives to financially support staff or maintain individual staff at a reduced capacity,
facilities where staff must care for animals have a limited ability to reduce their staffing levels and wage
budget to a minimum. The minimum position taken will be dependent on a number of factors, forexample, specialist care may be required for high risk/dangerous animals, breeding, neonatal/infants,
quarantine, socially-complex individuals and animals used within educational/engagement events on or
off site. Staff qualified in animal emergencies and incident management and species-specificmanagement (e.g. elephant keepers), contractors or equivalent staff that maintain infrastructure andlife support systems are also necessary. Animal care and specialist staff must be kept employed inappropriate numbers to safely care for the animals and provide appropriate husbandry and veterinary
care [4].
More labour-intensive practices that exist, such as shutting all animals in indoor enclosuresovernight (for some species this is legally required dependent on country laws) will more seriously
impact an animal’s welfare if the usual timings and environmental enrichment are not met. A lack ofqualified and competent staff to carry this out may result in individual animals being accommodated in
sub-standard temporary facilities much longer than before. Social species that are rotated due toincompatibility or otherwise, may spend longer in sub-optimal enclosures, other individuals held in
temporary enclosures for educational or entertainment purposes may not be moved into more suitableenvironments while these events are postponed (e.g. birds kept in small aviaries or holding areas when
not being flown in demonstrations may not experience free flight or have the opportunity for appropriate
exercise they would normally experience during educational displays).
Highly intelligent species with complex and sophisticated requirements such as great apes or
elephants not only require specialist staffing, but often require staff that have a positive relationship withindividual animals that enables the safe management of them. For example, elephants that aremanaged through free contact are extremely reliant on an established keeper/elephant relationship [5].
These individual relationships can often be a form of positive enrichment and interaction for the animals
as well, and the removal of such a relationship could result in individual animals becoming anxious or
stressed.

Animal husbandry training is reliant on a positive keeper-animal relationship and specific staff
training and experience. Animal training is used as a tool to safely move animals between housing andenclosures, deliver veterinary care and medication, and as stimulation or enrichment for the animals.
With staff time and/or the number of experienced staff limited due to a reduced budget these activities
could be impacted and consequently the welfare of the animals [6] [7].
Preparation of specialist diets for the animals and review of the diet and nutritional content must
be maintained. Presentation of the food and monitoring the feeding behaviours in individuals and groupsof animals is important, with a reduction in staff, staff time or specialist staff this may be compromised.
Species with a high metabolic rate are dependent on specific diets at regular intervals. For example,
birds in a large, free-flight aviary, which holds several species, might be difficult to monitor and provide
appropriate care and dietary needs if staff time has been reduced or there is a loss of specialist staff.
While on-site veterinary facilities may require more initial investment, this is balanced by the factthat the facility has on-site veterinary support and access to veterinary facilities and medicine rather
than having to out-source this requirement. Facilities that are reliant on external veterinary support may
have trouble accessing that support during periods of revenue loss dependent on the reasons behindthe financial downturn. This will depend on the number of species held in the facility and the specialist
care they need. It may not be financially viable to employ a full-time vet/s, but consideration must be
made as to whether the veterinary service can continue through the period of revenue loss without
impacting animal care and welfare. On site veterinary facilities must be maintained and appropriate useof equipment and medicines is needed to care for all the animals in the facility, including animals underveterinary care or in quarantine, alongside proactive and reactive veterinary actions.
Facility size and species diversity differ immensely and are closely linked to staff number andexpertise and changes in staffing numbers or expertise could have an impact on animal welfare undersignificant revenue loss [5]. A diverse range of species in human care requires both specialist care andcontinued infrastructural overheads (e.g. enclosure temperature maintenance, water quality control,etc) and links back to personnel requirements that cannot be reduced even under unprecedented
circumstances.
Aquariums and vivariums require specialist animal care staff and technical assistance to maintainthe habitats and environmental conditions for the fish and reptile species. Continuous monitoring of life
support systems and regular maintenance and servicing of equipment is essential along with monitoring

of food intake. With the reduction or loss of technical assistance the environmental conditions required
for life could be compromised [8].
This is also the case for other overheads which cannot be frozen or minimised. Utilities to animal
housing cannot be turned off where a species needs a specific thermal range, humidity, ventilation,light, water salinity or UV exposure. A suitably nutritious and balanced diet needs to be prepared andprovided to each animal, often with specialist diets or supplements, along with a supply of clean drinking
water or a filtered water supply. Access to and storage of appropriate medicine is essential, as are staff
that can perform medical practices, including safe and humane euthanasia. Staff-intensive practices
which result from enclosure design, number of animals or management practice, must be continued.
Species in climates outside of their natural temperature/humidity requirements often require substantial
overheads to maintain the artificial environments within the appropriate parameters. For facilities that
hold a significant number of non-endemic species that require specialist environments, theconsequences of revenue loss may be more serious.
How animals are managed within a facility before a downturn in revenue will impact a facility’s
ability to cope with reduced overheads. For example, facilities that do not have appropriate breeding
protocols in place result in overcrowded facilities that often require the rotation of individuals between
temporary or off-exhibit and public enclosures due to incompatible animals or limited space to safely
introduce individual animals.
Limited enclosure environments, that are reliant on daily and/or complex environmental enrichment
which cannot be achieved during a reduced income period, will result in species experiencing asignificant compromise in care [9].
Good enrichment practices are managed through a structured programme but are reliant on expert
staff. Even complex, naturalistic environments require some behavioural and environmental enrichment
intervention, particularly for the more complex species that have complex requirements. Specificspecies environmental requirements (such as temperature/humidity or water quality checks/filtration
systems) that cannot be effectively and consistently maintained as a result of revenue loss, could causea significant impact on the animal’s welfare.
The secondary impacts of revenue loss on the ability of a facility with animals in human care toprovide a high standard of animal welfare are:
1) External resources and service and;

2) Visitor interactions and;
3) Restrictions on animal movements and conservation activities.
Sourcing appropriate and nutritional feed may be interrupted. Supplies of specialist foodstuffs andconcentrated feeds may be limited. Fresh produce or feeds with a short shelf life which need regulardeliveries may be reduced or be diverted. Food prices can increase if certain supplies are in demand
which may increase feed bills.
Disease surveillance services which are carried out on-site or sent off site must be maintained.
Staff who carried out on-site services may be impacted along with supplies and resources needed tocarry out the screening. Off-site/external surveillance facilities may have a reduced or suspended
service or there may be a delay in the delivery/transporting of animal samples and reporting of results
If visitor numbers are reduced or the facility has closed completely, any animals that may havebeen reliant on the visitors providing food in that facility will have to compensate for this and provide
appropriate diets. The reduction in visitors buying food for the animals will have a two-fold effect: there
will be a reduction in revenue from not purchasing the animal feed or the facility relies on externallypurchased foods brought into the facility which will mean the facility has to purchase the shortfall in foodpreviously provided by the visitors.
There are numerous different forms of animal-visitor interaction in facilities with animals in humancare. An absence of visitors will often mean that such interactions are suspended, and this can have asignificant impact on the welfare of animals normally involved in these interactions [10]. Species usedin animal presentations or educational events may be housed in accommodation that would beconsidered substandard if permanently used. However, usually these conditions are often mitigatedthrough activities within a presentation or event itself which may not be taking place. Positive
interactions with visitors may be rewarding for some individual animals and the removal of suchinteractions may cause a depression in welfare.
Conservation management remains imperative for many facilities and key staff will be required to
manage these programmes. A number of species will be part of national, regional or global population
management plans with species-specific management goals, that if interrupted will impact the effect oflong-term management plans for that species and consequently the conservation success. Financial
loss or restrictions to normal operations (travel/transport) may result in the reduced capacity to transfer
animals to other facilities.

The interruption of global or regional population management plans can have both a conservation
and animal welfare consequence. Often individual animals are temporarily loaned or held within a facility
for breeding or reintroduction/rehabilitation purposes. An inability to transfer these animals in a timely
manner could result in individuals being held in facilities that had not planned to accommodate thespecies longer than necessary and could result in animals being held in temporary unsatisfactory
enclosures. Overstocking as a result of successful breeding and the inability to transfer animals canalso result in overcrowded conditions.

4. Identified Mitigating Factors

4.1. Internal Factors
Existing facility governance, financial and practical management will dictate how significantly thisrevenue loss will impact the animal’s welfare. Management proficiency, leadership and governancemethods will mandate the consequent management infrastructure, advance contingency planning,crisis planning, risk management and recovery strategies and welfare certification documentation andStandard Operating Procedures (SOPs).
Building strong relationships with facility donors, partners and members helps with financial
security, as does appropriate governance that ensures effective cash reserves. Ensuring a facility is notreliant on a single revenue avenue and diversifying the funding avenues while investing in securingmulti-year grants will also help with financial security.
Many facilities hold animals which are not normally found in their region or climate. This can havesignificant cost implications, for example, substantial indoor accommodation, climate control and strict
management/husbandry protocols which increase staff time and resources.
The manner in which a facility has developed a species plan will influence how it can maintain
good welfare standards for the animals under its care. The species selected will determine how they
will be managed, the staff required, and the resources and infrastructure needed. Consideration towhole-of-life care costs for the animals and potential offspring requirements (staff, feed, medicine andenrichment) as well as construction, maintenance and running costs for each species enclosure andhousing must be taken before a commitment is made.

Consideration of specialist care, diets, environments, and life support systems needed for eachspecies, and having a long-term breeding plan, will help predict overheads and forecast budgets foranimal care and maintenance costs.
A comprehensive species plan with the reasons for holding and breeding those species is critical,
not only for public perception and support, but for the welfare of those animals. Not all species will havea direct or indirect conservation role, they may have an education or research role or more than one of
the above, but it is important to be able to justify the role of each species [11]. Facilities which are
members of an association or accredited members of an association follow best practice guidelines andanimal welfare standards set by the national or regional association, to assist in implementation of good
institutional species planning and ex situ programmes [12].
Staff numbers, expertise and engagement are all key factors that will support the mitigation ofanimal welfare risk under significant revenue loss. Closely associated with facility governance andexternal government support, access to competent and necessary personnel with relevant skills inanimal care and facility and life support system management practices is critical.
Community perception and support of a facility will influence their response to any emergency
financial appeals. Facilities that have provided programmes such as membership or sponsor an animal,
will have a greater ability to draw on these relationships and secure emergency funding from loyal
customers. A facility that is not considered an essential community need or has a poor or fractious
relationship with its community will have a reduced chance of receiving support.
By showing the local community, organisations and governments that consideration to why species
are kept in human care and how good welfare standards are practiced throughout the facility they are
more likely to give support and respond when assistance is needed [13]. Appropriate and factually
accurate external communication to all interested and affected parties is vital. Under normal
circumstances, many facilities supplement income through visitor subscriptions and ‘adopt an animal’schemes. Highlighting best practice animal welfare in communications will serve to uphold public trustand ensure the probability of these revenue streams remaining continuous. Additionally, opportunities
are then afforded to solicit further, directed donations to maintain animal care.

4.2. External Factors
A country’s response to an unprecedented event will impact revenue for a facility. Closure
requirements can be catastrophic, especially when a facility can be entirely or significantly reliant on

visitors. A country’s ability to respond swiftly and effectively to a crisis through novel regulations andtheir timely and efficient execution will dictate how long a closure may be required.
Existing legislation and governmental oversight pertaining to animals held in human care can
impact animal welfare under revenue loss, simply due to the requirements of facilities to abide by theselaws.
Consideration must be given to existing government legislation and insurance cover for mitigation
against the impact on animal welfare, particularly relating to any sort of enforced closures of facilities
and/or extreme revenue loss. As the insurance industry reacts to the impact of the pandemic, specificinsurance cover may be unavailable or unaffordable to many animal facilities in the future. Type of coverand claimable limits within a policy must be considered. The structure of the organisation (e.g. private,
government, charity) may influence access to grant schemes or alternative revenue sources.
A loss in income as a result of a facility closure to visitors can be offset by alternative income
resources. Government subsidy and support and/or extraordinary government aid has been provided
in a number of different countries at differing levels. For example, ZAA Australasia received access toa $96 million support package from the Federal Government in Australia, [14] while in the UK thegovernment launched a £14 million support fund, [15] that zoos could apply for to cover animal carecosts that cannot be lowered, including, keepers’ wages, animal feed and bedding, vet care andmedicines, electricity and heating and waste removal.

4. Discussion
Over the course of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic which forced zoos, aquariums, wildlife parks andsanctuaries globally to close to visitors and consequently undergo revenue loss, social media posts
indicated a general concern for animals in these facilities. However, for the most part, these concerns
predominantly centred on an apprehension that the animals were going hungry [16]. Whilst this certainly
may have been the case in some facilities, the overall impact on general animal welfare in thesesituations are often less obvious and multifaceted.
From this perspective animal welfare under crisis must be regarded as being paramount. Other
natural disasters that have historically impacted on facilities with animals in human care around theglobe have taught the lesson that prior preparation through disaster/crisis relief and/or mitigation
protocols are essential [17]. The advent of a global epidemic causing extended disruptions to visitationand ensuing revenue loss is - to use a much-coined term - unprecedented across the international

animal care community. Although, some facilities which have undergone extremes of climatic disastersuch as floods and hurricanes (which also impact visitation for extended periods) have demonstrated
that prior consideration and development of crisis protocols and risk assessments can have aconsiderably mitigating effect upon a decline in animal welfare under such circumstances [13].
Such crisis protocols however are not necessarily simply projected courses of action in an
emergency. From an animal welfare perspective, prior preparation rests upon the development andimplementation of documented standards for animal welfare during normal operation. Effective SOPs
will ensure all staff are aware of best practice standards. During a reduction in personnel as a result of
revenue loss, animals within a facility that lacks appropriate SOPs and/or does not ensure all their staff
are well trained will be at a greater risk of having poor welfare.

5. Conclusions
For facilities to maintain good animal welfare standards and to mitigate against any reduction in
animal welfare standards during a crisis the following recommendations must be considered [Figure 1].
Legislation. Effective and enforceable national or regional animal welfare legislation to regulatecontinued standards of animal care. Where this is lacking, facilities, national associations and NGOs
should work together and lobby for appropriate legislation which supports good animal welfare.
Governance. The governance of a facility will set out how an organisation prepares, maintains,and manages its operations and how it is perceived internally by staff and associates and also externallyby government, non-government organisations and the public. Reviewing current governance or
implementing appropriate processes and structures may help mitigate against a crisis.
Finances. Consider the revenue streams a facility relies on and how it structures its finances.
Diversify income sources and access government and non-governmental grants to make finances morerobust.
Association Membership. Align with other facilities’ standards and with national or regional
association policies and procedures. Associations may engage in lobbying activities for increased
assistance or supportive legislation.
Species Planning. Justifying the roles and goals for every species held in a facility will assist in
designing and planning the whole of life care for those individual animals. Consideration of theconservation, education and research roles for each species and the enclosure build and long-term

maintenance/running costs must be taken. National or regional associations may have guidance or
standards in place to assist facilities to address species planning.
Staffing. Investment in staff training and increased capabilities of staff. Address staff-intensive
husbandry practices and enclosures which require increased staff time and management. These
measures may help reduce overhead costs and potential instances of reduced animal welfare during
periods of closure and during normal facility operation. Species-appropriate enclosure design withspecies-specific habitats, allowing animals to exhibit natural behaviours (environmental enrichment),
maintains good animal welfare while staff time may be reduced.
Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs). SOPs can ensure best practice animal care is provided
within a facility. They describe how a practice should be carried out and the standard that should be
met. From enclosure/habitat cleaning to euthanasia, a well-managed facility will describe who, whenand how certain practices pertaining to animal care are carried out. Implementing or reviewing current
animal husbandry and health and safety standards will help maintain good animal welfare during acrisis. Having SOPs which allow for species-specific natural behaviours (e.g. free movement throughout
the on and off exhibit enclosures),may reduce staff-intensive management practices during a period of
reduced staffing.
Communication. Public support for a facility’s values and goals is critical during a crisis and during
normal operations. Clear and factual messaging to the public and other external organisations andauthorities will assist with local, national, and international campaigns and funding opportunities.
Internal communication is also important.

Figure 1. Preparing to Optimise Positive Animal Welfare During a Crisis.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Georgina Groves. Writing—original draft preparation,
Georgina Groves, Dave Morgan and Simon Marsh. Writing—review and editing, Dave Morgan, Simon
Marsh, Georgina Groves and Karen Fifield. Visualization, Karen Fifield. Investigation, Simon Marsh.
Project administration, Simon Marsh. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of themanuscript.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgements: We would like to thank Martín Zordan and Paula Cerdán for their support.

References
1.

Blackett, T.A.; McKenna, C.; Kavanagh, L.; Morgan, D.R. The welfare of wild animals inzoological institutions: are we meeting our duty of care? Int. Zoo Yearb. 2017, 51, 187–202.

2.

Pomerantz, O.; Terkel, J. Effects of positive reinforcement training techniques on thepsychological welfare of zoo-housed chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Am. J. Primatol. 2009,
71, 687–695, doi:10.1002/ajp.20703.

3.

Ward, S.J.; Sherwen, S.; Clark, F.E. Advances in Applied Zoo Animal Welfare Science. J.
Appl. Anim. Welf. Sci. 2018, 21, 23–33, doi:10.1080/10888705.2018.1513842.

4.

Whitham, J.C.; Wielebnowski, N. New directions for zoo animal welfare science. Appl. Anim.
Behav. Sci. 2013, 147, 247–260, doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2013.02.004.

5.

Ward, S.J.; Melfi, V. Keeper-animal interactions: Differences between the behaviour of zoo
animals affect stockmanship. PLoS One 2015, 10, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0140237.

6.

Carrasco, L.; Colell, M.; Calvo, M.; Abelló, M.T.; Velasco, M.; Posada, S. Benefits oftraining/playing therapy in a group of captive lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla). 2009.

7.

Ward, S.J.; Melfi, V. The implications of husbandry training on zoo animal response rates.
Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2013, 147, 179–185, doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2013.05.008.

8.

Huntingford, F.A.; Adams, C.; Braithwaite, V.A.; Kadri, S.; Pottinger, T.G.; Sandøe{ A N, P.;
Turnbull, D.J.F. Current issues in fish welfare., doi:10.1111/j.1095-8649.2005.01046.x.

9.

Calstead, K.S.D. The Biology of Animal Stress: Basic Principles and Implications for Animal.
Alleviating stress in zoo animals with environmental enrichment; 2000;

10.

Jones, H.; McGregor, P.K.; Farmer, H.L.A.; Baker, K.R. The influence of visitor interaction on
the behavior of captive crowned lemurs (Eulemur coronatus) and implications for welfare.
Zoo Biol. 2016, 35, 222–227, doi:10.1002/zoo.21291.

11. IUCN Species Survival Commission Guidelines on the Use of Ex situ Management forSpecies Conservation;
12. EAZA Standards for the Accommodation and Care of Animals in Zoos and Aquaria; 2019;13.

Kirk-Cohen, G.; Stránský, M.; Cz, • Michal@sky; Ceo, I.; Zordan, M.; Morbin, C.; Ho, J.; Ball,
C.; Canchal, M.; Cerdán, P.; et al. WAZA News. Storms on the Horizon; 2019;14. Zoo Aquarium Association Australia Australian zoos and aquariums welcome government
relief for animal care Available online:
https://zooaquarium.org.au/Public/News/Articles/Australian-zoos-and-aquariums-welcomegovernment-relief-for-animal-care.aspx?fbclid=IwAR3H3Pznorvrvb3ZG1G69VSQzqV1200DliSSfaz9JhfMGJj6o8sXZK9FvI.
15. UK Government £14 million financial support for England’s zoos unveiled. Available online:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/14-million-financial-support-for-englands-zoosunveiled.
16. Andriansyah, A. Indonesian Zoo Raising Money to Feed Tigers, Other Animals Available
online: https://www.voanews.com/covid-19-pandemic/indonesian-zoo-raising-money-feedtigers-other-animals.
17.

Johnson, Y.J.; Nadler, Y.; Field, E.; Myint, M.S.; O’hara-Ruiz, M.S.; Ruman, A.; Olson, S.;
Herrmann, J.A.; Briscoe, J.; Hickey, M.; et al. Flu at the zoo: Emergency management
training for the nation’s zoos and aquariums. J. Homel. Secur. Emerg. Manag. 2014, 11,415–435, doi:10.1515/jhsem-2013-0052.