CITY CLERK

Clause embodied in Report No. 3 of the Economic Development and Parks Committee, as adopted by the Council of the City of at its meeting held on April 16, 17 and 18, 2002.

1

Review of Parks and Recreation Animal Operations (Various Wards)

(City Council on April 16, 17 and 18, 2002, amended this Clause by deleting Recommendation No. (3) of the Economic Development and Parks Committee and inserting in lieu thereof the following new Recommendation No. (3):

“(3) that the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism be requested to work with the Advisory Committees of Riverdale Farm, Far Enough Farm and the Zoo, and, in consultation with the , to prepare animal management plans for each site; and further, that these plans include an outline for ongoing input and consultation with the Toronto Zoo.”)

The Economic Development and Parks Committee recommends:

(1) the adoption of the report (February 28, 2002) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism;

(2) the adoption of the report (February 25, 2002) from the General Manager and CEO of the Toronto Zoo; and

(3) that the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism be requested to work with Riverdale Farm Advisory Committee to prepare an Animal Management Plan for Riverdale Farm, in consultation with the Toronto Zoo, the said Animal Management Plan to also include other animal operation sites such as the High Park Zoo and Far Enough Farm (Centre Island); and further such plan include an outline for ongoing input and consultation with the Toronto Zoo.

The Economic Development and Parks Committee reports, for the information of Council, having requested the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism to undertake ways to measure the number of patrons that attend the facilities outlined in the report (February 28, 2002) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism.

The Economic Development and Parks Committee submits the report (February 28, 2002) from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism: Toronto City Council2 Economic Development and Parks Committee April 16, 17 and 18, 2002 Report No. 3, Clause No. 1

Purpose:

To report as requested by the Economic Development and Parks Committee, at its meetings of March 29, 2001 and May 14, 2001, on the co-ordination of the Toronto Zoo/Farms and Petting Zoos.

Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

There are no financial implications resulting from the adoption of this report.

Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

(1) the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, through the Parks and Recreation Division, continue to manage the four City animal operation sites;

(2) the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism review the findings and recommendations of the Toronto Zoo investigation and establish, in consultation with Toronto Zoo staff, a plan to address the findings and recommendations; and

(3) the appropriate City officials be authorized and directed to take the necessary action to give effect thereto.

Background:

Since March 2001, the Toronto Zoo and Parks and Recreation Division staff have been reviewing the feasibility of co-ordinating the City’s five animal operations, including the Toronto Zoo. On May 14, 2001, a report was submitted to the Economic Development and Parks Committee jointly from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism and the General Manager and CEO of the Toronto Zoo, providing an outline of the review.

Throughout July and August 2001, the Parks and Recreation Division conducted a participant survey at Riverdale Farm, High Park Zoo and Far Enough Farm. Results of the survey indicated that: Far Enough Farm had 100 percent of the respondents rate the site between good and excellent; High Park Zoo had 92 percent of the respondents rate the site between good and excellent and Riverdale Farm had 85 percent of the respondents rate the site between good and excellent.

In January of 2002, community consultation meetings for High Park Zoo, Far Enough Farm and Riverdale Farm were held with the Chair of the Toronto Zoo, Local Councillors and area residents. The purpose was to explain the process to date, review the three options with the community and gather input. The results from the three meetings indicated an overall preference to continue to have the Parks and Recreation Division operate the sites in each community. It should be noted that the community meeting at Riverdale Farm displayed interest in having the zoo involved in the operation by a small margin. Toronto City Council3 Economic Development and Parks Committee April 16, 17 and 18, 2002 Report No. 3, Clause No. 1

Conclusions:

The Parks and Recreation Division will continue to operate its animal sites and establish a mutually acceptable partnership with the Toronto Zoo to enhance the quality of service to the public and to the animals in its care. The Parks and Recreation Division staff will review the findings and recommendations of the Toronto Zoo as the basis for establishing a plan of action to address the items identified in the Toronto Zoo report.

The Economic Development, Culture and Tourism, Parks and Recreation Division welcome the assistance of the Toronto Zoo staff in the development of these plans.

Contact Name:

Ms. Claire Tucker–Reid, General Manager, Parks and Recreation Division, Telephone: 416-392-8182, Fax: 416-392- 8085, Email: [email protected].

The Economic Development and Parks Committee also submits the following report (February 25, 2002) from the General Manager and CEO, Toronto Zoo:

Purpose:

To report on the review of four Parks and Recreation facilities that exhibit animals to the public and the possible co-ordination of these facilities with the Toronto Zoo.

Recommendation:

It is recommended that the Parks and Recreation Division continue to operate the four facilities.

Financial Implications and Impact Statement:

There are no financial implications.

Background:

Since March 2001, staff from the Toronto Zoo and Parks and Recreation Division have been reviewing the feasibility of co-ordinating the City’s five animal operations, including the Toronto Zoo. On May 14, 2001, a report was submitted to the Economic Development and Parks Committee jointly from the Commissioner of Economic Development, Culture and Tourism and the General Manager and CEO of the Toronto Zoo, providing an outline of the review.

There are four animal facilities operated by the Parks and Recreation Division. These are:

(a) Riverdale Farm: Replicates a small 19th century farm. Features farm animal breeds sanctioned by Rare Breeds Canada. Animals include horses, cows, pigs, goats, rabbits, ducks and chickens. Located in Cabbagetown near Gerrard Street and Parliament Street. Toronto City Council4 Economic Development and Parks Committee April 16, 17 and 18, 2002 Report No. 3, Clause No. 1

(b) Far Enough Farm: Provides visitors the opportunity to see and touch a variety of domestic farm animals including donkeys, horses, sheep, goats and pigs, and also a pair of emus. Located on Centre Island.

(c) High Park Zoo: Displays a range of primarily non-domestic animals, including bison, mouflon, llamas, highland cattle and barbary sheep. Located within High Park.

(d) Thomson Park Zoo: A smaller seasonal operation that provides an interactive setting with donkeys, goats, sheep, rabbits and chickens during the summer months. Located in Thomson Park near Lawrence Avenue and Brimley Avenue.

The following Guiding Principles were accepted in undertaking the review:

(a) the care and safety of the animals is a priority; (b) animal management expertise, within the City of Toronto, resides with the Toronto Zoo; (c) animal management is not within the core business of the Parks and Recreation Division; and (d) the public must maintain access to opportunities to visit and learn more about a variety of domestic and non domestic animals.

Four potential operational scenarios were reviewed:

(a) Option 1: Toronto Zoo assumes responsibility for all aspects of the operation of Riverdale Farm, High Park Zoo, Far Enough Farm, Thomson Park ;

(b) Option 2: Toronto Zoo assumes responsibility for all aspects of animal management at all four Parks and Recreation animal sites;

(c) Option 3: Parks and Recreation retains responsibility for all four sites and enters into a formal service level agreement with the Zoo regarding animal management; and

(d) Option 4: Status Quo. No involvement by the Toronto Zoo.

Review Process:

The Toronto Zoo made several visits to each facility to gather information. The focus of these visits was to assess for each site: - animal care practices; - staffing levels and duties; - condition of buildings and grounds; - educational focus; - community involvement; - environmental sensitivities; - operating costs: current and future; - revenue potential; - capital investment needs; and - existing long term plans. Toronto City Council5 Economic Development and Parks Committee April 16, 17 and 18, 2002 Report No. 3, Clause No. 1

Much of this information was provided from two site visits to each facility, described as follows:

- A three person team from the Toronto Zoo, with considerable animal care expertise, visited these sites to assess whether these zoos would meet the standards of the Canadian Association of Zoos and Aquariums (CAZA). CAZA is a national organization that has an accreditation process; the Toronto Zoo is an accredited CAZA member. The accreditation process measures a number of attributes including: level of animal care, veterinary care, public safety, security of collection, and whether the facility has education and conservation programs.

- A preliminary building audit was undertaken, led by the Toronto Zoo’s Manager of Facilities and Services, to ascertain the general condition of the buildings and to estimate the costs to bring these buildings up to Toronto Zoo standards, as needed. Visual observation and discussion with Parks staff focused on the building structure and servicing, public pathways, and paddock fencing.

Other sources of information included the following:

- While visiting New York City, Councillor Mammoliti and Mr. White met with staff of the Bronx Zoo to discuss the New York management model. Wildlife Conservation International is the governing authority of the Bronx Zoo, and manages three other City-owned zoos through a contract with the City.

- Other professionals in the zoo industry were contacted regarding the potential for revenue at each site, overall theming, and similar business issues.

- Parks staff surveyed visitors at the three sites in August and September 2001, to determine satisfaction levels and to seek input on what improvements visitors wanted.

- Councillor George Mammoliti, Chair of the Toronto Zoo Board of Management, and Mr. Calvin White, CEO of the Toronto Zoo, met on two occasions early on in the review process with the Riverdale Farm Advisory Committee.

In early January 2002, the Parks and Recreation Division organized three community consultation sessions, at High Park, Toronto Island and the Riverdale Farm. Councillor Mammoliti chaired these sessions. Councillors McConnell and Miller attended, and Parks and Recreation Division and Zoo staff gave an overview of the process and findings to date. All three sessions were well-attended by the community.

Discussion:

The four sites, although often referred to as “zoos”, are not zoos by modern day standards. More appropriately, they are facilities with a collection of animals, and each site has evolved over time based on its unique history and surrounding community. Today’s zoos are focused on three goals: education, recreation, and conservation. To properly balance these three goals in managing a zoo, it is essential to have a multi-year plan that articulates: the overall theme; collection composition; education objectives; conservation impact; and resource requirements. Toronto City Council6 Economic Development and Parks Committee April 16, 17 and 18, 2002 Report No. 3, Clause No. 1

Whether they are called “zoos” or “farms”, any facility that keeps animals for public display should have these elements. With the possible exception of Riverdale Farm, the Parks and Recreation “zoos” are not operated in this way.

Not surprisingly, these sites do not meet the standards of the Canadian Association of Zoos and Aquariums. While the animals are well cared for and in good condition, a number of improvements would need to be made to the animal enclosures, husbandry practices, and public programming to bring these sites up to CAZA requirements. As an accredited CAZA member, the Toronto Zoo would be obliged to make these changes, which would require additional funding, if these sites became the Zoo’s responsibility.

The operating budget for the four Parks and Recreation Division sites totals approximately $800,000.00, not including corporate services and utilities. The Toronto Zoo is of the opinion that the City is operating these facilities very cost-effectively. The Parks staff are doing a good job with the resources they are allocated. If the Toronto Zoo were to assume responsibility for these sites, the costs would be significantly higher to implement the Zoo’s operating approach. It is estimated that an additional $500,000.00 would be required annually.

Regarding capital funding, these facilities would need a capital investment to make changes to the buildings, animal enclosures and grounds to meet CAZA and Toronto Zoo standards. This is estimated at $200,000.00 for Riverdale Farm, $300,000.00 for Far Enough Farm and approximately $5.0 million to re-develop the High Park Zoo, if the Toronto Zoo operated these sites. Even if the Parks and Recreation Division continues to operate these sites, this level of investment phased over a number of years is very important. These facilities need capital funds to support a planned maintenance program, although in the case of High Park it would be more prudent to re-build.

Based on the community consultation process completed in early January 2002, it is clear that the local communities would prefer to keep these facilities under the management of Parks and Recreation. While each community had its own viewpoints and comments, the prospect of the Zoo running the three sites generated several concerns that were repeated at each session:

- the potential for losing the intimacy and uniqueness of a small facility; - concern about user fees in the future; - would the Zoo feel pressure to close these facilities, in difficult financial times; and - concern about reduced representation and input into the activities of their local zoo or farm.

Councillor Mammoliti tried to allay these concerns by expressing the Zoo’s position and explaining how these facilities might change in the future. However, it is evident that as a whole, the communities are not pushing to change these animal facilities. They are focused on retaining their local farm or zoo, with access year round and without an entrance fee. It should be noted that of the three consultation sessions, the Riverdale Farm community demonstrated the most openness to having the Zoo involved in an operating role. Toronto City Council7 Economic Development and Parks Committee April 16, 17 and 18, 2002 Report No. 3, Clause No. 1

As the involvement of the Toronto Zoo has raised concerns by the citizens, Zoo staff recommend that the Zoo not become involved with these sites at this time. However, the Zoo would encourage Parks staff to plan for capital expenditures to improve these facilities as discussed in more detail in the next section of this report.

Comments on Each Animal Facility:

The significant points and conclusions from information collected by Zoo staff from visits to each facility are described below:

Riverdale Farm:

The Riverdale Farm is an impressive facility. It is themed as a 19th century rural farm and its programs and activities reinforce this focus. The Farm is generally in good repair and recent investments in signage and pathways give the site a fresh look. There is tremendous support from the community, particularly the Riverdale Farm Advisory Committee that represents neighbourhood interests and is involved in fundraising for Farm projects.

The collection is mainly domestic animals, but the Farm is moving towards an emphasis on Ontario rare breeds. This is a positive move as it would provide visitors with a more authentic image of a turn of the century Ontario farm. There is a need to keep animal records on site (diet, health and animal movement data), particularly if less common breeds are going to be the focus.

From time to time, there have been conflicts between the Parks and Recreation Division staff and the Advisory Committee concerning animal management issues. Parks and Recreation Division management staff do not have the level of animal expertise necessary to easily explain and defend sensitive decisions. This is definitely needed, to instil confidence in the Riverdale community that the correct decisions are being made. The Riverdale Farm has had a tumultuous past, with rumours of closure or reduced operating hours appearing frequently in the media. These reports have contributed to the tensions between the Parks and Recreation Division staff and the Advisory Committee. It is important that the continuity of the Farm be confirmed, if not through this report then through a separate Council directive, to allow the staff and Advisory Committee to forward plan. There currently is not a long term plan for the Farm that would describe the collection composition, improvements to education programs, theming, special events, etc.

The Riverdale Farm is a facility that is well-used by the community. There are various education programs that operate out of the buildings and many of these programs, such as Junior Farmers and the Riverdale Farm Camp, fit the farm theme or connect with the animal collection. The Farm has organized programs for school groups and scheduled talks for the general public. Education programs are important because they help visitors to interpret what they are seeing and get the public more actively involved. Modern zoos believe that animals should not be in captivity unless this is contributing to a higher purpose, for example, public education or conservation of endangered species. Toronto City Council8 Economic Development and Parks Committee April 16, 17 and 18, 2002 Report No. 3, Clause No. 1

The rural farm concept can be even further enhanced by adding more rare breeds to the collection, attention to detail in how the animals are presented, and using a critical eye around the site to ensure signage, fencing supply storage, etc., is tidy and well maintained. Already the staff have employed some effective tools for interpretation and education. This is an evolving field and staff should be encouraged to continue to think of creative ways to involve the public.

The buildings and grounds are generally in good condition and are suitable for a farm setting with domesticated animals. The maintenance inspection noted that some of the animal buildings do not have working floor drains and these should be operational, or new ones installed, to permit wet-cleaning as needed. Interior repairs and painting to the houses should also be completed. These interior repairs are considered minor, with the exception of the Residence which could require more extensive work depending on the planned use.

In summary, the Toronto Zoo sees the following tasks as a priority:

- set up animal records (diet, health, behaviour) on site; - install floor drains in all barns to allow wet-cleaning; - make necessary building repairs as noted above and described in more detail in the Maintenance Inspection report; and - develop a long term plan for the Farm, including a collection plan.

High Park Zoo: The High Park Zoo (HPZ) has been part of the Park for over 100 years. It displays a variety of non-domestic animals, such as bison, mouflon, barbary sheep and some birds, as well as domestic animals such as highland cattle. While the animals are well cared for, the facility is old and outdated. Viewing is through chain link fence, the paddocks are small for some animals, and there is virtually no interpretation of the collection through graphics or staff interaction with the public. The HPZ has changed very little over the last 30 years. There are nine animal holdings and most of the buildings are simple log construction with limited or no utilities. Most buildings lack floor drains for wet cleaning and several buildings are rotting and in need of replacement. Fencing is in poor condition, with obvious signs of posts heaving and rusting. Storm runoff from two pens drains into an open ditch and this is directed to a settling pond. This problem is being addressed by the City’s Water and Wastewater Services Division. Some of the buildings had evidence of pest infestation with mice, pigeons and raccoons, although a pest control service is contracted.

In summary, none of the buildings at HPZ meet Toronto Zoo or modern zoo standards for construction type or servicing. Each building should have concrete floors, power, water and functioning floor drains. There is no overall educational message or theme to the HPZ. The animals do not relate to a particular geographic area or habitat. Education programs that operate from High Park do not connect to the zoo. There is no long range plan for the zoo or the animal collection that would explain why these animals are being presented. It is noted that the animals in the collection are very hardy animals and therefore are easier to care for. The low-lying location of the zoo within the park causes wet conditions, which limits the animal species that can be maintained. There are no animal records on site. Toronto City Council9 Economic Development and Parks Committee April 16, 17 and 18, 2002 Report No. 3, Clause No. 1

There are two zoo attendants responsible for the facility, which is minimal staffing to maintain a facility of this size. These staff also perform other park duties when additional coverage is needed.

There is a volunteer group, the High Park Citizens’ Advisory Committee (HPCAC), that provides input on park policies and objectives, facilitates volunteer involvement in the park and promotes public awareness and responsible stewardship of the park. With respect to HPZ, volunteers assist in monitoring the public to prevent animal feeding. Nevertheless, public feeding does occur on a regular basis and low staff numbers make the “no feeding” policy virtually impossible to police. If City Council is committed to keeping the High Park Zoo operating as a zoo in the future, a major capital investment will be required. This would entail a complete re-design of the area including an overall theme, a collection plan, a stronger education thrust, new animal holdings and paddocks and visitor walkways and amenities. In the interim, the Parks and Recreation Division should make several improvements. These are:

- develop an acquisition/disposition policy; - set up animal records (diet, health, behaviour) on site; - improve the water quality in those paddocks where the pipes are rusted; and - when replacing graphics, look at more effective messaging.

Far Enough Farm (Toronto Island):

The Far Enough Farm (FEF) is located on Centre Island and has been in existence for over 40 years. The farm operates year-round and maintains a collection of mainly domestic farm animals such as donkeys, horses, goats, and chickens, as well as a pair of emus. Most of these animals are owned by the City, a few are leased. It is estimated that approximately 25 percent of the 1.2 million people that visit Centre Island annually also visit FEF, or about 300,000 visitors. Most visits occur during the May to September period.

The standards of animal care at FEF could be improved. Some animal paddocks needed a more thorough cleaning and some of the buildings storing supplies were untidy. The animals appeared to be in good health. There is a need to maintain animal records, including diet, health and animal movement information. There are approximately 10 buildings or shelters at FEF. None of the buildings at the farm meet Toronto Zoo or modern zoo standards for condition or servicing. Each building is of simple construction with limited or no utilities. Each holding or shelter should have concrete floors, power, water and functioning floor drains. Some of the buildings are in such poor condition they need to be torn down. The farm has no perimeter security fence and staff explain that security of the farm animals has never been a problem. The FEF does not have a strong education message for visitors. While the buildings and animals clearly portray a farm theme, this should be enhanced by graphics and interactive tools to further interpret what visitors see. There are no scheduled keeper talks, although keepers answer questions from visitors as they complete their work. The Centre Island School includes activities at the farm in their programs, e.g., animal husbandry and stable management. The School is the main user of the farm during the winter months. Toronto City Council10 Economic Development and Parks Committee April 16, 17 and 18, 2002 Report No. 3, Clause No. 1

The Toronto Island Trust is the Island community advisory group. Approximately 700 residents live on the Island and are very involved in community activities such as the Farm. However, unlike the Riverdale Farm, the Trust does not have a fundraising role at the FEF or the level of involvement in programming.

The Far Enough Farm lacks a long term plan, an impediment that prevents the Farm from reaching its full potential. A multi-year plan will assist staff in securing resources to maintain the buildings, develop the collection, present the animals well to the public and increase the educational content of the farm experience.

In summary, the Toronto Zoo sees the following tasks as a priority:

(1) set up animal records (diet, health, behaviour) on site; (2) install floor drains in all barns to allow wet-cleaning; (3) make necessary building repairs as noted in Maintenance Inspection report; (4) improve the tidiness of the buildings and grounds; and (5) develop a long term plan for the Farm, including a collection plan.

Thomson Park Zoo:

This facility is the smallest of the four Parks and Recreation Division animal sites. It has five pens, with a variety of domestic animals including rabbits, sheep, donkeys and small horses. The animal collection is leased on a seasonal basis for the summer period. There are no educational programs connected to the animals and there are no signs or educational graphics for the public.

The total cost to operate the facility is $2,300.00, which includes labour, food and leases. The operating costs are low, as the animals are primarily looked after by Parks and Recreation Division seasonal staff who have other duties in Thomson Park.

Zoo staff noted that the pens are rotting and need to be replaced. As well, there should be more of a staff presence in the facility, as the public are frequently feeding the animals. In conclusion, Zoo staff recommend that the Parks and Recreation Division consider discontinuing this operation.

New York City Model:

As part of the review, information was obtained from New York City about their management model for their city owned zoos.

The Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) operates four zoos and one aquarium in New York City. In the early 1980’s, the City of New York approached WCS (then known as the New York Zoological Society) about operating three local zoos which were being managed by the City’s Parks and Recreation Department. The Society had an excellent reputation in the zoo field and was successfully operating the Bronx Zoo, New York’s largest zoo and comparable in many respects to the Toronto Zoo. The City could see obvious advantages in bringing the expertise of the Bronx Zoo staff to these smaller facilities. The three sites needed to be modernized and the City wanted the Society to oversee these renovations, contributing exhibit design and animal care Toronto City Council11 Economic Development and Parks Committee April 16, 17 and 18, 2002 Report No. 3, Clause No. 1 expertise to raise the standards. A detailed agreement between the Society and the City was drafted that set out how the sites would be managed by the Society during and after the renovations.

Today, the WCS continues to operate the three sites at Central Park, Queens and Prospect Park on behalf of the City. The City owns the land and most of the buildings, while the Society owns the animal collection. The City approves the annual expenses and revenues and the deficit is covered by the City. The City’s philosophy is to keep the admission rates low so the facilities are accessible by local residents. The City is the final authority in setting the operating hours and admission prices of each facility. This is not an issue with the Society because by contract the City absorbs approved deficits. Capital improvements are funded by the City. The staff are employees of the Society.

There is a difference in scale between the City of Toronto animal facilities and the New York City zoos. All the New York facilities have comparatively large budgets and are well-staffed. For example, Central Park Zoo encompasses six acres, has 74 full time staff and a budget of $6 million US. Nevertheless, the New York model demonstrates that one governing authority can operate zoos in several locations, providing the terms and conditions of a transfer are agreed at the outset. The Society was very thorough in describing the financial support, staffing levels and equipment required to operate these locations and the City agreed to a certain level of operating and capital support. One of the City’s objectives was to raise the standards at the three sites.

Conclusions:

The Toronto Zoo has the animal expertise and management skills to operate the Riverdale Farm, High Park Zoo and Far Enough Farm on behalf of the City. However, it was apparent from the public consultation sessions that this is not what the citizens want. Therefore, it is recommended that these sites continue to be managed by the Parks and Recreation Division. The Zoo would encourage the Parks and Recreation Division to plan for capital expenditures to improve these facilities as discussed in this report.

Contact Name:

Ms. Susan Gunton, Director, Planning and Analysis, Toronto Zoo, Telephone: 416-392-5911; Fax: 416-392-5934; email: [email protected].

______

The following persons appeared before the Economic Development and Parks Committee in connection with the foregoing matter:

- Ms. Pauline Mazumdar, Chair, Riverdale Farm Advisory Committee, and filed a copy of her submission; - Mr. Randy Brown, Vice Chair, Riverdale Farm Advisory Committee; - Ms. Klara Latif, Member of the High Park Citizens’ Advisory Committee, and filed a copy of her submission; Toronto City Council12 Economic Development and Parks Committee April 16, 17 and 18, 2002 Report No. 3, Clause No. 1

- Mr. Don Barnett, Member of the High Park Citizens’ Advisory Committee, and filed a copy of his submission; - Mr. Paul Rappell, Co-Chair, High Park Citizens’ Advisory Committee, and filed a copy of his submission; and - Councillor Pam McConnell, Ward 28 Toronto Centre-Rosedale.