In the last two months the news headlines coming from the Kyiv municipal zoo are more like war reports. Dead, killed and poisoned are the key words. The number of victims is growing. The authorities respond with lies or wishful thinking.
On May 31, the list of the zoo’s martyred residents grew by one more when a bison died. It came just after a camel died on May 26.
There is no information about the reasons behind the death. Intoxication from potatoes thrown in cages by unknown enemies is unconvincing.
There are plenty of questions as camels, for example, are known to be very sturdy and capable of surviving even in the most difficult deserts of Mongolia, Africa or Australia.
Ukrainian animal rights activists, locked in a cage and wearing masks, take part in a protest called “No ZOOicide!” by the entrance to the Kyiv Zoo on Dec. 20, 2009. The protesters demanded an improvement in animal-keeping conditions at the zoo. (UNIAN)
But it seems that the conditions of the Kyiv zoo are more extreme. God knows what would happen to the camels in the Gobi, Sahara or Gibson deserts if the current management of Kyiv was in charge there.
It seems that, in the concentration camp the Kyiv zoo has become, any desert would seem like a resort to a poor animal. In nature, any animal will fight for survival in the presence of looming danger. It will run, fly away, swim away or crawl away. In the Kyiv zoo, all they can do is break their own necks, as happened with a male zebra that died in April. When being moved to the summer enclosures, he was separated from the zebra females. He ran after them. The zoo management said the zebra died “from joy,” meaning his hormones were going wild.
Then there was the elephant that died on April 26. The lies that continue gushing from zoo director [who is curreently suspended] Svitlana Berzina and Deputy Mayor Ihor Dobrutskiy are capable of burning any lie detector. Take, for example, their statement that the elephant was poisoned with eggs.
This hypothesis was voiced not only by Berzina, but also the zoo’s chief veterinarian, who should know that elephants do not eat any protein food. They have also talked about a strange attempt to poison two yaks. According to the vets, the symptoms were similar to those of the elephant. But there are still no results of any toxicological tests to prove this.
Berzina says the zoo is surrounded by enemies who are intent on poisoning zoo residents. Two hours after the elephant’s death, before the autopsy, she made statements about the cause of death and the killers.
But other experts said that some deaths, like the death of the camel, was caused by poor food quality or toxic mats the animals sleep on, or a combination of these two factors. This could happen because the person in charge of food is not qualified for the job, which requires a livestock expert with a proper diploma.
The problem of unqualified employees continues on to the top. Berzina, a marketing specialist with a checkered past, has no relevant education with which to run a zoo.
Berzina started as an organizer of dog fights at a shelter, then moved on to become the director of the Center for Animal Identification. Among other positions there, she was in charge of the process for “humane reduction of the number of homeless animals in the city of Kyiv.” We all know what’s going on with homeless animals in Kyiv. Berzina continues to be in charge of this process that is anything but humane.
It’s difficult to say how that makes her qualified to run the zoo. She was selected without competition and without, apparently, consideration of her previous problems with the law for financial wrongdoing, charges that she denies.
Moreover, the zoo’s accountancy department employs Inna Krichkovska, who on July 9, 2004, was sentenced to three years in prison for financial abuse.
Why two people with this sort of track record are in charge of the zoo’s finances is a good question to ask the Kyiv authorities. But an even more interesting question is how the zoo finances are controlled.
You won’t need to go far to find an answer. Just click the Kyiv’s Zoo’s website, zoo.kiev.ua, and dig around in the reports published there. It’s a gold mine for the investigators, who either know nothing or want to know nothing.
Here are a few examples. Ever since the arrival of Berzina, the mass media have been campaigning about the importance of the animal guardianship program. You pay an amount according to the price list, and get good publicity in return. If one believes the website, the honorable mission has drawn many people – from Mayor Leonid Chernovetsky and his deputies, to ordinary businesses and citizens.
According to the 2009 financial report, the zoo received an additional Hr 522,000 through this charity. But the zoo’s accountants seem to have problems with math: Chernovetsky alone has given Hr 50,000 monthly to his elephant, which totals Hr 600,000 for the year.
And then there are his deputies, companies and citizens. In other words, the difference between what the management has declared and what has reportedly been given is more than a million hryvnias.
In another example, last November Berzina presented a report of the work of the zoo over 10 months. It contained a curious line in the expenses section – “legal services and audit,” which cost Hr 3.4 million. However, both the line and the figure evaporated from the final report for the year. Instead, there appeared a modest expense of Hr 154,000 for auditing services. Perhaps these figures are too small for investigators to bother with.
What are tens of million of hryvnias per year, controlled by Berzina, compared to tens of millions of dollars that could be gotten for the 34.22 hectares of municipal land where the zoo sits in the center of Kyiv?
This gold mine continues to excite the minds of the Kyiv authorities since 2005, when the plan for moving the zoo out of the city surfaced for the first time. It seems that the itch is still there. And alas, the theory that they’re trying to do it by hook or by crook seems more realistic every day.
If they cannot move the zoo legally, it can be done in an asymmetric way, by reducing the collection of animals in order to claim that a small collection of animals does not need such a large area.
Replenishing the zoo animals is unrealistic at the moment. Despite the mantras of the city authorities, the zoo is not getting an elephant any time soon. The zoo has been in international isolation for a long time, and a thaw is especially unlikely after the series of deaths.
Let’s get back to the death of the young female camel a month after the death of the elephant. Berzina, of course, announced once again that, according to the autopsy, the camel was poisoned by evil-doers.
There is little action coming from the authorities – be it presidential, cabinet or mayoral – despite parliamentary inquiries and demands from the press and civic organizations.
An employee bends over a dead elephant in the Kyiv Zoo on April 26. The only elephant in the zoo 39-year-old male named Boy, died that day in his enclosure. (UNIAN)
There is still a way out, and the recipe is simple.
The zoo should be moved to the Cabinet’s jurisdiction, and a full-scale inspection conducted by the State Security Service and the general prosecutor. A commission should be created from representatives of the media and animal rights groups, including independent domestic and foreign experts, but with no municipal officials involved.
Berzina should be permanently relieved of her duties, and a foreign manager appointed for a year. This would speed up the return of the zoo to the European Association of Zoos, from which the zoo was excluded in 2007. All other half-measures are useless.
Andriy Kapustin is a writer and animal rights activist. The article first appeared at http://lb.ua/analitic/society/2010/05/26/46664_unichtozhenie_kievskogo_zooparka.html and is reprinted with permission.
