Zoo Violated Ethics Code, Group Rules : Misconduct: National zoological organization faults San Diego Zoo for its handling of controversy over sale of surplus animals to a hunting ranch in Texas.

A national zoo organization has found the Zoological Society of San Diego guilty of misconduct in the way it publicly handled the controversial sale of surplus San Diego Zoo animals to a Texas hunting ranch, it was disclosed Monday.

The American Assn. of Zoological Parks and Aquariums, with 160 institutional members, found that the San Diego Zoo “did not meet the goals and concepts” of the group, AAZPA Executive Director Sydney J. Butler said.

The zoo’s misconduct was not in the sale of the animals itself--which the AAZPA said the San Diego Zoo did unwittingly--but in the handling of the subsequent controversy when a San Diego animal rights group brought the charges publicly. The zoo says it was faulted for making two public misstatements about the sales.

“We did not find that they knowingly sold any animals to the hunting ranch, nor did we find that the animals were harmed,” Butler said in a telephone interview from Bethesda, Md. “In fact, the animals were returned, once it was discovered they might have gone to someone who might not have cared for them properly.

“It was in the handling of that issue where certain of our ethics code precepts were violated,” Butler said. He would not elaborate on how exactly the ethics code was violated, Butler said, because of rules of confidentiality between AAZPA and its members.

The reprimands do not carry any specific discipline but the expectation that the Zoological Society of San Diego will address the problem, he said.

“The San Diego Zoo is taking this seriously,” Butler said.

For its part, the San Diego Zoo on Monday acknowledged the ding by its peers, but shrugged it off.

At issue, said zoo spokesman Jeff Jouett, were misstatements by the Zoological Society when the charges were first aired in September, 1991, by San Diego Animal Advocates and Friends of Animals, which also complained formally to the national zoo organization.

The Zoological Society erred when, in its initial response to the charges last year, it said that a zoo employee had visited the Texas hunting ranch before allowing two Dybowski sika deer to be sent there. Two months later--last November--the Zoological Society corrected itself and said no employees had inspected the hunting ranch before the animals were sent there.

A second error occurred, Jouett said, when the Zoological Society reported that the two sika deer had been returned to the San Diego Wild Animal Park, before the animals actually were returned. That misstatement was also publicly corrected.

“With all respect due the AAZPA, we do not believe that these errors support a suggestion of unethical conduct by the Zoological Society or any of its staff,” Jouett said in a prepared statement.

The Zoological Society of San Diego, in the face of charges by the animal rights groups, said last September it did not realize that the breeders to whom it was selling surplus animals had ties to private hunting ranches.

Zoo officials acknowledged at the time that by dealing with the breeders, however unwittingly, the zoo had broken with its professional code of ethics and its own written policies.

Butler said the AAZPA is, in the meantime, drafting standards on the sale of surplus animals to breeding farms and hunting ranches.

Its current standards call for members generally to “make every effort to ensure that exotic animals do not find their way into the hands of those not qualified to care for them properly.”

Butler said new language would prohibit the sale of surplus animals to hunting ranches and breeding farms.

Sally Mackler, president of San Diego Animal Advocates, said she applauded the AAZPA for taking some action against the local Zoological Society--but questioned its worth.

“It’s significant only so far as it shows that a serious problem does exist and has been recognized by the Zoological Society’s own peers,” Mackler said. “The fact that they have taken action of any kind indicating a breech of ethics is significant in and of itself.”

The AAZPA specifically found that the Zoological Society of San Diego violated the standard that “a member shall not engage in conduct that adversely affects, or is prejudicial to, the concepts and ideals of the AAZPA.”

The group’s ethics committee also found violations of two pledges made by its members--one, to “display the highest integrity, the best judgment or ethics possible, and use (of) professional skills to the best interests of all,” and to “maintain high standards of personal, professional and business conduct and behavior.”

The ethics committee’s findings were endorsed by the AAZPA’s board of directors, Butler said.