Standards: What are they? Who makes them? Why have them?

I have spent much of the past six to twelve months trying to convince the owners/operators of a parrot refuge, to start implementing the Standards For Arboreal/Perching Bird Sanctuaries, that were created by The Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries (GFAS). And I've offered to help. So far, the only thing I've accomplished is to get myself banned from the refuge property. Why? Can it be that standards and how and why they are made are not as well understood as I had thought? Let’s see. Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary, Second Edition, defines a standard as:

1.      Something established for use as a rule or basis of comparison in measuring or judging  value or quality, for example.

      

2.      Anything recognized as correct by common consent, by approved custom or by those most competent to decide.

3.      A level or grade of excellence, attainment etc. regarded as a goal or measure of adequacy.

 Although I’d have been hard-pressed to come up with a definition before actually delving into the dictionary myself, I believe most of us share the same general idea of what a standard is. So, I don’t believe that the owners/operators of this refuge are resistant to standards because they don’t understand what standards are. Perhaps it’s because standards are used as a rule or basis of comparison in measuring or judging. The Canadian Kennel Association for example maintains standards of physical characteristics for every recognized breed of dog. The dog, in a dog show, that comes closest to the standards for that breed, wins. Some standards are used as a goal or measure of adequacy. Students attend college or university in order to meet the standards set for their careers of choice. Most jobs and careers demand compliance with a certain standard of knowledge and proficiency to ensure entry level adequacy. The GFAS Standards are used in both ways, to compare a sanctuary’s level of adequacy with sanctuaries recognized for their excellence. In the case of parrots, sanctuaries thus recognized and accredited by GFAS include Foster Parrots and The Oasis Sanctuary, both in the U.S.A. Let’s face it, being measured against standards for quality can be either gratifying or uncomfortable and embarrassing, depending on the level of quality judged to be present or absent, as the case may be.

Who makes or produces standards? The definitions suggest, “…those most competent to decide and/or judge”. Does the Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries (GFAS) meet these criteria? It was founded in 2007 by leaders in the fields of animal protection, veterinary care, sanctuary management, and non-profit professionals. They refined and expanded existing sanctuary standards based on their own knowledge and expertise. I suppose if one isn't chosen as one of those experts, one could become disgruntled with the whole idea of complying with someone else’s proposed standards. However, when the overriding goal of a sanctuary is to provide quality care to the animals in residence, resistance to standards would appear to be somewhat contradictory.

Why do we have standards? The reasons seem to be as many as they are varied. It’s really enough to know that organizations, in this case parrot sanctuaries, that comply with standards of excellence enjoy a reputation for efficiency, safety and professionalism. Fundamental responsibilities are met and risks minimized. People, behaviours and organizational practices are legitimate.

The GFAS Standards for Arboreal/Perching Bird Sanctuaries are extensive and cover every aspect of care including housing, handling policies, staff safety and education and training protocols. Implementing some of them would be time consuming and/or costly. Some would take very little effort or other resources to implement. But becoming accredited would definitely take time.

Why would a sanctuary not want to implement standards representing quality care for its residents? Today, most companies, organizations and societies embrace standards of some kind. Educational institutions employ standards to determine who may enroll and who may proceed. Federal and Provincial laws are standards of behaviour. The CRTC uses standards to determine and monitor the moral content of films and movies.  And many sanctuaries and refuges have embraced the GFAS Standards. Sadly for the many parrots at this refuge, there is no mechanism, other than community pressure, to either impose or enforce standards. And without that I will stay banned from this refuge too.