Dan Ashe’s Leadership at AZA Sparks Backlash From Within the Zoo Community

In recent months, the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA), once considered the gold standard in zoological accreditation, has found itself under growing scrutiny — not from animal rights groups, but from its own community. At the center of the storm is Dan Ashe, the organization’s President and CEO since 2017, whose recent actions and statements have sparked a wave of internal dissent, raising questions about his leadership and the future direction of the AZA.

The most recent flashpoint came at the AZA’s 2024 Annual Conference, where Ashe once again invited a speaker from a historically anti-zoo organization to the main stage. This time, it was a senior representative from the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) — an organization whose public stance on captive animals often runs counter to the values held by many accredited zoos and aquariums. For long-time members of the AZA, the move was more than symbolic; it was perceived as a quiet alignment with groups that have actively campaigned for the closure of zoos and the removal of animals from managed care.

This decision followed earlier controversies involving People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) being given a presence at a previous AZA event. While Ashe has positioned these gestures as a move toward dialogue and inclusivity, critics argue that inviting organizations openly hostile to the very existence of zoos is not only tone-deaf but fundamentally at odds with AZA’s mission to support and advance animal care, conservation, and education.

“Many of us feel betrayed,” said one senior curator at a large Midwestern zoo, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “The AZA is supposed to be our advocate, not give a platform to groups that would rather see our doors closed.”

Ashe’s defenders argue that he is simply trying to navigate a shifting cultural landscape — one in which the public is increasingly skeptical of traditional animal displays.

One of the most visible fractures emerged from AZA’s accreditation decisions. Under Ashe’s watch, several prominent institutions — including the Columbus Zoo, once a flagship member — have had their accreditation revoked or denied renewal. In some cases, the reasons cited included management changes or infractions dating back several years, leading many to question whether the process is truly impartial.

“There’s a growing perception that these decisions are being driven by internal politics and not objective criteria,” said another AZA member institution executive. “It’s hard to trust the system when it starts looking like it’s about who you know — or what narrative the leadership wants to promote.”

Nowhere has Ashe’s rhetoric drawn more ire than in his statements about captive elephants. In a 2023 interview, Ashe claimed that elephants in well-designed zoo habitats move just as much as their wild counterparts, dismissing criticism of confined spaces as a “complete fabrication.” That assertion was met with immediate backlash from wildlife scientists and animal welfare organizations, who argued that such statements minimize the complex physical, social, and psychological needs of one of the most cognitively advanced mammals on Earth.

Ashe’s approach stands in stark contrast to a growing body of scientific literature on animal behavior and welfare. “The notion that a zoo environment can match the physical range and social complexity of wild elephants is not just incorrect — it’s dangerous,” said Dr. Miranda Wu, an animal behaviorist who works with sanctuary populations.

While no one within the AZA is openly calling for Ashe’s resignation — at least not yet — the organization appears to be at a crossroads. Some fear that its credibility as a science-driven institution is eroding under the weight of opaque decision-making, politically symbolic gestures, and leadership increasingly out of sync with its membership base.

“The AZA was built on trust — trust in science, in ethics, and in each other,” said a former board member. “Right now, that trust feels very fragile.”

If Ashe is to steer the AZA into its next chapter with unity and integrity, he may need to reckon with the perception that the organization is no longer advocating for its members — but for a narrative that distances itself from the very institutions it was created to serve.