In Nepal's capital, a 1932 private collection of animals has grown into the Central Zoo — now managed by a semi-governmental nonprofit and standing as a symbol of how far the country has come in conservation. Nepal has achieved remarkable success protecting Bengal tigers and greater one-horned rhinos through protected areas and community-based efforts. Now, officials say a new draft policy could extend that momentum by inviting private players to build wildlife hospitals, rescue centers and zoos across the country.
But experts are urging caution. The proposed guidelines aim to bring currently unregulated "mini zoos" under legal oversight and improve infrastructure and public awareness. Yet critics warn the draft lacks clear definitions, limited enforcement capacity and weak animal welfare standards — gaps that could enable wildlife capture disguised as rescue.
"There are so-called mini zoos in Nepal, but many function more like killing centers," said Dibya Raj Dahal, president of the Small Mammals Conservation and Research Foundation. "Small wild animals are captured from the wild and sold to these facilities under the guise of rescue. In reality, it is extraction."
Dahal acknowledged the draft was an improvement on the current regulatory vacuum but called it incomplete. The guidelines fail to clearly define what constitutes a rescue case — listed as injured, orphaned or problematic animals — leaving room for misuse. "Even within national parks, animals face threats. So how exactly will these categories be interpreted?"
Zoologist Rachana Shah, a former curator at Jawalakhel Zoo, offered a more measured view. "It's good that something like this is being introduced — at least it provides a pathway," she said, noting that most rescues stem from genuine wildlife distress rather than deliberate capture. Species like tigers and snow leopards often enter human settlements when injured or stressed.
Wildlife experts say the risks are amplified by overstretched Division Forest Offices, which would oversee compliance. Most staff are trained foresters, not wildlife specialists. "We need a dedicated regulatory mechanism," Dahal said, "potentially a specialized unit within the Division Forest Office, to properly manage and monitor the proposed sector."
India offers a potential model. Zoo expert Dipak Sawant said Nepal could draw lessons from India's Central Zoo Authority, which grants private zoo approval for two to three years and renews only if standards are met. "Zoo recognition is not permanent," he said. "In cases of non-compliance, recognition can be withdrawn."
As Nepal drafts new guidelines and plans zoos in Tanahun and Suryabinayak, conservationists say the details will determine whether private participation strengthens wildlife protection or undermines Nepal's hard-won gains.