STEP RIGHT UP, IT'S SHOWTIME
When The "Gold Standard" Rides On The Backs Of Dolphins
Georgia Aquarium’s dolphin performance raises questions about AZA accreditation, education and the use of wildlife in entertainment.
An accreditation seal promises something meaningful. When a zoological institution is presented as meeting the profession’s highest standards, visitors have reason to expect that its treatment and presentation of animals reflect those commitments. The accompanying video of trainers riding dolphins at Georgia Aquarium invites a direct question: how does this spectacle fit the “gold standard”?
ㅤ
The footage, previously shared on social media earlier in 2026, shows dolphins performing in a theater before an audience, including sequences in which trainers ride the animals through the water. The original recording date has not been independently established. The concern addressed here is the conduct visible in the video and the institutional standard under which it is presented.
The accreditation behind the performance:
Georgia Aquarium in Atlanta is accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA). In a March 18, 2024 announcement, the aquarium celebrated its fourth consecutive accreditation, following earlier accreditations in 2008, 2013 and 2018. Its current website continues to identify AZA among its accrediting organizations.
ㅤ
The aquarium’s announcement described a review encompassing animal welfare, veterinary care, staff training, safety, education and conservation. That breadth matters: the public is being asked to trust an institution’s overall approach to animals, including how those animals are presented to visitors.
ㅤ
AZA itself uses the language of a “global gold standard.” Its March 2026 accreditation announcement encouraged visitors to regard the AZA logo as assurance of excellent animal care and a better future for wildlife. Such language carries an obligation to explain practices that appear difficult to reconcile with those ideals.
What does riding a dolphin teach?
Georgia Aquarium promotes its dolphin presentation, “Destination: Dolphin,” as an opportunity to learn about dolphin biology, observe natural behaviors and develop a connection that inspires conservation. Those are worthwhile educational goals. The question is what a trainer riding a dolphin contributes to them.
ㅤ
A dolphin’s capacity to learn a trained routine does not establish that the routine is necessary for education. Nor does demonstrating the animal’s strength or coordination explain why a person needs to be carried through the water. Visitors can learn about movement, communication, social relationships and threats to dolphins without making human riders part of the lesson.
ㅤ
The presentation also conveys a message through what audiences see. Whatever conservation information accompanies the performance, the image of a trainer riding a dolphin presents a wild animal as a vehicle for human entertainment. An institution committed to education should examine whether that image supports—or undermines—the respect for wildlife it seeks to cultivate.
Training deserves a purpose that can withstand scrutiny:
Training can serve important animal-care purposes. Asking an animal to participate in an examination, present a body part for inspection or cooperate with routine care has an identifiable practical purpose. A public performance involving a human rider requires its own justification.
ㅤ
The video alone does not establish injury, the animals’ internal experiences, the training methods used or a violation of AZA standards. Its significance is more specific: it documents a performance choice that an accredited institution should be prepared to defend on educational and ethical grounds.
ㅤ
Even if a routine can be performed safely, safety does not resolve whether it belongs in a conservation institution. Even if participation is described as voluntary, that does not establish that carrying a trainer is a necessary or appropriate educational objective. The questions concern both the animals’ experiences and the public message created by the activity.
What needs to change:
Georgia Aquarium should explain the specific educational purpose of dolphin-riding routines, the evidence supporting their inclusion and how their welfare implications are assessed. It should also explain whether the same learning goals could be achieved through presentations that leave human riding out of the program.
ㅤ
AZA should make clear how it evaluates such routines within accredited institutions. If riding dolphins is compatible with its standards, the association should publicly explain that compatibility and consider whether its standards adequately address the message these performances send.
ㅤ
Institutions promoted as leaders have an opportunity to move beyond inherited entertainment practices. Georgia Aquarium could demonstrate that leadership by retiring dolphin-riding routines and centering its presentations on the animals’ biology, care and conservation.
ㅤ
A “gold standard” should be visible in the choices an institution makes when spectacle is optional. When trainers ride dolphins before an audience, the institution and its accreditor owe the public a convincing explanation of how that choice advances the values their accreditation represents.
Related Reading:
“The ‘Gold Standard’ Under Inspection” — An examination of USDA inspection findings involving AZA-accredited institutions and the larger question of what the public should reasonably expect when an organization describes its accreditation as the zoological profession’s “gold standard.”
Evidence • Education • Accountability
How You Can Help:
Awareness is the first step toward meaningful change. Help advance evidence-based education, transparency and accountability by sharing this article with others.
Together, we can encourage a more informed conversation about the treatment and protection of wildlife.
