Note - this thread was split from its original source and edited to remove some off-topic content and to remove some confusion about its origin. Neither Jarkari, nor ZooPro who appear in this first post started this thread - their contribution was in response to other posts and this just happens to be the most appropriate place to start this new thread - Sim' Hi ZooPro, I am only asking this as I am curious. Does DEWHA ask for ARAZPA's advice on imports like this?
If the import request is for a regionally managed species, and if the institution requesting the import permit is a Zoo and Aquarium Association member, and if the import request goes against the recommendations for the program, then DEWHA will usually seek additional information. If the import is according to the regional plan, then generally, the permit is issued (assuming the request meets all other requirements - species can be imported, sending zoo is approved etc.). If the import is for a non-managed species or if the import is being requested by a non-Association member, then DEWHA does not generally seek additional advice.
Does ZAA have some say about when a ZAA zoo wishes to import animals of a program species from a non-association from say, Tasmania?
I think you might be getting confused about the terms "import" (which is the context of this thread, and meaning from outside Australia) and acquisition - acquiring animals from Tasmania is not really considered to be importing. Zoo and Aquarium Association members would generally only acquire program animals in accordance with the species management plan for the species, as determined by the species coordinator. If the coordinator recommends that animals be acquired from a non-Association member (I'm assuming this is what you mean), this recommendation would only be made after consultation with the non-Association member. So to answer you question, the species coordinator for the program makes the recommendation to the zoo.
Although as I understood it, in the case of CITES 1 species, DEWHA will usually only give permits for animals entering a program. I presume Borneo Orangs are CITES 1, therefore it would seem odd if am import permit was granted.
Is your inference here that it's a good thing that the Zoo and Aquarium Association has very little input into what species private zoos can display?
In what any zoo can display yes. The only body governing that should be DEHWA, EPA, BQ, what ever! the Government Body Responsible
Surely that's a no-brainer. Should Coles supermarkets be able to prevent Woolworth's from selling certain products? Should QANTAS be able to block Virgin Blue servicing a destination? ARAZPA may fancy itself as the peak body of zoos in Australia - I don't know. But it certainly is not. ARAZPA represents less than a third of the animal display enterprises (public or private) in the country. It is a self-selected industry association, nothing more.
Maybe you should find out a little more about who and what the Zoo Association is..... It's actually not a governing body in any way, shape or form, and it's voice is the voice of it's institutional members, something that your own institution is striving for. I really think you might want to do some more reading about what the Association is all about, and what its mission is. The recommendations coming out of the Zoo and Aquarium Association about what species are managed and supported (and therefore, displayed) in its member institutions, are developed entirely by the Taxon Advisory Groups, and these are made up of one representative from every member institution. So in fact it's the institutional members that are directing what they and their fellow members assign their resources to when it comes to species management. When it comes down to it though, all institutions, whether they are members of the Association or not, can, and do, make whatever decisions they want, based on their own needs at the time.
Geeze what a depressing view of zoos. So animals are nothing more than different brands of cornflakes, shunted on and off shelves according to their popularity with the consumer? No doubt there are some operators that take that view, but if I thought that attitude was prevalent across the zoo industry here I would have joined Born Free long ago. Sure there are some animals that do pick up custom, Adelaide will do well out of Giant Pandas for a while, and both Melbourne and Taronga will get a fillup from elephant babies, just as they did from gorilla births a decade ago. White lions? Seem to have created reasonable interest in the regions they are located, but nothing I can find beyond. Anything else? A photo in the local paper, and if you are very lucky, thirty seconds at the end of the daily TV news. Stand outside San Diego Zoo, which attracts visitors from around the world, and ask people as they go in what animals expect to see, and they will give you a list they could have seen at a zoo in their home town. Ask them what they saw when they come out, and they will most likely give much the same list. Ask them why they are visiting and they will talk about the reputation of the zoo. Ask them if they would return or recommend, and why, and they will talk about the experience they had. Only a few animal nuts like you or me will care that we saw the only purple-sided tit-warbler in captivity. Lets face it zoos rarely compete head to head. When they do it is usually on things like convenience, price (and price can work both ways) and of course reputation. But their biggest competitors are not other zoos, but other activities, ranging from sports to amusement parks, to free activites in the local park. I've noticed that Australia Day is no longer a particularly busy day because of all the free activities councils and governments run on this day now. Well if is not, I don't know what is. It certainly represents the most visitors, the largest turnovers, the biggest number of animals and the greatest variety of species. Not to forget the bulk of employees, and the of course almost all the conservation and research work in zoos. It is the body that represents zoos to the Federal government, and where government and other organisations turn.
Interesting. Having been a member for eight years, nobody has ever told me who to deal or not deal with. At the end of the day, all we have ever been asked to do to remain a member of ARAZPA is to advise them what animals we have, and what animals we would like to have. The irony is that free exchange works in favour of the smaller zoos, not against them. You know up till about three or four years ago any zoo could join just by signing up and paying $750. One of the biggest complaints was the number of private zoos that would join for one or two years, grab the animals they wanted, then quit.
It's not my view of zoos, it is my view of ARAZPA. It's an industry association, and its members have absolutely no business trying to use their status as members to indirectly regulate their competitors. I don't know if that happens, but I was answering the question posed by Zoo Pro. FWIW I think that ARAZPA is an excellent concept that I wholeheartedly support. I think its implementation of some key programs is slipshod, but that will hopefully improve. There isn't one. And that's the problem. There are at least 100 small and medium sized animal display enterprises that are not members of the club. Mostly that's by choice, and certainly a few of them (though not many, I wouldn't think) would be ineligible on animal welfare or management grounds. Looking to ARAZPA to understand the needs and concerns of the zoo industry in this country is a bad way to develop policy for zoos. The Association represents the big players relatively well, and most small businesses poorly. As the owner of one of the smallest Australian institutions in ARAZPA, MRJ, I put forward that you are extremely lucky and privileged to have the access to government and industry leaders that you do.
It's hard to address such generalities. I've seen nothing like that, that is all I can say. Maybe it happens, maybe it doesn't. Overall I think the problem with most programs is usually commitment from members, and usually not from animal staff but senior management. Yes as you say that is their choice. Ok, I haven't found it particularly difficult to be involved in ARAZPA, so how much of a privilege it is I don't know. As a smaller operator we have had plenty of opportunities to participate, far more than I can take advantage of. Certainly a huge amount of ARAZPA effort is in exotics, which we have nothing to do with. And there is almost nothing done at a state level, which is of course where we are regulated. With national standards coming, maybe that will change. I'm sorry I can only put it as I see it, even if that is a "privileged" position. As to whether it is a good or bad thing that ARAZPA represents zoos to government, we can all have our views, but it is a fact of life that governments deal with industry associations, no matter what industry you are in. When I was in the boating industry, the Boating Industry Association was the body government went to, whether I was a member or not.
I wasn't claiming that it was, just to clarify. Yes. I think I've said before that when I say "ARAZPA" I mean the institutional members taken as a collective, rather than the ARAZPA staff whom I'm sure do a wonderful job. Not in at least one notable case! You've said yourself that you joined ARAZPA before an onerous but, more importantly, hugely under-resourced accreditation program came into effect. And the only problem with this is what I've mentioned above. At present there is an unreasonable barrier to membership that, at the very least, has been to the detriment of one applicant that we know of (Darling Downs). From where I sit, that's not to the benefit of the Association (whose stated principles seem to be best served by having as many members as possible to provide spaces for program species). It's certainly not to the benefit of policy-makers, who currently lack an industry association which is capable of representing all zoos willing to be represented. It's harmful to Darling Downs, which could be a small zoo on its way to making a big contribution like Altina, Halls Gap or Cairns WSR. Instead, it's having to import animals from overseas at what must be significant cost... and having to import animals that cannot enter an ASMP because well, they can't access the ASMPs!
Got to say I agree with you, and I argued against elements of the program before it was introduced. And I do note it is currently being revised, which appears to be the cause of the current delay for DDZ. No excuses here. But there is a saying in politics that if you have to choose between a screwup and a conspiracy, choose the screwup every time.
If the organisation is serious about opening up to new members again, they'd put new applicants at the top of the queue for accreditation, since existing members that haven't been accredited yet can still participate in the programs.
As I understand it that is what was happening when the accreditation program was operating. (It is currently suspended). New members were being accredited as part of their application process. Current members were on a schedule that stretched out a number of years, all I remember is that we were way into the future.
