Join our zoo community

ARAZPA

Discussion in 'Australia' started by Coquinguy, 5 Mar 2006.

  1. Coquinguy

    Coquinguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    30 Aug 2005
    Posts:
    1,765
    Location:
    australia
    for those fairly new to the forum,
    i think we have raised this point a few times before, about regional collection planning objectives. what i'd suggest is that anyone who has not yet viewed arazpa's homepage should do so, particularly the points about regional planning priorities.
    off the top of my head, the priorities are
    1)threatened species, native or exotic
    2)species present in the region in good numbers
    3)species for which sound husbandry guidlines exist
    4)species who represent an educational, special interest or advocacy value.

    a good place to go next would be the federal govt's. page, review the species list and the propose a sustainable, economically viable program that would ensure long-term growth and genetic persistence of as many species in the regions zoo's as you think we should have? genetic theory, limited capacity, genetic diversity, climate, budgets, overseas populations (why should we maintain a population of a species here when it is common overseas and represents no conservation value at all, if only education) are all factors that come in to this planning.

    i think australiasias zoos, whose genetic capacity for most exotic species is considered short term are best to continue doing what they already are and sticking to these principles. a number of programs, including cotton-top tamarin and african lions currently exceed targetted populations and are the beginning of more viable populations. if the space currently dedicated to all cats in australasias zoos focussed on (and eventually they will) just-
    african lions
    cheetahs
    sumatran and bengal tigers (lesser priority for major zoos)
    serval
    snow leopard
    fishing cat
    golden cat
    then think of how much easier it would be to manage these breeding programs. fewer animals would need to be imported, at huge cost from overseas to infuse fresh genes in to our populations because we would have more space to manage our animals, more options to hold on to animals, temporarily stall breeding and so forth. there are other examples, including auckland zoo relocating its chimps to hamilton zoo so it can focus its resources exclusively on orang conservation, and the earlier tension between wpz and rhino tag coordinator over indian rhino imports.
    also, as beautiful as species like jaguar and puma are, there are many of them in overseas zoos, in well coordinated programs. but there arent too many northern quolls in american zoos, nor are there breeding programs for our mulgarra, or kowarri-equally fascinating, equally threatened. rather than focussing on jaguar or puma, wouldnt it be great if australias zoos focussed on our own marsupial predators more-the ecological threats facing them immediately appreciated because they are australian.
    and finally, when it comes to exotic species, in my mind australaisan zoos (and in arazpa's mind too) should make asian species it first priority and we should foster inter-reginoal relationships with our japanese and seaza counterparts, just as we already do and in a manner similar to what exists with north american and latin american zoos. our next priority should be african animals-we have superb open range facilites, suitable climate and husbandary experince and expertise.
    and another point-this time on the asian elephants. the whole import saga has prompted alot of discussion but i would like to comment on the welfare bodies opposing comments, which as many of you would be aware, were less than watertight, as well as to pose a few questions.
    firstly, if the exhibits built by taronga and melbourne zoo were cruel and substandard, then why did they (welfare groups) argue for circus animals to be housed there. (this reminds me of the contradictory comments surrounding seaworlds polar shore exhibit, obviously a commercial venture-and one which welfare groups bitterly opposed and then, when it came time to send ping ping back, they accused seaworld of not doing enough to retain him, despite the fact that the gold coast "is no place for a polar bear)
    then, theres the point about jessica napier's (of mcleod's daughter's where she evidently learnt not only about sheep and cattle but also elephants too) ridiculous comments about the elephants, which were to the effect of 'wild beasts being torn from the rainforest'. in a later statement, though i cant remember if it were issued by the zoo or welfare groups, the animals were all said to be 'very used to be trucked around'. does this sound like a wild animal to you? and all were born in captivity too, albeit logging camps.
    thirdly, the welfare groups questioned the zoos commitment to conservation. this annoys me. i know elephants are big crowd pullers, and i know historically they have not bred well (no longer the case, it reminds me of te gorilla scenario in the 1960s who would also never breed). but can you name any other environmental agency in australia that receives as much publicity about wildlife conservation than zoos,or raise as much attention and awareness about these issues?
    next, why couldnt the welfare bodies pull out after they lost the trial the first time???????? instead, they prolong the holding of the animals in what they would lead you to be cruel conditions (facilities the zoos have donated to thai universities), all at the cost to taronga and melbourne zoo, eating up their budget(money which they could have donated to the conservation projects, money which im sure the welfare agencies cannot afford to produce).
    i would like to know why animal welfare dont campaign as actively and vocally everytime our australian zoos import truly wild rhinos from africa(though they did whinge about wpz black rhino originally-now celebrated as a succesful breeding program which it is)-could it be because the maligned people spearheading these campaigns dont find them as attractive????????
    why not focus their campaiging more intensively on live export trade, or battery chickens, rodeos or stalled pigs??????????? they already have done great work in these areas though there is a long way to go-surely these cash strapped chairities would have got further in terms of outcomes by focussing on our domestic agricutural industries.

    im finished venting now-and im not apologising for being unashamedly pro-zoo!!! in this case, im all for it. i think at the end of the day, the balance tipped the right way. so bring on the elephants.
     
  2. Zoo_Boy

    Zoo_Boy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26 Nov 2005
    Posts:
    1,462
    Location:
    Australia
    WOW! the best argument i have heard so far, thnx so much glyn, thta was great , and yes animal wefare orgaisations are a bunch of hippicrites and jess napier wouldnt no a dog from an elephant. she is just some celeb wanting a photo op. its ridiclulus , zoos in this copunrty are saving species from extinction classic example is the przwaski horses which wpz and monarto sent back to the wild , and dubbo is planning to send some rhinos back aswell.

    on the elephants, i am all for em comin to aus, but tarongas exhibit is small , buta ll there needs are met. eventually i would love to see em a t duubo , but no doubt they will breed in taronga, and melbourne of course , whos exhibit is the best elephant exhibit in the world , as i have read and seen pictures.australian zoo's are my amazing grace , saving all animals from cruelty. the species such as elephants would no doubt be better at dubbo or werribee, but i belive they are ambassadors and advoctates for there species raising wareness for the plight of there speces and habitats.

    i love zoos and i am in 100% for them
     
  3. Zoo_Boy

    Zoo_Boy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26 Nov 2005
    Posts:
    1,462
    Location:
    Australia
    also do u have links to the exact page links for the federal govt list of species etc and aparza page where it talks about the issues u mentioned
    thnx again for a great argument
     
  4. jay

    jay Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    8 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    1,910
    Location:
    brisbane, qld, australia
    Glyn your comments about animal welfare groups are spot on. I was very disapointed that the RSPCA decided to get on the bandwagon whem they deliberatley ignore such cruel conditions as domestic live animal trade, battery chooks etc. It is for this reason that I hope that PETA never gets a firm footing here in Australia. I don't know how aware many of you are about PETa but their avowed aim is to stop ALL contact between humans and animals. They are opposed to keeping pets of any kind, (sorry no frogs or reptiles) are opposed to control of pest species (rabbits, wild pigs etc). And are rabid about zoos. They make the most outragous comments especially when it comes to elephants but that is just the tip of the iceberg. If they aver get their way about elephants in North American zoos you can bet that another high profile species will be next on their target list and so on until they shut zoos down all together. If you ever see PETA mentioned in context to an Australian situation, do your best to counter act it. They are terrorists in another disguise.
    That's right, I don't like them
    Jai
     
  5. Nigel

    Nigel Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    23 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    736
    Location:
    Wellington , New Zealand
    Born Free , and Zoo Watch Canada

    This is another "pro animal" organisation that is based in the UK , but has decided that it is another big anti zoo , wildlife sanctuary etc .
    It also decides to stick its nose into other countries and decries their zoos .
    What gets up my wick against them is the fact that they dont get their facts right . It accused Auckland Zoo of inadequately housing its dolphins .
    There was one big problem .
    Auckland Zoo has NEVER had dolphins !

    But do you think they cared about that when this pointed this out to them ?
    No .
    I had to take a hunk out of them several times before they withdrew their allegation about Auckland Zoo . I told them that I was all for organisations like theirs fighting against animal cruelty in situations where there was no vetinary care present , and if they really had to attack zoos , surely they should get their facts right first . They finally withdrew their allegations when I bluffed the threat of legal action against their organisation unless they
    could come up with proof of dolphins at the zoo !


    Having said all that against "Born Free" , I have found that the"Canada Zoo Watch" tries to keep a neutral stance towards zoos , but records facts rather than emotive ideas as often as possible . They try to visit all zoos in their country , write up quite detailed reports , and then makes a list of recommendations that would bring the zoo in question up to a "good standard "
    Although it was not clear to me what they were basing this standard on , there were numerous zoos that had no , or very few , recommendations given , as they were at the "standard" , or had exceeded it .
    The fact that numerous zoos were not shot down by this "Zoo Watch" suggests that they are not Anti Zoo .
     
  6. Nigel

    Nigel Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    23 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    736
    Location:
    Wellington , New Zealand
    Australia/NZ Zoo Page from"Born Free"

    My earlier comments refers .

    This is the current page of gripes against zoos in our region .
    I have told Daniel on numerous occasions that numerous places in Australia have active people/animal interaction , and if it was so bad , the Australian SPCA would have done something about it by now ..... and why accuse only one place of people/koala interaction when it is reasonably commonplace throughout Aussie ?
    I have also told him that if he cannot give me more details of the "Buderim Zoo"s real name , he should withdraw the allegation . If it ever did exist , it certainly doesnt now .
    But it is STILL listed there . Why am I not surprised ?!

    I will leave it up to our forum members who are more up to date with Taronga and Adelaide Zoos to take up the appropriate issues with him -- and if the allegations are wrong or no longer valid , hammer the living daylights out of Daniel -- it takes a little while for the truth to sink in !




    Travellers' Alert!
    Oceania
    Australia

    Attraction: Taronga zoo, Sydney
    Description: Reports about poor conditions of the elephants, Bears and gorillas.
    Last report received: 2001
    Action: We would be appreciated more reports on the conditions at this zoo.

    Attraction: Adelaide zoo, Adelaide
    Description: Reports of animals in small, barren enclosures. Apparently many animals have not received veterinary care because it has been too costly.
    Last report received:
    Action: Further information about this zoo would be appreciated.

    Attraction: Buderim zoo, Queensland
    Description: Burrowing animals kept in concrete enclosures. People are able to hold koalas.
    Last report received:
    Action: Our information is relatively old about this zoo and we would be appreciated up-to-date reports on the conditions there.
    New Zealand

    More information needed

    For more information on any of these establishments and information on how you can help these animals contact [email protected]
     
  7. patrick

    patrick Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    29 Nov 2004
    Posts:
    2,449
    Location:
    melbourne, victoria, australia
    Ha, that's very interesting nigel - for i too have sent numerous emails to this guy aguing the same points as you! on a particular note i discussed how widespread the practice of holding a koala was in australian zoos and wildlife parks and then gave him a list of facts about koala behaviour etc, and why it was not harmful to the animals. in regards to comments about the animals becoming stressed, i asked him if he knew that taronga zoo has some 30 or so koalas that are rotated. i told him that major australian zoos where among the very best in the world (and very well funded) and to state that an animal did not recieve veternary care was rediculous. i told him that although i didn't love the gorilla/elephant or bear enclosures at taronga, if you where to criticise them then you may as well criticise every other modern zoo in the world as well.

    in essence, maybe that is exactly what they are trying to do!

    what a ********. i mean here at the forum (and i am particuarly prone to it) we are quick to critiscise the zoos. however i generally feel that we have a pretty educated opinion and that there are others in the zoo commmunity who agree with us. i can't stand un-educated rubbish that these groups speil on about. often it seems they now no more than the average person who can recite urban animal myths such as "elephants live for a hundred years"....
     
  8. Nigel

    Nigel Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    23 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    736
    Location:
    Wellington , New Zealand
    zoo criticisms

    It was heartening to read your response , Patrick -- I am glad that someone else has also taken a few swipes at that ******** !

    But you are spot on -- we might be critical of some aspects of zoos , but we have good reason to be so . And even if a zoo is not so smart in one particular area , we dont knock the whole zoo unless it needs to be closed down or totally shaken up .
    As much as you rag Taronga Park Zoo ( and I can understand the logic behind that when you have lived near Melbournes Excellent Zoo ) you at least can accept that they do some good work , have excellent medical and dietary care for the animals .
    We all like to rag Our friend the Crocodile Hunter ( Crikey !! Not him again ! Hes really dangerous stuff !! ) I am sure that he makes a far better zookeeper than Daniel ******** of Born free could ever do .

    What gets up my nostrils is when the guy says that a particular zoo is mistreating animals that the zoo has never housed , and doesnt remove the accusation , or even does some homework for himself on the web . It shouldnt be too darn hard for anyone to ascertain from the web , and making some email enquiries , that ( for example ) any allegations of hungry pythons at any NZ zoo is just 100% unadulterated nonsense .
    But it appears that Daniel ******** doesnt have enough IQ to figure that one out . I have had to tell him more than once that Auckland Zoo has never housed Dolphins , and San Diego Wildlife Park has never housed Polar bears , but it didnt seem to matter to him .
    I dont usually give negative nicknames to people , but he doesnt do any good to any decent zoo in the world .
     
  9. Zoo_Boy

    Zoo_Boy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    26 Nov 2005
    Posts:
    1,462
    Location:
    Australia
    exactly , some zoos can be ratted on , but no one can rat on a zoo that provides the basic for there animals to opptimum opportunity, shelter, food and medical treatment , is what defines a zoo if its good, not the species , but the care of its animals
     
  10. Simon Hampel

    Simon Hampel Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    18 Oct 2003
    Posts:
    5,936
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Ha! I've been to San Diego Wildlife Park, and while it was about 3 degrees celcius the day we were there, I still can't imagine them housing Polar Bears at all - if you understand what that zoo is about, you'd laugh too ... very much open range (a bit similar to Werribee really, although you ride a train around the outside of the main large enclosures rather than a bus through them like at Werribee).

    They do, however, have Polar Bears at both San Diego Zoo and Sea World San Diego.

    One thing though - can I suggest we refrain from calling people names here (even if they deserve it) - we don't want to be causing problems at all (especially not legal problems) :eek:
     
  11. ZYBen

    ZYBen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    11 Jan 2006
    Posts:
    1,547
    Location:
    Darling Downs, QLD, Aust
    Too costly well they have spent millions on a new veterinaru center at the time that was written, ahhhhh
    yes some exhibits are small but not barren