Im currently writing a post about my thoughts on the current trends of ssp management within the AZA and I really need studbook access. Unfortunately I am rather strapped for cash right now, so if anybody would be willing to either send me copies of requested studbooks or let me use their AZA membership account that would be greatly appreciated. Absolutely frustrates me that a publicly funded organization keeps this stuff pay to access but it is what it is... DM me if you can help, thanks! PS: I feel kind of wrong posting this as a public thread when its not really a discussion, maybe a thread can be established for requesting and sharing studbooks as open access to this information is important? I know supporting zoos is also important, but I feel that this is justified for people like me who just want data access and not the full AZA Membership, and cant afford 80$ a year for that. I am sure some will disagree with me but thats my take.
What you are asking is not legal. A membership is on the premise for personal use and not redistribution. And my take is USD50 aint a lot to ask for in return!
I assume you are looking at the Professional Associate membership. It's August you can pay half price for the rest of the year and have full access. If you are not associated with a zoo buy a Friend membership without the magazine and pay just $30. Still gives you access to all TAGS, Studbooks, SSPs, and care manuals available. It's what I have and I am quite happy with it and spend endless hours browsing for things I'm interested in. Either way you shouldn't have to pay $80 to do your research which is good news. Honestly you may have a hard time finding someone comfortable sharing their account with you. Our names, addresses, and credit cards are tied to the accounts possibly more depending on what information the account holder has provided the AZA. That's pretty personal information that you would be getting access to. Not that I am suggesting you are trying to do anything wrong but most will consider their security.
I was mostly hoping to start some info/document sharing among members because judging by the long studbook thread there are lots of people in my same situation. I understood it was a big ask for someone to share their account details with me, but I thought it was worth asking, after all not everyone has lost trust in humanity on the internet just yet. Oh and thanks for the heads up, I might just be able to justify paying for that come august.
Sharing AZA documents as a member with 3rd parties contravenes your personal confidentiality agreement with AZA. So, it is a no go! I continue to see no objection to paying a USD 50 fee for an annual! Even for students! I wonder how one pays for annual tuition study fees??? Where is yours in relation to finance I wonder?!? (No disrespect mind)!
You must be a blast at parties. Seriously though I consider it quite rude to question my finances (despite the "no disrespect" comment you added with so much tact). Considering you chose to dig through my post history to find out that I am a student, you were surprisingly lazy in that you did not enough to actually read them. If you had you would have known that I am currently exploring options for studying in a zoo science related field. And for your information I am a recent graduate from HS/Community College tuition free. Im not trying to feign poverty or anything, to the contrary I am quite fortunate for my situation and upbringing, but like most young people I dont have money to burn either. 80/50$ to access the data of a publicly funded institutions about the founding population of captive populations is excessive and noninclusive. It goes against the educational principles of the institution, and paints a picture of an exclusive "members" only club. I believe very strongly in the principles of the freedom of information and scientific data, that is my objection. And if that means "contravening" a confidentiality agreement then so be it.
I’ll just say you won’t get far in the industry by openly breaking privacy agreements of the largest zoo accreditation program in North America (btw the AZA isn’t publicly funded. It’s a 501(c)3 non profit so studbook data doesn’t fall within the freedom of information act). The organization has to make money and a relatively small donation for all the information you seek isn’t really asking much. People here are trying to help and prevent you from getting in trouble. Take their advice. Save a bit of cash if you are so passionate about the data. Most of us here have done similar things. Any free information would come from the zoos themselves (you’d be surprised the information keepers have on individual animal histories) or USDA inspections (which have been discussed before are super unreliable but a good start).
Fair enough, I appreciate you people looking out for me. I got combative mainly because this guy was being quite rude assuming every kid can afford a 50$ membership, then questioning my personal finances of all things. I will probably end up buying a membership because its marked down this month (thanks to TZFan for the heads up!) That said I see far too many people searching for this information which common sense says should be public. While the AZA may be a private nonprofit it is nothing without its base of publicly funded zoos. It just feels wrong in your gut that kids around the country interested in zoology; the future conservationists we will rely on, cant get access to the information they need to understand how the captive breeding programs the AZA loves to talk about are actually run. I do want to get far in this industry, preserving the biodiversity of the planet is the most important thing I can possibly imagine doing with my life, but I also have morals. No industry is without its flaws and this is clearly one of them. Again thank you for looking out for me, Cheers, DL
I was primarily involved with the Asian Elephant studbook, since my daughter was a bidding zoologist and knew the entire thing backwards and forwards. She got me interested in this, of course, and here I am today. Back then, it was simple to access this resource, and with elephants.se, one could literally find any elephant over time and institution. Manna from heaven! However, I think the constant pressure from activists led to the studbooks becoming unavailable publicly. Any time an animal dies, PETA or IDA could build cases out of context, using the studbook to blame an elephant's fatal foot problems on x years at such and such zoo living in a small cell, standing on concrete. The resource was being used against the best interest of animals in captivity and saving the species. While I've often pulled my hair out not being to access the recent document, at least it's not available to use by those with malicious intent. I had no idea that joining the AZA as a non-professional would open up the studbooks, so even for $50, it's a vast amount of information for the money!
This is exactly why the American Kennel Club's studbooks, registration numbers, etc are now private, as well - too many issues with AR people. Breed club secretaries can ask for the exact numbers for their breed, and breed club historians can look at the stud book info (or people going to the physical library), but it's otherwise very hard to get a hold of more specific information.
Its a real shame that PETA nuts are at least partially to blame, also a shame that the easiest response seems to be restricting the info. I can only guess as to how PETA spun zoo data to their agenda. Elephants are going to be a controversial business no matter what at this point in zoos, but hiding the information and hoping criticizm will go away is a bad tactic IMO.. The AZA has made elephants a priority in recent years, yet rather than really explaining the problems of an ageing population and EHPV both in captivity and the wild most zoos take the emotional "we lost a family member" approach instead. Many zoo populations are also quite inbred, and I can imagine they might not want that to become public info owing to the stigma, however if they want more founders in order to create sustainable populations they will need more public support... Let us not forget that zoos are supposed be public education institutions. The public deserves to be educated on all subjects applicable.
@DelacoursLangur glad my tip about the pricing options can help. Good time of year to have asked the question. It is a shame the AZA has to keep some studbooks and SSPs closed from public eyes. It's not just a problem with the elephants but most marine mammals too. However you dont just need nuts to be frozen out on information. Some of the SSPs and studbooks are not kept up to date. The golden lion tarmarin SSP was from 2013 until this month. The studbook is still from 2008 I think. I have been watching that one for awhile. One thing I really like checking on from time to time is the TAGs. They are underrated little gold mines of information. You can see at a glance what the goals are for each species and how they want to achieve them, population, number of zoos. Some are neater than others. Always sad to see a phase out species but great when you see the rare phase in species.
The public may deserve to be educated, but whether they take your education is another matter entirely. You can put up all the signage you want, but per my experience as both employee and volunteer is around one in five people will actually read it. I have seen many a person glance over a sign, and then say something the exact opposite from the information provided. Educational programs and keeper talks are better, the public is intrigued and will often listen with interest. How much they will actually remember later, who knows. To address the subject more at hand, most to all of us on here will agree studbooks are very useful for managing populations. Many of us wish they were easier to access, myself included. To us, they contain a wealth of information we are hard pressed to find elsewhere. For the average person visiting a zoo, they do not care what the animal's lineage is, where else they can see the species, nor to know the best care standards for the animal. Most likely, if they have a question about an animal they saw, they will be satisfied with an answer off Wikipedia or some other questionably accurate site. Removing public access for the studbooks really probably did not bother the vast majority of zoo-goers. Most of them probably had no clue such a document existed. Another problem is whether the public cares enough to understand some of the technical information presented in such manuals. They may care a lot about seeing an elephant, finding out what its name is, how much it eats, and what it does. But trying to explain something like EHPV and the problem it presents is much harder. The commonplace communication nowadays is short snippets and facts, not a detailed report. Talk too long and people lose interest unless they are truly interested, it's a proven fact. I've seen this routinely in education programs of many kinds. Personally, I don't blame the AZA for attempting to hide the studbooks and such away from groups such as PETA. Seaworld, Bronx, and many others are constantly under fire from activists. However, I'm sure 50-80 dollars is a small price to pay for full file access to the hard-core activists. I'm not aware whether AZA has the capability to discriminate against someone found to belong to PETA or a similar group? I've said enough for now.
Yes, I believe so. I have a membership and it's been amazing! It's tremendously helped me with my personal research. I would definitely recommend it, though it's a bit of money, I personally think it is worth it.
Bit of an off topic question but if I were to have an account would I be able to see the SSPs that Oakland zoo is involved in and also animal transfers in the past, present, and future? I ask because I am considering obtaining an account if I can have access to that sort of data.
Decade-old lurker here, quick associated question: does AZA membership provide access to morbidity / mortality rates on a species-by-species basis, by any chance? Say, as part of an SSP, husbandry manual or similar? (I've been compiling data from necropsy reports from individual European zoos and publicly published literature for some years now, for scientific research. Would save an awful lot of time if I could shortcut that manual grind, haha)
