From 1999 to about 2005 I purchased paper copies of the Annual Census and Plan from ZAA. It was always interesting reading, detailing the zoos holding by species and in the early days also included the zoo wishing to move into exhibiting each species. Sadly they didn't make the move across the Tasman a few years back - something that I now regret. Has anyone successfully got a census from any zoo recently? It appears as if the information that was freely available not too long ago is now "Top Secret". I don't want to go back to the postage stamp collection days when annual census reports were freely publish as a means of boosting the ego of the director "I've got more animals than you", but it would be nice to be able to find information on animals held at a collection in Australia and New Zealand. (Zoo chat is an amazing resource and the work done by Childonas and others in creating and maintaining the various sticky threads in the Australasian forums is fantastic.) My question is why are zoos so afraid of publishing annual census data?
I don't think the zoos are afraid of publishing annual census data - they don't care to. Its not of value to anyone, but those like us that are curious. Fewer and fewer zoo staff are less interested in taxonomy and natural history.
I'm always amazed how little interest a lot of zoo-keepers have in animals. The keepers and ex-keepers on Zoochat are an exception obviously, or they wouldn't be on here, and I'm sure there are plenty of other keepers who have the same interest levels as us. But when I worked in zoos and still today, it was and is so very common to meet keepers who only learn what they need to for public talks but otherwise show no interest at all in other animals. A lot of keepers I've met had never been to any zoo other than the one they work in. Unbelievable as it may sound, I've even met a couple of managers of animal collections who had literally never been to any other facility than their own. I find it unfathomable.
I think that Zoos are afraid to publish census data, otherwise it would be readily available (like it is for major collections in the U.K.) The data is of value as it allows people who are interested in animal conservation to track how well zoos are doing. It makes me feel that they have sometihing to hide when data is not readily accessible.
Whilst this is true, it is only true of a proportion. The size of that proportion can be argued as long as anyone has the energy. The absolute opposite is also true, and not credited above.
What does that even mean? Literally the second sentence in my post was stating "the absolute opposite" to the main point about a lot of keepers not being generally interested in animals.
Speaking of species declining in Australia, does anyone know the status of hyacinth macaws and palm cockatoos in Australia? I think there’s actually quite a few more hyacinth macaws in Australia then most people believe.
The census and plan is still published it simply sits on the ZAA website. The due date for data updates for 2020 was last Friday. Paper copies are expensive and no longer needed.
In hindsight “quite a few more” is a bit of an exaggeration but there are definitely more than the “one or two birds left in Australia” that is often said on this site when people ask about Hyacinths in Australia. There is a place on the Gold Coast called Naturepet oz that has a pair of Hyacinths and I saw one of the birds back in 2017. The man I talked to there said he knows of around thirty birds in private hands (I think I previously spoke about this place in the zoos of Australia thread). Then there’s also the pair sold on gumtree several years back that’s was talked about in the exotic birds thread. So that’s at the very least four birds with potentially many more in private hands. Anyone know of any others?
It is a legal requirement in the UK. Annual 'stock list' submission is a requirement of the Zoo Licensiung Act Whilst there is the passing comment referred to, ie the second sentence; the rest of this post does not reflect the professionalism and commitment of most of the people we have met, and to suggest that it is 'so very common' for keepers to show less interest than the often amateur and sometimes very fleeting users of this site, is unfair and does them a disservice. That there is variation within any industry or sector, is so obvious, that it barely warrants copy.
Regarding the hyacinths, I think your statement is fair. I recall discussions on here (many years ago) that indicated most people believed there was but a scant few, such at the two males at Adelaide zoo. I've since discovered that there is actually at least a few pairs in private hands. Palms are unfortunately not in private hands at all, and regarding the origins of the few zoo animals that are here all paths lead back to Adelaide. Quite surprising that here is a native species of parrot that is established in aviculture overseas (though uncommon and very expensive) and yet not even established here in zoos.
