Karma Cats are a not for profit organisation raising funds to construct a sanctuary and breeding centre for endangered species - focusing on big cats To me it sounds very ambitious, but seems to have ZAA support, interesting that Zoo's applying to be members get pushed back but a facility that doesnt even exist is 'in'
it does sound very ambitious, especially in the time frame they've given on the site. It will be good if it goes ahead. I'm wondering if, judging by the website, they are planning on getting in jaguars (any bites...?) Awful name though, "Karma Cats"
I hope their stated aim of conservation is legitimate... However, studying their website I see that they intend to provide consultancy services to both private exotic pet owners and animal handlers in the film industry. I don't see how encouraging such exploitation fits with conservation. Also, I see that the managing director's experience includes time at "a big cat facility in NZ" - i.e. Zion. I hope Karma's treatment of big cats will be considerably more ethical than Craig Busch's! Sounds alarming to me.
I wa wondering where they were going to go, it says that they have the support of Ipswich City Council so there somewhere. Yet another facility to join the dozen or places that exhibit animals in the region. Makes me wonder how they will fare competition wise.
On their site it says they have Federal & State Government Pre-approval and Ipswich City Council Preliminary Approval. But then later down the page it says secure site has not been completed. I highly doubt any approval's, even preliminary, when there is not even a site!
Two things: The status for the subspecies of Tigers is wrong - for all of them. Apart from a couple of passing comments regarding supporting conservation, there is nothing else about conservation. Considering they have buttons for Poaching and Deforestation that lead to pages not created yet, I would have thought there would have been a page (or at least a button) for Conservation. Hix
Initially this seemed like an exciting and ambitious new venture. However, a scrutiny of the website reveals some cause for a bit of healthy scepticism. The corporate structure is beautifully set up to cover all the bases - a pretty girl to get the media coverage, an academic to guarantee some conservation credibility, a businessman so that the donors can give generously in the knowledge that their money will be well managed. However, the use of the word "sanctuary" is a bit disingenuous. We don't have a situation here in Australia where big cats need to be given "sanctuary" from unsuitable living conditions such as they have in the USA. Many of those "sanctuarys" are just an excuse for an individual to own a private zoo supported by public donations. Karma Cats vision statement includes the curious statement that they are creating an "overseas escape". I wonder what that means? The greater emphasis seems to be on creating a privately owned, big cat interactive playground. Your own private zoo financed by someone else! They talk about playing with a tiger cub and a one hour walk with a lion. One hour for heaven's sake!! They heavily emphasise cubs in their promotion. I am also intrigued that they can confidently claim that they have "preliminary approval" from BQ. There is no such status. Similarly, they don't appear to have purchased any land yet [they are still seeking donations] so it would not be possible to have "preliminary approval" from Ipswich City Council for an unknown site. Support, in principle, for the concept certainly but that is a long way away from "preliminary approval". Depending on the identity of some of the, so far, faceless animal management experts they could well have "support" from ZAA but that should not be construed that they are "in". And they will need to be well and truly "in" if they are going to achieve their species wish list by 2013. As a matter of fact they are going to have to jump the queue to achieve these species. As of this year's ZAA Conference this facility was not even on the radar. Under the new ZAA membership application protocols they will have to lodge an application for Associate membership. This will not even be considered until 2011. Given that there are a few applications in the queue ahead of them, it would be reasonable to assume that their application won't be considered until late 2011. Then they will need to be Associate members for a minimum of one year before they can be considered for Full Institutional Membership and thus participation in the breeding programs that they talk about. This means late 2012. During this time they would be able to house aged, post-reproductive or neutered rejects from ASMP programs but such specimens wouldn't really fit the image that they are trying to cultivate. And there are already waiting lists for Snow Leopards, Cheetah, Tigers etc from institutions already in ZAA, let alone those waiting to join who are already in the queue ahead of them. I am also intrigued by the claim that they have three employees with a total of over 44 [or 45 depending on the page] years of big cat breeding and handling. As Liz can only claim "a couple of months" voluntary experience at Zion, Australia Zoo and the CLBC plus 3 years employment at Dreamworld it would be reasonable to ask who are the other two employees with the other 40+ years experience. Which brings me to the most curious aspect of the claims made on this website. The Testimonials page features a glowing reference from a senior manager at Dreamworld! Some of you will recall the hysterical opposition to the fledgling Darling Downs Zoo that came from Dreamworld [and the other Big 2 on the Coasts]. Much of this opposition was due to the fact that we were building a zoo within their visitor catchment area. Now we have a much larger and slicker facility proposed for an area which is nearly 2 hours closer to Dreamworld than our zoo. And a Dreamworld senior manager [whose expertise I highly respect] is supporting it? Curiouser and curiouser. I look forward to his comments. Having said all that, if this a fair dinkum proposal I welcome it. Some years ago, when the Big 3 were trying to annihilate us, I maintained that a new Park will not reduce the portion of the visitation "cake" available to us. If it is any good it will increase the size of the cake available to all of us. No doubt there will be a bit of visitation fluctuation in the early days but it will all settle down and we should all benefit. Bring it on!
The logo looks very impressive. Also, great post Steve! It was very informative, honest and well written.
Darling Downs Zoo excepted, this sounds like yet another typical "Queensland " zoo. (You know; very flashy, very dollar-oriented, very superficial with a bit of lip service to conservation.)
Interesting notion Ara and highly misguided and mis-informed (I hope). Lumping all the numerous wildlife parks and zoological institutions of Queensland in that blanket statement is hugely unfair. I assume you may be referring to maybe 3 major players as opposed to the other 40+ institutions that are within Queensland?
Whoa mate! That might be a bit rich. I'm sure that there are a couple that might be accurately described that way but there are also a helluva lot of zoos up here that quietly plod along, not blowing their own trumpets all the time but still doing good things with and for animals.
Conservation/ white tigers @Ara, That is more than a bit rich. The "big three" zoos as you call them do a bit more than just be "flashy". It would be great to see all of the Australian institutions contribute more to conservation, within their means.
Not like ptig to be shy but it should be stated that Dreamworld has raised more cash for in-situ tiger conservation than all of the other Aussie zoos combined. A lot of this support has been raised on the back of the white tigers that some forumsters seem to despise so much.
Shy I am not that shy, but the debate over white tigers will never come to conclusion. I know that I am right................ and that is a heavy burden at times!
Not despise. Pity. It's in the hands of you and your fellow white lion holders, of course, to ensure that the same doesn't happen to them. I have complete faith in the Australian holders of the whites - don't know enough about overseas zoos to comment. On the topic of "Karma Cats" - it does look like their schedule is either way too optimistic, or they've got some serious pull with AZA. And the notion of a "sanctuary" for exotic cats in Australia is marketing, nothing more.
I feel the white Tiger issue has been flogged to death on this forum so lets try and stay on track with this thread guys , cheers
I suppose that someone has to carry the burden!!!! Care to make any comments, for publication, about Karma Cats?
