European Rabbits in one of the outdoor enclosures, but these Koala are also not owned by San Diego but were direct import from Australia.
If that rule does exist, it definitely isn't being reinforced consistently... Planckendael has been keeping pademelons with their koalas on-and-off for a fairly long time now, and those are definitely Queensland koalas from the breeding program. Are we sure that that was actually the reason Longleat decided not to go into those koalas? I've always assumed zoos directly importing animals from Australia just didn't want to be on the probably very slow waiting list for the breeding program...
I think you will find that Longleat 'chose' to import, and did not 'have' to import... I also doubt that San Diego is party to any Ambassador Agreement, signed between the importing and exporting zoos and the Australian Government.
I message my friend who originally told me about the rule, and they said Planckendael were told to stop mixing. Apart from LA and SDZ themselves, who afaik are the two coordinators/main breeders of the program in the US, all the zoos who currently keep Koalas mixed with other species are not part of the international breeding program and sourced animals direct from Australia, not via SDZ. This includes Zurich. They're not, but they are the head coordinator of the international Koala breeding program outside of Australia and therefore are capable of setting the qualifications for zoos who wish to partake in said program. Pairi, Zurich, and Longleat all keep Koalas in mixed settings, but none are members of the breeding program. ~Thylo
Any import from Australia is dependent on an Ambassador Agreement, so any zoo keeping such imported animals or their descendants in ANY situation (mixed or not) is doing so with the specific approval of the Australian Government.
Surely this is not true for many species of herps, birds, and even macropods imported from Australia over the years and then distributed across international zoos. LA has distributed a lot of directly imported and then subsequently bred reptiles and amphibians across the US to a number of other institutions of all sorts, and this is all within the past decade. Not to mention all the privately imported herps and birds for the private trade. Obviously you would know more than I do, but does the Australian government really have to approve when Hamerton or Jihlava bred bettongs are sent to Berkshire, Plzen, or Eifel? Or every time Cologne moved their wild-type Budgies between zoos or sold them to private keepers? Are the Eastern Quoll and Kowari EEPs dependent on Australian approval? (these are genuine questions for the record) But regardless of that, even if Australia does have to approve a zoo to receive non-Australian bred Koalas, if SDZ is in charge of the program it's still up to them who they choose to keep animals within their program. ~Thylo
The Australian Ambassador agreements only cover four mammalian taxa: koalas, wombats, platypus, and Tasmanian devils. I couldn’t say what the situation is for other Australian taxa, but I’m sure given all of his recent dealings with them @Andrew Swales will be in the know.
I suspect the issue is that San Diego are trying to enforce additional rules/restrictions on collections holding koalas which are part of their programme, on top of the rules and restrictions which the Australian ambassador agreement entails. I imagine they don't actually have much of a leg to stand on, though, and have merely not had their bluff called as yet.
I am afraid Thylo assumes an over-simplification, and the above statement is now out of date too. The 4/5 taxa (both Wombats) above, all require formal Ambassador Agreements as stated, but now Australian (Johnson's) Cassowary and Tiger Quoll do too, so there are now at least 7 spp included. In addition to that, the Australian export permits for other spp are ALL individual, and yes many DO include on-going spp-specific requirements, sometimes very detailed ones. This whole process is certainly no walk-in-the-park and our position is the result of a decade of careful planning, and visits to us by our Australian colleagues and to their zoos for extended experience gathering by our keepers and Vets.
I have no idea, especially since, as mentioned, they allow themselves and LA to mix them with wallabies (and I think LA has mixed them with echidnas as well). ~Thylo
One would say that designing exhibit for them and then throwing a hissy fit at president for not asking China for them does count as "serious consideration"
I think you're right. When I visited LA's Australia Nocturnal House in 1991, I think there were Australian echidnas in the enclosure. There were also other animals in the enclosure, perhaps some kind of possum.
But for every other "contender" the exhibit would be overpriced and unnecessarily luxurious A lot of this is more speculation, applying different points of view, and understanding things differently. But personally, building the bear exhibit the way it was planned just in case you someday, might do a half-assed try for panda...that seems way too illogical, especially for Prague (or "even for Prague?" )
I just found out that Milky Storks (Mycteria cinerea) are in the zoo's collection. Login • Instagram I wonder if this is a new SSP for the EAZA? I think the only other Milky's in Europe are at Cologne Zoo.
This species is held by Zlin (with breeding) for more than ten years. I suppose the animals in Cologne and Prague are coming from there. I don't think there is a breeding program for this species.
