Interesting. I did think it was interesting that Peel Zoo was being included in the main breeding program. I can't see an issue with private zoos keeping program devils but it needs to be monitored very closely. They want an insurance population of 1,500 devils and I doubt this will be achievable just with ZAA institutions. Devils live for a relatively short time (8 years) and only breed for 2 or three of those. I understand why they don't want them going to some private institutions (devils on dispay don't breed well). But if an zoo is willing to have off display facilities then they should be permitted to enter the program wether or not they are ZAA. A willingness for a private zoo to invest in off display facitlies should be welcomed as it shows they are truly dedicated to the cause. Also, given the short breeding lifespan our zoos will soon be housing surplus "old" devils. They could be offered to smaller, willing, zoos to display which helps in education. Compared to issues like Sumatran Tigers and Elephants the education of DFTD is quite low and it's easier to get someone interested in something if they can see the animal itself. My two cents. . .
The first comment made (below the article): Spoken like a true Tasmanian! Hix (No offence meant to any Tassie Zoochatters!)
given the Tasmanian Goverments previous track record in environmental management does it really matter where they are? as long as its not a Gunns owned zoo more to the point though, what is the problem with this anyway? is it just more pointless red-tape? really, the more devils in captivity the better. i have no concern with a non ZAA member holding devils as I cannot see how this will compromise the insurance program in any way. as Jarkari pointed out, an insurance population of 1500 animals will be difficult to acheive purely with just ZAA members. although officially I applaud the decision to kickstart the program with these institutions in the future they will need to offload 'retired' devils. places like the Hunter Valley Zoo might not have the expertise to breed devils (or they just might) but in the future they could hold additional animals. in the past many species have been saved not by governments but the efforts of a few commited individuals. in the case of the devil, it would silly to let beuracracy stand in the way of zoos like the HVZ who want to be involved. similarly, whilst I totally agree that the zoo industry in this nation should be professional, standardised and accredited the process through which this is acheived is a long one and at times excludes animals from ASMP even when numbers are critically low....think Cairns and their hippos. if the various State organisations which in some way or another have a say in how zoos are run agree that a place has met welfare standards, does it matter if it does not yet have professional accreditation?
