Like the name of the thread already proposes, have I (like many other members on zoochat) found the concept the eu came up with, to manage (potentialy) invasive species, rather unprofessional.
For most would I, more or less, be ok with the eu and find some criticism uneducated, but in this case, did the bureaucrats show, that they are not particularly in touch with the matter they create regulations for.
So I wanted to come on here to propose a potentialy better way to manage.
Though different cities, regions and countries implied the ban on certain species, differently, meaning they allowed short to long term exceptions, most councils seem to adopt the approach of full phase out.
There are several levels, where I find issues with the extremist approach.
The first, I do not find it fair how all institutions are seemingly presented as the same, what we germans call general suspicion, implying that scientificaly lead institutions (because in my opinion there is a spectrum) have more or less the same risk of management, if not neglect like some smaller parks.
So would my first proposal for a more professional adaption be, to allow exceptions for institutions, that achieved to keep a clean record of keeping species professionaly, with little to no escapes. Though this requires further specification, I think a properly funded enclosure with either thick resistant mesh, stabile moats and walls, chambers that prevent animals from escaping throught the gate the zoo keepers enter and exit. All waste material depending on the species would need to be treated in ways that prevent seeds, eggs or other states to enter the enviorment. This means in some cases fully shut off from the enviorment like a terrarium or tank, and in case of a deer as an example open top is still acceptable.
The second aspect I found unreasonable is the generalisation of climatic zones, meaning species that species that do not survive the northern european winter, could be housed and even in the frame of regulation be breed unless regularlj possible to be sourced from the wild, whilst southern institutions could sadly only house either rescued (temporarily) or sterilized individual.
As third regulatory agreement would every specimen (if possible) get catalouged and chiped. Thats not possible for snails and crayfish, but these smaller species are also the ones, that could be kept and bred in secured areas where all work is entirely shut off from the enviorment and all waste water and other material could be treated in ways that pretty much eliminate the chance of contermination. This would also imply that every move would require special agreements from official positions and a more thougth through transport, but all in all bears less risk than the trade of other commercial products.
In my opinion should it also be allowed for institutions that meet the named criteria to adopt rescued specimens from the wild.
Selfspeakingly could no park get forced to comply, but I actualy believe many institutions would actualy be open to work along these lines to be able to further display certain species.
I might have missed some aspects and would invite others to also propose ideas.
For most would I, more or less, be ok with the eu and find some criticism uneducated, but in this case, did the bureaucrats show, that they are not particularly in touch with the matter they create regulations for.
So I wanted to come on here to propose a potentialy better way to manage.
Though different cities, regions and countries implied the ban on certain species, differently, meaning they allowed short to long term exceptions, most councils seem to adopt the approach of full phase out.
There are several levels, where I find issues with the extremist approach.
The first, I do not find it fair how all institutions are seemingly presented as the same, what we germans call general suspicion, implying that scientificaly lead institutions (because in my opinion there is a spectrum) have more or less the same risk of management, if not neglect like some smaller parks.
So would my first proposal for a more professional adaption be, to allow exceptions for institutions, that achieved to keep a clean record of keeping species professionaly, with little to no escapes. Though this requires further specification, I think a properly funded enclosure with either thick resistant mesh, stabile moats and walls, chambers that prevent animals from escaping throught the gate the zoo keepers enter and exit. All waste material depending on the species would need to be treated in ways that prevent seeds, eggs or other states to enter the enviorment. This means in some cases fully shut off from the enviorment like a terrarium or tank, and in case of a deer as an example open top is still acceptable.
The second aspect I found unreasonable is the generalisation of climatic zones, meaning species that species that do not survive the northern european winter, could be housed and even in the frame of regulation be breed unless regularlj possible to be sourced from the wild, whilst southern institutions could sadly only house either rescued (temporarily) or sterilized individual.
As third regulatory agreement would every specimen (if possible) get catalouged and chiped. Thats not possible for snails and crayfish, but these smaller species are also the ones, that could be kept and bred in secured areas where all work is entirely shut off from the enviorment and all waste water and other material could be treated in ways that pretty much eliminate the chance of contermination. This would also imply that every move would require special agreements from official positions and a more thougth through transport, but all in all bears less risk than the trade of other commercial products.
In my opinion should it also be allowed for institutions that meet the named criteria to adopt rescued specimens from the wild.
Selfspeakingly could no park get forced to comply, but I actualy believe many institutions would actualy be open to work along these lines to be able to further display certain species.
I might have missed some aspects and would invite others to also propose ideas.