In terms of island fauna conservation there is no doubt Jersey is a world leader. Think Nobel prize. I didn’t see any arguments in favour of Bristol other than they had a handful more species.
British Isles Cup Redux - League B - Bristol/Wildplace vs Jersey
- Thread starter TeaLovingDave
- Start date
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
In my opinion, Jersey is ten times the organization that Bristol is in terms of its conservation output, however, I wouldn't give 3-0 vote to Jersey because it is worth acknowledging Bristols contributions too.
If there was the option I would have given it 3-1 to Jersey but there isn't so I settled for 2-1.
You must have missed the following:
And I believe mention has already been made of the fact they hold the international studbook for Lord Howe Stick Insect and Desertas Island Wolf Spider, too?
When I finish work I will root out precise details of these and other points for you.
Yes, if that had been an option I think odds are good I would have voted thus too.
Never said Bristol was a bad zoo. I did look at their website and the conservation projects they are involved in. Yes they are doing everything you would expect of a good zoo in this day and age. However based on the website, they came to this decades after Jersey, and nowhere nearly as significant in it's scope. Where is their Round Island?
Lord Howe Island Stick Insect conservation is well within the hands of Zoos Victoria and the NSW authorities. I doubt anybody else in Australia, let alone anywhere else in the world will be contributing to it's conservation. I am not accusing Bristol Zoo of this, but this is a classic zoo green wash. Exhibit an endangered species, put a label on it, even take part in a program, but have no connection to the conservation of the species in the wild. Makes it look like they are taking conservation action when there is none. (ed: I should say I'd much prefer them to exhibit threatened species rather than not, just don't make it out to be something it is not)
I look at what the average zoo does, what we do with our very limited resources, and what Jersey does, and make my judgement.
Last edited:
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
I think they deserve to be commended for their work particularly with the Desertas Island Wolf Spider afterall how many zoos out there are captive breeding this critically endangered little Madeiran spider?
I would bet that there aren't too many so good on Bristol for steering the conservation of inverts like this.
In other words, your usual "we've got this" spiel
the fact that Melbourne specifically chose to establish insurance populations outside Australia, and an international studbook managed by Bristol, suggests this is rather more than Bristol "making it look like they are taking conservation action when there is none" and "nowhere else outside Melbourne and NSW contributing to the conservation of the species".Have just rooted out the most up-to-date information with regards to conservation studbook involvement at Bristol pertaining to island species:
Studbook holder:
Fregate Island beetle (Polposipus herculeanus)
Lord Howe Island stick insect (Dryococelus australis)
Desertas wolf spider (Hognas ingens)
Luzon bleeding heart pigeon (Gallicolumba luzonica)
Mindanao bleeding heart pigeon (Gallicolumba criniger)
Black-naped fruit dove (Ptilinopus melanospilus)
Visayan tarictic hornbill (Penelopides panini panini)
Other Tarictic hornbill (Penelopides spp)
Heavy involvement in studbook:
Partula snail (Partula sspp.)
Mountain chicken frog (Leptodactylus fallax)
Utila spiny-tailed iguana (Ctenosaura bakeri)
Sclater's lemur (Eulemur flavifrons)
...plus lesser involvement in several other studbooks.
Now you are putting words into my mouth. Stop it you naughty tea drinker or we will cut your supply of Darjeeling English Breakfast and force you onto peppermint tea.In other words, your usual "we've got this" spiel
Have just rooted out the most up-to-date information with regards to conservation studbook involvement at Bristol pertaining to island species:
Studbook holder:
Fregate Island beetle (Polposipus herculeanus)
Lord Howe Island stick insect (Dryococelus australis)
Desertas wolf spider (Hognas ingens)
Luzon bleeding heart pigeon (Gallicolumba luzonica)
Mindanao bleeding heart pigeon (Gallicolumba criniger)
Black-naped fruit dove (Ptilinopus melanospilus)
Visayan tarictic hornbill (Penelopides panini panini)
Other Tarictic hornbill (Penelopides spp)
Heavy involvement in studbook:
Partula snail (Partula sspp.)
Mountain chicken frog (Leptodactylus fallax)
Utila spiny-tailed iguana (Ctenosaura bakeri)
Sclater's lemur (Eulemur flavifrons)
...plus lesser involvement in several other studbooks.
Yes Zoos Vic have had it covered for years re the LHI stick insect, and of course others would want to exhibit this highly charismatic and endangered insect with a great conservation story. It can only help encourage insect conservation in general. Bristol's involvement is all good, it is just not a conservation triumph.
No Australia in general does not have it covered re threatened species but as one of the world's richest and most advanced countries we should have. However our strict biosecurity and distance from Europe and North America makes it difficult for Australian zoos to participate in international programs and overseas zoos to participate in conservation of Australian species.
Yes if there was one lesson that was drummed into me when doing the Conservation of Endangered Species course at Jersey over two decades ago, is that species conservation work, including if not especially conservation breeding, is best done in the species range. So Australian zoos are best to suited to work with Australian animals and European zoos need to get out into range countries.
No most studbooks/SSPs/EEPs/etc are about keeping species going in zoos not about conserving them in the wild. Not that that is a bad thing, just it is not conservation. It may have a conservation outcome in the long term, but it is hardly the most direct route.
Sitting back enjoying my morning coffee.
Last edited:
Got another coffee so time for another rant.
The Guam kingfisher is extinct in the wild, because of an introduced predator (ironically an Australian brown tree snake), It is held in a number of American zoos, but what now? Ideally zoos will keep a population until some solution to the snake is found and they can be reintroduced. Genetically, if a species is to be held in captivity indefinitely there needs to be about 500 individuals in the population.
So zoo A and zoo B happen to each have 5 aviaries that are identical and suitable for kingfishers. Zoo A decides to support the Guam kingfisher program, taking on 5 pairs, employing a specialist keeper, and fully involving themselves in the program. Zoo B does get a pair but fills the other four aviaries with common species they got from breeders and dealers. They breed the occasional bird but their involvement in the program is minimal. However they do get to advertise "best collection of kingfishers, including the extinct in the wild Guam kingfisher", and boast about their "conservation success" every time they breed a chick.
So the Zoochatter Cup comes along along with zoo A and B as competitors and Kingfishers is the category. Who do you vote for? Should zoo B win 3-0 because it has by far the most species?
Of course Bristol is not zoo B, and really I think comparisons like this are extremely difficult. I do think however that in the face of a global extinction crisis we need to celebrate our conservation heroes.
I think I will bow out now and leave you guys to it.
The Guam kingfisher is extinct in the wild, because of an introduced predator (ironically an Australian brown tree snake), It is held in a number of American zoos, but what now? Ideally zoos will keep a population until some solution to the snake is found and they can be reintroduced. Genetically, if a species is to be held in captivity indefinitely there needs to be about 500 individuals in the population.
So zoo A and zoo B happen to each have 5 aviaries that are identical and suitable for kingfishers. Zoo A decides to support the Guam kingfisher program, taking on 5 pairs, employing a specialist keeper, and fully involving themselves in the program. Zoo B does get a pair but fills the other four aviaries with common species they got from breeders and dealers. They breed the occasional bird but their involvement in the program is minimal. However they do get to advertise "best collection of kingfishers, including the extinct in the wild Guam kingfisher", and boast about their "conservation success" every time they breed a chick.
So the Zoochatter Cup comes along along with zoo A and B as competitors and Kingfishers is the category. Who do you vote for? Should zoo B win 3-0 because it has by far the most species?
Of course Bristol is not zoo B, and really I think comparisons like this are extremely difficult. I do think however that in the face of a global extinction crisis we need to celebrate our conservation heroes.
I think I will bow out now and leave you guys to it.
Last edited:
Except that no one is arguing that Bristol should win 3-0 - because it has more species or otherwise - and only *one* person is even giving them an advantage full stop
so I believe I am not out of line when I suggest you are being a bit disingenuous.In any case, a 2-1 vote for Jersey still "celebrates our conservation heroes".... the word "heroes" being plural fitting rather well given it also acknowledges the achievements of Bristol.
Even ignoring your bizarre stance that Bristol being in charge of the ex-situ population of Lord Howe Stick Insect - at the request of Melbourne, I again emphasise - has no contribution or value to the overall conservation of the species, you have not addressed the very real successes of the Desertas Wolf Spider and Fregate Beetle programmes (which entail both in-situ and ex-situ work and thus qualify as the "need to get out into range countries." you cite European zoos should be doing) which are run by Bristol, nor the various species of Partula which owe their continued existence to the captive populations held at Bristol and other collections.
Oh, and I actually quite like peppermint tea
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
Another point that hasn't been raised yet in Jersey's favour is that it is because of Jersey and the Durrell Trust's ex-situ conservation efforts that Bristol zoo even has some of their island species.
Lac Alaotra bamboo lemur - Durrell initiated captive breeding programe 1990.
Livingstone fruit bat - Durrell initiated captive breeding programe 1992.
Malagasy giant jumping rat - Durrell was first to house species in captivity in 1990, to have successful captive breeding and the first ex-situ program.
Mountain chicken - First ex-situ by Durrell in 1999, first captive breeding program.
Aye-aye - Captive breeding ex-situ program initiated by Durrell in 1990.
All are in zoos thanks to Jersey and Gerald Durrell and I think that really says it all.
Lac Alaotra bamboo lemur - Durrell initiated captive breeding programe 1990.
Livingstone fruit bat - Durrell initiated captive breeding programe 1992.
Malagasy giant jumping rat - Durrell was first to house species in captivity in 1990, to have successful captive breeding and the first ex-situ program.
Mountain chicken - First ex-situ by Durrell in 1999, first captive breeding program.
Aye-aye - Captive breeding ex-situ program initiated by Durrell in 1990.
All are in zoos thanks to Jersey and Gerald Durrell and I think that really says it all.
Last edited:
Well I've voted and as I said I am out, so that's that.Except that no one is arguing that Bristol should win 3-0 - because it has more species or otherwise - and only *one* person is even giving them an advantage full stop
In any case, a 2-1 vote for Jersey still "celebrates our conservation heroes".... the word "heroes" being plural fitting rather well given it also acknowledges the achievements of Bristol.
Even ignoring your bizarre stance that Bristol being in charge of the ex-situ population of Lord Howe Stick Insect - at the request of Melbourne, I again emphasise - has no contribution or value to the overall conservation of the species, you have not addressed the very real successes of the Desertas Wolf Spider and Fregate Beetle programmes (which entail both in-situ and ex-situ work and thus qualify as the "need to get out into range countries." you cite European zoos should be doing) which are run by Bristol, nor the various species of Partula which owe their continued existence to the captive populations held at Bristol and other collections.
Oh, and I actually quite like peppermint tea
I do quite like peppermint tea as well as some other herbal concoctions, but never got into "real" tea. Espresso for me.
Coffee is good for mornings and when I wish to be tense - tea is soothing
I've been drinking a LOT of tea today!
I've been drinking a LOT of tea today!
Coffee is good all day... I just switch to decaf once it hits 4pmCoffee is good for mornings and when I wish to be tense - tea is soothing
I've been drinking a LOT of tea today!
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
Coffee all day everyday
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
Well, that's the rub - something doesn't need to be a massive "conservation triumph" to count as worthwhile or valid, as MRJ seems to feel.
And if it does, there's plenty of things which Jersey has done which have seen success, and which are good, but can hardly be heralded as "conservation triumphs" at the current point in time
for instance, the Malagasy jumping rat programme is currently struggling a bit because collections temporarily stopped breeding it at the request of Jersey. This meant that the population ended up ageing and by the time breeding resumed, it was a lot more difficult to get going. So we may actually lose that one in the long run. But it doesn't mean that it's not worthy of recognition, even if it's not a triumph.On another note, a pretty good counterpoint to the repeated assertions that the involvement by Bristol with LHSI is worthy of no credit in conservation terms because Australia has "got this" by themselves (despite the fact this involvement came about because Melbourne specifically wanted ex-situ reserve populations outside Australia) occurred to me; this is precisely the mindset which will probably see the Panay Cloudrunner dwindle into extinction in the coming years. A reserve population existed and was breeding, then London decided that as the population in the Philippine breeding station was doing well they "had this" and the ex-situ population could be wound down. No sooner had the ex-situ population declined to the point of no reverse, the double whammy of "seems there's none left in wild" and "a disease just killed all the captive ones in the Filipino breeding centre" hits.
It's never good to assume "we've got this" and look down with benevolent disdain on the involvement of others.
Onychorhynchus coronatus
Well-Known Member
Well, that's the rub - something doesn't need to be a massive "conservation triumph" to count as worthwhile or valid, as MRJ seems to feel.
And if it does, there's plenty of things which Jersey has done which have seen success, and which are good, but can hardly be heralded as "conservation triumphs" at the current point in time
Yes, I agree, but I think MRJ is right to suggest that Jersey's triumphs in conservation have been extraordinary and very notable ones and do surpass those of other zoos.
Again, I agree because there have been failures along the way and no organization is perfect. Conservation interventions are incredibly tricky and there are always errors that occur along the way to success and that must be learned from.
For example, one that comes to mind was with the Majorcan midwife toad. I believe there was once an accidental introduction of chytridiomycosis to the island and wild populations of the species when Jersey reintroduced the midwife toad to chytrid free areas.
I didn't know that about the Malagasy giant jumping rat, that is interesting, do you know why there was this request from Jersey to stop the breeding programe ?
Oh, I do agree with him there - as noted i would have preferred a 3-1 vote were one possible, like yourself. I merely disagree that Jersey being Jersey means the efforts of other zoos are worth naught.
Similar story with Mountain Chicken, too
though Chester, London and Bristol have done a lot to counter this error.Basically the same story as was the case for Pink Pigeon and Mauritius Kestrel - lack of interested new holders.