ZYBen
Well-Known Member
I have thrown around a few problems here and offline that I have about the way Species Management Programs (SMP) are run in Aust (and NZ because it is ARAZPA)
So essentially this is how I see an SMP functions
- Animals are held in a Display Establishments and paired with genetically suitable partners, this is managed by a Studbook keeper who co-ordinates the movements and pairings. When a suitable number of offspring are produced the pair are either separated or not bred again. Offspring are sent to different facilities interested in keeping the species.
Sounds like a great idea! and I am sure it works to a degree, but due to my involvement with the private sector I see a few problems.
The people running the show don't seem to believe animals have any 'value' ($$$) , the market for Lions, Tigers Monkeys and just about everything is very small, but I firmly believe they do and have seen documented evidence of this, most species dont have a high dollar value but you can put a price on anything. Part and parcel of all this is ownership.
I have always believed that any animal you have is yours, unless organised otherwise (such as breeding loans). When trading species with Zoological establishments I have organised something for down the track, or sent Animals back immediatley.
(and now for a little whinge)
I have been burnt however in these transactions, but never with a Non-ARAZPA member zoo. One facility I provided native fish to agreed to trade me 2 female Squirrel Gliders for the fishes. 2 years down the track I still did not have any Gliders....So I sent an e-mail to the correct person...no reply....so then to their boss....no reply... then to the director...no reply....and then to the CEO! And then I get a reply from the first one. Then after jumping through hoops I was supposed to get some Hosmers Skinks....Still no hosmers...
(now back to ownership)
So say a Zoo, lets call it Zoo A, purchased 2.3 Fat Tailed Dunnarts from Private Individual B
P) for the sum of $500. Money comes in, Dunnarts go, they are provided with the info they want re:lineage, all is well in both facilities. A year down the track Zoo A decide they want to join ARAZPA, they jump through hoops and get in (don't laugh Steve) they have had sucess breeding the Dunnarts and would love to be involved with the program (I am unsure if Fat Tailed Dunnarts are a program species, its just an example) so they do, and start moving Dunnarts around the Country readily. Zoo A have spurplus Dunnarts and Private Individual B wouldn't mind buying some back, but wait, no, they are now program species and can't go. Studbook keeper decides that Zoo A have bred too many Dunnarts from their pairings so moves all the Males to another facilty, Zoo C, but those males were bred at Zoo A or purchased from Private Individual B, is the recieving zoo or ARAZPA going to reimburse Zoo A for the costs of the dunnarts, unlikley!
Now thats a very simplified example but you get my point. ARAZPA and Gov Zoo's seem to have no concept of ownership
Now my next point.
Now back to Zoo A, they are asked to stop breeding the remaining pairs of Dunnarts, so they oblige. Unfortunatley Zoo C kept the Dunnarts outside, and after being raised inside, they did not cope with a harsh winter and unfortunatley they lose all the Young Males that were bred at Zoo A. Zoo A waits and waits for aproval to breed the Dunnarts again...but it never comes, they get on in age and are no longer suitable for breeding.
No more breedings from that lineage
Now that brings the question, Why should Zoo A stop breeding the Dunnarts, Private Individual B would still like some, as would Non-ARAZPA Zoo D, but alas, even if they did breed them, there are procedures to be followed sending program animals to Non Program Facilities, and is it really worth the trouble for Zoo A, they may not get the Animals, that they have flagged an interest for in the Regional Census for a few years, they dont want to cross ARAZPA they need Giraffe for their new Exhibit!
So simply :
A Member Zoo breeds a pair of animals, they breed a few and are asked to stop so they do, the facility where the young went shuts down, they die during mishaps in the liquidation (maybe through a hired consultant) and the Member Zoo's animals are no longer breeding age (breedable age). So we loose that blood line all together.
So heres my simple fix!
Zoo A breeds that pairing to member requirements and they are dispersed accordingly. Zoo A should then be allowed to continue to breed if they can place them, Private Individual B gets some as does Private Zoo D, and even E F and G! When Zoo's A and C lose the species atleast they can still get some! even if it is at a cost!
I think that for a program to be run effectivley it needs to be run by people who actually make money out of it (or their respective establishments). Working in a Privatley Owned Zoo I have seen the dedication that Zoo Owners put in, and quite frankly I can't see many of our Zoo 'Big Wigs' doing it. "Thats what employees are for, my desk and Air Conditioned office is way to comfortable". If the people running it were actually getting a monetery gain from their efforts the whole program, I believe, would run better, and we may of had one extra Pygmy Hippo Cow in the program!!!
Edit: I apologise for any spelling and gramatical errors or if i have the whole concept of an SMP wrong
So essentially this is how I see an SMP functions
- Animals are held in a Display Establishments and paired with genetically suitable partners, this is managed by a Studbook keeper who co-ordinates the movements and pairings. When a suitable number of offspring are produced the pair are either separated or not bred again. Offspring are sent to different facilities interested in keeping the species.
Sounds like a great idea! and I am sure it works to a degree, but due to my involvement with the private sector I see a few problems.
The people running the show don't seem to believe animals have any 'value' ($$$) , the market for Lions, Tigers Monkeys and just about everything is very small, but I firmly believe they do and have seen documented evidence of this, most species dont have a high dollar value but you can put a price on anything. Part and parcel of all this is ownership.
I have always believed that any animal you have is yours, unless organised otherwise (such as breeding loans). When trading species with Zoological establishments I have organised something for down the track, or sent Animals back immediatley.
(and now for a little whinge)
I have been burnt however in these transactions, but never with a Non-ARAZPA member zoo. One facility I provided native fish to agreed to trade me 2 female Squirrel Gliders for the fishes. 2 years down the track I still did not have any Gliders....So I sent an e-mail to the correct person...no reply....so then to their boss....no reply... then to the director...no reply....and then to the CEO! And then I get a reply from the first one. Then after jumping through hoops I was supposed to get some Hosmers Skinks....Still no hosmers...
(now back to ownership)
So say a Zoo, lets call it Zoo A, purchased 2.3 Fat Tailed Dunnarts from Private Individual B
Now thats a very simplified example but you get my point. ARAZPA and Gov Zoo's seem to have no concept of ownership
Now my next point.
When a suitable number of offspring are produced the pair are either separated or not bred again.
Now back to Zoo A, they are asked to stop breeding the remaining pairs of Dunnarts, so they oblige. Unfortunatley Zoo C kept the Dunnarts outside, and after being raised inside, they did not cope with a harsh winter and unfortunatley they lose all the Young Males that were bred at Zoo A. Zoo A waits and waits for aproval to breed the Dunnarts again...but it never comes, they get on in age and are no longer suitable for breeding.
No more breedings from that lineage
Now that brings the question, Why should Zoo A stop breeding the Dunnarts, Private Individual B would still like some, as would Non-ARAZPA Zoo D, but alas, even if they did breed them, there are procedures to be followed sending program animals to Non Program Facilities, and is it really worth the trouble for Zoo A, they may not get the Animals, that they have flagged an interest for in the Regional Census for a few years, they dont want to cross ARAZPA they need Giraffe for their new Exhibit!
So simply :
A Member Zoo breeds a pair of animals, they breed a few and are asked to stop so they do, the facility where the young went shuts down, they die during mishaps in the liquidation (maybe through a hired consultant) and the Member Zoo's animals are no longer breeding age (breedable age). So we loose that blood line all together.
So heres my simple fix!
Zoo A breeds that pairing to member requirements and they are dispersed accordingly. Zoo A should then be allowed to continue to breed if they can place them, Private Individual B gets some as does Private Zoo D, and even E F and G! When Zoo's A and C lose the species atleast they can still get some! even if it is at a cost!
I think that for a program to be run effectivley it needs to be run by people who actually make money out of it (or their respective establishments). Working in a Privatley Owned Zoo I have seen the dedication that Zoo Owners put in, and quite frankly I can't see many of our Zoo 'Big Wigs' doing it. "Thats what employees are for, my desk and Air Conditioned office is way to comfortable". If the people running it were actually getting a monetery gain from their efforts the whole program, I believe, would run better, and we may of had one extra Pygmy Hippo Cow in the program!!!
Edit: I apologise for any spelling and gramatical errors or if i have the whole concept of an SMP wrong