Taronga Zoo tz update
- Thread starter Coquinguy
- Start date
was zawadi the last bongo there?
Yes, I am afraid so .....! Gone to Singapore where he will be allowed to breed with unrelated females of his kind!
If the bureaucrats get their way bongos are out in ARAZPA before you know it! Dubbo: 0.2 (1 birth), Melbourne: 1.1 and Monarto: 2.0.
If only, you guys could import several bongos (say 2.3) it would go along way to allowing breeding to really make a difference. For now all combinations have been tried and you are in serious need of unrelated bloodlines.
There is still Bongo at Taronga. Went there yesterday and there was one on display.
There is really not much that can be done about the bongo situation......B. Tapir, M. Tapir, Hippo, P. Hippo etc are all still in critically low numbers. The tapir situation may be resolved; a more aggressive approach to breeding these animals and getting numbers up regardless of the lack of bloodlines is possibly the only approach to take. The low numbers of these animals in the country and age structure and sex ratio of their populations leaves them absolutely vulnerable. At this point the death of a single animal, let alone two or three from a freak accident or disease would condemn these species to certain regional extinction.
The most frustrating thing is the long time it seems to take to get anything much happening; the recent consolidation of p. hippos at taronga to create a breeding pair should of happened a long time ago.
There is really not much that can be done about the bongo situation......B. Tapir, M. Tapir, Hippo, P. Hippo etc are all still in critically low numbers. The tapir situation may be resolved; a more aggressive approach to breeding these animals and getting numbers up regardless of the lack of bloodlines is possibly the only approach to take. The low numbers of these animals in the country and age structure and sex ratio of their populations leaves them absolutely vulnerable. At this point the death of a single animal, let alone two or three from a freak accident or disease would condemn these species to certain regional extinction.
The most frustrating thing is the long time it seems to take to get anything much happening; the recent consolidation of p. hippos at taronga to create a breeding pair should of happened a long time ago.
on the other hand it should be pointed out that until bongo were black-listed from import a few years after the first few got through this species was headed for a population of 35 within the region.
ARAZPA was well and truly commited to creating a viable population of this species, unfortunately bio-security begs to differ. at the moment i am not sure what is planned long-term for this animal.....whether it is planned to phase them out completely or persist in the hope that something changes. the number of births that have occurred at TWPZ in recent years would suggest the latter, one hopes. just ramp up the pace
ARAZPA was well and truly commited to creating a viable population of this species, unfortunately bio-security begs to differ. at the moment i am not sure what is planned long-term for this animal.....whether it is planned to phase them out completely or persist in the hope that something changes. the number of births that have occurred at TWPZ in recent years would suggest the latter, one hopes. just ramp up the pace
glyn,
Do Biosecurity and Homeland Secretary ever consider zoos without anything other than marsupian fauna in Australian zoos? Long-term, if nothing substantial will happen, all exotic fauna will die out and what then becomes of the vision of ARAZPA zoos contributing to in situ conservation beyond its own borders? I think these questions need serious consideration at your end of the woods!
K.B.
Do Biosecurity and Homeland Secretary ever consider zoos without anything other than marsupian fauna in Australian zoos? Long-term, if nothing substantial will happen, all exotic fauna will die out and what then becomes of the vision of ARAZPA zoos contributing to in situ conservation beyond its own borders? I think these questions need serious consideration at your end of the woods!
K.B.
When the NSW zoos receivd two pairs of bongos they lost an oppurtunity to really create a viable population here. What should have happened was an import of a viable starter foundation, four or more unrelated pairs should have been brought in at the same time. As later imports of white rhinos and elephants did do this then it seems that a lesson was learnt.
For a long time giraffes were able to be brought in and a very pitable few were brought in. This has meant that ARAZPA are now struggling to keep this species from becoming critically inbred.
Primates, cats and dogs can be brought in but this may not always be the case. Sumatran tigers especially need more unrelated bloodlines. Almost all the animals in A and NZ are descendants of or mated to descendants of just one pair. (well two pairs but the two bloodlines are so intertwined that they may as well be one).
But of course I want more species and unfortunately the way the zoos work you can't have a viable population of more than one or two species of cats etc.
For a long time giraffes were able to be brought in and a very pitable few were brought in. This has meant that ARAZPA are now struggling to keep this species from becoming critically inbred.
Primates, cats and dogs can be brought in but this may not always be the case. Sumatran tigers especially need more unrelated bloodlines. Almost all the animals in A and NZ are descendants of or mated to descendants of just one pair. (well two pairs but the two bloodlines are so intertwined that they may as well be one).
But of course I want more species and unfortunately the way the zoos work you can't have a viable population of more than one or two species of cats etc.
As I am not a qualified zoologist or veterinarian, there is one question which has me stumped, namely, why are odd-toed ungulates able to be imported when even-toed ungulates are not? (Remember the horse flu problems not so long ago.) Maybe it's because the horse racing industry has a lot of clout in official circles?
I'm well aware that perissodactyls have different diseases to artiodactyls, but it stills seems to me that the authorities are being a bit hypocritical.
I'm well aware that perissodactyls have different diseases to artiodactyls, but it stills seems to me that the authorities are being a bit hypocritical.
Sorry for continuing on this aspect of the discussion. At Biosecurity's courtesy one can bring in primates (fine), but also cats and dogs????? (incredulous/ridiculous).
Excuse me for being so frank, but bringing in cats and dogs in islands fauna+flora ecosystems have been some of the most damaging to that ecosystem.
If one wishes to preclude any undesirable escapees or introduction of contagious diseases, it is hardly likely that a few exotics heavily tested will be part of that category .... however cats and dogs really are and also detrimental to Australian marsupilid faunas in general!
I rest my case.
K.B.
The reason why even-toed ungulate imports are far stricter is because the majority of our livestock farmers have sheep and cattle and pigs - all even-toed.
Yes, the racing industry has clout. It's the racing industry that wants to bring horses in and out of the country, and if there's a problem it's the racing industry that suffers the most.
The farmers, on the hand, don't want ANYTHING imported that could potentially introduce diseases into Australia and onto their farms. If there was an outbreak of BSE or FMD then the farmers lose their stock, and the rest of Australia finds they have to import meat from overseas or turn vegetarian.
Kifaru Bwana said:
No, of course they don't. That's not their job. However, if a zoo wishes to import something then Biosecurity will happily consider their application.
Hix
I think this is a pretty sweeping statement that digs more at irresponsible pet ownership as opposed to what the actual issue is. This issue is not so much escapees because when dealing with the ungulates concearned we'll be able to find them before they make it out the door. Contagious diseases in the ungulates are relavent as opposed to diseases in the canines and felines as there are no farmed canines or felines so there would be no product loss if a contagious disease did break out in the dogs/cats, probably household pets would get it and thats the limit to it. As ungulates such as cows form a huge part of our economy at the moment, as painful as it is for zoo lovers and workers at times, the ban has to and should stay on these animals. But using this as a way of pointing fingers to dogs/cats as a large group where the actual issue is the mismanagement of dogs/cats by pet owners not the animals themselves is wrong.
While biosecurity policy and procedures is based on science I think as some people have hinted there is some hypocrisy in what types of animals can be brought in and why - i.e. the science can be used in different ways to support different political/popular agendas.
Eg 1 - Horses versus other hoofed animals. There are just as many serious exotic horse diseases that we don't have in Australia as there are cow diseases and the risks of introduction are equivalent. The racing industry lobbied hard to allow import of horses but then at-border quarantine officials copped all the blame when something went wrong and the tax payer had to pay $100 million in eradication and compensation costs. Taxpayers, "innocent" horse owners and the horses were the victims.
Eg 2 - Cat and dog imports are allowed (albeit only from certain countries that don't have rabies) primarily because people would be up in arms if they couldn't bring their pets back from extended overseas stays.
Cat, dogs and especially horses can go almost anywhere after a short quarantine period, despite this significantly increasing disease risks. On the other hand, animals held in ARAZPA zoos are essentially in quarantine for their entire lives so the risks are very small and that's why more zoo animals should be allowed in (at the very least in urban zoos where the risk of transferring disease to farm animals is negligible).
It will be interesting to see what happens over the next 12 months as the Government is meant to restructure and better integrate its biosecurity functions. Hopefully there will be more funding to better facilitate risk assessments for zoo imports in the future.
Eg 1 - Horses versus other hoofed animals. There are just as many serious exotic horse diseases that we don't have in Australia as there are cow diseases and the risks of introduction are equivalent. The racing industry lobbied hard to allow import of horses but then at-border quarantine officials copped all the blame when something went wrong and the tax payer had to pay $100 million in eradication and compensation costs. Taxpayers, "innocent" horse owners and the horses were the victims.
Eg 2 - Cat and dog imports are allowed (albeit only from certain countries that don't have rabies) primarily because people would be up in arms if they couldn't bring their pets back from extended overseas stays.
Cat, dogs and especially horses can go almost anywhere after a short quarantine period, despite this significantly increasing disease risks. On the other hand, animals held in ARAZPA zoos are essentially in quarantine for their entire lives so the risks are very small and that's why more zoo animals should be allowed in (at the very least in urban zoos where the risk of transferring disease to farm animals is negligible).
It will be interesting to see what happens over the next 12 months as the Government is meant to restructure and better integrate its biosecurity functions. Hopefully there will be more funding to better facilitate risk assessments for zoo imports in the future.
Thanks Jet,
At long last ... another voice in the wide open desert (true I have been living out there for a long long time surrounded by just indominable sands, the wind and weather, the flora and fauna, its beauty and its dangers)!
I do not diminish the importance NOR validity of individual biosecurity measures anywhere (just say good standard quarantaine procedures) - testament to that are some of my other postings on this subject where these relate to exotic wildlife quarantaine procedures -.
However, I do remain a sceptic and reserve judgement as long as the agricultural industry anywhere takes precedence over any zoological expertise and as long as the agricultural industry remains the main recruiting ground for (exotic) veterinary experts (knowing the science of wildlife veterinary science is fast developing, yet little recognised or valued and sadly also woefully underresourced). Full scientific knowledge and understanding, adequate and efficient operation of quarantaine guidelines/ procedures as well as full adequately monitored imports and exports of exotic wildlife vs. domestic animals remains a myth rather than reality as long as domestically trained vets take precedence here.
In my country, we have experienced cases of possible contagious disease infection of exotics where the veterinary health authority has advised immediate euthanasia where valid methods of treatment of these contagious diseases and full recovery exist. Another example, is that these government vets adopt the type of strict quarantaine procedures where euthanasia is routinely applied to confiscated endangered or exotic species that are otherwise completely healthy, yet cannot be returned to their country of origin (or perceived to be so, it requires adequate funding and veterinary as well as other disciplines in monitoring). I find both a travesty of justice on our (rare or not) wildlife and plants, of which us Homo sapiens are but custodians.
The interests of veterinary health screening and environmental as well as wildlife conservation while trying to improve the quality of any agricultural industries (pffhhh the word when we are dealing with domesticated animals) is not served fully with current Biosecurity. We should neither create oversight in domesticated wildlife (as the well publicised domestic horse import incident in Australia) and neither euthanise fully healthy exotic wildlife. Continueing along this path is a dead end (and will never make a country free from any incremental disease risks.
We do however require more sound and better zoological/scientific expertise and advice regarding veterinary and zoonotic health issues. We do however require well trained experts in wildlife veterinary health as well as trained conservation and (endangered) species management cadres to benefit all.
I further contend that Biosecurity and the agricultural industry have not precluded the introduction of non native species into the wider Australian ecosystem (something we all know has been to the detriment of quite a few native wildlife species). In this respect the free trade in cats and dogs seems all the more contentious to say the least. E.g. dingoes were largely responsible for the extinction of quite of few marsupials amongst which the Tassie wolf.
I will remain ... forever more a logical sceptic here. Play me, if you can (LOL)
K.B.
Thanks Jet,
At long last ... another voice in the wide open desert (true I have been living out there for a long long time surrounded by just indominable sands, the wind and weather, the flora and fauna, its beauty and its dangers)!
I do not diminish the importance NOR validity of individual biosecurity measures anywhere (just say good standard quarantaine procedures) - testament to that are some of my other postings on this subject where these relate to exotic wildlife quarantaine procedures -.
However, I do remain a sceptic and reserve judgement as long as the agricultural industry anywhere takes precedence over any zoological expertise and as long as the agricultural industry remains the main recruiting ground for (exotic) veterinary experts (knowing the science of wildlife veterinary science is fast developing, yet little recognised or valued and sadly also woefully underresourced). Full scientific knowledge and understanding, adequate and efficient operation of quarantaine guidelines/ procedures as well as full adequately monitored imports and exports of exotic wildlife vs. domestic animals remains a myth rather than reality as long as domestically trained vets take precedence here.
In my country, we have experienced cases of possible contagious disease infection of exotics where the veterinary health authority has advised immediate euthanasia where valid methods of treatment of these contagious diseases and full recovery exist. Another example, is that these government vets adopt the type of strict quarantaine procedures where euthanasia is routinely applied to confiscated endangered or exotic species that are otherwise completely healthy, yet cannot be returned to their country of origin (or perceived to be so, it requires adequate funding and veterinary as well as other disciplines in monitoring). I find both a travesty of justice on our (rare or not) wildlife and plants, of which us Homo sapiens are but custodians.
The interests of veterinary health screening and environmental as well as wildlife conservation while trying to improve the quality of any agricultural industries (pffhhh the word when we are dealing with domesticated animals) is not served fully with current Biosecurity. We should neither create oversight in domesticated wildlife (as the well publicised domestic horse import incident in Australia) and neither euthanise fully healthy exotic wildlife. Continueing along this path is a dead end (and will never make a country free from any incremental disease risks.
We do however require more sound and better zoological/scientific expertise and advice regarding veterinary and zoonotic health issues. We do however require well trained experts in wildlife veterinary health as well as trained conservation and (endangered) species management cadres to benefit all.
I further contend that Biosecurity and the agricultural industry have not precluded the introduction of non native species into the wider Australian ecosystem (something we all know has been to the detriment of quite a few native wildlife species). In this respect the free trade in cats and dogs seems all the more contentious to say the least. E.g. dingoes were largely responsible for the extinction of quite of few marsupials amongst which the Tassie wolf.
I will remain ... forever more a logical sceptic here. Play me, if you can (LOL)
K.B.
I still feel that drawing in examples that are not related to zoological issues at this point is wrong in this forum. As a zookeeper i do sometimes get frustrated with the situation however also understand that when previous imports have caused major problems we need to be careful and at times when bird flu has been spreading and F&M is causing serious problems, not only in domestic populations but also zoo's we do need to be careful. The issue with dogs and cats is a whole separate issue. Horse flu was shocking but was stopped. we need to be careful! The region has some issues that need to be sorted but we do need to realise that we are dealing with quite large issues. Just because some people want hippos in zoo's doesn't make it right. We need to manage our zoo's with different ideals in mind, that may not revolve around containing all the major wanted species.