ZAA Devil "monopoly"?

[Steve Robinson]

Devil export sales lash Tasmania News - The Mercury - The Voice of Tasmania

THE State Government is scrambling to stop wildlife parks selling endangered Tasmanian devils to interstate parks.

It gave East Coast Natureworld owner Bruce Englefield an export licence this month to send four devils to the Hunter Valley Zoo in NSW and Peel Zoo near Perth.

He has another three devils in quarantine at his park that are earmarked for Phillip Island zoo in Victoria.

The devils are not part of the Government's official insurance population drawn from the wild and housed in zoos around the country.

The gruesome devil facial tumour disease has wiped out 80 per cent of the devil population and the insurance population could be the only thing standing between the species and extinction.

Although all devils in wildlife parks are technically owned by the State Government, Mr Englefield admits charging a "management fee" of several thousand dollars for each devil.

"I can't charge for the animal but I can charge for the management, the vet bills, the cages," he said.

Mr Englefield said he had lost money on the deals but gained "internal warmth" thinking his contribution could help save the species.

But the exportation of devils has outraged the Zoo and Aquarium Association, which is a member of the Tasmanian Government's official Save the Devil Program and represents zoos that have invested millions of their own money in the insurance population, which is largely not on public display.

ZAA executive director Martin Phillips said the peak body had raised "strong concerns" with the State Government and the devils were unlikely to ever become part of the insurance population.

"It would appear a private institution in Tasmania has provided them to a private institution in Western Australia for public display. I can't ascertain any other benefit," he said.

Mr Phillips said the insurance population was carefully managed to breed animals with genetic diversity, because in the wild devils had inbred, making them more susceptible to the contagious cancer.

"It has to be done through scientific analysis, not just random allocation of animals, which is what has happened here," he said.

"We don't want to see a captive population growing outside the program. It's not helping anyone."

Mr Phillips said the Government had assured him it was "working to put a stop" to any more devils being exported that were not part of the insurance population.

It is understood Mr Englefield's management fee for each devil was $5000 but Mr Phillips estimated it should not have cost more than $1500.

Mr Englefield said each receiving zoo had signed an agreement with Natureworld to return the devils and any offspring to Tasmania if they were needed but admits this would be "difficult" to enforce.

He agreed he had originally opposed sending devils to the mainland but changed his mind because the "genie was already out of the bottle" because zoos holding the insurance population had already commercialised the species and were "taking joeys into TV studios".

The director of the State Government's conservation division Howel Williams originally said the four devils from Natureworld were "a welcome addition to efforts to assist in securing insurance devil populations for the future".

ut on Friday he said it was important to recognise the devils were not part of the insurance population. He also flagged changes to stop the export of devils outside the official effort to save the animal.

"The next step is ensuring all animals in captivity are part of a managed breeding program and movements and breeding is centrally co-ordinated on the advice of expert small population practitioners," he said

 

[Jarkari]

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. . .

 

[ZYBen]

I agree with the comments of "Ben from QLD" found under the article

 

[Hix]

The first comment made (below the article):

If the Tasmanian Tigers had been exported instead of being extreminated they would never have become extinct.

Spoken like a true Tasmanian!



Hix

(No offence meant to any Tassie Zoochatters!)

 

[Coquinguy]

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?