female indian rhino in australia! » Western Plains Zoo

28-09-2006

Probably because there isn't really enough holding area in this region for sustainable breeding groups of three rhino species. In reality metropolitan zoos aren't going to be able to hold much more than a pair each, and that leaves four or five "open range" type facilities. To maintain viable groups, we'd really need upwards of 20 animals per species, and that means around 60 animals in total.

28-09-2006

ZooPro
If you need 20 animals per species, which sounds fair enough, could not the three open range zoos already in existance in Australia hold that many? If you add in the Australia Zoo, Mareeba and Orana Park, that would be four animals eack. The city zoos and smaller ones such as the National and Mogo could hold indiviuals or pairs, perhaps animals that are not needed for breeding purposes, that could be another eight sor so animals. I would just hate to see yet another species getting off to a promising start, only to gradually disapear because of lack of interest or whatever, aka the Malayan tapir.

Jay

28-09-2006

Mogo is going white rhinos, and has not really room or resources to hold 2 species, mogo is getting whites from oz and nz, 1 from nz and 2 oz.

mareeba would be great, but lets see if the owners to better than previous.

australia zoo will get everything, terri said it will be bigger than ever before, and i have herad whites and more elephants are on the list

as for tapir, i did get of well,taronga and adelaide breed theres, but no 1 else followed suite, even though melb had an exhibit

no room for more rhinos....?
28-09-2006

thats because of the eye problem Zoo_Boy. every malayan in australia is blind - our zoos have stopped any attempts at breeding them since (quite reasonably) they feel they need to resolve the cause first (brazilians meanwhile have run out of unrelated animals - the last pair that are not too closely realted was the pair at dubbo that just recently produced young. threre will be no more unless imports come through).

white rhino have always been on mogo's plans. they seem to be doing an african savannah thing. australia zoo wanted to house sumatrans at one stage, but soon realised ths was not only totally unrealistic, it was also not currently in the best interest of the species. there was talk on the forum of monarto going into holding black rhino. but that seemed unsubstantiated.

what gets me is this - if WPZ can manage hold 3 rhino taxa why can't monarto and werribee as well? whilst space comes into play with the city zoos, its obviously not an issue for the open range zoos. would it be fair to say that on the other zoos part, its not so much for lack of space but lack of interest and reluctance to spend the money on more rhino facilities when they already display one species - which seems to satsify the public just fine?

sure southern white rhinos may be quite easily sourced in large numbers from private reserves in south africa - but the indians and especially the blacks are the much more endangered. indian rhino would be particuarly good at raising funds for asian rhino specific conservation projects also, such as the vitally important breeding centers for sumatrans or expansion of the javan rhino habitat.

i suppose the other side of the coin is this - why on earth did dubbo import two additional species when there was no regional interest? well, if dubbo is willing and has the expertise i suppose they could argue why should they let other zoos lack of interest hold them back? its certainly not as if one can argue that dubbo holds indian and black rhinos at the expense of their obligations to breeding white rhino, or any other species for that matter...

i wonder when australian zoos are going to realise that by constantly citing "lack of space" as an excuse not to spend money on holding more of the same (or in this case similar) species, they are not only compromising their breeding for conservation message, but shooting themselves in the foot also?

28-09-2006

I think that's a little harsh, and somewhat unrealstic Patrick. We probably need a minimum of 60 places for 3 species of rhinos. Also discussed on the forum are the very real need for additional spaces for giraffes, elephants, zebras, nile hippos, pygmy hippos, tapirs, orang-utans, baboons and cheetah. Add to this the multitude of other species that zoos currently have in their collections in numbers that are too low to maintain effectively, and combine it with the relatively low number of spaces realisticly available in the larger zoos in the region, and you start to see the dilema that the zoos face.

And this list only includes exotic species, and does not cosider the needs of our native fauna which in many cases require intensive captive management, often for coordinated release programs.

Lack of sufficient numbers of spaces in this region is a real problem and is not just a matter of penny pinching.

If we had enough numbers (and therefore spaces) of many of the smaller exotic species that we have lost from the region over the past 10-20 years, we might not have lost so many of them.

I'll get off my soap box now!

28-09-2006

hey zoopro,

when we talk of lack of space - is it that the zoos actually don't have the room to build any new enclosures on any of their properties, or is it that they don't have the money to build any new enclosures?

in regards to city zoos i can fully understand how the former might actually pose a problem - often developing a new exhibit takes years of pre-shuffling and or downsizing of the collection to make the room.

but has dubbo, monarto and werribee actually already allocated all of their available land to future developments?

is there absolutely no space whatsoever for facilities for any additional species that are as yet not allocated a space of land?

a point i bring up frequently here on the forum is that, with things the way they are (and i assume we all aknowledge there is a bit of a crisis going on at the present in regards to maintaining populations) australia's zoo don't really have a choice but to make more space. short of another dozen or so really well funded zoos popping up in australia over the next decade, our few major zoos will have to start to think about the reality of distributing these target sizes amongst themselves.

short of my views being unrealistic, the scenario i put forward seems to be about the only one i can see as being practical. i don't deny that lack of "enclosure space" is an issue, but i want to know why zoos haven't addressed this by creating more.

of course another way to create space for larger populations is to reduce the amount of species being held, a process that is in place with numerous species being listed as intentional "phase-outs" (and a whole bunch more unintentional ones!!!). so why, when we are trying to downsize, are we allowing zoos like dubbo to import new species? firstly, the program is forever destined to be totally reliant on expensive international co-operation (by expensive i am talking about the need for regular import/exports) and secondly, we don't have enough space to even hold decent population sizes of the species we already have programs for.

my guess is that (and i don't work in the zoo industry so i admit i can get shut down here) the problem lies not with there physically being not enough space. i think the problem is more to do with zoos not wanting to spend the money building more simplistic generic-holding facilities for more members of the same species at their open-range sister properties, when they are struggling to finance multi-million dollar developments to (and rightly so) modernise and secure themselves a future in the 21st century.

by doing this though i argue that they are shooting themselves in the foot. our populations of most species are in collapse and my guess is that in about 5-15 years time you will feel the true impact of this at a trip to the zoo.

naturally, i want our zoos to be able to maintain a good range of species and i want to see our conservation breeding programs flourish, not be held back. personally, i think it was a little ambitious to expand our collection to 3 rhino taxa when ARAZPA was struggling to develop more regional partcipation with a 2nd species (of course i personally love indian rhinos and if i developed the regions collection plan we would probably just have them and 1 african species).

so if questioning why we can claim to have a problem with space whilst two open range zoos in australia remain particuarly underdeveloped is unreasonable - what are we going to do?

how are we going to reach our target population sizes?

are there going to be 180 rhino of 3 different taxa all at dubbo?

or are our zoos resigned to the fact that they will never reach sustainable numbers of these species?

28-09-2006

I have an idea which is probably full of holes but could be worth discussing. If the problem is lack of room at zoos to hold animals why not allow private people to keep animals in trust? They don't have to be part of the breeding group but could be excess animals - the old, extra males, closely related indiviuals etc. The private owners won't 'own' them but rather look after them because they like the idea of having a few rhino or giraffe on their properties. Of course the people would have to be carefully veted, won;t be able to make money from them (ie sell them, hunt them etc as they can in the US) and the zoos would be able to claim the animals back whenever they want. I'm sure that there would be quite a few people who could jump at the chance.

The other thing is that some of the smaller places such as Coffs Harvour, Alma Park and the Rockhampton place could also be 'helped' by some of the larger zoos. Alma admittadly is going to suffer soon because of its closeness to the Australia Zoo but there are several others that could be providing a home for excess indiviuals.

Jay

29-09-2006

your right

tht is a great idea, i beleive the only prob would be regulations, the thing is all exotic zoo aniamls, have to have a fence erected around the holding property, something like 3 meters high with bard wire and stuff, not so much to keep animals in but to keep ppl out, that could be expensive, my boss wanted to, but to go around jsut 16 arcres it would be more than 20 grand, so imagine that on a large propery.

other than things like that, the idea is great. i would as would every1 like to participate.

29-09-2006

Monarto have plenty of land alocated for a new savannah, they want African Elephants (shh i wasnt supposed to say that), and many many more antelope and the Bachelor Giraffe herd will be out there aswell, and probably a couple of rhino

29-09-2006

they shoudnt get much opposition either as they will have so many acres to raom, and state of art facilities, and i think if there was an effort to get them, a few other zoos would join in as well, prob dubbo, and even werribee, they said they wanted some a while back when i was sending designs etc to them.

04-10-2006

Hey Patrick. Honestly, I think it's a combination of both: certainly the metropolitan zoos are short of space (and likely sufficient funds as well), and in the case of the open range zoos, they are always the poorer sisters of the city zoos, with generally, far less funds applied to them. There are of course one or two exceptions to this - Australia Zoo springs to mind. An institution that has substantial funds behind it, and considerable space, but both of these were gained primarily via methods other than running a zoo. The TV shows and documentaries have made a substantial amount of money for the Irwins, and they have poured it right back into the zoo, into the purchase of land, and into conservation. But I don't know of any other major zoos in the region that make profits like Australia Zoo has been able to.

Of course they haven't, otherwise, they would appear as cramped places. But I'm sure they have allocated their land to future development, albeit in the short term, 5 years on longer term. Most of the bigger zoos have plans reaching 5 and 10 years ahead, and as you've pointed out, these plans depend on two major things: space and funds. Space can be made available for priority species, but having the funds to develop those spaces into suitable facilities, particularly if we are talking about the larger mammal species, so common in the open range zoos, is not always a simple thing.

We know that it's highly unlikely that another dozen, or for that matter, another 2-3 really well-funded zoos will appear in the region. So the zoos have to work together to manage the species they do have, in the regional space that is available. And I couldn't agree more - few major zoos will have to start to think about the reality of distributing these target sizes amongst themselves. The paper "Going, going, gone. A zoo without exotic animals?" quoted on this site by Barlow and Hibbard has clearly identified this, and has certainly made zoos wake up and realise that they need to think more seriously about how they manage the resources they have available to them, whether it be land or money.

A number of the metropolitan zoos have done exactly that over the years - Melbourne created Werribee; Sydney created Western Plains; and Adelaide created Monarto, but all of these large facilities require resources to run them, and unfortunately, the "parent" institutions don't seem to be able to raise significant amounts of money. Government loans and/or subsidies have been made available in some cases, but obviously, loans need to be repaid, or at least matched by gate takings, and this is no simple feat.

Ah!! Indeed, that is a very good question, and one we should be asking the zoos who import these new species. As far as I know, there is no one who "allows" (or for that matter, forbids) the zoos from importing new species - they apply for the appropriate import permits, the merits of each import are reviewed by the permitting authorities, and if sufficient justification is giving by the zoo applying for the permits, the permits are issued. Many people have asked themselves that same question, especially in light of the Barlow and Hibbard paper - why are we allowing zoos like Western Plains to import new species? In the name of conservation? Unlikely. To raise more revenue? Also highly unlikely.

Sadly, I think you are very right. As do many within the zoo industry, and it is only through research and publication of papers such as "Going, going, gone. A zoo without exotic animals?", from within the zoo industry that hopefully, zoos will wake up to the fact that they need to much better manage their resources - land, money and the animals - if they are to survive. Too many times, zoos in the region act with very narrow-minded and short-term goals in mind.

Clearly not. I would suggest that we would be battling to find sufficient spaces within the region's zoos to maintain 20 individuals of two of the three species of rhino, so you do indeed wonder why Western Plains is importing yet another, non-recommended species into the region.

In my opinion, we are unlikely to ever reach sustainable numbers of many of our species, if the zoos don't wake up to themselves, and manage what they have in a far more professional and scientific manner. We can only live in hope that they realise this before it is too late.

04-10-2006

thanks for the detailed reply zoopro.

after reading your response i an't help but think that maybe you agree with me?

my original post was this....

i wonder when australian zoos are going to realise that by constantly citing "lack of space" as an excuse not to spend money on holding more of the same (or in this case similar) species, they are not only compromising their breeding for conservation message, but shooting themselves in the foot also?

by that i simply meant that since we agree that holding larger numbers of individual species is instrumental in zoos creating more sustainable populations, and since space at the city zoos is severly restricted, expanding the collections at our existing open range zoos is really the only option to improve the situation.

and i'm not simply talking about the sorts of megafauna we usually see at these types of institution. i'm talking the reguar array of small and meduim sized mammals we see in our regions collective collection.

so whilst allocating the majority of funds to completely re-developing the exhibits at the city zoos is appealing. by not passing some of those funds to create simple holding facilities (note that have never suggested creating "exhibits" - i'm talking off public display, simple but effective enclosures) where they have the space to do so, the zoos are only creating a bigger problem for themselves further down the track.

like healesville sanctuary now hosts the australian wildlife hospital, i imagine a "centre for the conservation of endangered species" at werribee could end up being a useful conservation education tool as well and a great place for behind the scenes tours.

certainly for the time being there are a plethora of savannah species at our city zoos that are not represented at zoos like werribee and it would be benificial to the breeding program if we saw additional groups become established there, since they can be on display and still not mess with the exclusive "grassland" theme..

05-10-2006

Yep, I was agreeing with you, but in a way, attempting to defend some (and only some) of the decisions the zoos make. But mostly, I couldn't agree more!

05-10-2006

why thankyou.

i wasn't tryin to bag em' out so much as for their management so far (and i suppose i am really only talking about zoosvictoria and zoosouthaustralia), but instead question when they are going to realise that this is about the only parctical option to acheiving their goals of more sustainable populations in our region and put some funds into it.

we all wanna see our zoos overcome the population management issues that are facing them at the moment - and i imagine they will eventually.

31-10-2006

if the artiodactyl tag is in collapse then maybe the indian rhino, (the importation of which i disagreed with anyway because of the above points) should become a regional priority to replace the other species our openrange zoos are losing.
but i would say that the black rhinoceros program should be given first priority.
the whole idea does throw open an interesting question. for those familiar with western plains zoo, what will it actually look like in ten, twenty years if the hoofed stock collapse?
will the zoo persevere with current stocks of species, or bite the bullet, phase out non-viables and concentrate on 'potentials'.
i think wpz should import some african elephants from africa. the current stock are old and cant breed and they arent going to be around forever. i also think brazillian tapir should be concentrated on.
a future exotic speces list for wpz might read...
hybrid giraffes
plains zebra
scimitar oryx
addax
camel
spotted deer
fallow deer
water buffalo
blackbuck
american bison
wild horse
white rhinoceros
*brazillian tapir
*african elephant
*black rhino
*indian rhino
if bans on importing any of the artiodactyl species were lifted it would be great to see river hippo, bongo, barbary sheep and eland secured.
banteng and sambar could be secured if feral animals were bought in to the breeding program.
if you look at the current layout of dubbo, only a few sections will look 'empty'. principally the asian hoofstock areas and south american areas. but by combining the asian enclosures this area could still represent a viable zone.
only the south american section would look really empty. but if brazillian tapir were bought up to viable and a primate species introduced then this area could also represent a good display, albeit less diverse then the current one.
*one more interesting point. river hippos arent managed internationally but regionally (north america/europe) because they face quarantine restrictions, apparently.