APPLICATION FORM CONTAINMENT
Application for containment approval for new organisms under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996
Send by post to: Environmental Protection Authority, Private Bag 63002, Wellington 6140 OR email to: [email protected]
Application number
APP201517
Applicant
Zoo and Aquarium Association
Key contact
Simon Eyre
www.epa.govt.nz 2
Application for containment approval for new organisms
Important
This application form should be used if you intend to import, develop or field test any new organism (including genetically modified organisms (GMOs)) in containment. These terms are defined in the HSNO Act. The HSNO Act can be downloaded from: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1996/0030/latest/DLM381222.html. If your application is for a project approval of low-risk genetic modification, use application form EPA0062. The HSNO (Low Risk Genetic Modification) Regulations can be downloaded from: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/regulation/public/2003/0152/latest/DLM195215.html. Applications to field test GMOs will be publicly notified. The other application types may or may not be publicly notified. This application form will be made publicly available so any confidential information must be collated in a separate labelled appendix. The fee for this application can be found on our website at www.epa.govt.nz. If you need help to complete this form, please look at our website (www.epa.govt.nz) or email us at [email protected]. This form was approved on 1 May 2012.
May 2012 EPA0162 3
Application for containment approval for new organisms
1. What type of containment activity are you applying for?
Tick appropriate option: Application type Type of new organism
GM Import into containment Non-GM
Develop in containment i.e. regeneration, fermentation or GM genetic modification Non-GM
GM Field test in containment Non-GM
2. Brief application description
Provide a short description (approximately 30 words) of what you are applying to do.
The reassessment (under the HSNO Act) of terrestrial zoo animals and aquatic mammalian zoo animals
3. Summary of application
Provide a plain English, non-technical description of what you are applying to do and why you want to do it.
In May 2011 an application by ERMA (application number ERMA200651) was approved by the Authority to reassess all Zoo animals that were approved, or deemed approved, during the transitional period when the HSNO Act came into force. This application covers the terrestrial zoo animals and aquatic mammalian zoo animals that are approved or deemed approved under the HSNO Act for being held in zoological gardens.
4. Describe the background and aims of your application
This section is intended to put the new organism(s) in perspective of the wider activities(s) that they will be used in. You may use more technical language but please make sure that any technical words used are included in a glossary.
The Zoo and Aquarium Association is the peak industry body that represents over 80 member institutions across the Australasian region.
The aim of this application is the reassessment of animals in containment in zoos and aquariums in New Zealand so as to apply consistent controls across all zoo containment species.
All of the species within this application are either held in New Zealand zoological collections, were held in New Zealand during the transitional period for the HSNO Act, or have been subject to a full EPA approval but are not yet held within New Zealand. This application addresses the changes that have occurred in the zoo and aquarium
May 2012 EPA0162 4
Application for containment approval for new organisms industry, resulting in a focus on conservation, education, animal welfare and research rather than purely the display of animals for the leisure pass time of the community. It also seeks to address perceived deficiencies in the current containment standard with regards to the requirements for containing these organisms through a set of proposed controls. Previously there have been instances which have led to serious injuries, deaths, and the closure of containment facilities that could have been attributed to lack husbandry skills, forward planning, business continuity and financial sustainability. The proposed controls would enable MPI and EPA, as well as the zoo and aquarium industry, to have a level of assurance around all these potential issues, and reduce the likelihood of such an incident occurring. The Zoo Aquarium Association supports all approvals being considered with these factors in mind to ensure better administration, human health and safety, animal welfare and support for the standards required for a good zoo or aquarium. The Zoo Aquarium Association has a rigorous Accreditation programme for members but non members are not part of this. The Accreditation programme addresses many of the issues above which have led to closure of facilities or other less than optimal scenarios.
We propose a set of controls in this document that address the overlaps between containment, animal welfare, health and safety, the current zoo and aquarium standards, and biosecurity. We also propose controls around resourcing and planning, in particular regarding the potential closure of facilities, to recognise that the animals contained in zoos and aquariums are living organisms and their life may extend beyond the life of the containment facility.
5. Information about the new organism(s)
• For non-GMOs: provide a taxonomic description of the new organism(s). • For GMOs: provide a taxonomic description of the host organism(s) and describe the genetic modification (i.e. the experimental procedures and biological material to be used in the genetic modification and where the expression of foreign nucleic acid may occur). • Describe the biology and main features of the organism including if it has inseparable organisms. • Describe if the organism has affinities (e.g. close taxonomic relationships) with other organisms in New Zealand. • Could the organism form an undesirable self-sustaining population? If not, why not? • How easily could the new organism be recovered or eradicated if it established an undesirable self-sustaining population?
Organism in the application: See appendix one for full list of the species being reassessed.
Change in Giraffe Taxonomy New taxonomic information has been published which changes Giraffa camelopardalis from a single species with a number of subspecies to eight species (Appendix 3).
Giraffa camelopardalis → Giraffa angolensis (Angolan giraffe) Giraffa antiquorum (Kordofan giraffe) Giraffa camelopardalis (Nubian or Rothschild's giraffe) Giraffa giraffa (Cape giraffe) Giraffa peralta (West African giraffe) Giraffa reticulata (reticulated giraffe)
May 2012 EPA0162 5
Application for containment approval for new organisms
Giraffa thornicrofti (Luangwa giraffe) Giraffa tippelskirchi (Masai giraffe)
Until recently there was only a single species recognised for Giraffe which was Giraffa camelopardalis. With the new taxonomic information that splits them into separate species this does not change the nature of the approved species, as until recently they have all been seen as the same species. The Giraffes in New Zealand are either recorded at species level only (Giraffa camelopardalis) or as Rothschilds Giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis rothschildii). As such it is not possible to know which of the separate species, as listed by Groves and Grubb, have ever been present in New Zealand. However given that all Giraffe have been managed as a single species and none pose any greater risk than any other we would like to request that the approval be amended to that of genus level, Giraffa, which would then allow any of the species be kept in New Zealand zoos.
The organism that is the subject of this application is also the subject of: a. an innovative medicine application as defined in section 23A of the Medicines Act 1981. No b. an innovative agricultural compound application as defined in Part 6 of the Agricultural Compounds and Veterinary Medicines Act 1997. No
6. For field tests: The nature and method of the field test
Describe the nature and method of the field test and the experimental procedures to be used.
N/A
7. Proposed containment of the new organism(s) (physical and operational)
Describe how you propose to contain the new organism(s) after taking into account its ability to escape from containment (i.e. the possible pathways for escape).
All of the species in this application are held in containment facilities approved under the MAF Biosecurity New Zealand Standard 154.03.04 Containment Facilities for Zoo Animals. Those organisms with EPA approval are being held in accordance with a range of EPA/ERMA imposed controls that govern their containment in conjunction with this standard.
We propose a selection of additional controls be imposed on these organisms. These controls are outlined in Appendix Two of this application.
These additional controls are proposed with the knowledge that the EPA is working towards a revised containment standard for zoological garden containment facilities.
May 2012 EPA0162 6
Application for containment approval for new organisms
8. Detail of Māori engagement (if any)
Discuss any engagement or consultation with Māori undertaken and summarise the outcomes.
Advice from EPA KKT Maori Policy and Operations was to the effect that no engagement was required.
9. Identification and assessment of beneficial (positive) and adverse effects of the new organism(s)
Adverse effects include risks and costs. Beneficial or positive effects are benefits. • Identification involves describing the potential effects that you are aware of (what might happen and how it might happen). • Assessment involves considering the magnitude of the effect and the likelihood or probability of the effect being realised.
Consider the adverse or positive effects in the context of this application on the environment (e.g. could the organism cause any significant displacement of any native species within its natural habitat, cause any significant deterioration of natural habitats or cause significant adverse effect to New Zealand’s inherent genetic diversity, or is the organism likely to cause disease, be parasitic, or become a vector for animal or plant disease?), human health and safety, the relationship of Māori to the environment, the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, society and the community, the market economy and New Zealand’s international obligations.
Adverse effects on the environment All the organisms in this application are or will be maintained in containment facilities. Provided that containment is maintained, these organisms will not cause any adverse effects on the environment.
In the event of escape most zoo animals are unlikely to have any environmental impact due to the contingency plans in place within any zoological collection. All zoo containment facilities are required to have contingency plans which set out how a containment facility would locate/recapture/destroy the animal in the event of an escape (within or outside of the facility) Larger animals are more easily located. Those animals that require specialised dietary or environmental conditions are unlikely to survive for long without specialist care. However there are some species that could have an environmental effect if they were to breach containment, and survive/establish populations outside of the zoo undetected. The likelihood of this is low, due to zoo populations being relatively small, and the organisms requiring specialised diets and environments that may not be available or common in New Zealand.
We have identified three species that have the potential to cause localised impacts, in the event that they escaped/were release and established in the environment. The potential risks posed by those animals are outlined below:
Florida Soft Shell Turtle – highly carnivorous and thrive in deep fresh water. This species is aquatic and only comes onto land to lay eggs. As such a feral population will be harder to detect than some other fresh water turtle species. It is unlikely they could spread out of a single river system given the low numbers that are in New Zealand, for example only one male is currently held by any ZAA member institution, and that a gravid female would have to escape / be liberated for there to be a sustaining population in the wild. This species would have the ability to have an impact of localised fish, crustacean, duck and invertebrate species.
Oriental Short (small) Clawed Otter – localised predation on fish. The one longer term , 24 days, escape of a Short Clawed otter resulted in an approximate 1/3 loss of body condition of the otter by the time she was recaptured compared to her last weight recorded before she escaped. This is unlikely to have a long term effect as she would not have been able to survive for much longer due to the large loss of weight during the time she was at liberty.
May 2012 EPA0162 7
Application for containment approval for new organisms
African Clawed Frog – spread of chytrid fungus. One of the routes for chitrid fungus to be spread worldwide is believed to be by research colonies of African Clawed frogs, as this species is where the oldest records of chytrid fungus infections can be found. As chytrid fungus is already present in New Zealand, and only one native frog species is at all aquatic (Hochstetters Frog Leiopelma hochstetteri) the likelihood of this being more than a localised issue is highly unlikely.
Potential Risks to human health and safety: The risks posed to humans by the animals in this application are limited by the containment of these organisms in zoos. While zoos are generally open to visitors, barriers and other methods are in place to prevent direct physical contact between the visitor and the animals, with the exception of ‘encounters’ or contact animals which are managed with the containment of the organism, and the safety of the zoo visitors in mind. The main risk to humans from these animals is to the zoo keepers and other individuals involved in the care of the organisms. Below we have grouped the organisms based on the level of danger they pose to humans into the following categories: • potentially dangerous (have the potential to cause serious injury or death) • potentially harmful (could bite, scratch, or cause wounds that would require medical attention) • unlikely to cause harm (either incapable of causing physical harm, or due to general species demeanour are unlikely to cause injury unless provoked)
Note: Species in red are not known to be in NZ on 29th November 2012.
Potentially dangerous Potentially harmful Unlikely to cause harm African Forest Elephant All species of Bovidae African Clawed Frog African Lion Asian Golden Cat Australian Pelican – Note a self introduced wild population exists of this species in New Zealand African Savannah Elephant Black and White Colobus Beetle African Wild Dog Black Footed Cat Blue Poison Dart Frog American Alligator Black Handed/Central American Brazilian Agouti Spider Monkey Asiatic Elephant Black Lemur Brazilian Black Tarantula Baboon Bobcat Brazilian Pink Tarantula Black Rhinoceros Bolivian Squirrel Monkey Capybara Bonnet Macaque Brolga / Australian Crane Chaco Tortoise Bornean Orang-utan Brown Capuchin Children’s Stick Insect Brown Bear Bush Dog Chilean Rose Tarantula Chimpanzee Californian Sea Lion Costa Rican Zebra Tarantula Clouded Leopard Canis species Cotton Top Tamarin Collared Peccary Cape Porcupine Desert Scorpion Crab Eating Macaque Caracal Desert Tortoise Giant Panda Cheetah Dyeing Poison Frog Gorilla Common Squirrel Monkey Elephant Beetle Hippopotamus Common Squirrel Monkey Emperor Tamarin Leopard Common Wombat Feather-tailed Glider Malayan Sun Bear Crested Porcupine Fiji Banded Iguana Mandrill Dromedary Camel (Arabian camel) Fiji Crested Iguana Pig Tailed Macaque Fishing Cat Florida Soft Shell Turtle Puma Francois Leaf-Monkey Galapagos Tortoise Pygmy Hippopotamus Giraffe Giant African Millipede Rhesus Macaque King Baboon Tarantula Giant Prickly Stick Insect Salt Water / Estuarine Crocodile Komodo Dragon Giant Rainforest Mantis Snow Leopard Lace Monitor Glossy Starling Spotted Hyena Leopard Cat Golden Lion Tamarin Sumatran Orang-utan Long Haired Spider Monkey Golden Poison Frog Tiger Maned Wolf Goliath Bird-eating Spider White Rhinoceros Muller's Bornean/Grey Gibbon Goliath Stick Insect Oriental Short (small) Clawed Otter Gould’s Monitor
May 2012 EPA0162 8
Application for containment approval for new organisms
Potentially dangerous Potentially harmful Unlikely to cause harm Ring Tailed Lemur Great Grey Kangaroo Ruffed Lemur Greater Flamingo Serval Greater Rhea Siamang Green and Black Poison Frog Tasmanian Devil Green Iguana Vervet Monkey Grey Headed Flying Fox White Cheeked Gibbon Hibiscus Harlequin Bug White-handed Lar Gibbon House Gecko Zebra Jacksons Chameleon Koala Lesser Chevrotain Little Red Flying Fox Long Nosed Potoroo Madagascar Giant Day Gecko Meerkat Mexican Red-kneed Tarantula Moholi Bush Baby Naked Mole Rat Patagonian Mara/Cavy Peruvian Blonde Tarantula Peruvian Orange Stripe Tarantula Peruvian Pink Toe Tarantula Plumed Basilisk Pygmy Marmoset Red Backed Poison Frog Red Kangaroo Red Panda Red-footed Tortoise Rio Grande Gold Tarantula Sand Cat Scheltopusik/Glass Lizard Senegal Bush Baby Short Beaked Echidna South American Tapir Splash Backed Poison Frog Star Tortoise Steely Blue-leg Tarantula Texas Tortoise White's Tree Frog Yellow-banded Poison Frog Yellow-footed Tortoise
Benefits of having these organisms in zoos in New Zealand Viable populations of wildlife in human care can only be sustained in the long term through complex conservation breeding programmes requiring international trade in exotic species held by zoos. By helping to ensure the genetic and demographic health of wildlife populations in zoos it assists: • The New Zealand Government meet international and domestic commitments; • New Zealanders, and in particular, New Zealand school children, gain a greater understanding of biodiversity and fauna; and • The conservation of biodiversity
May 2012 EPA0162 9
Application for containment approval for new organisms
1. Assisting the New Zealand Government meet international treaty commitments International treaties such as the Convention on Biodiversity (CBD) and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) explicitly recognise the conservation value of wildlife populations managed by zoos. The New Zealand government is a signatory to all key treaties of relevance to biodiversity conservation. 2. Assisting the New Zealand Government achieve goals outlined in the NZ Biodiversity Strategy The New Zealand Biodiversity strategy also supports trade in genetic material for conservation purposes and the work zoos do to enhance New Zealanders’ understanding of biodiversity Objective 4.2: Maintain access by New Zealanders to genetic material from overseas, and participate in international frameworks relating to access to genetic resources and related knowledge and technology. Objective 4.5: Assist with international efforts to conserve threatened introduced plants and animals in New Zealand. Objective 8.1: Enhance and broaden individual and community understanding about biodiversity 3. Assisting the Conservation of Biodiversity The import of the exotic species covered in this application will aid wildlife conservation in the following ways: a) Through their inclusion in the Population Management Programs administered by the ASMP (Australasian Species Management Program). These programmes aim to maintain high levels of genetic diversity, develop and document husbandry expertise and establish an insurance populations to guard against catastrophic declines of the species in the wild. b) By illustrating global biodiversity to the 1.8 million people that visit NZ zoos each year. (Source: ARAZPA survey 2006). c) By providing revenue which supports the direct financial contributions that New Zealand zoos provide to conservation projects overseas (such as Cheetah Outreach in South Africa). By attracting visitors to zoos exotic species also contribute to the conservation of New Zealand native species in two ways. Firstly by attracting a stream of visitors that once at the zoo are exposed to important conservation advocacy messages about native species and by providing financial resources that zoos spend on zoo (ex-situ) or field-based (in-situ) conservation projects (such as Operation Nest Egg (for kiwi conservation)). Zoos also provide invaluable education regarding sustainability and the changes everybody can achieve at home or at school. The Convention on Biological Diversity states that “the conservation of biological diversity is a common concern of humankind” and all New Zealanders, indeed all citizens of the world, benefit from the conservation of biological diversity. 4. Zoos as valuable cultural resources The first New Zealand zoo opened over 100 years ago in Wellington. Since that time large zoos, holding a range of exotic species, have also been established in Auckland, Hamilton and Christchurch. New Zealand zoos have followed, and often led, international trends which have seen a shift in focus from visitor entertainment to visitor learning and wildlife conservation. New Zealand zoos are currently visited by over 1.8 million people each year and growing. Their importance as part of the New Zealand cultural landscape is shown by their longevity, popularity and the continued significant funding provided to zoos by local authorities, donations and Ministry of Education contracts. More than 134,000 students visit NZ zoos to take part in formal education programmes.
New Zealand zoos can only continue as cultural resources if they can display a range of exotic and native species. Visitors to New Zealand zoos will clearly benefit from their continued existence. 5. Healthy New Zealanders and environment The average visitor spends between 2 and 4 hours at a zoo. Most of this time is spent exercising, mainly by walking, and out in the fresh air. This would equate, when multiplied out by the number of visitors, to between 3.2 and 6.4 million hours of exercise. In addition to this a large part of zoo education policies are the environment and sustainability. Zoo education is aimed at all visitors and not restricted to solely to school groups. Education is carried out in many ways, but one of them is by showing rather than just telling, examples of this are rain water
May 2012 EPA0162 10
Application for containment approval for new organisms collection systems and the use of solar power that the community can see in use. In this way zoos help to educate visitors in ways they can help their environment themselves and so that we can all contribute to improving our environment.
10. For developments of GMOs that take place outdoors and field tests of GMOs: Alternative methods and potential effects from the transfer of genetic elements
• Discuss if there are alternative methods of achieving the research objective. • Discuss whether there could be effects resulting from the transfer of genetic elements to other organisms in or around the site of the development or field test.
N/A
11. For imports of GMOs: Could your organism(s) undergo rapid assessment (s42B of the HSNO Act)?
Discuss whether the GMO(s) to be imported fulfil the following criteria: • The host organism(s) are Category 1 or 2 host organisms as per the HSNO (Low Risk Genetic Modification) Regulations. • The genetic modifications are Category A or B modifications as per the HSNO (Low Risk Genetic Modification) Regulations and the modifications are not listed in the Schedule of these Regulations. • The minimum containment of the GMO(s) will be as per the HSNO (Low Risk Genetic Modification) Regulations (PC1 or PC2 as per AS/NZS2243.3:2002).
N/A
12. Other information
Add here any further information you wish to include in this application including if there are any ethical considerations that you are aware of in relation to your application.
13. Appendices(s) and referenced material (if any) and glossary (if applicable)
Appendix one: list of organisms
Appendix two: proposed additional controls
References
Groves, C., and P. Grubb. 2011. Ungulate Taxonomy. The John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore. Pages 64 - 70
May 2012 EPA0162 11
Application for containment approval for new organisms
14. Signature of applicant or person authorised to sign on behalf of applicant
I request the Authority to waive any legislative information requirements (i.e. concerning the information that shall be supplied in my application) that my application does not meet (tick if applicable).
I have completed this application to the best of my ability and, as far as I am aware, the information I have provided in this application form is correct.
15/2/13
Signature Date
May 2012 EPA0162 12
Application for containment approval for new organisms
Appendix One: Species covered in this application Species Common name Approval code Acinonyx jubatus (Schreber, 1775) Cheetah PRE008902 Acrobates pygmaeus Shaw, 1793 Feather-tailed Glider NOC002541 Ailuropoda melanoleuca (David, 1869) Giant Panda NOC100015 Ailurus fulgens (F.G. Cuvier, 1825) Red Panda PRE008903 NOC100019 All animals of the genus Canis (excluding C. Canis NOC002510 familiaris) All species of Bovidae, excluding the subfamily antelope, cattle, gazelles, NOC002511 Caprinae (chamois, goats, sheep, serows and Pronghorn Antelope NOC100023 relatives) and genera Bos (oxen and true cattle), Bubalus (water buffalo), and Syncerus (African buffalo) Alligator mississippiensis (Daudin, 1801) American Alligator PRE009038 Antidorcas marsupialis (Zimmerman, 1780) Springbok PRE008905 (now see NOC002511) NOC002494 (now see NOC100023) Antilope cervicapra (Linnaeus, 1758) Blackbuck PRE008907 (now see NOC002511) NOC002495 (now see NOC100023) Aonyx cinerea (Illiger, 1815) (syn. Amblonyx Oriental Short (Small) Clawed Otter PRE008904 cinereus (Illiger, 1815), Aonyx cinereus (Illiger, PRE008896 1815), Aonyx cineria Apalone ferox Florida Soft Shell Turtle PRE100002 Aphonopelma moderatum (Chamberlin & Ivie, Rio Grande Gold Tarantula PRE001042 1939) Aphonopelma seemanni (F.O.P.- Cambridge, Costa Rica Zebra Tarantula PRE001043 1897) Archispirostreptus gigas (Peters, 1855) Giant African Millipede NOC100080 Ateles belzebuth Long Haired Spider Monkey PRE008908 Ateles geoffroyi Spider Monkey PRE008911 Avicularia urticans (Linnaeus, 1758) Peruvian Pink Toe Tarantula PRE001044 Basiliscus plumifrons (Cope, 1876) Plumed Basilisk NOC100117 Boselaphus tragocamelus (Pallas, 1766) Nilgai PRE008913 (now see NOC002511) NOC002496 (now see NOC100023) Brachylophus fasciatus Fiji Island Banded Iguana PRE100003 Brachylophus vitiensis Fiji Island Crested Iguana NOC002116 Brachypelma smithii (Cambridge, 1897) Mexican Red Knee Tarantula PRE001045 Callithrix pygmaea (Spix 1823) (syn. Cebuella Pygmy Marmoset NOC002393 pygmaea) Camelus dromedarius Dromedary Camel (Arabian camel) PRE008914 Canis latrans Coyote PRE008915 (now see NOC002510) Caracal caracal Schreber, 1776 (syn. Felis Caracal NOC002542 caracal) Catopuma temminckii (syn. Pardofelis Asian Golden Cat PRE008916 temminckii, Felis temmincki) Cebus apella Brown Capuchin Monkey PRE008918 Ceratotherium simum (Burchell, 1817) White Rhinoceros PRE008919 NOC002497
May 2012 EPA0162 13
Application for containment approval for new organisms
Species Common name Approval code Cercopithecus aethiops Vervet Monkey PRE008920 Chamaeleo jacksonii Jacksons Chameleon PRE100004 Chrysocyon brachyurus Illiger 1815 Maned Wolf NOC002481 Citharischius crawshayi (Pocock, 1900) King Baboon Tarantula PRE001046 Colobus guereza Rüppell, 1835 Black and White Colobus NOC002543 Crocodylus porosus (Schneider, 1801) Saltwater/Estuarine Crocodile PRE009039 Crocuta crocuta Erxleben, 1777 Spotted Hyena NOC002544 Dama ruficollis Addra Gazelle PRE008921 (now see NOC002511) Dasyprocta aguti (synonym = Dasyprocta Brazilian (Golden) Agouti PRE008922 leporina) Dendrobates auratus (Girard, 1855) Green and Black Poison Frog NOC100094 Dendrobates azureus Hoogmoed, 1969 Blue Poison Dart Frog NOC100093 Dendrobates galactonotus (Steindachner, Splash Backed Poison Frog NOC100092 1864) Dendrobates leucomelas (Steindachner, 1864) Yellow-Banded Poison Frog NOC100096 Dendrobates reticulatus (Ranitomeya Red Backed Poison Frog NOC100097 reticulatus Boulenger 1884) Dendrobates tinctorius (Schneider, 1799) Dyeing Dart Frog NOC100098 Diceros bicornis Linnaeus, 1758 Black Rhinoceros NOC002545 Dolichotis patagonum (Zimmermann, 1780) Patagonian Mara/Cavy PRE008923 Elephas maximus Asiatic Elephant PRE008924 Equus burchellii (Gray, 1824) Zebra PRE008927 NOC002498 Eurycnema goliath (Gray, 1834) Goliath Stick Insect NOC100081 Extatosoma tiaratum (Macleay, 1826) Giant Prickly Stick Insect NOC100082 Felis margarita Loche, 1858 Sand Cat NOC002546 Felis nigripes Burchell, 1824 Black Footed Cat NOC002547 Galago moholi A. Smith, 1836 Moholi Bush Baby NOC002548 Galago senegalensis É. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, Sengal Bush Baby NOC002549 1796 Gekko monarchus House Gecko PRE100007 Gehyra australis House Gecko PRE100008 Geochelone carbonaria Red-footed Tortoise PRE100009 Geochelone chilensis Chaco Tortoise PRE100010 Geochelone denticulata Yellow-footed Tortoise PRE100011 Geochelone elegans Star Tortoise PRE100012 Geochelone nigra Galapagos Tortoise PRE100013 Giraffa camelopardalis (Linnaeus, 1758) Giraffe PRE008929 NOC002484 Gopherus agassizii Desert Tortoise PRE100014 Gopherus berlandieri Texas Tortoise PRE100015 Gorilla gorilla (Savage and Wyman, 1847) Gorilla NOC002550 Grammostola pulchra (Mello-Leitao, 1921) Brazilian Black Tarantula PRE001048 Grammostola rosea Walckenaer, 1837) Chilean Rose Hair Tarantula PRE001047 Grus rubicunda Australian Crane PRE100016 Helarctos malayanus Malayan Sun Bear PRE008931 Heterocephalus glaber Rüppell, 1842 Naked Mole Rat NOC100115 Hexaprotodon liberiensis Morton, 1849 Pygmy Hippo NOC002551 Hierodula majuscule Giant Rainforest Mantis NOC100083 Hippopotamus amphibius Hippopotamus PRE008932 Hippotragus niger (Harris 1838) Sable Antelope PRE008933 (now see NOC002511) NOC002499 (now see NOC100023)
May 2012 EPA0162 14
Application for containment approval for new organisms
Species Common name Approval code Hydrochaeris hydrochaeris (Linnaeus, 1766) Capybara PRE001041 Hylobates lar White Handed Lar Gibbons PRE008934 Hylobates leucogenys (syn. Nomascus White Cheeked Gibbon PRE008935 leucogenys) Hylobates muelleri Muller's Borean/Grey Gibbon PRE008936 Hylobates syndactylus Saimang Gibbon PRE008937 Hystrix africaeaustralis Peters 1852 Cape Porcupine PRE001034 Hystrix cristata Linnaeus, 1758 Crested Porcupine PRE008938 Iguana iguana (Linnaeus, 1758) Green Iguana (Family Iguanidae) PRE008900 Kobus ellipsiprymnus (Ogilby, 1833) Waterbuck PRE008939 (now see NOC002511) NOC002500 (now see NOC100023) Lamprotornis superbus (Rueppell, 1845) Superb (Glossy) Starling NOC002380 Lasiodorides polycuspulatus (Schmidt & Peruvian Blonde Tarantula PRE001049 Bischoff, 1997) Lasiodorides striatus (Schmidt & Antonelli, Peruvian Orange Stripe Tarantula PRE001050 1996) Lasiorhinus latifrons (Owen, 1845) Southern Hairy Nosed Wombat NOC002552 Lemur catta Ring Tailed Lemur PRE008940 NOC100016 Lemur macao Black Lemur PRE008941 Leontopithecus rosalia Golden Lion Tamarin PRE008942 Leopardus pardalis Linnaeus, 1758 (syn. Felis Ocelot NOC002553 pardalis) Leopardus wiedii Schinz, 1821 (syn. Felis Margay NOC002554 wiedii) Leptailurus serval (Schreber, 1776) (syn. Felis Serval PRE008943 serval Schreber, 1776) PRE008928 Liocheles waigiensis Rainforest Scorpion NOC100084 Litoria caerulea (White, 1790) White's Tree Frog PRE009037 Loxodonta africana African Savannah Elephant PRE100033 Loxodonta cyclotis African Forest Elephant PRE100034 Lycaon pictus African Wild Dog PRE008944 Lynx rufus (Schreber, 1777) (syn. Felis rufus) Bobcat PRE008945 Macaca irus Crab Eating Macaque PRE008946 Macaca mulatta Rhesus Macaque PRE008947 Macaca nemestrina Pig Tailed Macaque PRE008948 Macaca radiata Bonnet Macaque PRE008949 Macropanesthia rhinoceros Saussure, 1895 Giant Burrowing NOC100085 Cockroach/Rhinoceros Cockroach Macropus fuliginosus Desmarest, 1871 Western Grey Kangaroo NOC002555 Macropus giganteus Shaw 1790 Great Grey Kangaroo PRE100018 Macropus rufus (Desmarest 1822) Red Kangaroo PRE100019 Mandrillus sphinx Linnaeus, 1758 Mandrill NOC002556 Megacrania batesii (Kirby, 1896) Peppermint Stick Insect NOC100086 Neofelis nebulosa Griffith, 1821 Clouded Leopard NOC002557 Ophisaurus apodus (Syn. Pseudopus apodus) Scheltopusik/Glass Lizard PRE100021 Oryx dammah (Cretzschmar, 1826) Scimitar Horned Oryx PRE008950 (now see NOC002511) NOC002501 (now see NOC100023) Oryx gazella Gemsbok/Gemsbuck/Oryx PRE008951 (now see NOC002511) Otolemur crassicaudatus É. Geoffroy Saint- Brown Greater Galago/ Greater NOC002558
May 2012 EPA0162 15
Application for containment approval for new organisms
Species Common name Approval code Hilaire, 1812 Bush Baby Otolemur garnettii Ogilby, 1838 Northern Greater Galago/ Greater NOC002559 Bush Baby Pamphobetus antinous (Pocock, 1923) Steely Blue-leg Bird-eating Spider PRE001051 Pamphobetus platytomma (Mello-Leitao, 1923) Brazilian Pink Tarantula PRE001052 Pan troglodytes Chimpanzee PRE008952 Panthera leo African Lion PRE008953 Panthera pardus Leopard PRE008955 NOC002383 Panthera tigris Tiger PRE008957 Papio hamadryas Baboon PRE008958 Pecari tajacu (syn. Tayassu tajacu) Collared Peccary PRE008960 Pelecanus conspicillatus Australian Pelican PRE100023 Phalacrognathus muelleri MacLeay, 1885 Beetle NOC100087 Phascolarctos cinereus Goldfuss, 1817 Koala NOC002560 Phelsuma madagascariensis Madagascar Giant Day Gecko PRE009032 Phoenicopterus roseus (Phoenicopterus ruber Greater Flamingo PRE100025 roseus (Pallas, 1811)) NOC100021 Phyllobates terribilis (Myers, Daly, and Malkin, Golden Poison Frog NOC100095 1978) Pongo abelii Sumatran Orang-utan PRE100035 Pongo pygmaeus Orang-utan PRE008961 Potorous tridactylus Kerr, 1792 Long Nosed Potoroo NOC002561 Prionailurus bengalensis (syn. Felis Leopard Cat PRE008962 bengalensis) Prionailurus viverrinus Bennet 1833 Fishing Cat NOC002486 Pteropus poliocephalus Grey Headed Flying Fox PRE008963 Pteropus scapulatus Little Red Flying Fox PRE008964 Puma concolor (Linnaeus 1771) (formerly Felis Puma PRE008901 concolor) Rhea americana Greater Rhea PRE100027 Saguinus imperator (Goeldi, 1907) Emperor Tamarin NOC002482 Saguinus oedipus (Linnaeus, 1758) Cotton Top Tamarin PRE008965 NOC100018 Saimiri boliviensis I. Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire and Bolivian Squirrel Monkey NOC002562 Blainville, 1834 Saimiri sciureus (Linnaeus, 1758) Common Squirrel Monkey PRE009036 Sarcophilus harrisii Boitard, 1841 Tasmanian Devil NOC002563 Speothos venaticus (Lund, 1842) Bush Dog NOC100114 Suricata suricatta (Schreber, 1776) Meerkat PRE008966 NOC100020 Tachyglossus aculeatus Shaw, 1792 Short Beaked Echidna NOC002564 Tapirus terrestris (Linnaeus, 1758) South American Tapir PRE008967 Theraphosa blondi (Latreille, 1804) Goliath Bird-eating Spider PRE001053 Tectocoris diophthalmus (Thunberg, 1783) Hibiscus Harlequin Bug NOC100088 Trachypithecus francoisi Pousargues, 1898 Francois Leaf-Monkey NOC002565 Tragelaphus eurycerus (Ogilby 1837) Bongo NOC002502 (now see NOC100023) Tragelaphus spekii (Sclater 1863) Sitatunga PRE008968 (now see NOC002511) NOC002503 (now see NOC100023) Tragulus javanicus (Osbeck, 1765) Lesser Chevrotain NOC002566 Tropidoderus childrenii Gray, 1833 Children's Stick Insect NOC100089 Uncia uncia Schreber, 1775 Snow Leopard NOC002567
May 2012 EPA0162 16
Application for containment approval for new organisms
Species Common name Approval code Ursus arctos Linnaeus, 1758 Brown Bear NOC002568† Urodacus yaschenkoi Desert Scorpion NOC100090 Varanus gouldii Gould’s Monitor PRE100031 Varanus komodoensis Ouwens, 1912 Komodo Dragon NOC100116 Varanus varius Lace Monitor PRE009035 Varecia variegata Ruffed Lemur PRE008969 NOC100017 Vombatus ursinus Shaw 1800 Common Wombat PRE001035 Xenopus laevis African Clawed Toad PRE100032 Xylotrupes ulysses Guérin-Méneville, 1830 Elephant Beetle NOC100091 Zalophus californianus Californian Sealion PRE100038
May 2012 EPA0162 17
Application for containment approval for new organisms
Appendix Two: Proposed additional controls The Zoo and Aquarium Association (ZAA) would like to propose the following controls to assist in improving short, medium and long term containment of zoo animals. Each proposed control is designed to help maintain containment in a specific way. In blue under each proposed control is an explanation on how each one contributes to improved containment, or a brief summary of the reasoning behind the control. a. Any animal must be kept in an enclosure, and social grouping, that meets it’s physical, emotional and mental needs as per the Animal Welfare Act and Animal Welfare Strategy. If these needs are not met it may lead to individuals attempting to isolate themselves from conspecifics which could lead to breaches of containment. Increased levels of stress, from unnatural groupings or isolation, may lead to increased attempts to breach containment.
b. Methods of population management, relevant to the individual species, must be used to prevent overcrowding and to ensure a healthy and genetically diverse collection. These can include, but are not limited to, building additional enclosures, moving animals to other approved facilities, contraception, holding single sex groups and euthanasia. The method of management used should not compromise control a (above) If overpopulation exists within an enclosure increased aggression or need for an animal to disperse from a group may increase. These circumstances can lead to an increased pressure on the method of containment used. By managing the population density these risks can be mitigated.
c. Stocking density of an enclosure must be managed so as not to lead to either a welfare issue or increased pressure leading to individuals attempting to breach containment. If overpopulation exists within an enclosure increased aggression or need for an animal to disperse from a group may increase. These circumstances can lead to an increased pressure on the method of containment used. By managing the population density these risks can be mitigated.
d. Enclosures must meet a minimum standard. This standard is set out in the ZAA best practice guidelines for the draft Containment Standard. An example of where containment specifications are set out in the EPA approval would be with the Giant Panda approval. If enclosures are not constructed and maintained to a sufficiently high standard breaches of containment can occur more easily.
e. Sufficient staff with relevant experience and training must be employed to ensure the animals within the collection are given a high quality of animal care and are contained. Without sufficient levels of trained and experienced staff breaches of containment may occur more frequently.
f. Staff must be trained in the husbandry and care of each species before they are allowed to work with those animals, except when under direct supervision for the purpose of training. If staff are trained in the husbandry and care of a species they will understand more about the behaviours of the animals that they work with. This in turn can lead to reduced injuries to staff and reduced breaches of containment.
g. Staff training must be refreshed on each species each year. This can take the form of reading husbandry manuals and or practical assessments. If staff undergo regular training husbandry practices can be reaffirmed thus leading to reduced breaches of containment.
h. Records must be kept of all staff training for each species covered by these controls. These records must be signed and dated by the staff member to validate their skill base annually. For MPI to be able to audit training, records must be kept as evidence that the training has taken place.
i. A list of all staff who can work with each species must be maintained. This list would allow an MPI audit to cross reference the levels of training of staff with those working with any given species.
May 2012 EPA0162 18
Application for containment approval for new organisms j. A business must have the resources to ensure that all animals within its collection have an acceptable standard of welfare and care. This includes, but is not restricted to, having well maintained and suitable enclosures, an appropriate diet, veterinary support and the required level of experienced care. If more animals are held than there are resources in place for it can lead to welfare and containment issues. k. A business must show that it has the resources, or a plan to obtain those resources, to maintain the collection until after the next MPI audit. If it does not the collection must enact its exit strategy. Unless a collection has the resources to maintain an adequate level of care and upkeep then breaches of containment are more likely to occur. l. A business must maintain and display animals in safe facilities and have procedures in place that promote the safety of their staff, visitors, and community. These procedures must include, but are not limited to, daily husbandry procedures for animals that can potentially cause harm, visitor contact with animals, emergency procedure for escaped animals and for natural disasters. All of these procedures must be documented. Without written procedures different staff members may work with differing levels of understanding of containment and OHS requirements. This could lead to staff injuries or breaches of containment. m. A business must have a collection plan which shows all current species held, number of current specimens of each species and number of planned specimens of each species. The animal collection plan must also identify those new species that the business plans to start holding within the next five years. This is to demonstrate that a business has the resources, facilities and staff to appropriately manage their current and planned animal collection. If a new species is planned to be acquired the business must show how their staff will be trained in managing the containment of that species before the species is obtained. A collection plan is a living document and must be updated when new plans are made. The updated collection plan must be made available to MPI. A collection plan will allow a collection and MPI to assess the level of resources that will be required in an upcoming period. As it is a living document it allows for a collection to take advantage of opportunities as they arise, but still forecast the resources they will need to make available. n. A business must have an exit strategy that deals with dispersal of the collection if the business fails. This exit strategy must have clearly defined time frames for dispersal of the collection and a plan for if dispersal cannot happen for the entire collection. A business must be able to show it can maintain the collection through the dispersal period. Without an exit strategy MPI and other regional collections may need to take on a burden they are not equipped to do at that time. This could, potentially, lead to, as an example, new enclosures being built at short notice and things being missed leading to breaches of containment. o. The business must have clear financial indicators that would trigger the activation of their exit strategy and the dispersal of the animal collection Without clear financial indicators a business could fail prior to enacting their exit strategy, potentially, leading to, as an example, new enclosures being built at short notice and things being missed leading to breaches of containment.
May 2012 EPA0162