[zoo-biology] live animal trade - the road from DRCongo to USA

[Guest guest]

There are very complicated and difficult issues everyone is trying to

distill into a " black/white " or " right-wrong " scenario here.

 

But I have to say Neil's points are good ones, in that the " ownership " of

the monkeys is something that plays into the hands of the criminals when

corrupt or incompetent CITES officials allow the transport (trade) of

animals from one country to another with little to no regard for their point

of origin, and its legality. This " T " in CITES more often than not seems to

be the loophole criminals love the most.

 

Sometimes it boils down to how does it look to the world at large. Looks

like to me, getting together a group of prized animals and threatening to

kill/euthanize them will prompt some zoos to find the money to " rescue " the

animals, whether it's primates or pachyderms.

 

Jane

 

 

-

Neil Garrick-Maidment

zoo-biology

Monday, June 05, 2006 5:29 AM

Re: [zoo-biology] Re: live animal trade - the road from DRCongo to

USA

 

 

Hi Peter,

 

behind the scenes this discussion if far from ceased and if you dont mind I

would like to put a couple of points to Miss Killmar as I dont have her

direct e-mail.

 

Would San Diego and the other collections have put so much effort into a

more common species of monkey, one that is not needed for extra bloodlines

within the breeding programmes.?, such as vervets or some of the baboon

species, I dont think so !!!

 

Although Miss Killmar makes great issue that the money wasnt the issue she

still stressed it in her e-mail.!!!

 

I wonder how many park gaurds and facilities in the countries of origin

$400,000 would have bought, bringing much needed employment to a region that

is desperate for foreign funding and protection for its flora and fauna.

 

The problem is it would probably have been more difficult to raise this

money for a remote project. !!

 

That same amount of money would have paid for an enourmous amount of

education about the bushmeat trade in DRC!!

 

The one point that annoys me beyond belief is her assumption that somebody

owned the monkeys, I would like to say to her that the monkeys are actually

owned by the people and country of DRC, not somebody offering them from

South Africa no matter how well meaning these people were in their provision

of quarantine facilities etc.

 

Despite how Miss Killmar and the other collections feel this will perpetuate

a trade, I dont know how much the concerned individuals paid for the monkeys

but the very fact money exchanged hands has kept the trade going and will

provide a future market for the dealers. Especially if next time a rarer

species of monkey comes on the market.

 

This whole thing still has echos of the Gorillas illegally held in South

Africa, just because money has been spent there is this assumption the

animals belong to someone and it is then so difficult to repatriate the

animals back to the country of origin.

 

Zoos and aquariums worldwide (espcially San Diego which I personally hold in

very high esteem for there world leading work) do an amazing job in

conservation and captive breeding, not just in there own instituions but

also in the countries of origin they work in and I am 150% in favour of

them.

 

This was a misjudged situation that would have been better approached by

keeping the animals in Africa and using the $400,000 to help the animals

there and in turn the local people by provding employment and long term

prospects.

 

I would like to make one further point about Mike Bester, although I do not

like the type of business he is in and what he does (I have been e-mailing

him personally so there is nothing here I have not already said to him) I do

owe him a public appolgy for misunderstanding his role in this whole sorry

situation, which I hereby offer.

 

Best wishes

 

 

Neil

 

Neil Garrick-Maidment

 

The Seahorse Trust

36 Greatwood Terrace

Topsham

Devon

EX3 0EB

 

Tel: 01392 875930

 

www.theseahorsetrust.co.uk

www.britishseahorsesurvey.org

 

WORKING IN PARTNERSHIP WITH NATURE

-

" peterd482001 " <peter

<zoo-biology >

Monday, June 05, 2006 5:29 AM

[zoo-biology] Re: live animal trade - the road from DRCongo to USA

 

 

Although this discussion seems to have ceased I thought the

following document relevant and so have included it here.

 

Peter Dickinson

Zoo Biology Moderator

 

THE IMPORTATION OF 33 MONKEYS FROM SOUTH AFRICA TO SIX AZA ZOOS IN

2006

 

Karen S. Killmar, Associate Curator of Mammals,

San Diego Zoo

 

 

 

In June of 2005, 34 monkeys representing five different species

(Allen's swamp monkey, DeBrazza's guenon, Schmidt's spot-nosed

guenon, Wolf's guenon and Black mangabey) were purchased by the San

Diego Zoo, from an individual in South Africa . The animals had

originated in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and were

legally exported to South Africa, where they were to be sold into

the hobbyist trade (what is called the private sector or pet trade

in the U.S.). Once purchased, the animals were housed in South

Africa until the time of importation in March 2006. One of the

animals remained in South Africa (see detail below). A re-export

permit for these CITES II species was issued by the Republic of

South Africa (an import permit is not required for CITES II

species). Upon arrival in the U.S. , the 33 imported monkeys

entered a CDC-required quarantine period at a licensed facility in

California . After successfully completing the quarantine, the

animals were dispersed to the six zoos involved in the transaction.

 

 

 

The many media reports concerning this importation have focused on

the fact that the 33 monkeys are now in very good conditions and

have discussed, to varying degrees, the issues concerning the

commercial bush-meat trade. However, as often happens when

individuals report on a subject with which they are unfamiliar,

there have been some misstatements of the facts in some of the

reports. The few letters of criticism, which have recently been

circulated concerning this transaction, are using the misstatements

to bolster their points of criticism. This document is written to

reiterate the factual information concerning this importation.

 

 

 

In Spring 2005, an individual contacted me by phone from South

Africa . This individual indicated that he had a group of monkeys

that he had brought into that country from the DRC. He asked for

advice concerning the market value of the species so that he could

sell them in South Africa . I refused to give him any advice on

this matter. When asked where he had obtained the monkeys, he said

that he had purchased them out of the bush-meats markets in the

DRC. When I voiced my criticism of this method for obtaining the

animals, he stated that he felt strongly that he had rescued the

animals out of horrible conditions and that there was no other

process available (i.e. confiscation) for removing the animals from

the markets.

 

 

 

Shortly after this conversation, I contacted Mr. Mike Bester, who

acts as our agent for animal transactions in South Africa . I asked

Mike to check out this story and to please obtain more information

about this situation with the monkeys. Mike confirmed that the

monkeys were in South Africa and that they were going to be sold in

the hobbyist trade. At my request, he visited the facility where

the monkeys were being housed and confirmed the species that were

there. Mike indicated that the animals were legally imported and

that the CITES permits for both the export from the DRC and import

to South Africa were in order. Mike also indicated that these

individuals had built a quarantine facility and had the animals

tested for Ebola, Marburg , yellow fever and HIV 1/ 2, apparently

prior to the animals entering South Africa . Copies of the CITES

permits and the medical test results were obtained.

 

 

 

At this point San Diego Zoo staff made the decision to try and

obtain the 34 monkeys for the AZA zoo populations. Five other AZA

zoos ( Lowry Park , Houston , San Antonio , Denver , Wildlife World

Zoo) were approached about partnering with the San Diego Zoo for

this importation. All agreed to contribute funding, with

coordination being the responsibility of San Diego . Although the

animals had originated in the DRC, at the time I was contacted they

were legally in South Africa and owned by the individual who

contacted me. The decision was made to obtain the monkeys in order

to prevent their sale into the hobbyist trade.

 

 

 

In order to discourage any perception that we might represent a

repeat customer, we worked through Mike Bester to obtain the animals

and made it clear that we considered this a one-time opportunity to

keep this group of animals out of the hobbyist trade. All of the

information and documents I had access to, indicated that the

animals were legally imported into South Africa and were going into

what is considered a legal trade in that country.

 

 

 

POINT OF CLARIFICATION: As has been stated throughout this

transaction, the individual who obtained these monkeys out of the

DRC, stated that they were purchased out of the markets. The

animals were not confiscated since there is no existing regulatory

process in place in the DRC for removing animals from the markets

using this method. Some media reports have stated, or inferred,

that the animals were confiscated. That is incorrect information.

 

 

 

POINT OF CLARIFICATION: The five species are all listed as CITES II

(or Appendix II). The proper authorities in both countries legally

issued the permits, for exportation from the DRC and importation to

South Africa . There was no reason to question the legality of the

permits and the information concerning the permits was accepted in

good faith. If there were permits issued for additional animals,

that was information that was not shared with me, and there was no

reason for me to inquire concerning additional animals.

 

 

 

In June of 2005 the 34 monkeys were moved to a facility owned by

Mike Bester in order to await importation to the U.S. The

facilities in which the animals were housed, required modifications

and upgrades (e.g. electrical) in order to provide sufficient

shelter and heat for the winter months (summer in U.S. is winter in

South Africa ). The animals stayed in this isolation facility until

March 2006 (approximately nine months). During this time, animal

care staff was assigned to this facility as their primary

responsibility. In addition, an individual was hired to provide

enrichment to the animals on a regular basis.

 

 

 

Dr. Chris Kingsley, staff veterinarian for the Bester facilities,

individually examined the animals and completed various medical

procedures, at the recommendation of the Zoological Society of San

Diego (ZSSD) veterinarians. These procedures included TB skin test,

TB work-up (throat swab culture and gastric wash culture), fecal

culture and blood panel. The CDC does not presently take into

consideration pre-import medical test results when reviewing results

obtained during the U.S. quarantine period. However, it was

important to go through with the exam and testing process in order

to have a baseline determination of health status for each monkey,

and to detect any significant health issues that may have precluded

bringing an animal into the U.S. All of the animals were found to

have an acceptable health status. However, one female DeBrazza's

guenon showed a positive reaction on the TB skin test. Although her

TB work-up indicated that she did not have the disease, she

apparently had been exposed to a bird or mammal (or their waste

products) with the disease. If this animal had again shown a

positive skin test response, which would not be unusual, during the

CDC quarantine period, the results of the work-up would not have

been accepted in order to indicate this as a false-positive

response. This would then have significantly extended the

quarantine period for all of the animals in the shipment.

Therefore, at the recommendation of the ZSSD veterinarians, this

animal was removed from the shipment and remains at Mike Bester's

zoo on breeding loan from the San Diego Zoo.

 

 

 

POINT OF CLARIFICATION: One of the letters of criticism stated that

the DeBrazza's guenon " flunked a tuberculosis test and remained in

South Africa until it no longer tests positive " . This statement is

based on a misstatement of the facts in at least one of the media

reports.

 

 

 

In November 2005, Karen Killmar and a San Diego Zoo veterinarian

traveled to South Africa to view the monkeys, observe their care and

management, and to review all of the medical procedures and test

results available at that time. The animals were found to be in

very good condition. All medical records were in order. At the

time of importation, the health status of all of the animals was

acceptable.

 

 

 

In March 2006, the monkeys were transferred into 33 individual

crates and readied for shipment. A CITES Re-export Permit had been

issued by the RSA authorities, as is required for animals that have

previously been legally exported from another country. The shipment

traveled by air from South Africa to San Francisco , via

Amsterdam . Mike Bester accompanied the shipment to assure that all

went well. All CDC requirements concerning crate design, cargo

handling and in-transit activities were adhered to. Upon arrival in

the U.S. , the shipment was inspected and cleared by a Fish &

Wildlife officer and the animals were transferred to a CDC-approved

transporter for the trip to the quarantine facility. Officials from

CDC observed all off-loading, inspection and transfer activities.

 

 

 

The animals entered the CDC-required quarantine at a licensed

facility in California . The animals successfully completed the

three required TB tests during quarantine. In mid-April, the

animals were transferred to new crates (the importation crates could

not be reused) and were dispersed to the six zoos that partnered for

this transaction. Three trips were made by Karen Killmar (for

arrival of shipment, during the quarantine period and when the

animals left quarantine) to observe, monitor and provide

coordination for activities during this time period.

 

 

 

The entire cost of this transaction totaled about $400,000. The

receiving zoos all contributed to covering this total cost. This

amount included.

 

Ø Purchase of the animals,

 

Ø Facility upgrades for housing the animals in South Africa ,

 

Ø Animal food and enrichment items from June 205 to March 2006,

 

Ø Furnishings for enclosures (i.e. perching, food and water

bowls, etc.),

 

Ø Animal care and enrichment staff salaries from June 2005 to

March 2006,

 

Ø Veterinary costs for exams, testing procedures and medical

support in South Africa ,

 

Ø Construction of 33 crates in South Africa (design per IATA,

CDC, and all applicable guidelines for international shipments into

the U.S. )

 

Ø Ground transportation in South Africa ,

 

Ø Permitting and administrative costs,

 

Ø Air transport from South Africa to U.S. (including attendant

who accompanied shipment),

 

Ø California Department of Health permit for animals to enter

California

 

Ø Ground transport from San Francisco to quarantine facility,

 

Ø Quarantine charges (includes approximately 40 days of care

and feed, and medical procedures)

 

Ø Construction of 33 crates for transport from quarantine to

receiving zoos,

 

Ø Ground and air transport (post-quarantine) to receiving zoos,

 

Ø All travel costs for San Diego Zoo staff (four trips),

 

Ø Miscellaneous San Diego Zoo administrative costs

 

 

 

POINT OF CLARIFICATION: Unfortunately, many of the media reports

simplified the information concerning the cost of this transaction

and gave the impression that $400,000. was paid for the monkeys.

There were a couple of reports that provided more detail. In

hindsight, this is one of those instances where providing this

monetary information was probably a mistake because it can so easily

be misinterpreted, and misused. From the beginning of this

transaction, we have wanted to avoid placing any monetary value on

the monkeys, for the very reasons indicated by the critics.

However, when media reports don't clearly define the many activities

and items that account for the bulk of the costs, stating the amount

is certainly open to misinterpretation and criticism.

 

 

 

FINAL COMMENT: During this transaction, I have chosen to not share

the name of the individual who originally contacted me concerning

these monkeys. I did not know this person before the contact and I

have not met him or had any further contact with him. This was a

conscious decision to prevent any assumption that we could represent

repeat business opportunities.

 

Unfortunately, since our critics do not have this individual's name,

they have chosen to focus their attacks on Mike Bester, who has

worked with a number of AZA zoos for several years. Mike became

involved in this transaction at my request. He worked with us to

provide a standard of care and management for these animals that I

expected from him. This was a complex and time-consuming

transaction. It is not easy to import primates into the U.S. ,

considering all of our regulatory requirements. Mike expended a lot

of effort to meet all of the requirements so that the importation

would be successful. And most importantly, the well being of the

monkeys was his primary concern throughout this long process.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Dear Ms Dewar,

 

I could not agree with you more on the dubious

motives that prompt Western zoos to 'rescue' animals. San Diego Zoo

'rescued' several African Elephants from a park in Swaziland a few years

ago after the park ranger Ted Reilly threatened to kill them. I see a

political slant to any ostensible help coming from so called developed

countries to so called developing countries, in animal welfare as in other

fields. Since money takes precedence over ethics, it is very easy for

someone from US to fly into Congo or China or India and lecture 'natives' on

how animals should be treated. Never mind that the biggest consumer of

primates for laboratories is the US and that American zoos and European zoos

have competed with each other to display Giant Pandas, no matter what the

cost or the welfare implications. As Jeremy Seabrook noted in one of

his articles, white Western do gooders want tractable subjects or indirect

domination over former colonies. It is very easy to do it in Africa since in

a country like Congo ravaged by civil war, people are unlikely to worry much

over animal rights or challenge the logic meted out to help animals by

purchasing them. It is the traditional spiel of might being right. The

situation is changing in Asia since the apparently booming economies of

China and India mean a stronger knowledge base to counter neocolonial

designs or diktats. But Africa is still largely swamped with Westerners

trying to prove the world of their worth and carve their names with pride in

a continent that is still scarred by the effects of slavery and colonialism.

As outlined by Alan Green in ANIMAL UNDERWORLD, American zoos excel in

doublespeak, hypocrisy and irresponsibility and the latest deal in these

monkeys only strengthens that assertion. A potent example of the

questionable dealings of American zoos is the tacit support given by the AZA

to notorious animal trading groups like International Animal Exchange and

Zoological Animal Exchange. The British Federation Of Zoos does not forbid

its members from dealing with traders. The Conservation Breeding Specialist

Group went way out of its orbit to propose a captive breeding scheme for

Javan Rhinos even though Sumatran Rhinos are not doing well in captivity in

the US. Several Western zoos have dumped hybrid animals on Asian facilities.

Taronga Zoo in Australia for example, sent its surplus hybrid Orang Utans to

Hyderabad Zoo. Some of the world's worst zoos are in North America and

Europe, institutions as mercenary in outlook and as exploitative in nature

as the zoo exploiting the solitary Polar Bear in China. There are proposals

to breed Nepalese monkeys in captivity for anti terror tests in USA. I find

it a trifle odd, that the United States, the world's largest sponsor of

terrorism(Re: American Power and the New Mandarins by Noam Chomsky) needs

anti terror research to depend on a country like Nepal. Can you imagine a

situation where a Nepalese person could visit an animal laboratory in US and

point out the cruelty meted out to animals in US? But it is acceptable that

an American or a Canadian can have a hysterical outburst on encountering

cruelty in Asia or Africa regardless of the ground situation. That is how I

look at these rescue efforts of Western zoos, deals dictated by money and

not by concern for animal welfare.

 

I do feel these issues should be looked at in the proper perspective. When

Westerners speak of Asia and Africa, they generally tend to talk in

patronizing terms. They talk about helping these continents and their

inhabitants in much the way Rudyard Kipling talked about the white man's

burden to deal with devils and children. When the coin is tossed it always

comes up heads and the AZA and their cronies should realize that they can

only fool some people for some time with the spurious logic of charity when

the real motive was profit as illustrated succinctly in the South African

Gorilla case. The attached news item published in US on the monkey deals

reads more like a public relations copy than a news item and further exposes

the real motives of American zoos since the press can be manipulated with

money.

 

Please pardon me if I have caused you any offence. I trust you are well.

 

Best wishes and kind regards,

 

 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Ghosh

 

 

 

 

http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/politics/14759629.htm

Posted on Wed, Jun. 07, 2006

email

this<http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/politics/14759629.htm?temp\

late=contentModules/emailstory.jsp>

print

this<http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/politics/14759629.htm?temp\

late=contentModules/printstory.jsp>

Zoos pool funds to rescue monkeys from South Africa Thirty-three orphaned

primates, left behind by poachers, are distributed to six parks in the U.S. By

Tony Perry LOS ANGELES TIMES

 

*SAN DIEGO - *It started with a shocking phone call from a man in South

Africa to a monkey expert at the San Diego Zoo: How much should he charge

for young monkeys caught in the wild?

 

To Karen Killmar, associate curator of mammals, the idea of selling monkeys

was repellent.

 

" In this profession, you get some strange calls, but this was a first, "

Killmar said, adding in a chilly tone, " We do not put a price tag on our

animals. "

 

Still, Killmar was intrigued. She started asking the caller questions. The

more she learned about the monkeys, the more she thought they should be

rescued rather than sold as exotic pets.

 

The monkeys had been caught in the Democratic Republic of Congo and brought

to South Africa.

 

They were leftovers from the illicit traffic in " bush meat " that is pushing

some monkeys and other species to the brink of extinction.

 

Poachers hunt adult monkeys in the wild for food and then sell their young

as pets -- or to be fattened for slaughter. Selling bush meat is illegal in

most of Africa, but the trade still flourishes.

 

Killmar went to South Africa to meet the man and the captive monkeys.

 

The man was credible. He was not a poacher, just a businessman who had

bought the monkeys in Congo in hopes of making a profit by selling them in

more prosperous South Africa, where the sale of exotic pets is legal.

 

Now, 13 months after the call, 33 orphaned monkeys from five species have

been distributed among six zoos in the United States that, under the banner

of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, pooled their resources to bring

them to this country

 

" I realized we had to do something; we couldn't let these monkeys slip into

the private sector, " Killmar said.

 

Releasing them back into the wild was not considered an option because it

would have required returning them to Congo; also, some lacked the skills to

survive in the wild because they had been separated from their mothers at an

early age.

 

In early March, the monkeys arrived on a flight from South Africa to San

Francisco and, after a monthlong quarantine at a federal facility in

Sacramento, were distributed to zoos in Litchfield Park, Ariz.; Tampa, Fla.;

Houston; San Antonio; Denver; and San Diego.

 

The six zoos paid $400,000 to keep the monkeys under quarantine in South

Africa, have them tended by veterinarians and then flown to the United

States.

 

The San Diego Zoo, the most heavily visited zoo in the nation, paid $80,000

of the total.

 

Even as they arranged to bring the monkeys to the United States, zoo

officials debated the possibility that the move might encourage others in

Africa to offer monkeys for sale. The decision was made to continue the

transaction but to spread a cautionary word in animal circles.

 

" This is a one-time-only thing, " said Jane Ballentine, spokeswoman for the

Association of Zoos and Aquariums. The 33 monkeys are thought to be between

2 and 5 years old.

 

The six zoos are part of the association's Old World Monkey Taxon Advisory

Group, which tries to raise public awareness of the bush meat trade.

 

Jim Maddy, the association's executive director, said he hopes the monkeys

will " bring the harrowing story of the bush meat trade to the visiting

public. "

 

The 33 were divvied up by matching them with zoos that already had colonies

of the same species. Signs will be posted at the zoos telling the monkeys'

story.

 

Although the monkeys are imperiled by the bush meat trade and clear-cutting

of their habitat, they are not listed as an endangered species. If they had

been on the list, it would have been harder to rescue them because there

would have been more red tape to import them.

 

San Diego received four Allen's swamp monkeys and one Debrazza's guenon. A

second Debrazza's guenon flunked a tuberculosis test and will remain in

South Africa until it no longer tests positive.

 

At the San Diego Zoo, the newly arrived Debrazza's guenon, a young male, is

spending time with an elderly Debrazza's female for socialization before

making its public debut.

 

The four swamp monkeys -- two males and two females -- have gone on exhibit

in the zoo's Ituri Forest.

 

The species is known for its grunting sound, high-speed traveling on all

fours, and, in the males, a bright red scrotum.

 

" The fact they've survived and are so healthy, well-adjusted, active and

curious says something about their strength of character, " Killmar said.

 

 

 

On 6/5/06, Jane T. R. Dewar <jdewar wrote:

>

> There are very complicated and difficult issues everyone is trying to

> distill into a " black/white " or " right-wrong " scenario here.

>

> But I have to say Neil's points are good ones, in that the " ownership " of

> the monkeys is something that plays into the hands of the criminals when

> corrupt or incompetent CITES officials allow the transport (trade) of

> animals from one country to another with little to no regard for their

> point

> of origin, and its legality. This " T " in CITES more often than not seems

> to

> be the loophole criminals love the most.

>

> Sometimes it boils down to how does it look to the world at large. Looks

> like to me, getting together a group of prized animals and threatening to

> kill/euthanize them will prompt some zoos to find the money to " rescue "

> the

> animals, whether it's primates or pachyderms.

>

> Jane

>

>

> -

> Neil Garrick-Maidment

> zoo-biology

> Monday, June 05, 2006 5:29 AM

> Re: [zoo-biology] Re: live animal trade - the road from DRCongo

> to

> USA

>

>

> Hi Peter,

>

> behind the scenes this discussion if far from ceased and if you dont mind

> I

> would like to put a couple of points to Miss Killmar as I dont have her

> direct e-mail.

>

> Would San Diego and the other collections have put so much effort into a

> more common species of monkey, one that is not needed for extra bloodlines

> within the breeding programmes.?, such as vervets or some of the baboon

> species, I dont think so !!!

>

> Although Miss Killmar makes great issue that the money wasnt the issue she

> still stressed it in her e-mail.!!!

>

> I wonder how many park gaurds and facilities in the countries of origin

> $400,000 would have bought, bringing much needed employment to a region

> that

> is desperate for foreign funding and protection for its flora and fauna.

>

> The problem is it would probably have been more difficult to raise this

> money for a remote project. !!

>

> That same amount of money would have paid for an enourmous amount of

> education about the bushmeat trade in DRC!!

>

> The one point that annoys me beyond belief is her assumption that somebody

> owned the monkeys, I would like to say to her that the monkeys are

> actually

> owned by the people and country of DRC, not somebody offering them from

> South Africa no matter how well meaning these people were in their

> provision

> of quarantine facilities etc.

>

> Despite how Miss Killmar and the other collections feel this will

> perpetuate

> a trade, I dont know how much the concerned individuals paid for the

> monkeys

> but the very fact money exchanged hands has kept the trade going and will

> provide a future market for the dealers. Especially if next time a rarer

> species of monkey comes on the market.

>

> This whole thing still has echos of the Gorillas illegally held in South

> Africa, just because money has been spent there is this assumption the

> animals belong to someone and it is then so difficult to repatriate the

> animals back to the country of origin.

>

> Zoos and aquariums worldwide (espcially San Diego which I personally hold

> in

> very high esteem for there world leading work) do an amazing job in

> conservation and captive breeding, not just in there own instituions but

> also in the countries of origin they work in and I am 150% in favour of

> them.

>

> This was a misjudged situation that would have been better approached by

> keeping the animals in Africa and using the $400,000 to help the animals

> there and in turn the local people by provding employment and long term

> prospects.

>

> I would like to make one further point about Mike Bester, although I do

> not

> like the type of business he is in and what he does (I have been e-mailing

> him personally so there is nothing here I have not already said to him) I

> do

> owe him a public appolgy for misunderstanding his role in this whole sorry

> situation, which I hereby offer.

>

> Best wishes

>

>

> Neil

>

> Neil Garrick-Maidment

 

> The Seahorse Trust

> 36 Greatwood Terrace

> Topsham

> Devon

> EX3 0EB

>

> Tel: 01392 875930

>

> www.theseahorsetrust.co.uk

> www.britishseahorsesurvey.org

>

> WORKING IN PARTNERSHIP WITH NATURE

> -

> " peterd482001 " <peter

> <zoo-biology >

> Monday, June 05, 2006 5:29 AM

> [zoo-biology] Re: live animal trade - the road from DRCongo to

> USA

>

>

> Although this discussion seems to have ceased I thought the

> following document relevant and so have included it here.

>

> Peter Dickinson

> Zoo Biology Moderator

>

> THE IMPORTATION OF 33 MONKEYS FROM SOUTH AFRICA TO SIX AZA ZOOS IN

> 2006

>

> Karen S. Killmar, Associate Curator of Mammals,

> San Diego Zoo

>

>

>

> In June of 2005, 34 monkeys representing five different species

> (Allen's swamp monkey, DeBrazza's guenon, Schmidt's spot-nosed

> guenon, Wolf's guenon and Black mangabey) were purchased by the San

> Diego Zoo, from an individual in South Africa . The animals had

> originated in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and were

> legally exported to South Africa, where they were to be sold into

> the hobbyist trade (what is called the private sector or pet trade

> in the U.S.). Once purchased, the animals were housed in South

> Africa until the time of importation in March 2006. One of the

> animals remained in South Africa (see detail below). A re-export

> permit for these CITES II species was issued by the Republic of

> South Africa (an import permit is not required for CITES II

> species). Upon arrival in the U.S. , the 33 imported monkeys

> entered a CDC-required quarantine period at a licensed facility in

> California . After successfully completing the quarantine, the

> animals were dispersed to the six zoos involved in the transaction.

>

>

>

> The many media reports concerning this importation have focused on

> the fact that the 33 monkeys are now in very good conditions and

> have discussed, to varying degrees, the issues concerning the

> commercial bush-meat trade. However, as often happens when

> individuals report on a subject with which they are unfamiliar,

> there have been some misstatements of the facts in some of the

> reports. The few letters of criticism, which have recently been

> circulated concerning this transaction, are using the misstatements

> to bolster their points of criticism. This document is written to

> reiterate the factual information concerning this importation.

>

>

>

> In Spring 2005, an individual contacted me by phone from South

> Africa . This individual indicated that he had a group of monkeys

> that he had brought into that country from the DRC. He asked for

> advice concerning the market value of the species so that he could

> sell them in South Africa . I refused to give him any advice on

> this matter. When asked where he had obtained the monkeys, he said

> that he had purchased them out of the bush-meats markets in the

> DRC. When I voiced my criticism of this method for obtaining the

> animals, he stated that he felt strongly that he had rescued the

> animals out of horrible conditions and that there was no other

> process available (i.e. confiscation) for removing the animals from

> the markets.

>

>

>

> Shortly after this conversation, I contacted Mr. Mike Bester, who

> acts as our agent for animal transactions in South Africa . I asked

> Mike to check out this story and to please obtain more information

> about this situation with the monkeys. Mike confirmed that the

> monkeys were in South Africa and that they were going to be sold in

> the hobbyist trade. At my request, he visited the facility where

> the monkeys were being housed and confirmed the species that were

> there. Mike indicated that the animals were legally imported and

> that the CITES permits for both the export from the DRC and import

> to South Africa were in order. Mike also indicated that these

> individuals had built a quarantine facility and had the animals

> tested for Ebola, Marburg , yellow fever and HIV 1/ 2, apparently

> prior to the animals entering South Africa . Copies of the CITES

> permits and the medical test results were obtained.

>

>

>

> At this point San Diego Zoo staff made the decision to try and

> obtain the 34 monkeys for the AZA zoo populations. Five other AZA

> zoos ( Lowry Park , Houston , San Antonio , Denver , Wildlife World

> Zoo) were approached about partnering with the San Diego Zoo for

> this importation. All agreed to contribute funding, with

> coordination being the responsibility of San Diego . Although the

> animals had originated in the DRC, at the time I was contacted they

> were legally in South Africa and owned by the individual who

> contacted me. The decision was made to obtain the monkeys in order

> to prevent their sale into the hobbyist trade.

>

>

>

> In order to discourage any perception that we might represent a

> repeat customer, we worked through Mike Bester to obtain the animals

> and made it clear that we considered this a one-time opportunity to

> keep this group of animals out of the hobbyist trade. All of the

> information and documents I had access to, indicated that the

> animals were legally imported into South Africa and were going into

> what is considered a legal trade in that country.

>

>

>

> POINT OF CLARIFICATION: As has been stated throughout this

> transaction, the individual who obtained these monkeys out of the

> DRC, stated that they were purchased out of the markets. The

> animals were not confiscated since there is no existing regulatory

> process in place in the DRC for removing animals from the markets

> using this method. Some media reports have stated, or inferred,

> that the animals were confiscated. That is incorrect information.

>

>

>

> POINT OF CLARIFICATION: The five species are all listed as CITES II

> (or Appendix II). The proper authorities in both countries legally

> issued the permits, for exportation from the DRC and importation to

> South Africa . There was no reason to question the legality of the

> permits and the information concerning the permits was accepted in

> good faith. If there were permits issued for additional animals,

> that was information that was not shared with me, and there was no

> reason for me to inquire concerning additional animals.

>

>

>

> In June of 2005 the 34 monkeys were moved to a facility owned by

> Mike Bester in order to await importation to the U.S. The

> facilities in which the animals were housed, required modifications

> and upgrades (e.g. electrical) in order to provide sufficient

> shelter and heat for the winter months (summer in U.S. is winter in

> South Africa ). The animals stayed in this isolation facility until

> March 2006 (approximately nine months). During this time, animal

> care staff was assigned to this facility as their primary

> responsibility. In addition, an individual was hired to provide

> enrichment to the animals on a regular basis.

>

>

>

> Dr. Chris Kingsley, staff veterinarian for the Bester facilities,

> individually examined the animals and completed various medical

> procedures, at the recommendation of the Zoological Society of San

> Diego (ZSSD) veterinarians. These procedures included TB skin test,

> TB work-up (throat swab culture and gastric wash culture), fecal

> culture and blood panel. The CDC does not presently take into

> consideration pre-import medical test results when reviewing results

> obtained during the U.S. quarantine period. However, it was

> important to go through with the exam and testing process in order

> to have a baseline determination of health status for each monkey,

> and to detect any significant health issues that may have precluded

> bringing an animal into the U.S. All of the animals were found to

> have an acceptable health status. However, one female DeBrazza's

> guenon showed a positive reaction on the TB skin test. Although her

> TB work-up indicated that she did not have the disease, she

> apparently had been exposed to a bird or mammal (or their waste

> products) with the disease. If this animal had again shown a

> positive skin test response, which would not be unusual, during the

> CDC quarantine period, the results of the work-up would not have

> been accepted in order to indicate this as a false-positive

> response. This would then have significantly extended the

> quarantine period for all of the animals in the shipment.

> Therefore, at the recommendation of the ZSSD veterinarians, this

> animal was removed from the shipment and remains at Mike Bester's

> zoo on breeding loan from the San Diego Zoo.

>

>

>

> POINT OF CLARIFICATION: One of the letters of criticism stated that

> the DeBrazza's guenon " flunked a tuberculosis test and remained in

> South Africa until it no longer tests positive " . This statement is

> based on a misstatement of the facts in at least one of the media

> reports.

>

>

>

> In November 2005, Karen Killmar and a San Diego Zoo veterinarian

> traveled to South Africa to view the monkeys, observe their care and

> management, and to review all of the medical procedures and test

> results available at that time. The animals were found to be in

> very good condition. All medical records were in order. At the

> time of importation, the health status of all of the animals was

> acceptable.

>

>

>

> In March 2006, the monkeys were transferred into 33 individual

> crates and readied for shipment. A CITES Re-export Permit had been

> issued by the RSA authorities, as is required for animals that have

> previously been legally exported from another country. The shipment

> traveled by air from South Africa to San Francisco , via

> Amsterdam . Mike Bester accompanied the shipment to assure that all

> went well. All CDC requirements concerning crate design, cargo

> handling and in-transit activities were adhered to. Upon arrival in

> the U.S. , the shipment was inspected and cleared by a Fish &

> Wildlife officer and the animals were transferred to a CDC-approved

> transporter for the trip to the quarantine facility. Officials from

> CDC observed all off-loading, inspection and transfer activities.

>

>

>

> The animals entered the CDC-required quarantine at a licensed

> facility in California . The animals successfully completed the

> three required TB tests during quarantine. In mid-April, the

> animals were transferred to new crates (the importation crates could

> not be reused) and were dispersed to the six zoos that partnered for

> this transaction. Three trips were made by Karen Killmar (for

> arrival of shipment, during the quarantine period and when the

> animals left quarantine) to observe, monitor and provide

> coordination for activities during this time period.

>

>

>

> The entire cost of this transaction totaled about $400,000. The

> receiving zoos all contributed to covering this total cost. This

> amount included.

>

> � Purchase of the animals,

>

> � Facility upgrades for housing the animals in South Africa ,

>

> � Animal food and enrichment items from June 205 to March 2006,

>

> � Furnishings for enclosures (i.e. perching, food and water

> bowls, etc.),

>

> � Animal care and enrichment staff salaries from June 2005 to

> March 2006,

>

> � Veterinary costs for exams, testing procedures and medical

> support in South Africa ,

>

> � Construction of 33 crates in South Africa (design per IATA,

> CDC, and all applicable guidelines for international shipments into

> the U.S. )

>

> � Ground transportation in South Africa ,

>

> � Permitting and administrative costs,

>

> � Air transport from South Africa to U.S. (including attendant

> who accompanied shipment),

>

> � California Department of Health permit for animals to enter

> California

>

> � Ground transport from San Francisco to quarantine facility,

>

> � Quarantine charges (includes approximately 40 days of care

> and feed, and medical procedures)

>

> � Construction of 33 crates for transport from quarantine to

> receiving zoos,

>

> � Ground and air transport (post-quarantine) to receiving zoos,

>

> � All travel costs for San Diego Zoo staff (four trips),

>

> � Miscellaneous San Diego Zoo administrative costs

>

>

>

> POINT OF CLARIFICATION: Unfortunately, many of the media reports

> simplified the information concerning the cost of this transaction

> and gave the impression that $400,000. was paid for the monkeys.

> There were a couple of reports that provided more detail. In

> hindsight, this is one of those instances where providing this

> monetary information was probably a mistake because it can so easily

> be misinterpreted, and misused. From the beginning of this

> transaction, we have wanted to avoid placing any monetary value on

> the monkeys, for the very reasons indicated by the critics.

> However, when media reports don't clearly define the many activities

> and items that account for the bulk of the costs, stating the amount

> is certainly open to misinterpretation and criticism.

>

>

>

> FINAL COMMENT: During this transaction, I have chosen to not share

> the name of the individual who originally contacted me concerning

> these monkeys. I did not know this person before the contact and I

> have not met him or had any further contact with him. This was a

> conscious decision to prevent any assumption that we could represent

> repeat business opportunities.

>

> Unfortunately, since our critics do not have this individual's name,

> they have chosen to focus their attacks on Mike Bester, who has

> worked with a number of AZA zoos for several years. Mike became

> involved in this transaction at my request. He worked with us to

> provide a standard of care and management for these animals that I

> expected from him. This was a complex and time-consuming

> transaction. It is not easy to import primates into the U.S. ,

> considering all of our regulatory requirements. Mike expended a lot

> of effort to meet all of the requirements so that the importation

> would be successful. And most importantly, the well being of the

> monkeys was his primary concern throughout this long process.

>

>

>