Aardwolves in captivity
- Thread starter Giant Panda
- Start date
Brno does have those ferret-badgers of course
There is always exception to the rule, but they don't belong in the section I volunteer in
But, again, neither ZooChatters nor zoo employees reflect a "big majority of the general public". Most zoo-goers don't know what an aardwolf is, let alone visit to see one. As @Andrew Swales pointed out in another thread:
And missing from your assessment is concern for the animals themselves. If welfare is compromised, we have no right *whatsoever* to keep animals as stamp collections or life-ticks.
Well, for like 90% of zoo employees and I'm sure big majority of the general public would notice too. Diversity is important, so people are still motivated to visit. And from employee's point of view using my situation why would I travel all the way to Pilsen and Jihlava, when I have perfectly fine ABC collection of Brno 15 minutes from home knowing that my help there is always wanted and appreciated? It's the diversity that does that. In Brno, I would never have the on-hand experience with so much unique species I have in those two (ok there some other reasons as well, but that is for a wholly different thread and I don't want to rant here much) that Brno just can't match.
That would explain why is "Mazuri diet" a rude word for some people.
Diversity is important and is at least noticed by many visitors. I think with a more scientific approach aimed at conservation, there will be somewhat less species, but that does not mean there are options to maintain diversity in such a framework. More cooperation with private holders for herpetofauna, birds and small mammals would ensure a wide variety of animals is still be kept and specieswise there are more species kept privately than in public collections. Increased cooperation with serious and devoted private keepers would increase capacity dramatically from a zoo perspective.
Additionally better intercontinental cooperation between zoo could result in populations that are really managed globally, in this way even rarities for one continent are managed in a properly sized population worldwide. The Coquerel sifaka to Europe is one example, As is the management of Gorilla in Australia under the EEP. But there is a lot of room for improvement there, an overdosis of ego and nationalism stands in the way in some cases though...
Andrew Swales
Well-Known Member
I am not at all sure what you are implying here, but it does look on the verge of being insulting... or is this another misunderstanding, my bad?
This is straining credulity. You wrote that "If we could combine the ethical sourcing of enough suitable animals, with todays diets, I firmly believe that the species is pefectly suited to captivity", and then claimed I "miss-quoted" you that diets had been resolved. For civility's sake, I humoured that. Now I'm "on the verge of being insulting" for pointing out that captive rarity is no justification for poor welfare? Isn't it?
So, let me clarify my position (again): the eastern aardwolf import involved substantial animal welfare issues (among others...) and had no conservation value. I think you should address that. Since you've refused, why the "misunderstandings"?
I cannot speak for Swales, but I think he *might* have misunderstood your "missing from your assessment is concern for the animals themselves" remark to pertain to the text you quoted immediately beforehand:
I can assure you that (in one case at least) without the white tigers, camels, birds of prey, pygmy goats, meerkats and donkeys, play area and train; there would simply be no wombats, or quolls, or possums, or grison...
I could be incorrect of course!
Andrew Swales
Well-Known Member
Why will you not read what I wrote? I never said diets had been resolved.
I have cut and pasted, so that you can read it again:
'now the animals do very well on commercially available SDS Mazuri Anteater diets. This product is of patchy quality, but Aardwolves do better on it in our experience than do the species it was developed for.
The issues regarding the import of the Tanzanian animals, or other species such as Tarsiers or even North American Porcupines, I am not going to be drawn on.
If you consider that I should 'address that' is of no consequence, as I am not going to comment on a subject I have only third hand information on. I gave brief details of the background of the Southern Aardwolves we had personally imported from Namibia and South Africa.
Last edited:
...Which was clearly aimed at @HOMIN96's point. Why would I make a non sequitur response to a post from a different thread?
And I have cut and pasted this, so that you can read it again: "If we could combine the ethical sourcing of enough suitable animals, with todays diets, I firmly believe that the species is pefectly suited to captivity".
How is a species "pefectly [sic] suited to captivity" with "todays [sic] diets" if the diet hasn't been resolved?
No idea
as I said I was merely speculating where any misunderstanding might have arisen.Andrew Swales
Well-Known Member
It is you who used the words 'cracked', 'resolved', 'missunderstanding'. I simply gave the briefest of detail about the animals we imported and bred. Much more information and photos are on file here documenting the housing and breeding of the parent stock in Namibia and the results of the exporter in South Africa, who also supplied the animals to Krefeld, and of our hand-rearings. Our import(s) were carefully researched and not one animal was lost in the process. To imply otherwise is insulting.
A lot of this discussion is reminding me of a quote I once heard from a WCS video a few years back, talking about how conservation only truly works if we take caring for the Least Concern species just as seriously as the Critically Endangered ones (to put it simplistically anyhow, obviously many CR species will require much more attention than LC ones). I think some people here have forgotten that.
Personally, I gravitate towards collection planning focused on endangered species more than for biodiversity's sake, but I do believe any good zoo must find a healthy medium. As centers for education, Least Concern animals should be just as welcome as Critically Endangered ones. Of course, I would like to see zoos take on more serious programs for more highly endangered species, but I would never want to see the majority of species phased-out in favor of the same select few endangered species kept at every zoo. The latter has been more or less the AZA's approach to mammal programs, and it has been seen as a rather bad decision overall by mostly everyone. I feel to say that the general public won't really notice so it doesn't matter really devalues and rather undermines zoos in generally. While keeping the general public's interests in mind is important, zoos should never strive to base everything they do around what Joe Public will or will not think. Otherwise, what's the point of having zoos?
None of this is to say that I think Aardwolves should or should not be present in captivity, I just figured I'd add my two cents on the conversation of LC vs CR species in captivity.
~Thylo
Personally, I gravitate towards collection planning focused on endangered species more than for biodiversity's sake, but I do believe any good zoo must find a healthy medium. As centers for education, Least Concern animals should be just as welcome as Critically Endangered ones. Of course, I would like to see zoos take on more serious programs for more highly endangered species, but I would never want to see the majority of species phased-out in favor of the same select few endangered species kept at every zoo. The latter has been more or less the AZA's approach to mammal programs, and it has been seen as a rather bad decision overall by mostly everyone. I feel to say that the general public won't really notice so it doesn't matter really devalues and rather undermines zoos in generally. While keeping the general public's interests in mind is important, zoos should never strive to base everything they do around what Joe Public will or will not think. Otherwise, what's the point of having zoos?
None of this is to say that I think Aardwolves should or should not be present in captivity, I just figured I'd add my two cents on the conversation of LC vs CR species in captivity.
~Thylo
I figured this open-access paper would be an appropriate endnote to the discussion. It argues for the importance (and lack) of sustainable captive populations and scientifically defensible collection planning.
Error - Cookies Turned Off
Error - Cookies Turned Off