Port Lympne Wild Animal Park Port Lympne Wild Animal Park news 2021

Trudie said:
3 others that were rescues from Europe x
Click to expand...
This demonstrates how flawed the strategy can be. Why import heavily diseased lions across half Europe to the UK, where resources could equally have been better spent in country.

On a personal note: It is like my health issues (for privacy reasons I am not going to say what disease) by prescribing pills, you are not about to cure me nor bring me back to health.
 
Kifaru Bwana said:
This demonstrates how flawed the strategy can be. Why import heavily diseased lions across half Europe to the UK
Click to expand...

Not that I can be 100% sure but I believe its only just been discovered that the virus is present so that is why they have now changed their plans.
 
Embu said:
Not that I can be 100% sure but I believe its only just been discovered that the virus is present so that is why they have now changed their plans.
Click to expand...
Exactly, since they discovered this, they aren't coming any more. But the Borth pair have stepped into the breech so to speak. I think this shows the intention to house more animals that they can offer homes to from difficult circumstances.
 
Now they are not in Eaza there aren’t allowed to keep any species they dont already have so this may also be a way of bringing in new animals.
 
Just to get back on track any idea where these lions will end up or is there no positive outcome?
 
Kifaru Bwana said:
EAZA/EEP owned animals should go back to the loan out institutions (if they been kicked out or stepped out of EAZA).
Click to expand...
Morally and ethically they "should". But in reality, they do not ( @Andrew Swales has said).

*Edit - in reference to collections kicked out of EAZA*
 
Last edited:
Andrew Swales said:
Three wrongs in a row..!
Why? There is no reason why non-EAZA members should not participate, and co-operate fully with EAZA members and programmes, at all levels.
Click to expand...
If an institution has been kicked out of EAZA, which will be for good reason, then arrangements should probably be made to move EEP species to other collections. (IMO)

That doesn't take away from the fact that each situation is different, and that the keepers themselves are often fantastic. I'll also note that I don't believe PL should loose their EEP species.
 
Last edited:
ThomasNotTom said:
If an institution has been kicked out of EAZA, which will be for good reason, then arrangements should probably be made to move EEP species to other collections. (IMO)

That doesn't take away from the fact that each situation is different, and that the keepers themselves are often fantastic. I'll also note that I don't believe PL should loose their EEP species.
Click to expand...
I was not suggesting this, just that individuals on loan and when successful breeding takes place what happens to offspring, e.g. black rhino.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TNT
No 'explanation' is necessary, other than to repeat:

The three statements:
1 - Now they are not in Eaza there aren’t allowed to keep any species they dont already have
2 - EAZA/EEP owned animals should go back to the loan out institutions
3 - Morally and ethically they "should".
are all wrong.

Because, as I said above - non-EAZA collections can (and clearly do!) add species they don't already have - and participate in all levels of programmes, in which case the animals dont have to 'go back', should not 'go back' and there is no moral or ethical issue either.
I am not going to be drawn on which species and which collections, because there is plenty of data available already.
Simply checking before a post is published would save the need for corrections/contradictions.

edit - so far as I know, EAZA and the EEP programmes do not OWN any animals, as stated in number 2 above (EAZA/EEP owned animals) - so that is also wrong.
 
Last edited:
Andrew Swales said:
non-EAZA collections can (and clearly do!) add species they don't already have - and participate in all levels of programmes, in which case the animals dont have to 'go back', should not 'go back'
Click to expand...

Andrew, I agree with you. Non EAZA collections are incredibly valuable, and contribute greatly to EPPs... And so on.

But look at it like this... if an institution has been removed from an association on poor welfare grounds, and sees no wrong in what they've been doing, then IMO they should absolutely be required to move on their EEP species back to an EAZA collection.

Obviously, with longer lived species especially, ownership becomes an issue... But if a collection is given a species to participate in an EEP because they have gained membership, then that's different (and my opinion that the animals should be removed would apply).
 
ThomasNotTom said:
Andrew, I agree with you. Non EAZA collections are incredibly valuable, and contribute greatly to EPPs... And so on.

But look at it like this... if an institution has been removed from an association on poor welfare grounds, and sees no wrong in what they've been doing, then IMO they should absolutely be required to move on their EEP species back to an EAZA collection.

Obviously, with longer lived species especially, ownership becomes an issue... But if a collection is given a species to participate in an EEP because they have gained membership, then that's different (and my opinion that the animals should be removed would apply).
Click to expand...

This moves the point on from the original three points, which are wrong as they were written - and were the ones I corrected and was asked to explain.

Ejection of a member from an organisation because of poor welfare standards is a new issue completely.
Was this the case with Port Lympne?
 
In Feb 2021, Port Lympne wrote on Facebook: "Port Lympne is currently home to 14 Eastern black rhinoceros: 5 bulls and 9 cows."

Could someone help to find out, what's wrong with my list, pls? A bull is missing and I've got 10 females not 9:

Black rhino bulls:

Kingo (#341, *1983)
Sammy (#750, *1999)
Zuri (?, *2016)
no name? (?, *2018) - what's the name of this youngster?

Female black rhinos:

Arusha (#342, *1983)
Rosie (#384, *1988)
Vuyu (#558, *1991)
Ruaha #(663, *1996)
Solio (#888, *2001)
Nyasa (#911, *2003)
Nyota (#968, *2009)
Kissima (#992, *2012)
Rukuru (?, *2016)
Milimba (?, *2018)

Which of the females are going to be sent to Tanzania?
 
The bull thats missing is Malewa born in 2018

Kingo is dead i believe

Sammi may still be at Howletts
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top