Zootierliste Goes Worldwide
- Thread starter Animal
- Start date
-
- Tags
- zootierliste
I've noticed that the Cingulata and Pilosa are treated as separate orders, rather than in their former order, Xenarthra. The marsupials are still all placed together, despite having been separated into several orders at an earlier date.
What is the policy regarding these fenced African reserves with animals that are free-ranging, but certainly not wild. I would think they aren't a zoo, but I found e.g. Fathala Reserve in Senegal. Several of the listed species seem to refer to completely wild animals (like the birds), whereas others are translocated animals from Southern Africa who live in a 6000 hectare enclosure, which is presented as a wild safari...
I have tried to have Ol Pejeta added to ZTL specifically for the handful of captive animals they do have, which includes chimpanzees, a single Black Rhinoceros, and of course the famous Northern White Rhinoceros.
~Thylo
~Thylo
I can confirm (having been there last year) that the large ungulates - zebra, giant eland, waterbuck, giraffe, (single) rhinoceros are indeed captive. They also have lions in a separate enclosure that we didn't see, and West African crocodiles in a fenced pool.
All the birds listed on Zootierliste, as well as the primates, rodents, small carnivores and herps (other than crocodiles) will be wild - there are no enclosures, other than the main 'safari' and the pens for lions and crocodiles. There are also warthog present, and I imagine these would be wild (being able to fit underneath the fences).
We should remove these animals then. Zootierliste only lists animals that are held in human care (or captivity, to use the outdated word). Also it has to be visitable. Private collections that down allow visitors are also not listed.
What do reliably seen brown rats and house mice within indoor exhibits count as? They eat the prepared diet and are always visible, but not intentional and some zoos implement no pest control.
We don’t list them obviously, as well as zookeepers who do inhabit the exhibits from time to time
What about feeder animals, such as feeder mice. Do they count?
But where does captivity end and "wild" start? Are animals that are free to go in 6000 hectares captive when that area is fenced? If that is the case there are countless national parks and (private) reserves in Africa that could be included in Zootierliste. Even a place like Lake Nakuru National Park in Kenya is completely fenced, so you could argue those large mammals are captive too... That is a bit of an extreme example, but there is a lot of potentially grey area...
As far as I could tell, at Fathala, the animals are managed, i.e. fed and watered, with vetinary care. So I think would count?
I think the distinction between "Groundskeepers" and "Animal keepers" should be the difference here. Do the animals get their own food? Is there predatory behaviour? Then it's a national park, and the animals count as wild. Is there a veterinary clinic for the animals? Do the animals get fed? Are the predators separated from the prey animals? Then it's a wildlife park and it counts as captivity.
I'm not nearly as well-travelled as you, of course, but I guess I'd compare it to the difference between Natuurpark Lelystad and Nationaal park de Hoge Veluwe (Veluwe animals being wild, Lelystad animals being captive)
Depends, does the zoo count them as part of their collection?
I know some zoos have grasshopper or cockroach enclosures, even though they're feeder animals. If a zoo has a feeder mouse / feeder fish display, then they're part of the collection. Do they have them behind the scenes or do they order them in? That's just food
It is not as easy as that. There are plenty of examples of "wild" animals still being (supplementary) fed in Europe and Africa, sometimes as part of the regular hunting practices, sometimes to keep wild animals attracted to a certain area or sometimes to get them through periods of food scarcity.
Alternatively there are several rare New Zealand bird species like the Takahe who are part of a breeding program and who are intensively managed including veterinary care, but still live relatively "wild" lives in protected areas (predator proof fences or predator free islands...). They aren't truly wild, though some Takahe might think of themself as wild.
OkapiJohn
Well-Known Member
After having seen an "institution" in Hungary that is more of a circus than a zoo listed in ZTL I just reached the conclusion that in ZTL everything is valid and there is not a clear definition of what a zoo is.
For me, this just compromises the validity of some numbers in ZTL.
For me, this just compromises the validity of some numbers in ZTL.
But things like temporary rehab holdings count, so why wouldn't feeder animals?
I mean all bison in the lower 48 are managed to some extent - last I was aware there weren't any truly wild ones. They act wild and as a general rule recieve little additional care, but they're not truly wild.
Because a line has to be drawn somewhere - it just gets confusing at that point as to who keeps them as part of the collection and who's feeding them off on the regular.
Personally I find the concept of listing short term temporary holdings a bit unnecessary, yeah they held it, but it was never going to stay permanently and in some cases may never even be seen by the public. Like x facility held a confiscated alligator for 2-3 days before sending it to a facility properly equipped to care for it, why does that need to count? They took it by request and quickly sent it to somewhere that could properly care for it/had space for it in their collection.
Not all bison in the lower 48, just the vast majority. The White Mountains Herd in Utah and the North Kaibab Herd in Arizona are pretty unequivocally wild (although the North Kaibab Herd is outside of the species' native range).
I'm really curious to hear the staff's view on this one. Personally, if I was making the rules for what counts I wouldn't count either, but it feels really inconsistent to count one of these cases but not the other. I ask because I have been told by non-ZTL staff that feeder animals don't count, and I'm really curious to hear an official position on it if there is one, and the justification.
It is an institution that displays animals with a set place (not roaming like a circus). The animals are kept in human care and don't live wild. So it fits. Just because some holdings are considered lesser to others, that does not change that they display animals for the public.
To clear things up:
Zootierliste.de is a valuable resource for documenting institutions that maintain animals for public display. However, to ensure consistency and accuracy, it’s important to follow these guidelines when considering whether to add an institution:
Animals Must Be Kept for Public Display (Including Behind-the-Scenes)
Institutions must have animals displayed with the intent of educating or entertaining the public. This includes animals kept behind the scenes, provided the institution meets all other criteria for public visitation. Generic aquariums in restaurants are excluded.
Must Be Accessible to Visitors
The institution must be open to the public—not a private collection restricted to select individuals. Ideally, it should allow public visits more than once a year, although at least one annual opening is the minimum requirement.
A Fixed Location is Required
Only institutions with a permanent site are eligible. Mobile setups, such as traveling zoos or moving animal collections, are not included.
Animals Must Be Kept, Not Wild or Free-Ranging
The animals must live under the care of the institution and not be self-sustaining in the wild. Semi-wild places, where animals largely fend for themselves and are only occasionally supplemented with food or support, are not eligible for listing.
By adhering to these criteria, we can maintain the integrity and usefulness of Zootierliste.de as a resource for zoological enthusiasts and researchers.
Zootierliste.de is a valuable resource for documenting institutions that maintain animals for public display. However, to ensure consistency and accuracy, it’s important to follow these guidelines when considering whether to add an institution:
Animals Must Be Kept for Public Display (Including Behind-the-Scenes)Institutions must have animals displayed with the intent of educating or entertaining the public. This includes animals kept behind the scenes, provided the institution meets all other criteria for public visitation. Generic aquariums in restaurants are excluded.
Must Be Accessible to VisitorsThe institution must be open to the public—not a private collection restricted to select individuals. Ideally, it should allow public visits more than once a year, although at least one annual opening is the minimum requirement.
A Fixed Location is RequiredOnly institutions with a permanent site are eligible. Mobile setups, such as traveling zoos or moving animal collections, are not included.
Animals Must Be Kept, Not Wild or Free-RangingThe animals must live under the care of the institution and not be self-sustaining in the wild. Semi-wild places, where animals largely fend for themselves and are only occasionally supplemented with food or support, are not eligible for listing.
By adhering to these criteria, we can maintain the integrity and usefulness of Zootierliste.de as a resource for zoological enthusiasts and researchers.