Jopif, im sorry but you are talking utter rubbish. Stop please.
Cody , yes your proposal is possible and what's more was done for many years with baboons in general, in the safari parks whole early history .
Uk , and the European, safari parks in the 70s and early 80s mixed every species of baboons Imaginable ...
Mandrill, drill, hamadryas, gelada, olive, yellow, chacma etc
.....TOGETHER in the so called monkey jungles of that era. Woburn did the same. The parks bought job lots of baboons from mainly east africa to order, cheapest and easiest to obtain available, and added in whatever else was available from dealers and zoos, whether that was a group or individuals of any other species available. The large area mostly allowed co existance . Sex imbalance was the initial issue. Too many males causing baboon aggression. Genetically it'd be interesting to know exactly what the ancestry of certain safari parks baboon groups was. Lack of good heated winter housing back in those days was an issue. The hardiest most numerous species survived long term.
The monkey jungles all initially had zebra and eland in with the baboon mixes.
The baboons coexisted with the zebra and eland. Everything bred and reared young. Baboons would groom and sit on the eland and zebra. Because the mixes were successful they were followed by trios or small groups of white bearded gnus.
Then African Ugandan buffalo, young African elephant , ankole cattle, other African antelope gemsbok, kudu, waterbuck etc, ostriches, American bison, auodad, yaks, pere davids deer ,dromedaries, bactrian camels , even common hippo and young white rhinos were all added in various uk and European locations on random basis as the parks transitioned from only containing 3 plus lion reserves and a monkey jungle to the more species diverse collection everyone sees now. Correct zoo geographic mix - no one cared. The animals didn't, still don't.
The size of these monkey jungles and the trees meant there were no stress issues between baboons and other species whatsoever. Species could separate or mingle as they wanted.
To say female antelope would be stressed by baboons is simply utter nonsense.
some parks did have issues with baboons plucking ostrich plumes out ....
The other species listed eventually moved to their own enclosures as lions, lions and more lions were replaced for increased visitor intrest. Or were transfered out, some like hippo for being invisible in a pond or aggressive in a mix . But most species were brought in to the collections via the monkey jungles as a secure initial holding for adding in any ungulates .
Also the monkey jungles were usually the smaller areas than the other reserves because of the security aspect, the metal faced fencing trying, albeit it unsuccessfully to keep them in was EXTREMELY expensive. And having large number of ungulates plus the baboons all grazing and browsing knocked hell out of the trees and vegetation , making the section look awful. removal of the mutiple lion sections made available bigger areas for the growing species collections and increasing numbers of ungulates.
The reason the parks went out of baboons was they could not keep them contained in the most part , theyd escape in and out the reserves and indeed the parks causing chaos and aggravation to locals , a risk to idiot joe public who would not keep windows closed and that they were way more destructive on cars than the macaques which followed on after them.
Knowsley still has a baboon group from initial opening still with zebra . Woburn also had black bears in the monkey jungle for decades with primates obviously after zebra were pulled from the mix ! That was prior to the bongo. Safari parks mixed anything and everything back then.
No main issues with the antelope baboon mixes but there were issues due to lack of heating in what we know know now were inadequate unsuitable extremley basic winter housing for antelopes. Some of which simply can't make it with no heat. And again issues of too many male antelopes together. The founder groups were in many cases too small or surplus males only and the lack of heated winter housing are the reason species were lost.
Some parks with extremely high numbers of baboons did have incidents of baboon gang aggression to ungulates , usually linked to lack of housing and conflict over shelter but this was outside the norm.
There were issues with baboons and red neck wallabies which was tried . Baboons would grab and eat joeys. That didn't happen with antelope, the wet rainy uk and European weather was a bigger risk to newborns than anything else. From what I remember impala and Thomson gazelle were tried , this would be an unacceptable risk with baboons , just asking for trouble as far as im concerned but as far as I know extremely small founder groups, climate ,substandard winter housing and impala especially in huge enclosures hitting fences at speed were the issue. Even in reserves without baboons these species failed , as parks had transitioned to east african reserves for hoofstock mixes by then , moving most species out the monkey jungles to fill the now vacant lion reserves . Safari parks in the past were commercial ventures only, hardy species that could handle the winter with bare miniminimum housing were what was wanted. Antelopes and gazelle, apart from the hardiest which were common eland, were simply too much work and cost to house successfully be of interest to most parks.
That has changed hugely and excellent winter housing and park interest in conservation and eep's has seen safari parks fulfill their potential far more with ungulates of varied species today.
Fast forward to present. Baboons were kept with white rhino at the infamous poor husbandry south lakes successfully. Having the zebra and rhino mix there was an issue due to a relatively small enclosure in a pretentious small park with a know all xxxx all owner trying to emulate a safari park. Seeing a male Hartmann zebra chase a rhino through an electric fence and almost across a totally inadequate so called haha onto a public path demonstrated the absolute failure of standards perfectly of south lakes and its then management
Cody's sensible question is easily answered. Woburn has a beautiful area of woodland, putting big hoofstock in there would knock hell out of the woodland and damage the trees. A few bongo don't do much damage. its a beautiful exhibit, green and lush, unlike the other hoofstock sections.closely cropped trees and not a lot of trees.
There's no rubbing, bark stripping, root compression, tree destruction going on. Having baboons in big numbers in the monkey jungles destroyed the trees in many parks , the few still with primates did reduce numbers to prevent that happening .
Knowsley for ever used the monkey jungle as zebra housing part of year when the other African reserve hoofstock were calving. Once the young are up , mobile, staying with the herds the zebra could be put back . Zebra especially females with no offspring tend to seek out and destroy newborns. When they have their own foals at foot such behavior is very rare. Idk why. Stallions are variable and aggressive behavior can be directed at anything up to the size of giraffe or rhino. Or not happen at all. Having ability to move zebra between hoofstock enclosures enables management to find a sweet spot where it can work successfully.
Unlike the general opinion on this forum.
But zebra being a threat to baboons, ballderdash.
Zebra basically ignore them or allow them to groom them. And yes baboons could use trees in any ungulate aggression interaction which doesn't really happen. Ungulate males especially can be aggressive to other ungulate species just because they are, and it doesn't matter the species. The way to mostly prevent animal damage is huge areas as then the aggression usually ends once one moves away from the other. Small enclosure the aggressors still able to drive the other animal as it doesn't get out the visual area it wants it out of.
Baboons are still mixed with BULL and breeding cow African elephant at Beekse bergen. Baboons aren't stupid enough to stand and get gored trampled. They just get out of the way if they need to. But basically are ignored by large ungulates or ride on their backs and groom them. Same with rhino and buffalo
The correct answer to Cody's question is yes it would work and work well, but you need a huge area of grassland for the hoofstock PLUS the extremely expensive, and very ugly, security fencing to keep the baboons in. having gelads in acres of grassland would be ideal for them but adding to a baboon which grazes with yet more big grazers -to keep grass from being destroyed itd need to be a really big area. The risks of herpes b virus has absolutely reduced the interest in safari parks keeping primates in drive through exhibits and was the reason for finally giving up on the idea for most parks. And the customer complaints of primates damaging cars which unless you have worked in these parks you would not believe The amount of damage occurring on a daily basis.
Financially it's unlikely to occur nowadays but yes Cody it could be done and yes it would work well. What's more it'd be high animal welfare. Reason it's not done isn't incompatibility but cost of fencing, car insurance liability and grassland management.
Mixing cape buffalo and white rhino with other hoofstock has been done . Sometimes it works , sometimes not. Remember the reason it did work in the safari parks back in the day was the animals were captured in the wild as babies , were housed in bomas adjoining each other, shipped en mass in adjoining crates, on exiting quarantine were young and just grew up together in the parks. Mix adult bull rhino, bull buffalo and big bull antelope from conventional zoo backgrounds, brought up in single species setting , and putting them in a drive through together, expect issues with each other. Baboons, they're not going to care about.
cape buffalo were in most safari park drive through for years, it was perceived risk to public getting out cars was the reason the parks chose to end keeping them in the mixed drive through exhibits . Which wasn't an issue with , to the public the better looking, ankoles.
And yes mixed species exhibits can have issues. how you manage it is the issue. Keep trying till it worked or remove individual trouble makers in the past was the solution. Move them to a different section, ship them out to another park, zoo or dealer , dehorn, castrate, euthanasia. These were what remedied it in the past. Right or wrong in the individuals reading this opinions. That's not an option with eep breeding recommendations now when zoos are managing species collectively. So if the eep recommends a new bull rhino that wont tolerate the greater kudu bull, like the previous bull rhino did, then you have a problem . You can't just move another from another park in as a replacement after the weekend like what happened before.
Accidents do happen, in the wild and in zoos. Seeing the indignation even on this forum when mixes go wrong is a minefield to tread, that im not getting into.
A lot of collections have the potential to make excellent high welfare mixed species exhibits but are too worried to try nowadays.
Looking at old international zoo year books, Anthony Smiths animals on view, RD Wildlife in Britain , willey online , and old guide books in general are good resources for seeing what mixed exhibits in the safari parks especially in the past occurred and worked.
Unqualified non expert definative opinions on this forum who have done no actual specialised research from said professional resources are not.
