ZooDoo Wildlife Park Yet more White Lions!
- Thread starter Nisha
- Start date
Just can't get it through here, can we? White lions are not distinct genetic units, ie they are not a distinct species or sub-species. They are a colour mutation resulting from a recessive allele. That we cannot seem to get that through to supposedly educated people on this list is the nub of the problem - how can we expect the general public to make the distinction...!
Last edited:
I'm not sure where this furphy comes from. Major zoos will deal with some non-ARAZPA members and sometimes will not deal with other ARAZPA members. It depends on policies within each zoo, and often comes down to personal contacts, reputation etc.
Melbourne Zoo has a formal in house accreditation any zoo can attempt, and once accredited can take Melbourne Zoo surplus. An ARAZPA zoo not accredited with Melbourne Zoo will not get animals from Melbourne Zoo. The major difference is that ARAZPA zoos get "first pick". OTOH any zoo accredited by ARAZPA is I understand automatically accredited by Melbourne Zoo. Unfortunately, as Steve well understands, the ARAZPA accreditation scheme is currently stalled.
The exception is program species, where the species coordinator will direct where animals go, and program species are almost never recommended to non-ARAZPA zoos.
Don't give up Steve, though 4 years is a long time.
But if ey are displayed alongside Tawny Lions then there should be no issue. Mogo, Canberra and until recently Zoodoo all display tawnys (not sure where ZooDoo's Lions are.
White lions are actually a very useful education tool. zoos not only educate about wildlife and conservation they are used as practical learning areas by schools teaching everything from maths to art and photgraphy. I often use white lions as an example when discussing genetics.
In the past many zoos did deliberately breed for black, and the result was inbred populations of leopards and jaguars. Once again, the principle should be breed for genetic diversity and let the alleles fall where they may. In the wild black leopards ranged from extremely rare (Africa) to very common (South-east Asia), so if conducting a breeding program for, say, Javan leopards one would expect to see a high proportion of black animals in the population.
Any one of my several applications for accreditation/membership application to be looked at.
Although we were told that our August 2009 application would be looked at either pre-Christmas or in the first week of January 2010, nothing has happened yet. My email sent 10 days ago to check on my application's progress remains unanswered. The relevant personnel are not on leave.
We won't "give up" but we will move on.
Melanism in jaguars is not comparable because it is a result of a dominant allele (two melanistic parents can have "spotted" or melanistic offspring, but two "spotted" can only have "spotted")
ScienceDirect - Current Biology : Molecular Genetics and Evolution of Melanism in the Cat Family
The last line of the abstract suggests that melanism is adaptive evolution meaning that in forested environments there would be more melanistic individuals (including leopards). This argument has been used for a whole variety of "mutant" cats including king cheetahs and white lions but never claimed for white tigers.
WHITE LIONS - MYTHOLOGY, HISTORY & GENETICS
MUTANT CHEETAHS
ARAZPAQ [or is it now ZAAQ?] is not an option for a zoo with serious exotic animal conservation ambitions.
It is a cheaper option for indigenous fauna parks.
It is significant that when our much missed Queensland Wildlife Parks Association [QWPA] was absorbed by ARAZPA, the QWPA member parks did not become members of ARAZPA. They had to either be full members of ARAZPA already or go through the whole process in order to join.
When the New Zealand parks were absorbed by ARAZPA they all became full institutional members automatically. Apparently the Kiwis were better negotiators! Our mob just gave it to them on a plate.
For a zoo in our position ARAZPAQ has little relevance.
To your knowledge Steve, are there any other outstanding applications to join ARAZPA?
What I'm driving at is whether your experience is exceptional or the norm. I can think of a dozen non-ARAZPA institutions that could benefit from membership, but how many are actually trying?
What I'm driving at is whether your experience is exceptional or the norm. I can think of a dozen non-ARAZPA institutions that could benefit from membership, but how many are actually trying?
geeze we really do go round in circles here! am i the only one who remembers this exact debate and melanism analogy when mogo brought in their white lions?
to answer ara's question, there's a big difference - black jaguars and leopards are a naturally established, and successful mutation. in fact in some regions it is supremely dominant (usually rainforests).
white lions and tigers have failed to ever establish themselves in the wild. i don't believe, as some do, that being white is even remotely advantageous. instead from all the information i have gathered, that there have only ever been the odd periodical white lion or tiger ever appear in the wild. in the case of tigers its even rarer. potentially just the one individual. these animals have been captured, taken into captivity and propagated via inbreeding.
i don't have a problem with white lions existing in the wild - so long as they were born there on their own accord. nature will take care of them in one way or another and prove once and for all just how many white lions there are supposed to be.
now we should all avoid inbreeding wherever possible, but even if zoos did frequently select leopard pairs specifically for melanism you still have a gene pool that - if returned to its place of origin, had a natural chance at survival. you can take comfort in knowing that likely hundreds of thousand of years of testing has proven that these black cats have a as a serious chance of survival as any other zoo-bred cat and that, more importantly, their genetics will be absorbed into the wild population without ill-effect.
we can't say that about white lions. because the mutation has never established itself. and the fact that there seems a number of carriers of the gene in the wild, yet so few examples of animals displaying the white coat - that its probably been around for hundreds of years - and never, ever managed to become dominant over or even a significant percentage of the overall lion population. not even in one area.
According to ARAZPA there is only one other "actually trying" but they were vague as to whether that is the Whistling Ponds Bird Sanctuary in WA which has already achieved provisional membership. Within my network of associates there are none that are now interested in joining.
There are more than a dozen that are not members but whether or not they would benefit from membership is another matter. Some have already had bad experiences with the Association and have no wish to join. Some have been members and have dropped out for a variety of reasons. Some have gone down the application path like us and have just dropped off out of sheer impatience. And some are of such a low standard that they will never achieve membership - given that any Association is only as strong as it's weakest member.
I would like to think that our experience is exceptional - maybe they just don't like me? Or my circus background? Or the fact that I tell it like it is? Or that my zoo is in the visitation catchment area of the employing park of one of their powerful board members? Who really knows?
I really don't like that last heading. . . . Mutant Cheetahs? As with our lion population there are cheetah that carry this gene. That does not make them any less valuable to our breeding programs. Sorry, off topic but just giving my two cents.
I think they mean mutant as in mutated gene - which technically it is.