An argument for white tiger extinction

[DavidBrown]

The author argues a scientific and ethical case for why white tigers should not be propagated or kept in zoos.

White tiger controversy: Zoos shouldn’t raise these inbred, ecologically irrelevant animals. - Slate Magazine

 

[Pertinax]

Interesting read. But I would dispute the suggestion that the gene for 'White' colour itself also expresses other faults like crosseyes etc, which I believe like the other defects, also stem from the inbreeding involved to create White Tigers. The original White tigers in India were very healthy animals, normal in every other respect other than their colour.

The suggestion is also made that their places in Zoos could be taken by purebred Sumatran and Siberian tigers in need of conservation, but no mention is made in that context of the need of Indian tigers, the species from which the White tigers were themselves originally derived.

 

[ThylacineAlive]

I've said this before but I think that, if zoos still want to display white tigers, the AZA should phase-out these hybrids and import pure individuals of both normal and white color from India. If they don't want to do that, then phase-out hybrid Bengals (except maybe the Golden Tigers) and replace them with Sumatrans, Amurs, or Malayans. I'd prefer the first option better, though. Does anyone know if there are any pure Golden Tigers anywhere?

~Thylo

 

[Chlidonias]

I've said this before but I think that, if zoos still want to display white tigers, the AZA should phase-out these hybrids and import pure individuals of both normal and white color from India. If they don't want to do that, then phase-out hybrid Bengals (except maybe the Golden Tigers) and replace them with Sumatrans, Amurs, or Malayans. I'd prefer the first option better, though. Does anyone know if there are any pure Golden Tigers anywhere?

why not "golden tigers"?

 

[ThylacineAlive]

why not "golden tigers"?

Because they are extremely rare and an even more popular animal than white tigers and, again, are there really any pure Goldens anywhere nowadays?

 

[elefante]

This is a very thought-provoking article. I really enjoy seeing white tigers in zoos as I think they are stunning creatures (I particularly like their blue eyes). However, the article and the AZA PDF included make a very good point that subspecies like the Amur and Sumatran are endangered and that white tigers take up valuable space for these animals. I guess my question is, would the AZA be opposed to white tigers from India where apparently many are not inbred like their American counterparts? Also, what about white lions from South Africa? There are are areas where those naturally occur aren't there? Are some of them not inbred? Are king cheetahs that severely inbred and are they even that common in zoos? I've never seen one of them or a white lion. I know I took this a bit off topic but I do think this is a very thought-provoking article and, forgive the expression, the issue is not black and white.

 

[reduakari]

Because they are extremely rare and an even more popular animal than white tigers and, again, are there really any pure Goldens anywhere nowadays?

"golden" tigers are by definition not "pure." Just like white tigers, they are the result of intentional inbreeding. Just like white tigers, they take space and resources that would be better used to help Amur, Sumatran and Malayan tigers.

 

[Chlidonias]

I always like to read the comments on articles like this one

This article may well be true, but where are all the unbiased references backing up what this person is saying? It's all very well shoving in biased website links but what's really needed are scientific journals and papers proving all of these facts, otherwise this could just be the ramblings of a fool.

What a load of crap! White tigers did appear naturally, of course anything white is not likely to survive long in a predatory world. Human intevention has helped to maintain white tigers. I like white tigers! I think they are beuatiful (same as the regular ones). If there are genetic defects, these can be bred away from and still preserve the white. Whoever wrote this article is a complete idiot on breeding. I would prefer to continue to see white tigers and not have them become a 'distant memory', we have enough of those.

 

[ThylacineAlive]

"golden" tigers are by definition not "pure." Just like white tigers, they are the result of intentional inbreeding. Just like white tigers, they take space and resources that would be better used to help Amur, Sumatran and Malayan tigers.

There are pure whites, they live in India and the rest of the Bengal Tigers remaining wild range. Is it crazy to think that there may be a pure Golden Bengal Tiger out there somewhere?

@elefante- Yes Malayans, Sumatrans, and Amurs are endangered but so are Bengals. If we want white tigers in zoos in the US then we might as well own and be breeding the Endangered animal as appose to the generic animal (as long as we breed normal-colored ones as well).

 

[elefante]

There are pure whites, they live in India and the rest of the Bengal Tigers remaining wild range. Is it crazy to think that there may be a pure Golden Bengal Tiger out there somewhere?

@elefante- Yes Malayans, Sumatrans, and Amurs are endangered but so are Bengals. If we want white tigers in zoos in the US then we might as well own and be breeding the Endangered animal as appose to the generic animal (as long as we breed normal-colored ones as well).

I did neglect to mention Bengals didn't I? If the white tigers in zoos are purebred Bengals then would that make it wrong to have them? They would not be a crossbreed that would have no conservation value, just a different color. Then would that make them different from black jaguars and leopards or the other color variants of other cats mentioned that do occur in the wild?

 

[reduakari]

There are pure whites, they live in India and the rest of the Bengal Tigers remaining wild range. Is it crazy to think that there may be a pure Golden Bengal Tiger out there somewhere?

@elefante- Yes Malayans, Sumatrans, and Amurs are endangered but so are Bengals. If we want white tigers in zoos in the US then we might as well own and be breeding the Endangered animal as appose to the generic animal (as long as we breed normal-colored ones as well).

Please....

The ignorance displayed by these comments is really discouraging. Please do just a little research--all white tigers and (especially) "goldens" are thoroughly inbred and generic. They offer zero conservation value.

 

[Arizona Docent]

Most (perhaps all) of what is said in the article many of us knew. The one interesting tidbit is his experiment in asking Facebook friends to make statements about white tigers to prove how misinformed the public is. Of course people on the other extreme - such as the author of this article - are also misinformed. White tigers DID live to adulthood as healthy animals - the white gene does not make them unable to survive. (Over a dozen adult whites were shot in India during the first half of the 19th century). The crosseyed effect is not a natural defect in white tigers - it is a result of inbreeding (and would occur in closely related orange tigers as well).

As a matter of fact, there are a few responsible breeders (non AZA of course) that are producing very beautiful cats right now without these effects because they have injected new bloodlines. Perhaps the best example is this place in South Carolina: RSF | Rare Species Fund| TIGERS | The Institute of the Greatly Endangered and Rare Species | Myrtle Beach, South Carolina

As with many issues, I think the most sensible is a middle ground. Do not breed specifically for the white gene, but do not try to eliminate it either. Start an indian tiger (I prefer that term over bengal) breeding program with a large number of oranges, only a couple whites (healthy imports from India), and let the gene randomly occur on occasion as it would in the wild.

 

[elefante]

Most (perhaps all) of what is said in the article many of us knew. The one interesting tidbit is his experiment in asking Facebook friends to make statements about white tigers to prove how misinformed the public is. Of course people on the other extreme - such as the author of this article - are also misinformed. White tigers DID live to adulthood as healthy animals - the white gene does not make them unable to survive. (Over a dozen adult whites were shot in India during the first half of the 19th century). The crosseyed effect is not a natural defect in white tigers - it is a result of inbreeding (and would occur in closely related orange tigers as well).

As a matter of fact, there are a few responsible breeders (non AZA of course) that are producing very beautiful cats right now without these effects because they have injected new bloodlines. Perhaps the best example is this place in South Carolina: RSF | Rare Species Fund| TIGERS | The Institute of the Greatly Endangered and Rare Species | Myrtle Beach, South Carolina

As with many issues, I think the most sensible is a middle ground. Do not breed specifically for the white gene, but do not try to eliminate it either. Start an indian tiger (I prefer that term over bengal) breeding program with a large number of oranges, only a couple whites (healthy imports from India), and let the gene randomly occur on occasion as it would in the wild.

I like the way you think.

 

[Hix]

Most (perhaps all) of what is said in the article many of us knew. The one interesting tidbit is his experiment in asking Facebook friends to make statements about white tigers to prove how misinformed the public is. Of course people on the other extreme - such as the author of this article - are also misinformed. White tigers DID live to adulthood as healthy animals - the white gene does not make them unable to survive. (Over a dozen adult whites were shot in India during the first half of the 19th century). The crosseyed effect is not a natural defect in white tigers - it is a result of inbreeding (and would occur in closely related orange tigers as well).

As a matter of fact, there are a few responsible breeders (non AZA of course) that are producing very beautiful cats right now without these effects because they have injected new bloodlines. Perhaps the best example is this place in South Carolina: RSF | Rare Species Fund| TIGERS | The Institute of the Greatly Endangered and Rare Species | Myrtle Beach, South Carolina

As with many issues, I think the most sensible is a middle ground. Do not breed specifically for the white gene, but do not try to eliminate it either. Start an indian tiger (I prefer that term over bengal) breeding program with a large number of oranges, only a couple whites (healthy imports from India), and let the gene randomly occur on occasion as it would in the wild.

This is the response I have been hoping to see.



Hix

 

[reduakari]

Most (perhaps all) of what is said in the article many of us knew. The one interesting tidbit is his experiment in asking Facebook friends to make statements about white tigers to prove how misinformed the public is. Of course people on the other extreme - such as the author of this article - are also misinformed. White tigers DID live to adulthood as healthy animals - the white gene does not make them unable to survive. (Over a dozen adult whites were shot in India during the first half of the 19th century). The crosseyed effect is not a natural defect in white tigers - it is a result of inbreeding (and would occur in closely related orange tigers as well).

As a matter of fact, there are a few responsible breeders (non AZA of course) that are producing very beautiful cats right now without these effects because they have injected new bloodlines. Perhaps the best example is this place in South Carolina: RSF | Rare Species Fund| TIGERS | The Institute of the Greatly Endangered and Rare Species | Myrtle Beach, South Carolina

As with many issues, I think the most sensible is a middle ground. Do not breed specifically for the white gene, but do not try to eliminate it either. Start an indian tiger (I prefer that term over bengal) breeding program with a large number of oranges, only a couple whites (healthy imports from India), and let the gene randomly occur on occasion as it would in the wild.

.
Sorry, while you are clearly well-intentioned, intelligent and connected to many big cat organizations, any argument that relies on "expertise" of charlatans like those in charge of "TIGERS" (one quick glance at their website says it all) cannot be considered credible. There are not enough spaces in zoos (AZA or otherwise) to support viable long-term populations of three tiger subspecies, much less four. Yes, white tigers are pretty, and it's possible they may have occured with some regularity in India in the past. But have any wild white tigers been seen, much less added to the captive population, in the past 50 years? And why should precious space and scarce money be devoted to breeding a tiger subspecies that is by far the most plentiful in the wild and well-maintained in captivity in its home range, at the expense of other much rarer and more vulnerable subspecies?

 

[Chlidonias]

a couple of things worth pointing out:

1) the white gene in captive tigers descends entirely from one animal (Mohan, caught in 1951). The white tigers in India, whilst pure Indian tigers, are still highly inbred.

2) apparently strabismus (i.e. the cross-eyed effect) is directly linked to the white gene and is not caused by inbreeding. Not all white tigers are visibly cross-eyed but all carry the abnormality in their brain's wiring.

 

[DDcorvus]

So the gene cause strabismus is on on the same gene as the one for the white colour. Is there any testing being done to establish the cross-over percentage? It is probably very low, but it can't be 0% so when breeding sufficient white tigers with unrelated normal coloured ones you should be able to split the two effects.

If it's ethical and if any institution would have the will and capacity to do it are different things. Plus you would end up with more useless generic white tigers.

 

[Pertinax]

a couple of things worth pointing out:

1) the white gene in captive tigers descends entirely from one animal (Mohan, caught in 1951). The white tigers in India, whilst pure Indian tigers, are still highly inbred.

2) apparently strabismus (i.e. the cross-eyed effect) is directly linked to the white gene and is not caused by inbreeding. Not all white tigers are visibly cross-eyed but all carry the abnormality in their brain's wiring.

1) White cubs were also produced from two normal tigers, with no known connection to 'Mohan', in the Hawthorn's Circus in the USA and the two lines, 'Rewa' and 'Circus', have subsequently merged as well as being crossed with other Tiger races-primarily Siberian, to the extent there are no purebred Whites outside of India. It is true the Whites in Indian zoos are highly inbred as they have been as guilty as anywhere else of mass-producing this colour phase.

2. Can you give me a reference for the Strabismus/white gene link theory? 'Mohan' was never described as such, his (inbred) white offspring 'Champak' and 'Chemili' which went to Bristol Zoo certainly weren't, nor to my knowledge were any of their cubs or the other subsequent, increasigly inbred, White Tigers at Bristol.

 

[Pertinax]

There are pure whites, they live in India and the rest of the Bengal Tigers remaining wild range. Is it crazy to think that there may be a pure Golden Bengal Tiger out there somewhere?
.

Fallacy. There are many purebred, but very inbred, White Tigers in Indian Zoos nowadays. But they only occur in the wild very rarely indeed, and even then normally in only one small part of Central India.

The Golden 'tabby' Tiger is yet another product of selective breeding between White and normal tigers and is in effect an artificial mutation. Note that not all cubs from such crossings(white x normal) carry the Tabby gene, only the occassional ones do though it can be selectively bred for, as can any mutation.. So in the wild as Whites only occur so rarely, the chance of any Golden/Tabby tigers being produced must be infinitessimal.

 

[Pertinax]

White tigers DID live to adulthood as healthy animals - the white gene does not make them unable to survive. (Over a dozen adult whites were shot in India during the first half of the 19th century). The crosseyed effect is not a natural defect in white tigers - it is a result of inbreeding (and would occur in closely related orange tigers as well).

As with many issues, I think the most sensible is a middle ground. Do not breed specifically for the white gene, but do not try to eliminate it either. Start an indian tiger (I prefer that term over bengal) breeding program with a large number of oranges, only a couple whites (healthy imports from India), and let the gene randomly occur on occasion as it would in the wild.

They certainly did live to maturity, even in the wild if allowed too, before being shot. The original white male 'Mohan' lived to a venerable old age in captivity. He was described as an exceptionally large and fine specimen and the original (non-inbred) White tigers were usually regarded as slightly larger in body-size, than normal.

I had first hand experience of the first Whites kept at Bristol Zoo(the two surviving cubs of the third litter of Mohan x Radha). From memory 'Champak' and 'Chemili' were not crosseyed, nor were their cubs, nor (to my knowledge) were any subsquent Whites at Bristol. If Strabismus is linked to the White gene then it certainly should have showed up there. I believe, as you said, it is related to inbreeding, whatever the colour of the Tiger. Although Bristol's Whites were obviously inbred, that factor didn't seem to cause it either. However that was only a few generations of inbreeding, and such defects may not appear until the inbreeding has become more extreme still or may only crop up in certain lines/strains anyway.

Regarding breeding from pure Indian Tigers(I too prefer that name and think that term is correct over 'Bengal'- 'Bengal' tigers would come from Bengal (only), Indian Tigers come from India as a whole) The incidence of the White gene appearing in captive breeding might also depend on the area of origin of the parents as White tigers in India have nearly all come from just the one district. Normal tigers obtained from that region might or might not carry the gene, whereas if zoos were breeding with Tigers which came from any other part of India, White cubs would probably never be produced. However, a high percentage of normal-coloured Tigers in Indian Zoos probably now carry the white gene also as a result of repeated breeding projects, and as Indian zoo-bred Tigers are the only ones likely to ever be acquired by Zoos outside India, the chances of them producing White cubs are probably very much higher than from wild-caught Tigers.