The Woodland Park Zoo responds to these articles with an editorial column in the Seattle Times: Op-ed: Zoos play a vital role protecting wild elephants and their habitat | Opinion | The Seattle Times
Major news article on elephants in zoos
- Thread starter DavidBrown
- Start date
Quick question - why is the breeding / survival of Asian elephants in American zoos so bad while the European population´ve already reached the break-even point (births = deaths)? And at the same time, the situation among African elephants is the total oposite, in Europe they are dying out while the breeding in America is so much better.
Much (all?) of the wave of African elephant reproduction in the U.S. is from wild caught individuals that came from South Africa to the San Diego Zoo's Wild Animal Park and Lowry Park Zoo in Florida. It will be interesting to see what happens with the reproductive patterns of their captive born offspring.
Egos. Americans zoos had the chance 10 years ago to cooperate with each other and redistribute breeding age elephants to encourage reproduction. However, most of them hesitated about moving elephants because they wanted to do it themselves (via AI or wait until money could be found to build better exhibits to bring in a bull - meanwhile many biological clocks ran out), or they felt that their individual elephant was important for their community and couldn't see that elephant leaving.
If you look closely, you will find that neither Asians nor Africans are doing well reproductively in America. And even though Europe's African elephants reproductive rate is about the same as Americas, they are much better off because it is a much younger population than in America.
casuariusb
Member
The reporter was well aware of these databases. Your supercilious comment is an example of the ignorance frequently shown by zoo supporters as to the scientific value of these software compendiums. These databases do store a huge amount of valuable information and ZIMS, when fully functioning, will be an important resource. But, please don't ignore the limitations.
Although the membership has probably doubled in the last twenty years, stored data is, in the main, only from ISIS member zoos who represent considerably less than half of existing institutions. The records are about species traded and kept within these zoos and not a species' database. Attempts to use ARKS as a basis for regulatory purposes in Europe failed because of the one-sided and incompleteness of the data.
Prior to the 1980s very few zoos kept records of any kind and ARKS (ZIMS) contains a huge amount of speculative, incomplete and unverifiable historical data. The founders of, at least some, species survival programmes have been subsequently shown to be of different species and the genetic purity of others has been seriously questioned.
With regard to the elephants in the US, the AZA studbooks are not available for scrutiny so it is difficult to know how detailed the background is, but it would be very surprising if animals in all zoos, circuses and private collections are included. AZA is not interested in the species, per se, just in the holdings of selected zoos. Making AZA out to be an authority on elephants, or any other species, has to be made with caveats.
Studbooks for both Asian and African elephants in the United states are available on the taxon advisory group website. Where it does include non-AZA/SSP animals.
AZA TAG Documents
The Association of zoos and Aquariums is more of an authority on elephant care and welfare than I believe you're aware of. The policies which are slated to be instated in the coming years will truly modernize elephant care in the United states. If the AZA didn't care for elephants as you claim, then why would they even draft such specific guidelines for excellence in care? Why would they begin the National Elephant Center initiative (the first phase will be complete in January). See, there is the true fallacy in your argument. If the AZA didn't care/wasn't an authority on elephants, and only cared about filling spots at member institutions, why would they build an offsite facility which would not be actively breeding elephants?
Lastly why did you refer to @Gerenuk in a condescending manor as a "pro zoo." Unfortunately for you I suppose this is a zoo enthusiast message board. Pro Zoo people are not the minority in this instance.
I'm sorry casuriusb, but your comments show some ignorance on your behalf.
Regarding the article, the author does not mention any existence of computer databases used by zoological institutions. He claimed that zoos do not comprehensively track births and deaths. This is completely false. As with any data collection, there will always be limitations and errors involved. Science itself is not perfect. And no claims have been made on this thread to indicate that ARKS, medARKS, ZIMS, etc are any different.
Your comments regarding elephants and studbooks in North America are also not true. These documents are publicly available and the data contained is open to correction. Studbooks are living documents and are constantly being revised.
Your comments on the AZA are true to an extent. AZA is merely a public relations organization that gives American zoos a collective voice and assists in coordinating activities amongst American zoos. However, further discussion of what the AZA really is belongs in its own discussion. I would like to note that the people involved with the AZA elephant TAG and SSPs are more of an authority on elephants than you and I are. And it would be an insult to many of those working with elephants, to claim that they are not interested in the species.
And finally concerning your personal attack on me, I do not claim to be superior to anyone on this website. But I will find it necessary to provide actual facts (unlike many of the false claims that Michael Berens made in his series of elephant articles) and perspective on issues that can provide some clarity. While I am not an authority on elephants, I am also not just a zoo supporter as you have claimed. I am not sure how journalism is perceived in Europe, but in America journalists' reports are often trusted and many times treated as fact without question. Mr. Berens's articles had many inaccuracies and I felt compelled to point them out. Just like Mr. Berens statements, any of mine are open to debate, and the facts that I provide can easily be found.
Regarding the article, the author does not mention any existence of computer databases used by zoological institutions. He claimed that zoos do not comprehensively track births and deaths. This is completely false. As with any data collection, there will always be limitations and errors involved. Science itself is not perfect. And no claims have been made on this thread to indicate that ARKS, medARKS, ZIMS, etc are any different.
Your comments regarding elephants and studbooks in North America are also not true. These documents are publicly available and the data contained is open to correction. Studbooks are living documents and are constantly being revised.
Your comments on the AZA are true to an extent. AZA is merely a public relations organization that gives American zoos a collective voice and assists in coordinating activities amongst American zoos. However, further discussion of what the AZA really is belongs in its own discussion. I would like to note that the people involved with the AZA elephant TAG and SSPs are more of an authority on elephants than you and I are. And it would be an insult to many of those working with elephants, to claim that they are not interested in the species.
And finally concerning your personal attack on me, I do not claim to be superior to anyone on this website. But I will find it necessary to provide actual facts (unlike many of the false claims that Michael Berens made in his series of elephant articles) and perspective on issues that can provide some clarity. While I am not an authority on elephants, I am also not just a zoo supporter as you have claimed. I am not sure how journalism is perceived in Europe, but in America journalists' reports are often trusted and many times treated as fact without question. Mr. Berens's articles had many inaccuracies and I felt compelled to point them out. Just like Mr. Berens statements, any of mine are open to debate, and the facts that I provide can easily be found.
I believe casuriusb is attempting to claim that the AZA is more interested in maintaining elephants in captivity than conserving elephants in the wild. And there is truth to this argument. However, it is in the interest of any individual, organization, or company to ensure its own survival. And for the past decade, American zoos have been challenged with an elephant demographic crisis that must be taken care of first, before other priorities of elephant husbandry and conservation can continue. However, his comments do come off as brash and insulting; and he does not seem interested in a respectable debate.
casuariusb
Member
The phrase “elephant care and welfare” or any imputation concerning it did not appear in the text. Your response suggests a guilty conscience.
There is nothing defamatory or incorrect about claiming “AZA is not interested in the species, per se, just in the holdings of selected zoos”. AZA does not pretend its mission is otherwise, despite being very active in species conservation.
Yes, both studbooks are online in abridged form. As the authors/studbook keepers state, there are gaps requiring more research. Although deserving treatment under another topic, questions concerning geographical origins, the potential importance of individual wild populations and maintaining their genetic and behavioural traits, not to mention the African species split, are not dealt with as far as I am aware. How much comparative DNA work has been done? With your key connections you must know all the answers.
Again, a Pavlovian response to anything which might be construed as 'zoo critical'. I consider “pro zoo” to be an accolade. What I object to is anyone blithely repeating tantra without placing it in perspective. Zoo enthusiasts do not need to rely on hype or gratuitous aspertions to validate their opinions.
casuariusb
Member
Without wishing to antagonise you further or be disrespectful in any way, it was your original comment “the reporter doesn't know about ARKS, medARKS, or the emerging ZIMS” which prompted my response.
Just like you, I am neither an expert on elephants nor just a zoo supporter.
Mr Berens' articles, flawed as they may have been, were the result of considerable research and highlighted a specific problem regarding the future of captive elephants in the US. It was at least catty, my original formulation was 'snide', of you to suggest the research omitted to look at the obvious sources.
From personal contact I am well aware of the devotion displayed by those associated with elephants to their welfare and conservation.
My faith in the veracity of articles published in the press, in books, in scientific papers, in chat shows, press releases and online web pages is limited. The wisdom of experts needs to be treated with as much respect as the depth of impartiality behind it. Journalists, of necessity, must regularly formulate material for publication which is interesting, sometimes contentious, but essentially remains a personal viewpoint while justifying their salary. Trust is something I reserve for my dog.
What Michael Berens' articles might hopefully encourage is a more general discussion about how zoos should approach the future keeping of elephants and their management. Already, Woodland Park Zoo has weighed in with an excellent summary of its own views (Op-ed: Zoos play a vital role protecting wild elephants and their habitat | Opinion | The Seattle Times). A realisation of a widespread educational conservation function for zoos does however entail a resolution of the demographic problem.
Biologically, elephants are herd animals and although individual males are encountered after hierarchical disputes equilibrium and welfare is best achieved through family groups. Financial and space restrictions preclude the indefinite expansion of most zoos and consideration has already been given by AZA for the establishment of large ranges, outside any particular zoo, to support natural growth. Just how 'natural' remains to be seen, but the commitment should include an obligation to focus on geographical origins.
You have not expanded on how you think the demographic crisis might be resolved and this would be interesting to hear. Selecting this focus instead of dealing with husbandry and conservation in parallel will be emotionally difficult. Imports from the wild will certainly only be possible from a limited number of populations. AI may be part of a solution as imported sperm might give the genetic match necessary. Any long delay in implementing a solution is likely to lead to an elephant-less US.
Hope this is not too brash and insulting.
Just like you, I am neither an expert on elephants nor just a zoo supporter.
Mr Berens' articles, flawed as they may have been, were the result of considerable research and highlighted a specific problem regarding the future of captive elephants in the US. It was at least catty, my original formulation was 'snide', of you to suggest the research omitted to look at the obvious sources.
From personal contact I am well aware of the devotion displayed by those associated with elephants to their welfare and conservation.
My faith in the veracity of articles published in the press, in books, in scientific papers, in chat shows, press releases and online web pages is limited. The wisdom of experts needs to be treated with as much respect as the depth of impartiality behind it. Journalists, of necessity, must regularly formulate material for publication which is interesting, sometimes contentious, but essentially remains a personal viewpoint while justifying their salary. Trust is something I reserve for my dog.
What Michael Berens' articles might hopefully encourage is a more general discussion about how zoos should approach the future keeping of elephants and their management. Already, Woodland Park Zoo has weighed in with an excellent summary of its own views (Op-ed: Zoos play a vital role protecting wild elephants and their habitat | Opinion | The Seattle Times). A realisation of a widespread educational conservation function for zoos does however entail a resolution of the demographic problem.
Biologically, elephants are herd animals and although individual males are encountered after hierarchical disputes equilibrium and welfare is best achieved through family groups. Financial and space restrictions preclude the indefinite expansion of most zoos and consideration has already been given by AZA for the establishment of large ranges, outside any particular zoo, to support natural growth. Just how 'natural' remains to be seen, but the commitment should include an obligation to focus on geographical origins.
You have not expanded on how you think the demographic crisis might be resolved and this would be interesting to hear. Selecting this focus instead of dealing with husbandry and conservation in parallel will be emotionally difficult. Imports from the wild will certainly only be possible from a limited number of populations. AI may be part of a solution as imported sperm might give the genetic match necessary. Any long delay in implementing a solution is likely to lead to an elephant-less US.
Hope this is not too brash and insulting.
I appreciate the change in your dialogue, but you still seem quick to judge me.
I hope you took the opportunity to read Mr. Berens’s articles. I was pointing out the inaccuracies in Mr. Berens’s articles, not his research. As I mentioned before, the author claimed that there was not such database used by the zoo community to track births and deaths. This claim is certainly not true, and never did I suggest how this author should conduct his research. I don’t mind criticism of zoos or their husbandry, but I don’t tolerate false claims.
And I am glad that you too believe how flawed his articles were. Unfortunately most people do not share the same feelings towards media as you and I do. I doubt Mr. Berens’s articles will encourage too much discussion about the approach to elephant management philosophy. However it will help set the tone for how the Woodland Park and Oregon Zoos make future decisions regarding collection planning and management. Mr. Berens’s articles only seemed to have reached a more regional, rather than national audience. Maybe if the articles had been written 5-10 years ago, would a forum then be necessary on a larger scale.
However, as I’m sure you are aware, over 10 years ago a study was conducted on the sustainability of elephants in AZA zoos and the results were damaging to elephant managers. Headlines were certainly made then and zoos collectively began to look at elephants differently in America. As you have mentioned before in your editorials, zoos are not quick to change and the process has been slow for zoos to create more adaptive management for elephants in regard to their biology and management. A poor economy and zoo politics has also slowed this effort.
I have not expanded on my views pertaining to the American captive elephant demographics because I do not offer my opinions unless asked on this website – it would simply take too much time to do so. Building natural herds of elephants will take a long time, especially since most American zoos have only been minimally breeding elephants for about 10 years. Only a handful of zoos are able to achieve multi-generational family herds in the next 10 years (Syracuse, Saint Louis, Pittsburgh, Fort Worth, and African Lion Safari). And your desire to see elephant breeding based on subspecies is not possible in America – it would require too many imports from the wild and more zoos making commitments to display elephants.
Casuariusb your comments suggest that you are somewhat unfamiliar to the elephant situation in American zoos. They have been attempting to solve this crisis for over 10 years now, and it has been emotionally and politically difficult. The potential number of founders for both species has dwindled considerably in this time, and it will be necessary for imports to occur in the future. The African elephant population has already been bolstered with imports since 2003 (SDWAP, Lowry Park, Pittsburgh, and Puebla, Mexico). The first imports of Asian elephants since the early 1990s will occur soon with 3.0 from Europe. Many of the future Asian elephant imports will most likely come from zoos overseas with a few imports from range countries. Most elephants in America are unrelated to elephants in zoos overseas.
Artificial insemination is a large part of the solution to this demographics issue. Only a handful of zoos actually breed their African elephant naturally, 40% of African elephants born in North America in the last 5 years are results from successful AI. It has been less successful with Asian elephants. However, using imported sperm will not happen for some time. There are no current policies regarding the import of sperm from exotic ungulates into the US. Research and policy development has been ongoing for over 10 years. American zoos have been insistent on the use of AI technology for elephants, which has been a big reason why American zoos have not made the necessary transfers to create breeding herds. I’m not completely familiar with the economics of elephants in Europe, but in America elephant calves are no different than giant pandas when it comes to attracting guests and donors. Many American zoos wanted a piece of this pie. In addition, the threat of EEHV infections and the over-representation of certain bull elephants will continue to hamper the future of the American elephant population.
Your prediction is rather late, because these long delays have already hampered the efforts of the elephant SSPs. Both populations will continue to see high death rates for the next 10 years – about 40% of elephants in North America are over 40 yrs old. And it may take 15 or 20 years before America zoos can reach demographic sustainability. I have been observing the changes occurring with American zoos and elephant for about 15 years now and have found its evolution fascinating. It was disappointing to watch for those first 10 years how unorganized and uncooperative zoos were with their elephants. But recent changes in the last 2-3 years have shown more progress than the previous 10 years. My only offer of solution at this moment to the demographic program is for the transfer of bulls across the continent on a regular basis (every 5 – 7 years) and the consolidation of small herds into breeding and non-breeding herds. However, the elephant SSPs already seem to be working on this. The next 5 years will certainly be interesting to observe.
I hope you took the opportunity to read Mr. Berens’s articles. I was pointing out the inaccuracies in Mr. Berens’s articles, not his research. As I mentioned before, the author claimed that there was not such database used by the zoo community to track births and deaths. This claim is certainly not true, and never did I suggest how this author should conduct his research. I don’t mind criticism of zoos or their husbandry, but I don’t tolerate false claims.
And I am glad that you too believe how flawed his articles were. Unfortunately most people do not share the same feelings towards media as you and I do. I doubt Mr. Berens’s articles will encourage too much discussion about the approach to elephant management philosophy. However it will help set the tone for how the Woodland Park and Oregon Zoos make future decisions regarding collection planning and management. Mr. Berens’s articles only seemed to have reached a more regional, rather than national audience. Maybe if the articles had been written 5-10 years ago, would a forum then be necessary on a larger scale.
However, as I’m sure you are aware, over 10 years ago a study was conducted on the sustainability of elephants in AZA zoos and the results were damaging to elephant managers. Headlines were certainly made then and zoos collectively began to look at elephants differently in America. As you have mentioned before in your editorials, zoos are not quick to change and the process has been slow for zoos to create more adaptive management for elephants in regard to their biology and management. A poor economy and zoo politics has also slowed this effort.
I have not expanded on my views pertaining to the American captive elephant demographics because I do not offer my opinions unless asked on this website – it would simply take too much time to do so. Building natural herds of elephants will take a long time, especially since most American zoos have only been minimally breeding elephants for about 10 years. Only a handful of zoos are able to achieve multi-generational family herds in the next 10 years (Syracuse, Saint Louis, Pittsburgh, Fort Worth, and African Lion Safari). And your desire to see elephant breeding based on subspecies is not possible in America – it would require too many imports from the wild and more zoos making commitments to display elephants.
Casuariusb your comments suggest that you are somewhat unfamiliar to the elephant situation in American zoos. They have been attempting to solve this crisis for over 10 years now, and it has been emotionally and politically difficult. The potential number of founders for both species has dwindled considerably in this time, and it will be necessary for imports to occur in the future. The African elephant population has already been bolstered with imports since 2003 (SDWAP, Lowry Park, Pittsburgh, and Puebla, Mexico). The first imports of Asian elephants since the early 1990s will occur soon with 3.0 from Europe. Many of the future Asian elephant imports will most likely come from zoos overseas with a few imports from range countries. Most elephants in America are unrelated to elephants in zoos overseas.
Artificial insemination is a large part of the solution to this demographics issue. Only a handful of zoos actually breed their African elephant naturally, 40% of African elephants born in North America in the last 5 years are results from successful AI. It has been less successful with Asian elephants. However, using imported sperm will not happen for some time. There are no current policies regarding the import of sperm from exotic ungulates into the US. Research and policy development has been ongoing for over 10 years. American zoos have been insistent on the use of AI technology for elephants, which has been a big reason why American zoos have not made the necessary transfers to create breeding herds. I’m not completely familiar with the economics of elephants in Europe, but in America elephant calves are no different than giant pandas when it comes to attracting guests and donors. Many American zoos wanted a piece of this pie. In addition, the threat of EEHV infections and the over-representation of certain bull elephants will continue to hamper the future of the American elephant population.
Your prediction is rather late, because these long delays have already hampered the efforts of the elephant SSPs. Both populations will continue to see high death rates for the next 10 years – about 40% of elephants in North America are over 40 yrs old. And it may take 15 or 20 years before America zoos can reach demographic sustainability. I have been observing the changes occurring with American zoos and elephant for about 15 years now and have found its evolution fascinating. It was disappointing to watch for those first 10 years how unorganized and uncooperative zoos were with their elephants. But recent changes in the last 2-3 years have shown more progress than the previous 10 years. My only offer of solution at this moment to the demographic program is for the transfer of bulls across the continent on a regular basis (every 5 – 7 years) and the consolidation of small herds into breeding and non-breeding herds. However, the elephant SSPs already seem to be working on this. The next 5 years will certainly be interesting to observe.
Last edited:
If you look at the numbers listed in the SSP we do have an older population but we have a boom of males between 5-15 years old. More Zoos need Bachelor herds if we are ever going to get decent and workable sex ratios.
There are plenty of spaces for males elephants in zoos right now. It will be 10-15 years before more space for true bachelor herds is absolutely necessary - especially since TNEC is opening next year and Pittsburgh off site facility is expanding.
Also, of the younger generation (those born since 1990) - the sex ratio is quite even for both species. Asians: 31.37 Africans: 29.33
Also, of the younger generation (those born since 1990) - the sex ratio is quite even for both species. Asians: 31.37 Africans: 29.33
Last edited:
casuariusb
Member
Thank you for your reply and useful review. I certainly do need more depth in my understanding of the American elephant problem and your help is appreciated. My tone often annoys my children, my wife and ex-wife too, so you are in good company.
There was really no intention originally to engage in a discussion on elephants in the US, but these ZooChat exchanges have brought out a number of interesting points which are worth following up.
From a conservation point of view, I think there is a consensus that zoos must be involved, through education or in situ support or both. The captive breeding of elephants has very limited species conservation value despite the vaunted back-stop function. Where captive breeding does take place it should be managed by the whole scientific community rather than any zoo industry body, although the TAG & SSP should play leading roles, and endeavour to support both sub-specie and wild population diversity. This is however a much more complex issue than might be assumed at first sight.
As you rightly pointed out previously, (most) zoos have a justifiable commercial aspect, which needs to be respected, handled at a national level by the respective organisations. Unfortunately, my opinion, the TAG & SSPs function as a powerless sub-committee (loxodontaafrica please correct) in these national bodies and despite being able to make recommendations about breeding and transfers are unable to enforce any long-term strategy, having neither funding nor resources. Otherwise it is difficult to explain how the expert knowledge evident in the TAG & SSPs was unable to insist on preventative measures twenty years ago to combat the current problem.
Elephants are one of the iconic zoo species, like the Giant panda and the Polar bear, which generate huge public interest (and funds) when births occur. One would assume long-term planning was intrinsic for both biology and commerce.
In all probability, imports from range countries (of all endangered species) are likely to dry up in the next twenty/fifty years. Where corruption remains a central social, political and economic problem exports will continue, but reversing captive demographics will not be so easy as in the past. At some stage the US and Europe will be deprived of replacements and will have to captive breed or do without the species. Those imports which do continue will probably be of a non-endangered species or population and lead to a homogeneous captive animal, not in itself a bad thing because the public is generally unable to appreciate the subtle differences and the educational value through contact remains.
The work of the studbook keepers is impressive and worthy of the highest praise for the diligence shown. The current captive European Asian elephant population is however difficult to assess because the available statistics are from 2008, but any favourable position relies on the historical relationships between European and range countries although births are not uncommon. One situation worth mention is that Leipzig Zoo has successfully focused on Vietnamese animals which is commendable since the wild population may be on the verge of extinction (there are still several hundred in private hands however), but similar focuses by other zoos on other regional populations is complicated by confusion about origins. No doubt like the US a great number of European elephants came through traders, such as Ruhe, who had or gave little accurate origin information. DNA analysis would resolve many questions.
The selfish attitude of zoos to transfers of their one and only animal are understandable and well known to me personally because we had to part with our remaining elephant in Jaderberg at the beginning of the 1990s. Transportation difficulties and the inherent risk of incompatibility do suggest that AI could be a viable alternative to new imports while creating a sustainable population. Single animal holdings may continue to be necessary for bulls and females which cannot be integrated into any herd although this type of social structure must be preferred.
Despite the number of US states, which I understand leads to some complications, you should be in a better position to co-ordinate changes than Europe where multiple languages and regulatory differences, not to mention political and social extremes, hinder concerted effort.
I shall follow developments over the next years with interest.
Happy New Year!
There was really no intention originally to engage in a discussion on elephants in the US, but these ZooChat exchanges have brought out a number of interesting points which are worth following up.
From a conservation point of view, I think there is a consensus that zoos must be involved, through education or in situ support or both. The captive breeding of elephants has very limited species conservation value despite the vaunted back-stop function. Where captive breeding does take place it should be managed by the whole scientific community rather than any zoo industry body, although the TAG & SSP should play leading roles, and endeavour to support both sub-specie and wild population diversity. This is however a much more complex issue than might be assumed at first sight.
As you rightly pointed out previously, (most) zoos have a justifiable commercial aspect, which needs to be respected, handled at a national level by the respective organisations. Unfortunately, my opinion, the TAG & SSPs function as a powerless sub-committee (loxodontaafrica please correct) in these national bodies and despite being able to make recommendations about breeding and transfers are unable to enforce any long-term strategy, having neither funding nor resources. Otherwise it is difficult to explain how the expert knowledge evident in the TAG & SSPs was unable to insist on preventative measures twenty years ago to combat the current problem.
Elephants are one of the iconic zoo species, like the Giant panda and the Polar bear, which generate huge public interest (and funds) when births occur. One would assume long-term planning was intrinsic for both biology and commerce.
In all probability, imports from range countries (of all endangered species) are likely to dry up in the next twenty/fifty years. Where corruption remains a central social, political and economic problem exports will continue, but reversing captive demographics will not be so easy as in the past. At some stage the US and Europe will be deprived of replacements and will have to captive breed or do without the species. Those imports which do continue will probably be of a non-endangered species or population and lead to a homogeneous captive animal, not in itself a bad thing because the public is generally unable to appreciate the subtle differences and the educational value through contact remains.
The work of the studbook keepers is impressive and worthy of the highest praise for the diligence shown. The current captive European Asian elephant population is however difficult to assess because the available statistics are from 2008, but any favourable position relies on the historical relationships between European and range countries although births are not uncommon. One situation worth mention is that Leipzig Zoo has successfully focused on Vietnamese animals which is commendable since the wild population may be on the verge of extinction (there are still several hundred in private hands however), but similar focuses by other zoos on other regional populations is complicated by confusion about origins. No doubt like the US a great number of European elephants came through traders, such as Ruhe, who had or gave little accurate origin information. DNA analysis would resolve many questions.
The selfish attitude of zoos to transfers of their one and only animal are understandable and well known to me personally because we had to part with our remaining elephant in Jaderberg at the beginning of the 1990s. Transportation difficulties and the inherent risk of incompatibility do suggest that AI could be a viable alternative to new imports while creating a sustainable population. Single animal holdings may continue to be necessary for bulls and females which cannot be integrated into any herd although this type of social structure must be preferred.
Despite the number of US states, which I understand leads to some complications, you should be in a better position to co-ordinate changes than Europe where multiple languages and regulatory differences, not to mention political and social extremes, hinder concerted effort.
I shall follow developments over the next years with interest.
Happy New Year!
Disobedience of the SSP/TAG recommendations can result in the temporary withdrawal of AZA membership. As demonstrated by the Toronto zoo situation, in which the city council voted to send the elephants to PAWS when the SSP/TAG had advised they be moved to Disney's Animal Kingdom and later the National elephant center.
Your comment about zoo Leipzig continuing a vietnamese elephant lineage is false, because although they have three cows from the Saigon zoo, their bulls are from India and Myanmar (and they are actively breeding).
I myself was inspired by seeing elephants as a child. When I lived in Seattle I came face to face with Hansa (the 2000 calf, born to Chai) numerous times. The impact of these experiences have truly made me who I am today. I'm not saying that every child who visits living elephants will become the world's foremost conversationist or elephant specialist, BUT they will walk away from that trip to the zoo with a new first-hand understanding of the magnificence of the animals they had read about and seen on T.V. In order to ensure that visitors will continue to be impacted by elephants, breeding is necessary. As one of the most recognizable and evocative species in popular culture as well as their essential role in ecosystems elephants are the basis of conservation, they are a perfect species for the public to connect with.
I have mapped the diversity of North America's African elephant population by country of origin. In the U.S. we have animals with the following lineage:
1.) Zimbabwe (the most common due to the imports carried out by Arthur Jones, the animals were prime breeding age when the first evaluation and reconfiguration of the breeding program took place)
2.) South Africa (primarily attributed to the 2003 import collaboration by the San Diego Safari Park and Lowry Park zoo, and added to by the import of three breeding cows by the Pittsburgh zoo)
3.) Namibia (nine elephants were imported from Namibia to Africam Safari, in addition to breeding elephants Ellie (LPZ) and Maclean (DAK)
4.)Mozambique (Kubwa (Indianapolis) is the only breeding specimen in the U.S.)
5.)Kenya (Bulwagi (Birmingham) is the only breeding animal representing Kenya and that being said he is only half)
6.) Tanzania (Osh (Oakland) is a pure Tanzanian animal imported in 2004 from Howletts)
7.) Zambia (Thabo Umsai (Pittsburgh) is half Zambian and was imported in 2011 from Zoo Dresden)
Your comment about zoo Leipzig continuing a vietnamese elephant lineage is false, because although they have three cows from the Saigon zoo, their bulls are from India and Myanmar (and they are actively breeding).
I myself was inspired by seeing elephants as a child. When I lived in Seattle I came face to face with Hansa (the 2000 calf, born to Chai) numerous times. The impact of these experiences have truly made me who I am today. I'm not saying that every child who visits living elephants will become the world's foremost conversationist or elephant specialist, BUT they will walk away from that trip to the zoo with a new first-hand understanding of the magnificence of the animals they had read about and seen on T.V. In order to ensure that visitors will continue to be impacted by elephants, breeding is necessary. As one of the most recognizable and evocative species in popular culture as well as their essential role in ecosystems elephants are the basis of conservation, they are a perfect species for the public to connect with.
I have mapped the diversity of North America's African elephant population by country of origin. In the U.S. we have animals with the following lineage:
1.) Zimbabwe (the most common due to the imports carried out by Arthur Jones, the animals were prime breeding age when the first evaluation and reconfiguration of the breeding program took place)
2.) South Africa (primarily attributed to the 2003 import collaboration by the San Diego Safari Park and Lowry Park zoo, and added to by the import of three breeding cows by the Pittsburgh zoo)
3.) Namibia (nine elephants were imported from Namibia to Africam Safari, in addition to breeding elephants Ellie (LPZ) and Maclean (DAK)
4.)Mozambique (Kubwa (Indianapolis) is the only breeding specimen in the U.S.)
5.)Kenya (Bulwagi (Birmingham) is the only breeding animal representing Kenya and that being said he is only half)
6.) Tanzania (Osh (Oakland) is a pure Tanzanian animal imported in 2004 from Howletts)
7.) Zambia (Thabo Umsai (Pittsburgh) is half Zambian and was imported in 2011 from Zoo Dresden)
Weren't Lowry Park and San Diego Safari Park's elephants imported from Swaziland?
Does anyone know what went on with the decision concerning thabo usami? He was originally slated to join Bulwagi Callee and Ajani in Birmingham but at the last minute he was replaced with Tamani (Bulwagis son)
So for Birmingham's four
Ajani - Namibia (Maclean) Zimbawe (Ivory)
Bulwagi - Kenya (Peter) South Africa (Mama)
Tamani - Kenya/South Africa (Bulwagi) Namibia (Elle)
Callee - Zimbabwe (Jackson) (Nan)
Ajani - Namibia (Maclean) Zimbawe (Ivory)
Bulwagi - Kenya (Peter) South Africa (Mama)
Tamani - Kenya/South Africa (Bulwagi) Namibia (Elle)
Callee - Zimbabwe (Jackson) (Nan)
Thabo Umsai has been selected to breed with all the breeding cows present at the Pittsburgh zoo upon maturity. In the words of director Barbara Baker "We are grooming him to take over Jackson's position as the top breeding bull in the country." Thabo Umsai's space in Birmingham was taken by Tamani whom was supposed to originally go to Cleveland.
The animals which were imported actually originated in South Africa. They were relocated to Swazi game reserves as orphans from the culls.
The animals which were imported actually originated in South Africa. They were relocated to Swazi game reserves as orphans from the culls.