the ones listed in the thread....
Phase out species in United States
- Thread starter jusko88
- Start date
Exactly, sorry for being so unspecific.
Thaumatibis
Well-Known Member
Now that's interesting. The DWA called their night monkeys peruvians, but chlidonias told me they were actually nancy ma's. Which institution has or recently had Aoutus Miconax? I'd love to know.
~ Thaumatibis
to be precise, I said that the DWA calls their monkeys Aotus nancymae. (Which, for future readers, I did here: http://www.zoochat.com/22/night-monkeys-dwa-409005/)
And to be confusing, the New World Primate TAG calls Aotus miconax the Andean Night Monkey. What they are calling the Peruvian Night Monkey is Aotus nigriceps.
In the 2009 TAG, it says that there are in AZA zoos (using their taxonomy):
20 A. lemurinus griseimembra
3 A. nigriceps
9 A. nancymae
7 A. azarae boliviensis
1 A. vociferans
41 "other/unknown hybrids"
Last edited:
Thaumatibis
Well-Known Member
Oh, great. Now I'll never see an Aotus miconax! 
...Until I can travel to South America, that is
~ Thaumatibis
...Until I can travel to South America, that is
~ Thaumatibis
What zoos have olive baboons anyway?
Interesting.
What about Aotus trivirgatus? I believe Bronx had them in World of Darkness in at least 2007 as well as A. (lemurinus) griseimembra until at least 2012 when the Monkey House closed.
~Thylo
not a clue. There were no trivirgatus listed so by then they may have died, been moved on, or included in the "other/unknown" section.
On the other hand, I have seen griseimembra labelled as Aotus trivirgatus griseimembra so it is also possible that the A. trivirgatus which the Bronx had are actually the same animals as their A. (lemurinus) griseimembra.
Lol right now everyone is being so incredibly zoo-nerd-y that I don't even understand what you are saying
Well, what do you expect?!
Thaumatibis
Well-Known Member
We're just dicussing the joys of Aotus!
Seriously, what did you expect when you joined? A discussion on Macro Economics? ~ Thaumatibis
Toronto Zoo has olive baboons but its not an AZA institution at the moment.
What do people see as the future for sun bears and polar bears right now, even though neither are currently phase outs?
Sun bear births are currently rare, and as far as I know, there is currently no big research being done to help improve their numbers.
Polar bear births are also rare, but there is currently extensive research taking place in areas like the cincinnati zoo to decode their breeding patterns and whatever to figure out how to successfully breed them well.
Sun bear births are currently rare, and as far as I know, there is currently no big research being done to help improve their numbers.
Polar bear births are also rare, but there is currently extensive research taking place in areas like the cincinnati zoo to decode their breeding patterns and whatever to figure out how to successfully breed them well.
I've seen several zoos plan to have Sun Bears in planned future exhibits - if they aren't available what would that large seemingly carnivore compound be used for in Tropical Asian exhibits?
Oh ok good. As far as I know the last sun bear birth was in san diego a few years ago, which is not good, since there should probably be at least 1 birth each year.
Tigers, gharials, dholes(depends), leopards, and smaller predators too such as snakes or smaller omnivorous animals
Most of the exhibits already have or have in the plans a Tiger exhibit or even multiple ones. Are dholes that prominent a species in North American Zoos?
I think only two or three zoos keep them but they are breeding and I believe they're a phase-in species. Still, with a probably much smaller captive population than Sun Bears have over here, they're not a very good replacement.
As for Leopards, with the only subspecies the AZA will work with being Amur Leopard, they don't really work for a tropical Asian exhibit either.
~Thylo
I accept that tigers are among the most popular zoo animals, but I think zoos are making a great mistake by making larger tiger exhibits, while phasing out other species. As there seems to be only one attempt to reintroduce captive tigers into the wild and much of southern and southeast Asia has a rapidly growing human population, what is the point of continually breeding tigers, when zoos have already saved them from extinction? There are several endangered species and subspecies of cats that are critically endangered, but are not represented at all or have pitifully low zoo populations. There seems to be only one zoo that keeps the Iberian lynx, which is much rarer species than the tiger. Very few zoos keep the flat-headed cat, which is another critically endangered cat.
Zoos should be trying to save as many species as possible, but several zoos seem to be moving towards the appearance of a chain store, where you can guess what you are going to see, because that is what the general public wants. Rather than phasing out unpopular species, couldn't some zoos phase out some of the more popular ones instead, but provide vouchers for nearby zoos that have those species?
Zoos should be trying to save as many species as possible, but several zoos seem to be moving towards the appearance of a chain store, where you can guess what you are going to see, because that is what the general public wants. Rather than phasing out unpopular species, couldn't some zoos phase out some of the more popular ones instead, but provide vouchers for nearby zoos that have those species?
AZA does not phase out species because they are unpopular. AZA phases out species that are so rare in zoos that there aren't enough for a sustainable captive population. The reason why it seems like AZA only phases out animals who aren't popular is because most of the animals who are popular are most common in zoos to begin with. In the 1900s, AZA phased out african forest elephants, who were popular, but also where very rare.
I do not like how AZA zoos have 3 subspecies of tiger, but only 1 subspecies of leopard.
I do not like how AZA zoos have 3 subspecies of tiger, but only 1 subspecies of leopard.