An Analysis of Animals in Speculative Zoos in the United State

[USZOOfan42]

Is there anything else I should fix? Isn't it true that a lot of the American Bison have part domestic cattle ancestry.
Untitled document

I’d remove Tasmanian devil if I were you, as the population is limited and will likely stay that way. No breeding, just ambassador pairs if I recall correctly. I also doubt we will see new holders.

 

[Wisp O' Mist]

Bit of a loose definition on my end, as the entirety of the population isn't truly pure Bison bison.

Is there anything else I should fix? Isn't it true that a lot of the American Bison have part domestic cattle ancestry.

All American Bison have cattle DNA. This has been known for nearly three years now. How anybody with an interest in this species still be unaware of that is something that I simply don't understand.

Genomic evaluation of hybridization in historic and modern North American Bison (Bison bison) | Scientific Reports

 

[MOG2012]

You wanted what was sustainable and in the AZA - everything I marked is either crashing populationwise, held at only one or two places, or being managed out due to lack of interest/problems. I don't get this pick and choose deal. You're trying to keep Fanaloka and Barasingha on but refusing to include generic Giraffe; that's not realistic nor is it helpful for projects.



Bit of a loose definition on my end, as the entirety of the population isn't truly pure Bison bison.

@Great Argus Should I assume that animals like common wombats, yellow-cheeked gibbon, red-tailed monkeys, spot-nosed monkeys, California mice, spiny mice, etc. are sustainable (or fit my criteria). Is there anything else I should fix? Should I add any other non-generic animals?

 

[Great Argus]

@Great Argus Should I assume that animals like common wombats, yellow-cheeked gibbon, red-tailed monkeys, spot-nosed monkeys, California mice, spiny mice, etc. are sustainable (or fit my criteria).

I mean most of those are questionable in terms of sustainability. I'm curious what your consideration of sustainable is though?

 

[MOG2012]

I mean most of those are questionable in terms of sustainability. I'm curious what your consideration of sustainable is though?

Sustainable means is able to continuously be kept in the us (if imports are easy, it would be sustainable) for a prolonged period (low early mortalities)

 

[Great Argus]

Sustainable means is able to continuously be kept in the us (if imports are easy, it would be sustainable) for a prolonged period (low early mortalities)

I dare say that's a little bit vague since there's species like Walrus that are long-lived and therefore long term present despite being borderline unavailable.
That's a reasonable qualifier I suppose, no population benchmark or anything? Only qualification is they have to stick around long term?

 

[Chlidonias]

Sustainable means is able to continuously be kept in the us (if imports are easy, it would be sustainable)

So basically anything able to be imported would be considered sustainable for your purposes? Where would something like three-toed sloths fall in your list?

 

[MOG2012]

I dare say that's a little bit vague since there's species like Walrus that are long-lived and therefore long term present despite being borderline unavailable.
That's a reasonable qualifier I suppose, no population benchmark or anything? Only qualification is they have to stick around long term?

They should have a somewhat large population (10+ mixed gender but breeding would be easy-ish)

So basically anything able to be imported would be considered sustainable for your purposes? Where would something like three-toed sloths fall in your list?

I mean legally and easily importable with easy-ish care needs

 

[Great Argus]

They should have a somewhat large population (10+ mixed gender but breeding would be easy-ish)

10 seems a little low re sustainable but fair enough.

I mean legally and easily importable with easy-ish care needs

Yet we're still docking flying squirrels?

 

[MOG2012]

10 seems a little low re sustainable but fair enough.



Yet we're still docking flying squirrels?

What should I add back/add or remove?

 

[Great Argus]

What should I add back/add or remove?

Remove:

Bare-nosed Wombat
Yellow-cheeked Gibbon
Lesser Spot-nosed Monkey
Greater Oriental Chevrotain

Gelada and Aye-aye are debatable. California Mouse has a modest population but it's insurance population held by one facility (SDZSP).

I still say add Generic Giraffe and Fallow Deer at least.

 

[MOG2012]

Remove:

Bare-nosed Wombat
Yellow-cheeked Gibbon
Lesser Spot-nosed Monkey
Greater Oriental Chevrotain

Gelada and Aye-aye are debatable. California Mouse has a modest population but it's insurance population held by one facility (SDZSP).

I still say add Generic Giraffe and Fallow Deer at least.

I removed the first 4 animals and added Fallow Deer. I'm not interested in adding/encouraging generic. Any other animals that I should fix? Would it help to go down in sections staring with monotremes and marsupials?;

Monotremata

• Tachyglossidae
  • Short-beaked Echidna Tachyglossus aculeatus

Didelphimorphia

• Didelphidae
  • Virginia Opossum Didelphis virginiana

Diprotodontia

• Macropodidae
  • Huon Tree Kangaroo Dendrolagus matschiei
  • Western Grey Kangaroo Macropus fuliginosus
  • Tammar Wallaby Notamacropus eugenii
  • Parma Wallaby Notamacropus parma
  • Red-necked Wallaby Notamacropus rufogriseus
  • Common Wallaroo Osphranter robustus
  • Red Kangaroo Osphranter rufus
• Potoroidae
  • Woylie Bettongia penicillata
• Phascolarctidae
  • Koala Phascolarctos cinereus
• Acrobatidae
  • Narrow-toed Feather-tailed Glider Acrobates pygmaeus
• Petauridae
  • Sugar Glider Petaurus breviceps

 

[Great Argus]

I'm not interested in adding/encouraging generic.

You do you then. However I will say that regardless of your opinion, the generic giraffe is one of the highest qualifying mammals for this list. There should be no reason to not include such a widely held large mammal with one of the most stable populations in the AZA. I understand you don't care for generic, but if the point of this list is to be a reference point, then that exclusion merely decreases its value.

Any other animals that I should fix? Would it help to go down in sections staring with monotremes and marsupials?

Honestly at this point I'm not really interested in making further suggestions. There are a number of edits I think should be made, but there continues to be heavy inconsistency and because of the guidelines you want to follow the list is not the most helpful.

 

[Aardwolf]

Just chiming in, I think that part of the problem is that you're trying to sort the animals into these neat little categories of sustainability and that's just not going to be reflected in real life. There are plenty of species which currently have zero representation in American zoos, so I'd suppose you would call them unfeasible - but there's nothing stopping anyone from importing them, in many cases. Permits can be granted, imports can be planned, governments can change, etc. If a species isn't on CITES, restricted by USDA, CDC, etc, or have some other restriction, it could be quite easy. Twenty years ago, I never expected Titicaca water frogs to be such a popular species in zoos. Now, they're seemingly everywhere in AZA.

I saw another poster on this thread say that moose weren't really feasible, presumably because there are so few holders. The truth is, there are plenty of moose available - the state of Alaska actually sends out an email to zoos every year checking to see who wants orphaned moose, brown bear, and other animals that end up being non-releasable. So there's no shortage of moose... there's a shortage of zoos that are within a climatic zone that moose will thrive in.

Likewise, just because a species is thriving now doesn't mean that it will be in the future. When I was young, lion-tailed macaque was one of the most thriving of SSPs - there was even talk of sending some of the genetically surplus animals back to India for reintroduction programs. Now, they're a vanishing species within AZA, listed as phase out. That being said, they still have a foothold in zoos in other parts of the world - who's to say that they couldn't come back?

I never expected to see dhole in a US zoo - they're listed as injurious by FWS and their import is restricted. Instead, I've seen them in four US zoos in recent years, and for a while it seemed like they might establish a decent foothold in the US. Now, it looks like they won't after all. These things come in booms and busts.

I appreciate that you set yourself up with an interesting challenge for this thread - but maybe the answers really aren't there to be found. A species is feasible until it isn't. But then it might be feasible again in the future.

 

[Great Argus]

I think that part of the problem is that you're trying to sort the animals into these neat little categories of sustainability and that's just not going to be reflected in real life.

That's a good way of putting it. It's rather a trying to put a square peg into a round hole deal. Things vary so much across species and trying to fit them into these boxes just starts not working.

So there's no shortage of moose... there's a shortage of zoos that are within a climatic zone that moose will thrive in.

It was more the climate issues with Moose, I know they've been a bit notorious for being tricky to maintain successfully. Trying to class them as sustainable didn't entirely make sense with that in mind, hence putting them in debatable initially. It would make more sense to put them in a "regionally restricted" category I think, along with Pronghorn for one.

 

[MOG2012]

You do you then. However I will say that regardless of your opinion, the generic giraffe is one of the highest qualifying mammals for this list. There should be no reason to not include such a widely held large mammal with one of the most stable populations in the AZA. I understand you don't care for generic, but if the point of this list is to be a reference point, then that exclusion merely decreases its value.



Honestly at this point I'm not really interested in making further suggestions. There are a number of edits I think should be made, but there continues to be heavy inconsistency and because of the guidelines you want to follow the list is not the most helpful.

What inconsistencies do you think are there? I added generic giraffe. What animals should be added/removed so this would be a valid reference point

 

[MOG2012]

I'm back with a redo with corrected information with a new format.

To review, here are the scales that I'm using.

Abundance Scale:
Abundant: 51+
Extremely Common: 36-50
Common: 21-35
Uncommon: 11-20
Rare: 6-10
Extremely Rare: 1-5

Feasibility Scale:
Extremely Plausible: 5
Plausible: 4
Somewhat Plausible: 3
Barely Plausible: 2
Implausible: 1

Regions of Zoos:

These regions aren't completely accurate but they will be used in enclosure recommendations.

Platypus Ornithorhynchus anatinus

@WhistlingKite24

• Extremely Rare in AZA
• Not Present in Non-Accredited
• Extremely Rare as a Whole

This species is monotypic, only found in San Diego Zoo Safari Park (in the USA). Breeding has been non-existent (in the US) and worldwide, it's rare and often unsuccessful. They tend to level for 15-20 years in captivity. Group sizes wise, they are mostly solitary but for breeding purposes, 1.1 can work with separated enclosures except during breeding season which is during late July through early November.

@WhistlingKite24

They typically have indoor enclosures but due to habitat and climate similarities, facilities in the Pacific Northwest (look at map above) could have outdoor enclosures though they are easily stressed. To maximize viewing, reversed lighting is best and is commonly used.

For solitary platypus, an enclosure with 20+ sq. m total space including a 10+ sq. m pool works and for a pair, 40+ sq. m total space with a 15 sq. pool works (separated burrows would be needed).

My recommended enclosure requirements are:

• Underwater viewing
• In the pool, aquatic plants, leaf litter, and submerged logs
• Simulated burrows and nesting chambers surrounded by vegetation

Overall, they are Barely Plausible (suggested by @Aardwolf ) as they aren’t implausible but only major zoos with strong partnerships with Australian zoos would work. Their diet is also extremely expensive as yabbies are banned? Like @WhistlingKite24 mentioned, demand is too high and it’s unlikely that there will be enough platypus to replace future deceased ones. In my opinion, it’s Not Recommended as they aren’t that sustainable.

Short-beaked Echidna Tachyglossus aculeatus

@WhistlingKite24

• Rare in AZA
• Extremely Rare in Non-Accredited
• Uncommon as a Whole

The Short-beaked Echidna has many subspecies but the specific subspecific information in zoos is not certain (the Zootierlieste probably isn't accurate). Breeding has been historically unsuccessful but it's been increasingly successful recently. They tend to level for 30+ years in captivity (though long-beaked echidnas live longer in captivity). Group sizes wise, they are also mostly solitary but for breeding purposes, 1.1 can work.

Some possible challenges of them in captivity is their hard/expensive (ish) diets, challenging/complicated reproduction habits, and stress levels.

@Zoofan15

Indoor and outdoor enclosures are varied with outdoor housing year-round being possible for the Southeast (deep), Californian Mediterranean, and the Southwestern Deserts (mostly year-round). To maximize viewing, reversed lighting is best and is commonly used if indoor enclosures are present.

For solitary echidna, an enclosure that's 10+ sq. m large works and for a pair, an enclosure with 40+ sq. m large size and multiple burrows works.

They work in many mixed species enclosures but in my opinion, nocturnal animals should be housed with them to minimize stress so the following species are my recommended compatible animals:

• Bare-nosed Wombat Vombatus ursinus
• Huon Tree Kangaroo Dendrolagus matschiei
• Koala Phascolarctos cinereus
• Parma Wallaby Notamacropus parma
• Southern Hairy-nosed Wombat Lasiorhinus latifrons
• Sugar Glider Petaurus breviceps
• Tammar Wallaby Notamacropus eugenii
• Tawny Frogmouth Podargus strigoides
• Woylie Bettongia penicillata
• Yellow-footed Rock Wallaby Petrogale xanthopus

My recommended enclosure requirements are:

• Underground barriers to prevent escapes (0.5 m deep is good) and fully enclosed to prevent pests
• The substrate should be deep and burrowable. Artificial Burrows and tunnels would be interesting
• Hollow logs, plants, rock crevices, and nesting boxes with a shallow water feature

Overall, they are Plausible as the captive population has increased and are found in almost a dozen facilities. In my opinion, they are Recommended for the same reasons.

Example Enclosure:
the Las Vegas Zoological Park: the Land Down Under
Inhabitants: Breeding Pair of 1.1 Short-beaked Echidna Tachyglossus aculeatus (1.1 ambassadors behind the scenes) and a Breeding Pair of 1.1 Tawny Frogmouth Podargus strigoides (0.1 ambassador behind the scenes, used for Flight Show)

There are two enclosures, one outdoors and the other indoors. The outdoor area is 90 sq. m large and 6 m tall with 1.5 m deep underground fencing. Vegetation includes various trees, shrubs, and grasses. There are rocky outcrops, logs, branches, and a shallow pool. The indoor enclosure is lit by red LED lights and is 30 sq. m large and 4 m tall. There is underground viewing for artificial burrows and tunnels. There is a dead tree, rocky outcrops, hollow logs, branches, and nesting boxes. Connecting these enclosures is a ground tunnel and a 3 m tall elevated tunnel.

Species of Interest:

• Western Long-beaked Echidna Zaglossus bruijnii - An EEP was recently established which hoped to use confiscated individuals from Indonesia (illegal pet trade). If this happens, in the not so near future, they might be imported (though I doubt there will be high demand).

Recommended Species Document: Untitled document

What do you think so far? Please identify any mistakes, errors, feedback, etc.

 

[Birdsage]

Their diet is also extremely expensive as yabbies are banned?

I’m not certain, but I do wonder whether ordinary domestically-farmed crayfish would be a viable alternative.

 

[MOG2012]

Woolly Opossoms Caluromys sp.

@Giant Eland

• Not Present in AZA
• Rare in Non-Accredited
• Rare as a Whole

This genus has three species, Derby’s Woolly Opossum (Caluromys derbianus), Brown-eared Woolly Opossum (Caluromys lanatus), and Bare-tailed Woolly Opossum (Caluromys philander). In the US, it’s likely mostly misidentified Derby’s but their short lifespan makes it hard to track what facilities keep them. They tend to live for only 5 to 7 years in captivity with breeding almost non-existent (females rejecting the males is common). Group sizes wise, they are strictly solitary, coming together briefly for mating.

They typically have indoor enclosures but outdoor enclosures in the Californian Mediterranean (with night enclosures), and Southeast U.S. (deep) could work. They are nocturnal so reversed light would be needed to maximize viewing.

My recommended enclosure requirements are:

• Enclosure Sizes: 10+ sq. m floor space with at 2-3 m vertical height
• Fully Enclosed as these possums can climb virtually any texture surface
• Trees, branches, perches, and thick ropes
• A nest box lined with nesting material such as dried leaves, straw, shredded paper or fleece along with a sleeping pouch
• Hiding spots such as hollow logs

Overall, they are Barely Plausible as they are found in non-accredited zoos but aren’t recommended by the AZA. Additionally, there are several challenges such as being somewhat easily stressed for enclosures and dental problems. In my opinion, it’s Not Recommended for the same reasons above and due to the fact that they have a low lifespan.

Virginia Opossum Didelphia virginiana

@RatioTile

• Abundant in AZA
• Abundant in Non-Accredited
• Abundant as a Whole

Virginia Opossums are common rescue animals that are often used as animal ambassadors. Most captive opossums live for about 3-4 years on average but occasionally, they can live up to 8-10 years but that’s rare. Once they reach the age of 3, they are considered geriatric with age-related issues common. They breed readily in captivity but most facilities don’t try breeding them. Group sizes wise, they are solitary, and a pair is only possible for mating as stress and injury is common.

@Coelecanth18

Enclosures in zoos vary from outdoor and indoor enclosures but indoor enclosures are more common. In the Pacific Northwest, Californian Mediterranean, Mid-Atlantic (night enclosure), and Southeast U.S., outdoor enclosures work. They are nocturnal so reversed light would be needed to maximize viewing if indoor enclosures are used.

Recommended Compatible Species:

• Common Raccoon Procyon lotor
• North American Porcupine Erethizon dorsatum
• Striped Skunk Mephitis mephitis

My recommended enclosure requirements are:

• Enclosure Sizes: 15+ sq. m with 2-3 m of vertical height
• Fully enclosed
• Underground fencing going down at least 30 cm deep
• Multiple nest boxes or dens with heat and soft bedding
• Many climbing structures with platforms, and branches

Overall, they are Extremely Plausible as they are extremely common in zoos though it’s often only in places with native opossums. In my opinion, it’s Recommended for the same reasons above.

Example Enclosure:
Hartford Zoo & Science Museum: the City at Night
Inhabitants: Breeding Pair of 1.1 Short-beaked Echidna Tachyglossus aculeatus (1.1 ambassadors behind the scenes) and a Breeding Pair of 1.1 Tawny Frogmouth Podargus strigoides (0.1 ambassador behind the scenes, used for Flight Show)

The largest enclosure in the nocturnal house is in the center of the gallery, being 70 sq. m large, 4.5 m tall, and red-lit. Visitors can see various climbing structures such as elevated platforms, oak branches, hemp ropes, and wooden ramps. There are dens and nest boxes with integrated cameras for viewing. There is a small 350 litre pool along with small trees, shrubs, and groundcover along with logs and boulders. This enclosure houses a bachelor pair of 2.0 Common Raccoon Procyon lotor (1.0 individual behind-the-scenes which is used as an animal ambassador), a solitary 1.0 Striped Skunk Mephitis mephitis (0.1 individual behind-the-scenes which is used as an animal ambassador), and a solitary 0.1 Virginia Opossum Didelphis virginiana (1.1 individuals are behind-the-scenes and are used as animal ambassadors) which are all non-releasable rescues.

Recommended Species Document: Recommended Mammals
Example Enclosures: Example Enclosures

What do you think so far? Please identify any mistakes, errors, feedback, etc.
I'm not going to probably post next week as I'm working on my master plan for Franklin Park Zoo and Stone Zoo (on this document: Zoo New England Master Plan), please provide feedback

 

[Lycaon]

Nice work.