Animals that have gotten easier to take care of in captivity

PossumRoach said:
Definitely new world monkeys. According to Josef Lindholm III. on the "Zookeeping An Introduction to the Science and Technology", In the early 1960s "te best public zoo record for a squirrel monkey was six years, no captive howler monkey had lived more than 5 years, and no titi for more than four years. By 2005, five tits have lived at least 24 years, four howler monkeys had reached at least 22 years,; and four squirrel monkeys had lived for at least thirty years."
Click to expand...

I definitely agree with your comment and particularly with regards to Callitrichids.

Worth mentioning that there have even been significant advances in the husbandry of some of the more challenging species like the pied tamarin, the black lion tamarin and our buffy tufted marmoset.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CMP
Howler monkeys, especially red howlers are another leaf-eating primates which were considered impossible to keep in European zoos. But now they reliably live and breed. Black howlers are even becoming one of more common large New World monkeys in Europe.
 
Jurek7 said:
Howler monkeys, especially red howlers are another leaf-eating primates which were considered impossible to keep in European zoos. But now they reliably live and breed. Black howlers are even becoming one of more common large New World monkeys in Europe.
Click to expand...

Yet no brown howlers and arguably these are of much greater conservation concern than either of the other species of howler that you mention.
 
PossumRoach said:
Well what a shame. It's like zoos are trying to focus on mammals they have from being gone for good, instead of introducing new ones because of le conservation.
Click to expand...

Yep, I think the brown howler is going to be in dire straits soon enough.

My colleagues work with this species and it has seen devastating declines all over the country due to yellow fever.

It has become locally extinct in many locations where it was once an abundant species.

They are literally dropping from trees dead or dying very slowly crawling along roads and having seizures and vomiting their own blood.
 
Last edited:
Onychorhynchus coronatus said:
China's inevitable rising growing geopolitical influence in the world is just not going to be kind to the pangolin.
Click to expand...
Chinas inevitable rising geopolitical power brings loads of problems environmentally. Let's not forget what they did to the Yangatze River Dolphin or the Giant Paddlefish or the South China Tiger. They are destroying coral reefs in the South China Sea and they have skyrocketed our global carbon emissions. China is kind of the worst environmentally speaking.
 
Westcoastperson said:
Chinas inevitable rising geopolitical power brings loads of problems environmentally. Let's not forget what they did to the Yangatze River Dolphin or the Giant Paddlefish or the South China Tiger. They are destroying coral reefs in the South China Sea and they have skyrocketed our global carbon emissions. China is kind of the worst environmentally speaking.
Click to expand...

Ok, yes, you are right, China's rising geopolitical power does bring environmental problems and granted these extinctions have occurred as a result of anthropogenic activity in China but lets be careful with using the term "they did".

Because for the sake of argument we should remember that the same might be said by a Chinese with regards to the geopolitical power / influence of the USA and its outsized ecological footprint and this would be an equally valid and pertinent piece of criticism.

I think this would especially be the case in terms of global carbon emissions as it has to be mentioned that many of China's global carbon emissions are actually just offshored American emissions.

Most countries have a tragic list of extinct species so just as China has the baiji and giant paddlefish so the USA has the passenger pigeon, ivory billed woodpecker and the Carolina parakeet.
 
Onychorhynchus coronatus said:
Because for the sake of argument we should remember that the same might be said by a Chinese with regards to the geopolitical power / influence of the USA and its outsized ecological footprint and this would be an equally valid and pertinent piece of criticism.
Click to expand...

Our ecological footprint (especially carbon dioxide) is still notably smaller than China's. I don't know enough specifics to argue much on the subject however.

Onychorhynchus coronatus said:
Most countries have a tragic list of extinct species so just as China has the baiji and giant paddlefish so the USA has the passenger pigeon, ivory billed woodpecker and the Carolina parakeet
Click to expand...

True, although we have saved and rebounded a large number of species. American Bison, California Condor, Sea Otter, Gray Wolf, Red Wolf, American Alligator, among others. Besides actively working to support a large number of other species. Also China still imports and receives a lot of animal products we don't.
 
Great Argus said:
Our ecological footprint (especially carbon dioxide) is still notably smaller than China's. I don't know enough specifics to argue much on the subject however.



True, although we have saved and rebounded a large number of species. American Bison, California Condor, Sea Otter, Gray Wolf, Red Wolf, American Alligator, among others. Besides actively working to support a large number of other species. Also China still imports and receives a lot of animal products we don't.
Click to expand...

In terms of carbon emissions apparently yes at first glance that would appear to be the case.

But as I said before we have to consider that much of China's emissions are essentially "outsourced emissions" and about 25 % of the world's emissions are outsourced emissions and the bulk of these are from the USA.

These are basically carbon emissions that are generated in the production of consumer goods manufactured in foreign companies in China and for foreign consumption and a lot of countries currently exploit this "carbon loophole" to reduce emissions within their own borders yet keep the consumption going.

I totally agree with you on the species that have been effectively conserved in the USA and I'm not criticising that by any means ( I'm a conservationist afterall) as some of these I find to be truly inspirational conservation success stories (like the black footed ferret and California condor in particular).

However, what I was driving at was more that just like with any country as well as extinctions there could also be argued to be conservation success stories similar to those in the USA that have occured in China like the giant panda and the white headed langur for example.

Basically all I'm saying is that we have to be a bit careful when we blame China and cast it in the role of the world's most destructive country from an environmental perspective as the reality is very complex. That is to say, we shouldn't absolve China of the impact it is having on the environment but neither should we absolve the complicity of our own governments and countries in this either.
 
Last edited:
Onychorhynchus coronatus said:
However, what I was driving at was more that just like with any country as well as extinctions there could also be argued to be conservation success stories similar to those in the USA that have occured in China like the giant panda and the white headed langur for example.
Click to expand...
It could also be argued that the reason for saving the Giant Panda was viewed as purely commercial. There is lots of public outcry for panda support, they're popular, and zoos pay quite a lot to get them. We have discussed in other threads that it appears some of the money goes to buying giant pandas. So is it really worth congratulating them if they did it for money? Also was the White Headed Langur done by China or a conservation society?
 
Westcoastperson said:
It could also be argued that the reason for saving the Giant Panda was viewed as purely commercial. There is lots of public outcry for panda support, they're popular, and zoos pay quite a lot to get them. We have discussed in other threads that it appears some of the money goes to buying giant pandas. So is it really worth congratulating them if they did it for money? Also was the White Headed Langur done by China or a conservation society?
Click to expand...

We must be pragmatic, it is always worth congratulating people for conservation and even if their motives were of the financial kind...

But anyway initially the exchange of pandas with Western countries from the 1970's onwards were not because of commercial incentives but rather ones of a diplomatic / foreign policy nature, "panda diplomacy", because this was during the Cold War and with the onset of the Sino-Soviet split (and Sino-Vietnamese war) and Nixon and Kissinger moving in on China and flirting with Mao Zedong.

Later on the "ex-situ" (haha :rolleyes:) outside of the range country did become a purely commercial venture (with a sprinkling / tad of strategic foreign policy thinking too) in terms of exchanges with Western zoos for truly tremendous sums of money that benefitted the Chinese, yes, you are absolutely right.

However, it is a mistake to confuse the whole ex-situ captive breeding programe for the giant panda within China itself to be a commercial venture to rake in money from Western zoos because it obviously isn't this at all. It is an effort that spans multiple decades and intensive efforts that have led to a great deal of success with breeding the species.

I believe that some Chinese conserve their pandas with captive breeding programmes for the same reason / motive that Americans conserve their black footed ferrets and some Brazilians conserve their golden and black lion tamarins which is to say they do so because they feel a moral / ethical duty to the species and natural world.

But I also strongly suspect that there may be an element of Chinese Nationalism and politics at play in the drive for panda ex-situ conservation in the country as how would it look on the international / world stage for China to lose their iconic rockstar species ?
 
Last edited:
Westcoastperson said:
It could also be argued that the reason for saving the Giant Panda was viewed as purely commercial. There is lots of public outcry for panda support, they're popular, and zoos pay quite a lot to get them. We have discussed in other threads that it appears some of the money goes to buying giant pandas. So is it really worth congratulating them if they did it for money? Also was the White Headed Langur done by China or a conservation society?
Click to expand...

No, the white headed langur is actually an incredible story of community based conservation in a collaboration between ordinary rural Chinese communities, educators, academics and conservation practitioners.

I think it is one of those stories which is not only uplifting but actually very useful for illustrating that we can't talk about China or judge it and its impact / attitude towards the environment in a monolithic sense.

There are clearly Chinese working as hard for conservation of biodiversity as their American, European or Latin American counterparts / colleagues.

Anyway have a read of this, it is really interesting : Endangered monkeys retrieve paradise in China's karst village - Global Times


The zoochatter @baboon has been there and can tell more about this particular species and its conservation.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Reads very strange, that an insect-eater is given food containing lots of rice, porridge or other carbohybrates...
 
PossumRoach said:
Well what a shame. It's like zoos are trying to focus on mammals they have from being gone for good, instead of introducing new ones because of le conservation.
Click to expand...
The zoos would love to focus on more endangered species, but these do not live in zoos. Who could agree to capture 20+ individuals of an endangered species to start a captive breeding programme in European zoos? The presence of species has partly historical reasons: black howler monkeys could be imported from Argentina, while the (other) Brazilian species were not allowed to be exported. The main exporter of spider monkeys to Europe was situated in Colombia, hence the population of Colombian Black spider monkeys. And so on.
 
Pepe said:
The zoos would love to focus on more endangered species, but these do not live in zoos. Who could agree to capture 20+ individuals of an endangered species to start a captive breeding programme in European zoos? The presence of species has partly historical reasons: black howler monkeys could be imported from Argentina, while the (other) Brazilian species were not allowed to be exported. The main exporter of spider monkeys to Europe was situated in Colombia, hence the population of Colombian Black spider monkeys. And so on.
Click to expand...

Thats interesting to hear, it doesn't suprise me about the difficulty of exporting Brazilian species, but I do hope that eases up with regards to brown howlers as they could really do with an ex-situ insurance population outside of the country.

There are so many individuals of this species within sanctuaries and zoos across the country that I doubt it would be necessary to capture any of these.
 
Last edited:
Tim May said:
Thanks for providing this very interesting link.

The link below provides an interesting historical perspective on captive pangolins,

https://pangolinconservation.org/wp...-Husbandry-of-Pangolins-in-Captivity-2007.pdf
Click to expand...

I had a read of this and was stunned by this quote about pangolins escaping and swimming Czech rivers :confused::

"pangolins are good swimmers [Sanyal, 1892]. One Manis spp. has been found swimming across a tank 33.5 m wide. Another swimmer was found in the Prague Zoo, Czech Republic, where two Chinese pangolins escaped. One was caught immediately, but the other was caught as a ‘‘crocodile,’’ 10 km from the zoo. It had, in November, swum across the 40-m wide Moldau River."
 
  • Like
Reactions: CMP
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top