Shadow Nursery isn't open anymore.
Are These in Captivity? #2
- Thread starter The Cassowary
- Start date
Aenocyon100
Member
Do you know where his Kiangs might have gone?
No idea.
Dr. Wolverine
Well-Known Member
Also, Are there any Thorny devils outside of Australia?
No - very few in captivity in Australia either, they're very difficult to maintain is my understanding.
fs_squid8711
Member
Are there any african forest elephants in any zoo?
Yes, a few in Africa and one or two places in Japan.
Bactrian Deer
Well-Known Member
In the US, Canada, or Mexico; are any of the following sandgrouse in captivity?
1.) Double-Banded Sandgrouse
2.) Burchell’s Sandgrouse
3.) Yellow-Throated Sandgrouse
4.) Namaqua Sandgrouse
1.) Double-Banded Sandgrouse
2.) Burchell’s Sandgrouse
3.) Yellow-Throated Sandgrouse
4.) Namaqua Sandgrouse
Part of it is that thorny devils are ant-eaters, and so they need live insects to eat. They lack a long tongue to eat the traditional 'anteater gruel'.
None of them are afaik, at the very least not publicly. The most recent sandgrouse kept here is Four-banded at Tulsa - not sure anyone's seen them since 2020 however.
I suspect a diet designed for mammals wouldn't suit a lizard nutritionally, for one thing. Thorny Devils require live ants of certain Australian genera, they won't just eat whatever insects are offered.
USDA reports claim that the mara species at the Toledo Zoo is actually the Chacoan mara instead of the Patagonian mara. Is this true, or did the inspectors get their taxa wrong?
For that matter, also looking at USDA mammal lists, is it true that there are now Heude's pigs at the Garlyn Zoo, or in captivity period? (Same except the second part of the question for Garlyn's alleged aardwolves)
USDA reports are a bit notorious for misidentifying animals. If you see something on one that seems wrong, that's almost certainly because it is.
I can personally confirm that Toledo's maras are Patagonian.
These are accurate - Garlyn does have Aardwolf, the species has been increasing in private hands as of late.
Most "Chacoan mara" on usda are Patagonian. There are a few Chacoan, though. It's important to verify unusual things you see on those.
Going to disagree on this.
Now that would be news to me, and a surprise! The ones I know of are all in Arizona and Texas.
I know you've gotten use out of the USDA report data. It certainly can be useful, but you cannot deny that the species lists provided are often (if not usually) wrong, and that odd listings are often (if not usually) incorrect. I'm certainly not suggesting that that data is completely worthless.
No, they are not often or usually wrong, and I've found the occasional odd listing to be incorrect maybe half the time. There's been a few in particular that I was shocked to discover were correct. The wrong ones are usually the same few species (northern tamandua).
Agree with TinoPup here - been several cases recently that turned out to be true when checking out the place's social media. Many of the errors have generally been recurring known misidentifications such as "mountain coati" and "northern tamandua". It certainly doesn't hurt to double-check things - rarely there's an incompetent inspector with very obvious errors, and the aforementioned naming issues - but by and large further investigation has proven they're generally pretty on point.