I
I believe the giraffe are the next IRA to be looked at after completion of the hippo IRA
Future of Zoos SA zoos (Speculation)
- Thread starter Abbey
- Start date
The AZA manages a population of around 150 Masai giraffe and a larger population of generic giraffe (with Rothschild’s and Reticulated lineages becoming mixed sometime ago).
I imagine Australasia will be happy to continue with hybrids as they’ll be a more diverse range of giraffe genetically to import; though they could potentially import Masai once the IRA is complete. This would involve phasing out the hybrids though, which would be a long process considering this species can live into their 20’s.
Some zoos in Australia had made the effort with the Rothschild back in the day when importation was allowed but as in the reoccurrence of the same problem over again when bans are reintroduced the small number here then only have a limited amount of time before inbreeding starts or hybridisation takes place. The easiest solution if possible would be to import giraffe/and other hoofed stock species in larger numbers before any possible further bans reappear.
There was even a debate on whether the Rothschild’s giraffe we imported were purebred as the North American population of Rothschild’s giraffe became somewhat intertwined with the Reticulated giraffe and as such, are listed as hybrids in the studbook.
Like you say, the focus from here should be on importing while we can. If there’s any suggestion that a ban may appear, it’s not worth attempting to establish a Masai population and instead focusing the resources on importing as many genetically diverse giraffe as we can accomodate to sustain the Australasian population long term.
Yes with quarantine issues we face here in Australia/New Zealand with certain groups of animals planning for the longer term is critical for health of the said species and keeping pure lines as much as possible.
As the case with our Bongo population to import tiny numbers leads to quick inbreeding, common sense would dictate a minimum number for importation.
One issue with our giraffes is that a number of the city zoos have recently received young bulls to restart their breeding programmes e.g. Auckland Zoo, Melbourne Zoo and Wellington Zoo. In some cases it may be possible to transfer these bulls to a bachelor facility e.g. Hamilton Zoo for New Zealand zoos and start over with an imported bull. Alternatively, Dubbo and Monarto could import unrelated bulls and cows and send out the first generation bulls as and when replacements are needed; with young imported cows joining the city zoos in the interim.
I’m hopeful the novelty of being able to import Bovid species will inspire zoos to import. A founder base of even 4.4 Eastern bongo (more would be better) could sustain our region for decades.
In regards to the importation of Bovid I am sitting on the fence watching who does what. My feeling is I am not expecting a stampede by our zoos. By the way they have miss handled a number of species in resent year’s it does not inspire me to hope for to much action.
The saving grace for me is what’s happening at Monarto zoo and some of the regional zoos I believe they will set the pace for a lot of our future zoos direction.
I suppose it’s not dissimilar to product marketing where you have:
1. Ground floor investors - zoos like Altina and Darling Downs Zoo that have an interest in importing and the initiative to do it.
2. Mainstream investors - zoos like Dubbo and Monarto, who have the finances to undertake the large scale imports.
3. The bandwagon investors - zoos who won’t import, but will happily receive surplus from the zoos that have.
4. The non investors - those that have no apparent interest in the species available.
Wondering if there’s a 5th option where all but two of our major zoos are basically government run with all the extra red tape and politics that go along with the normal government run structures, where as a society and private run zoos see things though a different lense.
Last edited:
Good point. There would undoubtedly be pressure from higher up to make decisions that are cost effective rather than conservation minded. An example being a mainstream zoo holding a herd of generic zebra because importing purebred Grant’s zebra would attract no extra visitation. Privately run zoos have financial pressures, but make their own decisions.
So spend muti millions on hotels and other non animal related thing’s and let others worry about maintaining pure bred and healthy non inbred bloodlines. Also appointing a board full of non animal savvy people to appease the woke politicians in a said government
I’d be interested to know if the hotels generate significantly more revenue from a smaller number of guests; than a larger number of customers generate through a more low key style form of accomodation/mass sleepover.
The latter is just as enjoyable in a group setting with friends and would require significantly less capital to implement. A larger audience could be reached/engaged with and more momey would be left over for other projects.
Swanson02
Well-Known Member
Do we have any full subspecies individuals in Australasia left and where they are held? Also, I was told that one of the old giraffes at Monarto was South African? Or it at least was of some South African admixture?
Unless they officially are recognised as separate species of Giraffe, I couldn't see Australasia dropping everything and switching to a set subspecies tomorrow. Our issue obviously is that we don't have the sheer volume of holders that N.America and Europe have, so any decision to switch species has to be unanimous. As we know the one advantage of all these phase-outs is that it opens the room up for region-wide breeding programs. Our zoos in the future won't differ too much in their collections but as a result, our populations of individual species will be much larger and more sustainable.
To my knowledge no, given the “Rothschild’s giraffe” reportedly have Reticulated lineage. These are three of the founders of the current population (imported by Taronga Zoo): 1.0 Jan Smuts (born 1943 at Johannesburg Zoo) - purebred South African giraffe (G. c. giraffe); 0.1 Clara (born 1950 at the Smithsonian National Zoo) - purebred Nubian giraffe (G. c. camelopardalis); and 0.1 Mighty (born 1933 in Tanzania) - purebred Masai giraffe (G. c. tippelskirchi). From these, a hybrid population was quickly established.
I agree any switch to a purebred (Masai is realistically our only option) would be impractical given how widespread the hybrids in the region are - with a large cohort of young animals. Furthermore, to safe guard against a future import ban, a larger founder base would be require than what North America could spare from their surplus. They only have 150.
Randomname0183
Well-Known Member
Aren’t European imports currently possible? Those would open up opportunities for the other subspecies (Europe has a growing population of Rothschild, Reticulated, West African and even hybrid giraffes), but I’m unaware of how many roadblocks would be present for these sorts of imports so maybe it’s best to stick to US imports.
No importation is allowed at this time until a IRA is completed for giraffe which still could be a few years away
Long term, yes Europe would also be an option. Our last giraffe to be imported from outside the region was a female who came from the Netherlands in 1997. Like @Zorro says, the IRA will need to be completed first, but giraffes from North America and Europe would allow us to create a more diverse gene pool with multiple unrelated founders.
It’ll be interesting to see which zoos take advantage of this, but it seems likely that Monarto and Dubbo will replace the bulls in their breeding herds with new founder bulls as a starting point and supplement these herds with cows as space allows. Smaller zoos could hold 1.1 or 1.2 breeding pairs with Adelaide also planning to hold giraffe now.
Last edited:
Swanson02
Well-Known Member
Is it possible that we only import giraffes of a particular subspecies from now on, say Masai? So over the next 100 years, our population on average becomes more Masai percentage-wise? I understand it's nowhere near the genetic importance of a full-blooded Masai population. But an average population of say 80% Masai, 10% South African, and 10% Nubian in my eyes is more valuable than a population being composed of 4 subspecies at 25% each.
This could also be done for other 'generic' animals in the region with complex mixed subspecies backgrounds, such as lions and Chimpanzees. However, I wouldn't do this for say Orangutans as we have already established, separated Sumatran and Bornean populations.
Absolutely. The best way to do this would be to have purebred Masai bulls covering multiple cows in large breeding herds and then adding Masai cows as and when we can. Smaller zoos could hold single pairs and contribute cows to the larger herds and bulls to head up herds at other facilities. By replacing each hybrid cow in a breeding herd with a Masai cow, we could eventually get there.
It’s also possible to contracept cows, so a zoo could even hold a breeding herd consisting of a Masai bull, Masai cows and any number of hybrid cows (on contraception).
Chimpanzee would be trickier as they’re a female dispersal species and males are therefore difficult to integrate into new troops. Most, like Taronga, Wellington, Rockhampton and Monarto have a succession of young males coming through that will be in the troop for decades. The males in Hamilton’s troop are aged 29 and 34 and this represents a rare opportunity to replace them with new males when they die however, so it’s not impossible.
Swanson02
Well-Known Member
What subspecies currently make up our chimp population, and roughly what percentages do they compose? Cheers again
