If recently extinct species were brought back, which ones would fit zoos most?

Also I would like to have a new rule on this thread as the maker of the thread, You can post animals such as thylacines or pinta’s, but mark at the start of the post “PREHISTORIC” if you are suggesting an animal that is for example a mammoth.
 
Also I would like to have a new rule on this thread as the maker of the thread, You can post animals such as thylacines or pinta’s, but mark at the start of the post “PREHISTORIC” if you are suggesting an animal that is for example a mammoth.
Sounds fair. You mentioning the atlas brown bears reminded me of Mexican grizzlies. Caucasian moose would be another one, as would Large Palau, Mascarene, dusky, and Guam flying foxes. Madagascan Pygmy hippos, sea minis, Japanese seal lions, Caribbean monk seals, Burmeister’s fox, Queen of Sheba’s gazelle (AKA Yemen gazelle), Schomburgk’s deer, red gazelle, and any of the Antillean monkey species. I was looking at a list of recently extinct mammals, and good gracious, there are a lot!!! Most are rodents and marsupials.
 
I would suggest Palaeoloxodon falconeri, giving even smaller zoos the chance to keep elephants.
Forget the regular petting zoos with goats and sheep, this would be the ultimate interactive exhibit!!!! Don't forget to include Cygnus falconeri though too!
 
You can post animals such as thylacines or pinta’s, but mark at the start of the post “PREHISTORIC” if you are suggesting an animal that is for example a mammoth.

Of course, the mammoth was around until well after the pyramids were built :p so not so prehistoric!
 
Pig-footed bandicoots and huias

Sounds fair. You mentioning the atlas brown bears reminded me of Mexican grizzlies. Caucasian moose would be another one, as would Large Palau, Mascarene, dusky, and Guam flying foxes. Madagascan Pygmy hippos, sea minis, Japanese seal lions, Caribbean monk seals, Burmeister’s fox, Queen of Sheba’s gazelle (AKA Yemen gazelle), Schomburgk’s deer, red gazelle, and any of the Antillean monkey species. I was looking at a list of recently extinct mammals, and good gracious, there are a lot!!! Most are rodents and marsupials.
Guam’s probably are still alive but probably not any in captivity so that counts, The other guy if you are referring to Huias themselves then they are not gone but some are.
 
Of course, the mammoth was around until well after the pyramids were built :p so not so prehistoric!
The fact that it’s the only mammoth with a proper common name makes me along with the fact that it looks prehistoric makes me consider it prehistoric. I do know that they went extinct in alaska by the time the pyramids were built.
 
Equus Ferus F, Réunion sacred ibis, and Mammuthus primigenius would probably be able to cope in captivity
 
Huias themselves then they are not gone but some are.
?? Do you mean NZ wattlebirds as a family?? Because huias only refer to a singular extinct species. Also you title it recently extinct species then set arbitrary boundaries completely on your own accord of what counts or not??
And this thread really is just people listing off random species, I mean I understand some probably won't need an explanation but like at least put some effort in it.
 
?? Do you mean NZ wattlebirds as a family?? Because huias only refer to a singular extinct species. Also you title it recently extinct species then set arbitrary boundaries completely on your own accord of what counts or not??
And this thread really is just people listing off random species, I mean I understand some probably won't need an explanation but like at least put some effort in it.
I guess someone forgot mammals called Huias exist.
 
the only mammoth with a proper common name makes me along with the fact that it looks prehistoric makes me consider it prehistoric.

Well, if your definition for "prehistoric" has descended to "looks prehistoric" then the question really becomes "what makes something look prehistoric" doesn't it :p if you mean "recognisable animal, but hairier" then this would make the Sumatran Rhinoceros, Woolly Armadillo and half the population of Newcastle Upon Tyne prehistoric!

As for the suggestion that lacking a common name makes something prehistoric, that covers most extant invertebrates and rather a lot of fish, amphibians and smaller reptiles.

I guess someone forgot mammals called Huias exist.

I guess someone else forgot the mammals are called Hutias :p
 
Guam’s probably are still alive but probably not any in captivity so that counts, The other guy if you are referring to Huias themselves then they are not gone but some are.
I think you're getting confused with hutias, some of which still survive. I have only seen Cuban and Jamaican hutias in captivity and I'd like to see more species.
 
The pigeons have indeed been in captivity but to breed they need lots of other birds, possibly in the thousands to make just 1 egg.
Passenger Pigeons bred quite readily in captivity. In England the Earl of Derby was breeding them so successfully that he used to release them. When he died there were seventy Passenger Pigeons in his aviaries.
 
If Atlas bears were still around, I'm 99% sure that every zoo African area would have brown bears - but they'd be grizzlies as a stand in, just as Amur leopards are used for Africans.
IDK about that, at least if you’re talking about American zoos. Generally brown bears are not used in Eurasian-themed areas over here, and obviously they would not fit with the savanna/rainforest theme of most African areas.
 
IDK about that, at least if you’re talking about American zoos. Generally brown bears are not used in Eurasian-themed areas over here, and obviously they would not fit with the savanna/rainforest theme of most African areas.

I mean, A LOT of animals that are in savannah and rainforest themed US zoo African exhibits shouldn't be in them. I've seen a lot of zoos lump Madagascar in with mainland Africa (including putting ring-tailed lemurs in rainforest exhibits), put desert antelopes in savannah exhibits, etc. I don't think it would be too big of a stretch to say that some zoos would throw grizzlies in to African areas and say, "Eh, close enough."

Source: Way too many institutional collection planning meetings over the years with people trying to shoehorn favorite animals into exhibit concepts that don't work.
 
I mean, A LOT of animals that are in savannah and rainforest themed US zoo African exhibits shouldn't be in them. I've seen a lot of zoos lump Madagascar in with mainland Africa (including putting ring-tailed lemurs in rainforest exhibits), put desert antelopes in savannah exhibits, etc. I don't think it would be too big of a stretch to say that some zoos would throw grizzlies in to African areas and say, "Eh, close enough."

Source: Way too many institutional collection planning meetings over the years with people trying to shoehorn favorite animals into exhibit concepts that don't work.
Maybe not, but with say, sticking some scimitar-horned oryx in a savanna exhibit with giraffes, zebras, etc, you’re still mixing them with other hot-climate animals even if they don’t share the same biome. Considering how Atlas bears come from not only a different biome but one with an enormous temperature difference, that being the snowy Atlas Mountains, I feel the distinction is much greater there. We can agree to disagree on this, but personally I don’t think it would be very common for American zoos to display grizzlies as part of savanna and rainforest-themed exhibits, especially seeing as they’re an indigenous species over here and are often star attractions of North-American themed areas.
 
Back
Top