Lowland gorillas in Europe 2012

Status
Not open for further replies.
Agree entirely! If he is to be introduced to females, the current London group is entirely suitable, and the right size too, not too many,not too few.

By my reckoning if he can father babies even with only one female(most likely it would be with Mjuku) he would probably be allowed to stay there longerterm. The question remains, will he?;)

What in your opinion would be the chances of any other females at ZSL/London being bred by K. in the event he is definitely coming in?


Clarifications earlier write-up:
* My summation re newly established meant integrating with a good mix of young and older experienced females.
* The blackback / silverback ... having seen the Howletts gorilla troupes with high social eptitude(s) they strike me as good breeding partners' whether blackback / silverback (usually blackbacks of a certain age in established groups with silverback do not take on that silver lining untill taken out of their troupe as they are being surpressed by the dominant silverback ... that was my understanding anyway).
 
What in your opinion would be the chances of any other females at ZSL/London being bred by K. in the event he is definitely coming in?


The blackback / silverback ... having seen the Howletts gorilla troupes with high social eptitude(s) they strike me as good breeding partners' whether blackback / silverback (usually blackbacks of a certain age in established groups with silverback do not take on that silver lining untill taken out of their troupe as they are being surpressed by the dominant silverback ... that was my understanding anyway).

Kumbuka-the two females its hoped he will breed with are obviously 'Mjuku' and 'Effie' (Zaire is his grandmother- they say she is 'too old' to bred which isn't so though she has been unbred so long it may be the equivalent.) I would say Mjuku is the most likely because she's younger than Effie and has bred more recently- but who knows? We will see;)

Blackbacks/silverbacks.

In the past at Howletts(and probably elsewhere) they have sometimes had to remove blackback males which have started to bully females and/or young, sometimes even when a silverback is present. Though they are already fertile and can father offspring, they still aren't mature enough, physically or psychologically, to manage a group properly though its often been done in zoos- in the wild I imagine a blackback would never get the opportunity to take over a group- only adult males?
 
Djengi

Changing the subject (a little): Last weekend I visited the all male group in Schmiding, Austria. See a couple of photos at the Zoo Schmiding Gallery. A keeper told me that Djengi (*2000) was "sent away" two weeks ago, but she could not tell me where to. Two Flickr friends asked me if he was possibly transfered to London. Do you know anything about him? Or to put it this way, is there any doubt about Kumbuka moving to London?

P.S. More pictures will be posted in Zoo Schmiding: Gorillas - a set on Flickr soon.
 
A keeper told me that Djengi (*2000) was "sent away" two weeks ago, but she could not tell me where to.

Djengi was born at Bristol zoo to the ill-fated parents Claus and Undi- their only offspring before both of them died. He was handraised afterward at Stuttgart. Can't believe he is already twelve years old. Its strange they couldn't tell you where he has gone- they must know.:confused: I think Kumbuka's move to London looks fairly certain now, clean bill of health permitting, so Djengi is very unlikely to be going there.
 
Maybe Howletts is looking for an unrelated and genetically interesting male.
 
The group at Howletts which needs a new unrelated male is Kijo's old group. There are still several of his sons currently in the group including a young silverback (Bitono) and a blackback (Jah). I guess these would have to leave before they can add a new male. Also I don't think Djengi is particularly important genetically though he's not related to any of Howletts groups. I am pretty sure he isn't at Howletts though....
 
Djengi et al.

Something I've been wondering for a long time already: Why is it that many zoos seem to be so reluctant to publicly share information about transfers of their animals? I sort of understand why they prefer news articles like "Gorilla baby born last weekend" to "Gorilla baby, aged 3 weeks, died last Saturday". But as far as Djengi's transfer is concerned, there is nothing on the zoo's website, and no results with Google search either. I did write to Zoo Schmiding a couple of days ago but haven't got an answer yet. :mad:
Same with the official gorilla studbook. I wrote to the EAZA HQ in Amsterdam, politely asking for a copy of the 2011 studbook, and after 3 weeks was told to send my request to another representative / official of EAZA "who will decide if you are entitled to receive the studbook". (According to their website, only EAZA members are.) But why do they treat the studbook like a state secret? What are they afraid of? People who are more interested than the average zoo visitor and who could possibly ask inconvenient questions? :confused:
I don't get the reason for their secret-mongering. Maybe someone in this forum can tell me.
 
Something I've been wondering for a long time already: Why is it that many zoos seem to be so reluctant to publicly share information about transfers of their animals? I sort of understand why they prefer news articles like "Gorilla baby born last weekend" to "Gorilla baby, aged 3 weeks, died last Saturday". But as far as Djengi's transfer is concerned, there is nothing on the zoo's website, and no results with Google search either. I did write to Zoo Schmiding a couple of days ago but haven't got an answer yet. :mad:
Same with the official gorilla studbook. I wrote to the EAZA HQ in Amsterdam, politely asking for a copy of the 2011 studbook, and after 3 weeks was told to send my request to another representative / official of EAZA "who will decide if you are entitled to receive the studbook". (According to their website, only EAZA members are.) But why do they treat the studbook like a state secret? What are they afraid of? People who are more interested than the average zoo visitor and who could possibly ask inconvenient questions? :confused:
I don't get the reason for their secret-mongering. Maybe someone in this forum can tell me.

With some honourable exceptions (Doug Richardson immediately springs to mind) I am sorry to say that most UK senior zoo professionals give the impression of finding amateur enthusiasts a nuisance. I wouldn't presume to speak for elsewhere in the world, and other posters may well feel that I'm being unfair. But I speak as I find.
 
But why do they treat the studbook like a state secret? What are they afraid of? People who are more interested than the average zoo visitor and who could possibly ask inconvenient questions? :confused:
I don't get the reason for their secret-mongering. Maybe someone in this forum can tell me.

I have met this many times in 50+ years of Zoo interest.;) I think this secrecy stems from a fear that interested or well-meaning 'amateurs' (though not all 'interested' people are necessarily amateurs;)) may try to meddle in affairs such as studbooks or animal movements that are regarded as private within the professional zoo community and therefore are none of their business. 'Nuisance', as Ian mentioned above, is the word that summarises it well I think.

With odd exceptions, I now bypass zoos directly for information or studbook requests. Fortunately Zoochat provides a whole network of zoonews 'scouts,' some of whom do contact and successfully get replies from the zoos. Plus the arrival of the Internet has meant many studbooks now appear online(see above) so much of this secrecy is nowadays rather wasted, as it would be for your request for the Gorilla studbook, albeit the online one is a year or so older.

The general reluctance many zoos display about imparting information about animal deaths and movements is probably a long-held defensive reaction used principally to fend off press and anti- zoo movements which might use such information against them. Its a form of paranoia. In the case of transfers, they are often kept quiet to prevent 'spoiling' in advance any publicity surrounding them, or in case they fall through-something I do find understandable though its sometimes taken to extremes.

Re Djengi- his removal probably isn't seen as noteworthy enough to put on their website. It will soon become apparent whether he is still in the population or not, and where. If he is sick/has died or been transferred elsewhere -maybe Schmiding will still answer your question soon.
 
Last edited:
Re: Djengi

Thanks Nisha, Ian and Pertinax for your replies!

I have had the studbook 2010 already from the website you provided, Nisha, and since two weeks ago I also have the 2011 issue, from a friend in the US who got it from a friend in the UK who ... etc., i.e. via inofficial channels.

Your replies confirmed my presumptions more or less. Somehow the "zoo network's" attitude toward the public reminds me of an authoritarian state and its authorities (e.g. the monarchies from before WWI) - they do whatever they want, and feel annoyed if one of their "subjects" dares to question them, or even asks a question. Zoo visitors pay for admission (that's all they are allowed to do) and in exchange get to see "a group of four males" (Schmiding), not four individuals with their respective names. (I am aware that in many other zoos they do tell their names.) As it is common in politics nowadays, I really think they should be more transparent about their animals regarding public relations. All the secrecy actually triggers suspicions from animal rights groups and such, so more transparency would be a perfect way to meet these suspicions and dispel them, unless they really have to hide something. [Sorry for my clumsy English, but I hope you get my point.]

I guess their is no independent, or even internal monitoring body watching the activities of the EAZA or the EEP. In politics there are boards of enquiry, so why not implement something similar for zoo animals.

Not only Djengi was not noteworthy enough to be put on their website - it still reflects the state of 2005. One of them has moved since, two others have joined (so it were 5 for a while), and now it's back to four again (Djengi). On their flyer they avoided any names and just say "four male gorillas". And only now it deems to me that Djengi might have died actually, and the keeper's reply to me - "he was sent off" - was her way of saying "that's none of your business".
 
And only now it deems to me that Djengi might have died actually, and the keeper's reply to me - "he was sent off" - was her way of saying "that's none of your business".

Your summation echoes many similar observations in this vein about zoo organisations and their secrecy. Which is why bypassing the formal channels for information is often more successful. That is fair enough if they are suspicious and unwilling to recognise straightforward interest or enquiries.

Staff who give out wrong information(if it was such in this case) in the hope you will 'go away' don't do their zoo any service either-anyone with a brain will sooner or later find out if the information is correct or not.;)

Re Djenghi- I hope he hasn't died but it does seem likely perhaps. If his death or transfer was only very recent, it won't show until 2012 studbook is published though.
 
Last edited:
Regards to Djengi - He might yet turn up... possible he's being quarentined or held off show somewhere and a press release would then be issued once he goes on public display (long shot but it's happend before now...)

In other news - Longleat's batchelor group is delayed. Exhibit is now expected to be open in time for Kids school holidays (Second half of July) No indication when the boys will now arrive (They were orginally scheduled for last week)
 
In other news - Longleat's batchelor group is delayed. Exhibit is now expected to be open in time for Kids school holidays (Second half of July) No indication when the boys will now arrive (They were orginally scheduled for last week)

I would guess by the end of this month, to allow them a couple of weeks to settle in before going on show?
 
I share Willard's opinion about keeping information about transfers and deaths a secret by zoos. The death of gorillababy Tamu at Rotterdam Zoo was not made public until about 3 months after the fact! They said they wanted to have the cause of death before mentioning it. That's ridiculous. Regular visitors miss the baby and everyone knows there is something wrong. There is nothing wrong with saying that the baby died at the age of 3 months and later on giving the cause of death. BUT... I must say there are zoos that give excellent information! Barcelona Zoo and Bioparc Valencia were very kind in giving information when I asked for it. Also Burgers Zoo and Apenheul always give immediate response and plenty of information. They also have an e:mail address for getting information, something that Rotterdam Zoo doesn't have.... Obviously they do not want to be "disturbed" with all sort of "silly" questions. I still think that by giving sincere information they will attract more visitors and most importantly, they will create goodwill among the regular visitors. Everybody with a clear mind will accept that animals could die or have to be transferred to other zoos. As long as the zoo is honest about these things. But the zoo says "it's their policy and they are not going to change it"............
 
PR policy

I still think that by giving sincere information they will attract more visitors and most importantly, they will create goodwill among the regular visitors. Everybody with a clear mind will accept that animals could die or have to be transferred to other zoos. As long as the zoo is honest about these things.

That's exactly what I think too. Around 90% of the visitors won't care about accurate information anyway, but the remaining 10% - regulars, enthusiasts, members of this forum - will appreciate that little extra bit of effort, and that most likely will have a positive influence on their attitude toward a zoo. For instance, when the unnamed baby in Pittsburgh died recently, there was a press article on the zoo's website the day after. They explained the circumstances of its death, the measures taken by the vets, and did so without knowing the cause of death yet. Result: Everyone was sad about the baby passing away, but no one blamed it on the zoo or had second thoughts AFAIK.

Finally, if a zoo bothers to have a website online in the first place, they should also bother to maintain their site and provide regular updates on their animals. And that especially includes deaths and transfers. It should be an "obligation to provide" and not something reluctantly told on request, if at all. - And that's the end of my sermon. ;)
 
Last edited:
PR policy (postscript)

I've only now realised that there was a similar discussion at the Twycross thread in March already. Sorry for the repeat of almost the same arguments - I can almost hear our moderator mumbling, "Oh no, not again ..." :rolleyes: But nice to see that I'm not the only one who is sensitive to this issue.
 
Sorry for the repeat of almost the same arguments - I can almost hear our moderator mumbling, "Oh no, not again ..." :rolleyes: But nice to see that I'm not the only one who is sensitive to this issue.

Actually its interesting that so many people(i.e. Zoochatters) come across this problem independantly of each other in their enquiries to various zoos. Its not 'across the board' but it certainly seems as widespread as it was the past.

If Schmiding is one of those zoos that don't update their website regularly or publicly identify the Gorillas etc I would guess there is also less chance they will respond to your enquiry about what's happened to Djenghi.

If so, of course that raises my curiosity levels too!;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top