Rare Javan Leopards photographed

[Kifaru Bwana]

I think he is refering to results from this paper Mazak and Groves (2006) - http://arts.anu.edu.au/grovco/tiger SEAsia Mazak.pdf (Please correct me if Im wrong Thylo)

I believe its available for all to view but can forward it on if its not. I think there are far too many flaws in this paper for it to be taken as gospel, but I guess everyone can make their own mind up.

CambsVet, I do hold Dr. Groves in high esteem with regard to his morphological studies. However, with this paper my position also remains unswayed and refer back to my erstwhile assessment.

 

[jbnbsn99]

I was informed about it and given some articles to read on it (which I don't have anymore unfortunately) by TeaLovingDave and jbnbsn99 in the chatroom. I'd ask one of them to clarify for you. Sorry I couldn't help you out more.

~Thylo

Yes, we told you about the article. But you misremember a lot of what we told you and started to interpret it your own way.

 

[ThylacineAlive]

Yes, we told you about the article. But you misremember a lot of what we told you and started to interpret it your own way.

What have I misremembered? Pleased correct me. It's my understanding that there was a theory and some evidence that there really are three tiger species- "mainland" (tigris), Sumatran (sumatrae), and "Sunda" (sondaica)- and that Javan and Bali were subspecies of each other with the Javan being the nominate.

~Thylo

 

[Arizona Docent]

It is certainly possible for someone with the will to maintain pure bloodlines of more than one subspecies. In the United States, the prime example is Exotic Feline Breeding Compound. They have the largest breeding group of amur leopards (working closely with AZA even though they themselves are ZAA), but also the only (as far as I know) US breeding group of north china leopards and the only (as far as I know) US mated pair of persian leopards.

In Europe, the prime example is Le Parc De Felins. They have separate breeding enclosures for persian leopards, amur leopards, sri lanka leopards (plus a fourth non breed enclosure for black leopard). Also separate breeding enclosures for malayan tiger, sumatran tiger, amur tiger (plus a massive white tiger enclosure, but I think they are no longer breeding). Also separate breeding enclosures for se asian leopard cat and amur leopard cat.

The main problem with virtually all AZA zoos is they are not willing to commit to more than one exhibit space for any variety of animal. So they already have amur leopards, for example, why would they "waste" valuable zoo space with a second type of leopard? This is why I think they really need to work more closely with private facilities, such as the members of the Feline Conservation Federation Welcome to the world of feline captive husbandry and conservation

 

[ThylacineAlive]

An example of a zoo focusing on more than one subspecies in an AZA zoo is Bronx who breeds both Malayan and Amur Tigers on a regular basis.

~Thylo

 

[Buldeo]

The main problem with virtually all AZA zoos is they are not willing to commit to more than one exhibit space for any variety of animal. So they already have amur leopards, for example, why would they "waste" valuable zoo space with a second type of leopard? This is why I think they really need to work more closely with private facilities, such as the members of the Feline Conservation Federation Welcome to the world of feline captive husbandry and conservation

Is this strictly an internal AZA matter, or does the public perception come into play here? In my experience, most zoo goers don't care about sub-species'; a leopard, is a leopard, is a leopard. The difference between a 'standard' African leopard and a Persian leopard is thus strictly academic.

That said, since the AZA has decided to focus on Amur & Snow Leopards, does that preclude zoos from acquiring a different sub-species? Does accreditation become an issue? For example, San Francisco has snow leopards. An older master plan called for an Amur exhibit as well; could the zoo choose to acquire Persians instead without fear of reprisal?

Three caught on a trail camera, including one melanistic.

Thanks for sharing! Love checking them out in the native habitat.

 

[ThylacineAlive]

Is this strictly an internal AZA matter, or does the public perception come into play here? In my experience, most zoo goers don't care about sub-species'; a leopard, is a leopard, is a leopard. The difference between a 'standard' African leopard and a Persian leopard is thus strictly academic.

That said, since the AZA has decided to focus on Amur & Snow Leopards, does that preclude zoos from acquiring a different sub-species? Does accreditation become an issue? For example, San Francisco has snow
leopards. An older master plan called for an Amur exhibit as well; could the zoo choose to acquire Persians instead without fear of reprisal?

Thanks for sharing! Love checking them out in the native habitat.

First off, you do realize that the Snow Leopard is a different species from the Leopard, right? I'm sorry if I'm mishearing you but it sounds to me like you're saying it is a subspecies of Leopard.

I'd say part of it is that the public sees an Amur Leopard, a Cape Leopard, or a Persian Leopard and all think they're the same thing with no differences whatsoever. We have three tiger subspecies in America- Malayan, Amur, and Sumatran (which, as I've mentioned earlier, may be its own species) and even there the public think they're all just one animal.

The AZA accreditation has led to other subspecies being driven out of American zoos. The AZA decided to only focus on the Amur Leopard and, thus, accredited zoos phased-out other subspecies and brought in Amur Leopards. There used to be Indian, Persian, North Chinese, and various African subspecies in U.S. zoos but now there are no Indian or North Chinese, only two Persian, and a few scattered Africans of a couple subspecies in AZA zoos.

I personally like ArizonaDocent's idea of having Amur Leopards being bred up North and a more warm-weather subspecies like the Persian and/or one of the African subspecies being bred in the South.

~Thylo

 

[Buldeo]

First off, you do realize that the Snow Leopard is a different species from the Leopard, right? I'm sorry if I'm mishearing you but it sounds to me like you're saying it is a subspecies of Leopard.

Yes, I am aware. Trying to save myself a few keystrokes. But you do raise an interesting question; do general zoo goers know that they're two independent species? While I haven't been to all zoos -- or even a lot of 'em -- the ones I've been to make no mention of the non-relation. Woodland Park Zoo comes closest to having the best educational materials, but I don't even think they mentioned it. A small bit of signage indicating the similarities between their rosette and broken-spot markings, would be great.

We have three tiger subspecies in America- Malayan, Amur, and Sumatran (which, as I've mentioned earlier, may be its own species) and even there the public think they're all just one animal.

All too true. It doesn't help when, like here in Oakland, we actually do have generic Tigers. There's a nice bit of signage detailing their story, but the fact that they're generic is glossed over. Part of the educational experience regarding the privately owned tiger problem should include several other things.

Even our damn lions are of uncertain parentage. Which, unless they were part Barbary or Asiatic, I didn't know was possible.

The AZA decided to only focus on the Amur Leopard and, thus, accredited zoos phased-out other subspecies and brought in Amur Leopards.

I don't necessarily object to the focus on Amur Leopards, but the associated educational materials should be improved to include references to the various other sub-species. For example, physical differences between the Cape & Persian Leopard.

I personally like ArizonaDocent's idea of having Amur Leopards being bred up North and a more warm-weather subspecies like the Persian and/or one of the African subspecies being bred in the South.

I also like this idea. It would certainly help with the Walmartization of American zoos.

 

[ThylacineAlive]

All too true. It doesn't help when, like here in Oakland, we actually do have generic Tigers. There's a nice bit of signage detailing their story, but the fact that they're generic is glossed over. Part of the educational experience regarding the privately owned tiger problem should include several other things.

My local zoo, Beardsley, has a sign explaining the story of generic white tigers. Which I find is very cool considering the don't even have them! They only have 1.1 Amur Tigers.

~Thylo