What's unfortunate is I suspect it's all just a few bad eggs who aren't very knowledgeable adding animals in bulk. If it was the occasional mis-entry here or there, I wouldn't be that bothered by it since that'd likely mean people who are adding zoos they visit often made well-intended mistakes, but that doesn't appear to be what's happening. Just like on Zoo Chat we have a small number of members who post massive amounts of "news" posts for zoos they've never visited and don't know too much about, it appears ZTL is suffering from the same issue, with the added complication that it's harder to stop.
Subspecies held in the USA, for ZTL
- Thread starter TinoPup
- Start date
guilty, my bad
EDIT: turns out I was wrong too. I was aware of a few pedigreed African sand cats that were used as ambassador animals. I knew several AZA zoos referred to their sand cats as Arabian. But I can find nothing to back up that the bulk of the population is of the Arabian subspecies.
Last edited:
I personally will put effort into tracking down locations where wild-caught and rescued animals, such as coyotes, black bears, and raptors, came from, and I’ve even emailed zoo administrators to double-check.
Should I list in notes on ZTL “consulted range maps and zoo staff for subspecies ID?”
We must be careful with cinnamon bears; although it is a valid subspecies, other American black bear subspecies can also come in brown.
Should I list in notes on ZTL “consulted range maps and zoo staff for subspecies ID?”
We must be careful with cinnamon bears; although it is a valid subspecies, other American black bear subspecies can also come in brown.
It's a shame there isn't a way to prevent people from adding certain listings that are repetitious and incorrect such as these.
I recall when I was more involved at Wikis, I often proposed the ability to place a section (as opposed to an entire page) under protection status.
Thanks. I found what seems to be a copy of an older Burrowing Owl studbook online, but my browser blocked it for security reasons.
I think it would be helpful; that way everyone knows what subspecific entries are legitimately researched rather than random guesses. It could prevent work in verifying IDs from getting erased in attempts to fix other people's errors. As an example, I've been adding to my Red Panda entries that I determined subspecies through visual ID - in case anyone wondered how I determined it or wants to dispute the ID.
Added benefit: there seems to be a lot of groupthink on ZTL, so if more people practice transparent notekeeping like that it may catch on with other users and mitigate the "random subspecies" problem a bit.
I'm jealous you're able to accurately visually ID the two red panda subspecies! Despite knowing what differences to look for, I still find that some of the fulgens in the United States look more like refulgens to me (especially one of the ones at Rosamond Gifford Zoo). I always need to either check the zoo signage and/or the AZA studbook when I see one I suspect is refulgens for this reason.
I find it's fairly easy if you focus on the forehead color.
Unfortunately, it's not always easy to see the forehead on a sleeping ball of red
Yes, but you can usually find some photos of the red pandas from that facility somewhere online (often in the ZooChat gallery or on the zoo's website) that can help you ID them.Unfortunately, it's not always easy to see the forehead on a sleeping ball of red
Which to note, Chattanooga, Fort Wayne, Franklin Park, Memphis, Zoo Boise, and Zoo Montana all have both - whether both are on display I do not know. Two others may have both in the near future and others have had both in the past, so tread carefully.
Just a side note. The accepted name for the Chinese Red Panda is Ailurus styani not refulgens, that was just a clerical error on the part of Alphonse Milne-Edwards
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/ailurus
Torgos
Well-Known Member
In AZA it used to be A.f. styani but now it's A.f. refulgens.......... Don't know why!
Well that's silly.
Well, I have to be
as there's no other way for me alone to tell what any of them are.Just realized I never responded to your reply about Red Pandas a while back:
I've never been to a zoo that signs their Red Pandas as one type or another. I also don't have access to a Red Panda studbook. Hence, I've had to learn how to ID visually (and you're right about having to get the right angle - several of them I've established ID using the zoo's social media or gallery photos rather than my own photos).
"Most" was probably are exaggeration, my apologies, though I have seen zoos sign their red pandas to the subspecies level. Yeah, being able to use a studbook for ID is definitely an advantage for those of us with an AZA membership (and this isn't the only species that has been useful for).
I am wrong again. Or rather I was originally right. The AZA SSP population of sand cats is Arabian
http://www.catsg.org/fileadmin/file...t_status_review_and_conservation_strategy.pdf
additionally there are a few animals owned by Columbus that are African in origin.
Sand Cat Project - Hawk Creek Wildlife Center
According to that article you shared, not all of them are:
I also see nothing on the Hawk Creek page to indicate they are African in origin, and seeing as it mentions twenty offspring from there going to other zoos, I'd be skeptical of your source saying there's are a different subspecies than most of the population.
@Ituri I'm a little confused by these different sources and information streams. As Neil just pointed out, the first source (the Arabian Sand Cat plan) states that ~10 years ago the North American population was a mix of pure Arabian and Arabian-Pakistani hybrids, with no African. Then the second source doesn't say anything about Hawk Creek/Columbus's cats being African; it does say they are "unrepresented in the US" then in the next paragraph mentions that their cats have produced 20+ cubs sent all over the country?
Columbus is listed in ZTL as having African (Saharan) Sand Cat, as is Hawk Creek; on the notes for Columbus it says "import from Chad" and that this was per an email to ZTL staff. I can't find anything online confirming that, though.
Worth noting that nearly all Sand Cat entries originated from what seems to have been an email to ZTL admin. I noticed this was the case for a few other cat species also - and the Reticulated Giraffe entries.
Columbus is listed in ZTL as having African (Saharan) Sand Cat, as is Hawk Creek; on the notes for Columbus it says "import from Chad" and that this was per an email to ZTL staff. I can't find anything online confirming that, though.
Worth noting that nearly all Sand Cat entries originated from what seems to have been an email to ZTL admin. I noticed this was the case for a few other cat species also - and the Reticulated Giraffe entries.
Okay I can address the African Sand Cat information, the Hawk Creek one did not contain the information I thought it had. They used to have more information stating that their original animals (Sahara, Juba, and Nyala) were imported from Sudan. But it's mentioned in the header on this page.
Conservation 2 - Hawk Creek Wildlife Center
Regarding the Pakistani hybrids, I'm told offline that they have largely been managed out of the population, but I don't have a shareable source for that information, so I'll keep digging.
So now we have Hawk Creek, a facility that is known for being secretive, saying these cats came from Sudan, and someone on ZTL saying they're from Chad, with Hawk Creek claiming their offspring are at a number of different zoos when the SSP is supposed to not include the African subspecies? I'm not aware of any other non-AZA sand cat holders (@TinoPup are you aware of any?) but could that be where they ended up? I'm beginning to think there are enough inconsistencies that the entire population might be best placed as "subspecies uncertain".