Noah's Ark Zoo Farm Tigers to return to the circus

The Tigers that are breeding now are definately pure. Most of them coming from other collections and not being descended from the Original group.
The Original Howletts/Port Lympne Breeding Programme bred over 350 tigers!
 
ZooLeopard said:
Is gerald the giraffe from a uk zoo? AAre they planning on getting anymore cause the last i heard he was with a goat (very noahs ark!) Maybe they should put the giraffe, goat and labrador all in one exhibit.
Click to expand...

No he came from somewhere in Europe. (Denmark I think) They have been saying that females are coming since he arrived although none have ever appeared.
 
Dartboy said:
When i visited in september i asked how the mother died, they told me she caught a disease that was uncurable to cats (cant remember the name). And their was nothing they could do about it is this the same as what they have been telling the press?
Click to expand...

FIP (Feline Infectious Peritonitis) - I think that's official. I think DEFRA recommend testing for FIP within 30 days of cats newly arriving at zoos. I believe it's relatively new in tigers, it was formerly known more with regards to domestic cats in close (and possibly insanitary) conditions in catteries.

Edit - link confirming FIP line: Tiger dies after birth Noahs Ark Zoo Farm | Bristol news | This is Bristol

They would have caught it before reaching N. Ark of course.
 
Last edited:
Dartboy said:
When i visited in september i asked how the mother died, they told me she caught a disease that was uncurable to cats (cant remember the name). And their was nothing they could do about it is this the same as what they have been telling the press?
Click to expand...
Hi, I have never been to the zoo but I have followed Tira's ( the mother tiger )story since she got there and I beleive from what I have read she did die of an incurable cat disease and the cub died of the same desease, she did not catch it though from what I understand, I think she must have been born with it but in answer to your question yes I think this is what they are telling the press.
 
ZooLeopard said:
quite good that. At least they cant start breeding them otherwise we would have another catastrophe!
Click to expand...
Thats below the belt you cannot say for certain that something would go wrong if they did get a female Giraffe,and I say that as one of Noah`s biggest critics on here.
 
In the early days zoos and circuses worked together trading and loaning animals. it is only in recent years that they have separated themselves. It is not shocking at all that some of their tigers came from Aspinall and I am sure there were animals exchanged the other way. I would say many species established in UK zoological gardens owe their existence to some sort of circus connection (Most likely Chipperfields)
 
Indeed Vulpes. Quite alot of Zoo Animals orginally came from disbanded Circuc collections.
Belle Vue definately had animals from Circus's
London Zoo have definately had animals from Circus's and sold animals to Circus's for Instance Jumbo.
This was quite common with larger municipal collections.
These slight connections are not all terribly bad it was something very common in the older days of animal-keeping. With quite alot of Circus's disbanding at around the same time what sort of expanding victorian collection wouldn't take the animals?
 
Vulpes said:
You know some people get animals that they loved stuffed to keep them forever, or will keep a piece of their fur or something else to remember them by. A good friend of mine kept a piece of her old English sheep dogs hair after he passed away. I dont agree at all that this is disrespectful. Somebody stuffing their Granny however would be a different story but I state again treating animals as people has no place in a serious discussion.
Click to expand...


Obviously opinions vary greatly, but personally I don't approve of stuffed animals, especially not in a zoo where frankly I don't see the point of them: I go to a zoo to admire live animals, not dead ones! It is an interesting debate though - I remember many years ago visiting a farm park that also had a hedgehog hospital. They had a display of stuffed hedgehogs, yet they also had a memorial garden where some of their 'favourite' animals were buried as a mark of respect. A smal child was asking their parents to explain this blatant use of double-standards, which I thought was a pretty intelligant observation from one so young.

My concern with Noah's Ark, however, would be more along the lines of what they did with those tiger parts...
 
If they were killing animals for the sole purpose of stuffing them, I could see your point however I see no harm in stuffing or doing anything else with a carcass that has died of natural causes!
 
I agree with you Vulpes, like I said this has happened in loads of zoos before.
 
Sand Cat said:
Obviously opinions vary greatly, but personally I don't approve of stuffed animals, especially not in a zoo where frankly I don't see the point of them: I go to a zoo to admire live animals, not dead ones! It is an interesting debate though - I remember many years ago visiting a farm park that also had a hedgehog hospital. They had a display of stuffed hedgehogs, yet they also had a memorial garden where some of their 'favourite' animals were buried as a mark of respect. A smal child was asking their parents to explain this blatant use of double-standards, which I thought was a pretty intelligant observation from one so young.

My concern with Noah's Ark, however, would be more along the lines of what they did with those tiger parts...
Click to expand...


I agree with you Sand Cat, I also go to zoos to see live animals and to see and get involved in the conservation projects that zoos are involved in, it may be the case that some zoos do posses stuffed animals but I feel this should be discouraged as it brings a touch of the macabre into a place that should be celebrating the diversity of life on Earth and the conservation efforts that people are putting into preserving it.
 
Personally i feel that stuffed animals have their place in educating people, also they are great tools to help blind kids feel what a tiger really looks like for example...so they have their educational purpose
 
jb.lancashire said:
I agree with you Sand Cat, I also go to zoos to see live animals and to see and get involved in the conservation projects that zoos are involved in, it may be the case that some zoos do posses stuffed animals but I feel this should be discouraged as it brings a touch of the macabre into a place that should be celebrating the diversity of life on Earth and the conservation efforts that people are putting into preserving it.
Click to expand...

Tell you what, why don't we close down the Tring Zoological Museum or the South Kensington Natural History Museum? Who are they trying to kid - trying to teach us about biodiversity indeed? They are nothing more than freak shows; cabinets of curiosity for sickos to visit.

Sarcasm aside, I think that viewing zoos merely as windows into the spheres of conservation and the concept of biodiversity is rather narrow-minded. Zoos educational remits are, quite rightly, much broader. Biodiversity might be the only topic in the vast sphere of the natural world that inspires your awe but you can't deny that its brilliance is matched by that of anatomical design.

Biodiversity is inextricably linked to taxonomy in this context and, practical con siderations aside, it is impossible to illustrate the principles of classification without references to anatomy. 2-dimensional images are no substitute for the real thing (otherwise we would all be sitting at home looking at animals in book or on the telly instead of visiting zoos to see the real McCoy) so I firmly believe that osteological and taxidermy specimens do have a very firm place in the zoological garden and a vital place in their educational role.

Out of interest, do you object to skulls being used to decorate vivariums as is done in many places now?

What about seashells as educational aids or enclosure decoration? Are these 'macabre'? They are as much part of a dead animal as a tiger skull.
 
Just back from a quick trip over to Tenerife to see the only Maroon-fronted Parrots in any zoo and saw this thread about NAZP,read it with a smug feeling of " I told you so" i must admit.My recent book gave this place a real lambasting [nice old word] and the review states "worryingly the zoo now has tigers".I could not have forecast the particular outcome but it is clear from a visit that expenditure on religous dogma comes before money spent on the collection. An expensive model ark, a huge ark climbing frame,yards of fancy graphics on creationism meanwhile they had a meerkat exhibit that looked like a bomb crater and a reptile house [now replaced i will admit] the size of a cupboard.And all this time their advertising has aimed straight at Bristol. I find it difficult to wish them well
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top