Underrepresented animals in zoos

Jarne said:
One zoo doesn't make a successful program, that's resources better spend on more viable programs.
Click to expand...
Under normal circumstances, I would agree, but this situation is a bit different. The Saiga antelope is critically endangered and this is one of the few areas outside of their home range where they can be kept. San Diego has had a LOT of success with saiga breeding and has helped grow our info on them. And I'm not talking about only giving the Safari Park a few, I'm suggesting giving them a heard. If they really want to establish other populations I'm sure The Living Desert and maybe the Wilds (I'm unaware of the climate out there) could be used as other areas to hold Saigas.
 
Westcoastperson said:
Under normal circumstances, I would agree, but this situation is a bit different. The Saiga antelope is critically endangered and this is one of the few areas outside of their home range where they can be kept. San Diego has had a LOT of success with saiga breeding and has helped grow our info on them. And I'm not talking about only giving the Safari Park a few, I'm suggesting giving them a heard. If they really want to establish other populations I'm sure The Living Desert and maybe the Wilds (I'm unaware of the climate out there) could be used as other areas to hold Saigas.
Click to expand...
Dozens of other species are also extremely endangered, including many North-African gazelle species that still have a shot in captivity if managed well. And unlike with saiga, we do have the option to build out a sustainable network of zoos. Even with three zoos, creating a population that is sustainable for a dozen or so generations isn't easy. The males can't be kept together if I recall correctly, so you'd need separation facilities. That costs money. So probably they will just need to cull most males, resulting in very very few males passing through their genes. That's a recipe for a genetic bottleneck. So instead of a stable population overseas shipping animals from time to time to local breeding centers, you'd need the opposite to happen to keep genetic diversity on a decent level. Those imports would probably allocate resources from sending saigas back. Especially with import/export regulations.

There is b.t.w. a successful semi-captive population in Kazachstan of roughly 600 animals, unlike what you are proposing a population that seems genetically healthy for many generations to come. Let them do their job, and let the US focus on projects that actually have meaning. Reintroducing a few saiga from the US is not going to help out saigas in the wild, and massive reintroductions from overseas are way too expensive. That's what local breeding centers and semi-captive projects are for. But as said before instead of zoos supporting those local facilities you'd have the opposite happening.

It's interesting b.t.w. to analyse the threats to the saiga. If climate change is going to wipe them out over their entire range, no captive breeding can stop that. In that case it's a lost species, but it seems that isn't the case yet. Blocking of migration paths and habitat destruction is another one that is not solved by captive breeding. Poaching is a big problem, but in some areas it is well managed. The biggest threat saiga had recently was a super disease wiping out a large portion of the population. However the populations affected were able to bounce back rather quickly. Repopulating from the present semi-captive population would also be possible after such diseases. No big need thus for overseas captive populations.
 
i feel like there are a lot of under represented species and types of animals that dont get enough love, mostly because the exhibit is very passable, like turtles and tortoises, rodents, old world vultures, etc
 
pichu said:
i feel like there are a lot of under represented species and types of animals that dont get enough love, mostly because the exhibit is very passable, like turtles and tortoises, rodents, old world vultures, etc
Click to expand...
You know, if our friends down under loosened their biosecurity laws for exports monotremes would be waaaaay more common:p
 
Rayane said:
Three-toed sloths are comparable to Pandas and Koalas because they also eat a very limited list of plants. However, when it comes to crowd pleasing and attracting, I think Koalas and Pandas are a bit higher on the list. Sloths are appreciated but definitely not as much.
How much it costs, I have no idea. Maybe not that much if you manage to plant the specific species required to feed them. But it's definitely way easier to feed two-toed sloths.

Eucalyptus and Bamboos are now planted all over the world, many zoos plant their own bamboo. There is probably someone here in Europe that specialises in Eucalyptus as well, probably selling to many of the zoos who keep Koalas.
However, as the demand for Cecropia leaves is probably very low to non existent as I'm not aware of any three-toad sloth outside of its range (except in DWA) publicly kept, either you make you grow your own Cecropia, either you import it on a regular basis.
Click to expand...

They fly in Cecropia leaves from Hawaii a few times a week last I heard.
 
There are several orders of marsupials that are underrepresented or not represented at all.

Very few species of dasyuromorphs, opossums and bandicoots are represented.

Does any zoo show marsupial moles, shrew opossums or monito de montes?
 
bison are one f the most common zoo animals ive seen in new england at least, but they are even common in small zoos too
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top