Ungulates in Australia

thanks yassa.

thats a very logical answer. more animals = higher odds of mutation = genetic diversity.

i remember a molecular biology scientist friend of mine (who had incidently decided to become an animator) told me that inbreeding wouldn't necessarily be the major hindrence in re-establishing a species like the thylacine. basically he said genetic diversity re-engeneers itself or in this case humans may be able to engineer that for them.

nonetheless, inbreeding may not seem detrimental to some species but we all know it can be with others, particuarly with more "advanced" species.

with ungulates in australia (because i'm determined to bing it back to that) i think we should continue to breed the species we have so long as they show little health issues as a result. as zoopro said, there not a complete blanket ban, and eventually we will no doubt see a drizzle of fresh blood begin to come in for some of these species. most ungulate species, even when showing problems associated with inbreeding have them "cancelled out" with one generation of fresh blood.

tigers, being big cats are not so fortunate though from what i have read. cheetah have numerous problems contributed to a natural "near extinction" that has left them particuarly vulnerable. south china tigers are apparently doing very badly in captivity as a result of a low founder base.
 
Couldn't agree more, Patrick, and that's why I think it's stupid to do things like deliberately keep the sexes apart in species like sitatungas so that they will die out in Australia!

As a matter of fact I strongly disagree with a lot of the decisions by various TAGs (admittedly out of my own ignorance and preferences) but some decisions seem crazy!
 
patrick said:
tigers, being big cats are not so fortunate though from what i have read. cheetah have numerous problems contributed to a natural "near extinction" that has left them particuarly vulnerable. south china tigers are apparently doing very badly in captivity as a result of a low founder base.
Click to expand...

See my comment under the new thread 'cat genetics'
 
Ara said:
Couldn't agree more, Patrick, and that's why I think it's stupid to do things like deliberately keep the sexes apart in species like sitatungas so that they will die out in Australia!

As a matter of fact I strongly disagree with a lot of the decisions by various TAGs (admittedly out of my own ignorance and preferences) but some decisions seem crazy!
Click to expand...

Are you involved in the TAG decisions ARA, and understand the background of how these decisions are made, or do you just see the recommendations, without any of the relevant information that led to the recommendation? It's very easy to be critical from the outside, in absence of the facts.

The TAGs have representatives from each of the 70-odd ARAZPA member institutions who are the specialists in those particular species, and who jointly make decisions for the region's collections, so there's a pretty good group of experts there making the decisions. Like you, not every one of them will aggree with every decision that is made, but it would be a near impossible feat to get 70 people to always be in total agreement. Overall, our collections would be much worse off if they were all managed separately without regional cooperation.
 
Ara, sadly i think you need to face the facts. with limited space, resources and quarantine issues, were never going to have zoos with the diversity of our north american or european counterparts. not that its bad thing. if phasing out species means more space for animals, more resources directed to in-situ and ex-situ conservation, genetically stable populations and more money to spend on building better exhibits, then im all for it. take melbourne zoo for example. draw a line down the central boulevard. on one side, youve got the future zoo. new enclosures, way more space but fewer species. on the other side, youve got a row of crappy big cat enclosures, run-down paddocks for maned wolves, tiny small cat enclosures, **** babboon enclosures, and enclosures for lions, hunting dogs and brown bears which could be better. many of these species are listed as phase outs, and as interesting as it to see such a diversity of animals, you cant help but feel the animals on the other side of the road have got it better off and ultimately, are that bit more worthwile having in captivity. i mean, in reality, is there any justification at all in having the only bobcat in australia in an enclosure thats too small?
i really think less is more and i fully endorse ARAZPA policy. and at the end of the day, as flexile as the zoos are to responding to new crisis, ie, the amphibian crisis, most of these policies arent overnight ideas. many of these management plans have been formulated over a decade ago, and as our zoo development programs catch up the region will be bette rbale to align itself with its conservation goals.
besides, sitatunga are boring ;)
it could be worse, we could be living in new zealand.....
 
when i talk of (in)breeding artiodactyls to conserve the species here, it has not so much to do with preserving the species because of my own particular fondness for them so much as it has to do with a concern that our open-rnage zoos will suffer as a result of their departure.

i love open range zoos. they are to me, much underappreciated when compared to their sister city zoos. they epitomise the "future zoo" to me.

we could always have more but are nontheless very lucky to have 3 very high standard open range zoos in this country.

the way they are presently structured are however, they are very focused and threfore reliant on ungulates. so personally i would assume the smartest thing is to maintain as wide a range as possible for the time being, until import restrictions can be negotiated around. obviously, i want our captive breeding programs for artiodactyls to be benificial for the species overall, but we are not particuarly in a position to be able to offer much at this stage. overall i think we can definatley afford to reduce our collection size managed by this TAG. currently not all open range zoos hold the same species. but until we can decide on what these new focused species may be and guarentee them entry to australia, i hope for their own sake our open range zoos try their best to maintain more than just a couple of the "viable" species.

that is unless the zoos see some progress with DEH in sight, in which case phasing out now makes sense
 
i actually reckon the loss of some more antelope species will not be too detrimental to the future of our open range zoos. so long as they have giraffe, zebra, eland, white rhino then there is a basic 'african savannah' selection there. then of course, youve got oryx and addax, and if things change in the future bongo too (forever). the loss of waterbuck, kudu, sitatunga, forest buffalo, and absence of springbok is a shame but i dont think the average zoo visitor would notice their absence.
theres still bison, buffalo and deer and blackbuck + przewalski horse to beef things up. western plains zoo with some minor alterations could easily overcome the phasing out of many artiodactyl species. i havent been to werribee yet but if they can deliver exhiits for say babboon, hunting dog, even hyena and (oh god) indian rhino then then once again the disappearace of kudu wont matter. and monarto....drive through exhibits for carnivores, Australia's largest chimp enclosure. rhino, giraffe. i think theyd be fine. monarto has never really had many antelope, in comparison to WPZ so their collection and physical plan probably doesnt need to be changed much at all.
 
yeah i was particuarly thinking about werribee and monarto, which are very safari-drive-thru focused. and somewhat more reliant on having a good artiodactyl contingent. i think people kinda want to see ungulates in partcicular at these kind of zoos.

of course you know i totally agree we could loose quite a few if we choose to focus on available asian species of deer etc..

and i agree, its vey much about keeping a "african savannah" and with rhino, zebra, giraffe and ostrich all secure, i don't think we will have too much problems in that area. just one or two antelopes really will suffice and we oryx can always be a stand-n here.

for time being though, unless there is a overturn in sight (and there may be), why not just maintain what we can?
 
i guess, but i can see how maintaining a herd of inbred sitatunga for example could be seen as a non-priority for TAG convenors with limited resources at hteir disposal. and if i was a zoo director commiting resources "
id much rather pay to import a new breeding male sumatran tiger than upgrade 'those rundown holding pens and calving barns' for the couple of sitatunga we have..."
 
As far as I'm concerned, the only justification for deliberately wiping out a species in Australian zoos would be if the spaces were needed for some other, more valuable species.

As we are talking about an ungulate here (sitatunga), "they" are hardly breaking the doors down bringing in replacement ungulates.

So what are you proposing using the spaces for, yet MORE giraffes and MORE common zebras?

Personally, I don't care if I never see another giraffe or zebra in my life. Give me the beautiful horned animals of Africa. (End of dummy-spit.)
 
I feel like a bit of a goose now.
I've just realised that, basically, the giraffe IS one of the beautiful horned animals of Africa!
 
Importation of sitatunga is very restricted, and impractical. The animals that we have in the region are ageing, and are widespread, with 2 females at Western Plains Zoo, 4 females at Hamilton Zoo and 2 males at Wellington Zoo. So each of these small populations occupies exhibit space, and there is little chance of them breeding, and little chance of us importing more new animals.

At the same time there are many other species in the region in smallish numbers, that we can import, to form decent-sized viable populations, maybe utilizing the space that is occupied by three sitatunga exhibits.

It doesn't actually take a great deal of thought to work out how the TAG might have come to the decision to phase sitatunga out, does it?
 
ZooPro, I know you're right. Your calm logic defeats my emotional, irrational argument every time.

All the same, I can't help feeling sad about it.
 
Sitatunga

ZooPro said:
Importation of sitatunga is very restricted, and impractical. The animals that we have in the region are ageing, and are widespread, with 2 females at Western Plains Zoo, 4 females at Hamilton Zoo and 2 males at Wellington Zoo.

Which means that there are 6 Sitatunga in the North Island of NZ ! I wish the zoos could co operate and Hamilton send 2 of theirs to Wellington , and Wellington send one of theirs to Hamilton .
And no red tape with biosecurity regulations to deal with -- not even fruit fly exclusion zones or nothing !
Click to expand...
 
Nigel said:
ZooPro said:
Importation I wish the zoos could co operate and Hamilton send 2 of theirs to Wellington , and Wellington send one of theirs to Hamilton .
And no red tape with biosecurity regulations to deal with -- not even fruit fly exclusion zones or nothing !
Click to expand...

The zoos are cooperating, and phasing the species out of the region by housing the sexes separately. It is planned to use the space they occupy for one of the antelope species.

Cooperation isn't always about breeding, it's about working together to achive a set goal, and the goal with this species is to phase them out of the regional collections.
Click to expand...
 
it makes perfect sense. sitatunga and bongo are very, very similar antelopes in both habitat choice, behaviour and appearance. most zoos want bongo so, why would be bother with both.

however - i have no idea what the founder bases were like for some of the other antelopes, but bongo have probably one of the most pathetic of all. that said, if and when the zoos manage to approve an ungulate import, i wouldn't be supprised if bongo was the first. they are very popular, and most zoos in australia would be happy to display them.
 
Sitatunga vs Bongo in NZ

I may be wrong here -- and I am open to correction , but I dont think there are any bongo in NZ zoos .
We have the sitatunga in Wellington and Hamilton
It costs a mint to import animals from overseas -- if we are able to legally do so at all with our strict biosecurity set up

and we are phasing out sitatunga !

I am sure there is plenty of roon for them at Orana Park , as they are currently utilising approx 20 % of the total land that they own .

This is just bizarre !
 
Correct Nigel, there are no bongo in New Zealand. Hamilton Zoo and Orana Park are both planning on holding the species, although not for at least a few years yet. It will probably take that long to sort out the importation requirements anyway!
 
All sitatunga in Australia and New Zealand are descended from a single pair brought in from Chicago and San Diego by Taronga back in the 1950's.

No new blood since then.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top