Nico_Olieros
New Member
includes current or past legislation, war, or any reason caused by humans, not nature itself.
What are some animals that are usually not in collections because of politics?
- Thread starter Nico_Olieros
- Start date
Most Galapagos species, also many Australian and New Zealand species (especially for other countries), Antarctic seals as well.
Sphenisciologist
Well-Known Member
Cetaceans immediately popped into my head
That one's more dependent on what country you live in unlike most of the other examples, but yeah it works.
Think that's less politics and more common sense..
Too many. Different laws make it almost impossible to bring new endangered (and many common) mammals or birds into human care, and zoos are generally forced to breed only the species which were already in their collections 20 or 30 years ago. It is ironic that most of these laws are aimed at veterinary or large scale trade, and harm nature and zoos just incidentally.
All ungulate animals from Africa and Asia are practically forbidden to be imported into European Union because of veterinary regulations. For example western giant eland and many other rare antelope. Ironically, these regulations are meant for large scale transport of livestock and meat. Zoo animals in their small numbers and careful quarantine will not spread any diseases.
Countries which ban export of most native animals include Papua New Guinea (birds of paradise, tree kangaroos), China (giant panda, snub-nosed monkeys etc) and Ethiopia (mountain nyala, ethiopian wolf, hirola, yellow-faced parrot etc). Ironically, Ethiopia allows hunting mountain nyalas and exporting trophies, but exporting live ones to zoos is forbidden.
Endangered species which cannot be exported include most monkeys from Peru, Andean and James flamingos, parrots, mountain zebras from South Africa etc. The same about many primates from Africa. Ironically, many of those in their native countries are commonly hunted for meat and sold on markets. But zoos are in the spotlight and are asked to be holier than the Pope.
There were several threads about these before.
All ungulate animals from Africa and Asia are practically forbidden to be imported into European Union because of veterinary regulations. For example western giant eland and many other rare antelope. Ironically, these regulations are meant for large scale transport of livestock and meat. Zoo animals in their small numbers and careful quarantine will not spread any diseases.
Countries which ban export of most native animals include Papua New Guinea (birds of paradise, tree kangaroos), China (giant panda, snub-nosed monkeys etc) and Ethiopia (mountain nyala, ethiopian wolf, hirola, yellow-faced parrot etc). Ironically, Ethiopia allows hunting mountain nyalas and exporting trophies, but exporting live ones to zoos is forbidden.
Endangered species which cannot be exported include most monkeys from Peru, Andean and James flamingos, parrots, mountain zebras from South Africa etc. The same about many primates from Africa. Ironically, many of those in their native countries are commonly hunted for meat and sold on markets. But zoos are in the spotlight and are asked to be holier than the Pope.
There were several threads about these before.
The USA has similar restrictions for the same reasons, which while understandable is still unfortunate.
The tone of this thread worries me. There seems to be an expectation that zoos should be allowed to go into a country, grab what they want and stick it into a cage. Yes zoos should be holier than thou because they should be leading the argument for conservation and sustainability, There is no point leading an argument against the bush meat trade if the next day zoo trappers go in to remove some prize specimens,
There is one species which is of course entirely political, and that is the giant panda. Otherwise politics as such often facilitate exports, for instance the number of koalas that have been exported hover the years in support of trade deals or even getting the Olympics.
There is one species which is of course entirely political, and that is the giant panda. Otherwise politics as such often facilitate exports, for instance the number of koalas that have been exported hover the years in support of trade deals or even getting the Olympics.
Politics is involved in some countries banning potentially invasive species
Sphenisciologist
Well-Known Member
I would say any of the ‘classic’ endangered animals (pandas, polar bears, sea turtles, elephants, tigers, etc.) will be controversial in captivity to an extent.
This isn't the point of the thread - we're talking about species that aren't in captivity for direct political reasons, not because they're controversial.
Not controversial at all, except maybe Leatherbacks. Very common in aquariums as rehabbed individuals as well as rehab centers temporarily and in head start programs.
Eh not really. They're plenty common and not really controversial.
There you go, denigrating koalas by reinforcing a common but incorrect myth about them. They are in fact never drunk or drugged, just leading a relaxed lifestyle exploiting a nutrient-poor but widely available food.
Can’t argue about the STD though.
I disagree about tigers. Zoos are practically expected to have them. I think you'd be hard pressed to think of a zoo that doesn't have them. I've personally only seen one AZA zoo without them and it is the Grizzly and Wolf Discovery Center. Maybe the situation is different in other continents. Elephants have come under scrutiny with animal rights groups but likely not much in the way of politics with them. What are the politics with sea turtles,
.
I agree, elefante. There are too many tigers in captivity. Supposedly, they are thee for conservation purposes, but very few are part of reintroduction programmes. Some are being kept as pure subspecies, but many are not. If they are not to be reintroduced, why is so much space being given to subspecies when many genera of small critically endangered animals are not being kept in captivity? If zoos need to keep subspecies, why are they keeping hybrids? If tigers attract visitors to zoos, why is there so much hostility to white tigers, which seem to be more popular with visitors than are pure subspecies?
Haliaeetus
Well-Known Member
The peak of popularity of White Tigers seems to be over in France and Europe.
Beauval Zoo that was a stronghold for this animal and one of the first importers in Europe has practically ceased to breed them (only 1 viable offspring since 2013).