When they can't breed them, then should try every option possible

In N.Macedonia it costs 40 euro first time insemination of a dairy cow, and the price is including the bought semen too. Technicaly is simple, it is not like in vitro fertilization
You're comparing apples with...durian? Jackfruits? Rambutan? Anyway, it's not a valid comparison.
For various reasons, the standard AI of a cow within one country is a lot cheaper, easier and far less bureaucratic than doing a rarely required AI of a dangerous, endangered wild animal that requires the international cooperation of different countries, offices, stakeholders etc., especially when not within the EU. The associated logistic effort and red tape is...formidable, to say the least.
 
I've assisted with an exotic felid AI procedure - I wasn't one of the vets, so my impressions might not be the most accurate, but it was a lot of work, involving the transfer of an animal from one zoo to another several states over, with a fair amount of stress on both staff and animals, and a fair amount of expense. We were only willing to do this because the female in question had physical limitations which would have made natural breeding difficult. Unfortunately, the attempt was unsuccessful, even with one of the world's leading exotic animal AI experts conducting the procedure.

There was a time in the 80s and 90s when everyone seemed convinced that AI was going to be the solution to everything, before the practical limitations of it became apparent - high costs, low success. There are situations in which it is very useful and I'm glad that we're continuing to explore additional research, but it's not something that most zoo programs rely on as much as I think we all suspected that they would back in those days.
 
Why do there need to be 'at least 15 new non-EAZA holders' in Eastern Europe? They would require space in the zoos. Which animals would they replace? I suspect that less popular animals would lose out again.

Sorry, I thought that it very easy to find new holders (among non-EAZA zoos), so thus minimum or at least 15 to 30 maybe can be found. Not that 15 are required. Many zoos have empty enclosures, or free space available where they can build a new enclosure. So no need to replace less popular animals.
 
Congratulations. You are further showing us why your statement with dairy cattle was flawed in the first place.

For comparison, you need to know things from both sides. How can I compare cow AI with tiger AI when the tiger AI is barely ever done, nor I know the costs that would arise. I just put it the cow AI (and only in regards to price, not the procedures involved), like starting point in an example.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, I thought that it very easy to find new holders (among non-EAZA zoos), so thus minimum or at least 15 to 30 maybe can be found. Not that 15 are required. Many zoos have empty enclosures, or free space available where they can build a new enclosure. So no need to replace less popular animals.
I would prefer zoos to put a few species of small endangered animals than can be part of a reintroduction programme, rather than a subspecies that won't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JVM
At least 15 new non-EAZA holders can be found in Eastern Europe, and in smaller non-EAZA zoos across whole Europe. 15 zoos can easily house at least additional 30 tigers. But here, large zoos keep them, are not passing them to other zoos, but also are not breeding them. It is not Ok with so rare animal.

From the European population, maybe only around 6-7 female tigers are in a breeding condition. So it is not a lot of work to be done, to inseminate them.

Would be nice if population grows to 40 animals in the next 10 years, and then so on.

Personally, I'm not comfortable putting animals in awful conditions just for the sake of potentially breeding them. The higher risk of being brought into war is another issue.
 
For comparison, you need to know things from both sides. How can I compare cow AI with tiger AI when the tiger AI is barely ever done, nor I know the costs that would arise. I just put it the cow AI (and only in regards to price, not the procedures involved), like starting point in an example.

Well I never said it was a comparassion. I am just saying that bringing to cost of AI for cows in one country when discussing about tiger AI for a continental breeding effort is flawed. Especially when you brought it up to counter the point that AI (for for big cats) is expensive and is not guaranteed to work.
 
Personally, I'm not comfortable putting animals in awful conditions just for the sake of potentially breeding them. The higher risk of being brought into war is another issue.

Not in the awful one, but in the better ones. There are some small to medium-sized zoos with decent enclosures, in Eastern half of Europe and not EAZA members, albeit they are smaller when looked at the number of species they keep. Under Eastern Europe, I thought on countries like: Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, other Balkan countries. Turkey maybe too. Many zoos in Israel too, it is close to Europe.
Or in non-EAZA zoos in Central/Western Europe, regardless.
 
Last edited:
Not in the awful one, but in the better ones. There are some small to medium-sized zoos with decent enclosures, in Eastern half of Europe and not EAZA members, albeit they are smaller when looked at the number of species they keep. Under Eastern Europe, I thought on countries like: Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, other Balkan countries. Turkey maybe too. Many zoos in Israel too, it is close to Europe.
Or in non-EAZA zoos in Central/Western Europe, regardless.
I'm still unsure why you want more zoos to have Malayan tigers when there are 120 captive individuals. Are there other animals that could be kept at the zoos instead?
 
I'm still unsure why you want more zoos to have Malayan tigers when there are 120 captive individuals. Are there other animals that could be kept at the zoos instead?

But specificaly for Europe, the number is only 20 animals. There is no breeding programme. And the population is not sustainable. Unfortunately, they might be wiped from Europe one by one, dying off from old age and unbred.
 
But specificaly for Europe, the number is only 20 animals. There is no breeding programme. And the population is not sustainable. Unfortunately, they might be wiped from Europe one by one, dying off from old age and unbred.

They're stable in North America though - not every continent needs a solid population of everything. The focusing on different tree kangaroos for example, it frees up more space instead of housing both. Similar situation with sifakas.
 
I don't got it? Don't understand
A turn of phrase. Do something rather than just talk about it. In this case, TeaLovingDave is saying he does not expect you to do something despite you talking about it.
 
With limited room in zoos, one thing that is very effective is to have different continents focus on different species. For example, AZA zoos manage klipspringer, baird's tapir, sloth bears, and some other species not managed by EAZA zoos, while the EAZA manages mhorr gazelle, alpine ibex, and asiatic black bears, along with many more species AZA zoos don't manage. If what has been said about the EAZA malayan tiger population is true, perhaps this is a species best left for the AZA to manage. Keep in mind there are a number of cat species the EAZA manages that are not present in the AZA- such as asiatic lions, and all of the non-amur leopard subspecies. I'd much rather see EAZA zoos pour resources into these programs, and save the malayan tigers for the AZA, as this would be a great way to maximize the populations that are sustainable in both regions.
 
Back
Top