Mate - my position differs from both you and MRJ inasmuch as I own the zoo and the buck stops with me. This position will obviously colour the way that I look at some issues.
i was hoping you might say that. because it is my belief that not only do white lions offer no real advantage over tawny lions as an educational tool they actually undermine real lion conservation and instead preach a conservation fallacy.
By being "different" they create more interest and thus encourage people to stop and actually take in our conservation message for the species as a whole.
even if a given zoo pulls no punches about white lions origins (and what white lion touting zoo does?), they are still essentially saying "regular lions need protection in the wild, because lions are amazing. but here for your enjoyment are some even better ones we made".
Not necessarily "better". The whole white lion dialogue has to be kept in context with the way that it really is out there. The fact that they are white gives us a better opportunity to get into our visitor's heads with our lion conservation message.
likewise if its simply an educational lesson of lion biology and behaviour in general - then isn't the best subject a bona-fide wild-type lion?
I don't disagree with that. I wouldn't advocate displaying ONLY white lions. Displaying the two colours side by side would make it so much easier to get our message across.
more likely and more damaging however, is if its education about lion conservation, can't you see that in displaying a pride of selectively bred non-natural lions, you compromise the integrity of the true wild-type lion at best and actually misinform and subvert the real lion conservation programs. truth is no zoo that houses white lions tells the truth that white lions are indeed an anomaly that have failed to establish themselves in the wild and that they instead breed them simply for aesthetics.
That may well be the case with some zoos. All I can say is "watch this space"!
because that doesn't sit so well with most.
"Most" who? "Most" ZooChatters maybe. But "most" zoogoers wouldn't give a damn. Hell, "most" zoogoers don't know the difference between a lion and a tiger. It takes something like a white lion to make them sit up and take notice!
yes, usually revolving around the ethics of their propagation.
Only on ZooChat! Zoogoers are much more positive and supportive.
being a question of taste i can't tell you that you're wrong. however i think its fair to say that the disadvantages to breeding white lions far outweigh the value in them aesthetically.
Then why do people breed so many of them? Because zoogoers love to look at them, and by looking and liking them they develop a desire to do more for the preservation of their species.
hardly. when mogo zoo first imported white lions they thought they had secured a drawcard that was unique to their zoo in the country. in just a few short years there are now 3 zoos in the country with white lions. this is in part thanks to mogo zoo breeding so many they had to actually undercut their own attraction by offloading some to another zoo. they could just have easily bred leopards or jaguars or imported another species of animal entirely and secured just as unique an attraction.
When Mogo imported theirs they were unique in Australia and Mogo Zoo had a few years with a novelty attraction. It sure helped their attendance figures just as white tigers did for Dreamworld, Taronga and Dubbo, white bears did for Sea World and white and black pandas will do for Adelaide. Mogo's importation was an inspired positive move. The same zoo's lack of breeding control was a puzzling negative outcome. What other proven drawcard species is available to a small privately owned zoo in Australia? Leopards? No. Jaguars? You know the answer to that one! And neither of those species will get bums on seats to the extent that anything white will. What else?
so cross bred lions are halfwits and inbred ones are not?!! i think the evidence would support that hybrid vigour is actually associated with good health whereas inbreeding, as is the case of white lions creates the halfwits.
My comment there was not confined to lions. You are only too well aware of the white tiger situation. I have just come back from South Africa where I saw a number of breeders paying a great deal of attention to the bloodlines of their white lions.
likewise there is nothing "REAL" about white lions.
on a side note - there is growing consensus amongst taxonomists that there is actually only two extant subspecies of lion represented - the african and asian. now you are probably more informed on this topic than i am, but it is my understanding that the mainstream australian population of zoo lions are of varying african ancestry. thus if the two subspecies argument is accepted, then any african "crossbreed" proves to be a pure as they come.
well, pretty poor to be honest. i think the only argument that i can't instantly dismiss is that they are attractive. but likewise you can't say you won that point either. however i do warmly invite you to try and counter any of my arguments. i do like a good debate.
Over to you!!!
till we meet again old friend..........
