ZooChat
ZooChat members don't see this advert. Join Now - it's free!
Go Back   ZooChat > Europe > United Kingdom

European wolves in the UK

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
zebedee101's Avatar
Member
Offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Yorkshire UK
Posts: 218
Photos: 254
  #31
Old 26-06-2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by tetrapod View Post
The enclosures are pretty standard wooden and mesh aviary-style for most smaller species, pig netting on posts for larger species and mesh panels with overhang for the wolves. The appeal of WW is that it is set in natural Kentish woodland, so the basic exhibits (generally) don't reflect badly on the animals. That said the wolf exhibit is largely denuded of undergrowth and in winter is a swamp. Some species can be very difficult to see due to to their individual natures (stoats, weasels, adders, beavers), while others can be difficult to see because of the size of the exhibit (roe deer, wolves). Chances are you will not see the shrews as they along with water voles, dormice and harvest mice are bred off-display. Unfortunately the park isn't run like a progressive zoo. Management try to run the park as an educational 'woodland experience' which is fine, but the animals take a very much back seat as to the importance in the park. The big drawcards have always been the badgers (very much an under-rated display species in the UK) and the wolves.

The reason more zoos haven't taken on wolves are that they traditionally hard to place from surplus. And when you start breeding, then surplus wolves abound. I imagine a fair proportion of the Longleat and Whipsnade wolf pups don't make it to their first birthdays. Unfortunately it is just the way it is managed.
Like Tetrapod stated, the issue with wolves is, it is nigh on impossible to introduce new animals to an existing pack, so as stated surplus are hard to place unless a new pack is being formed at another location and the existing pack can be effectively split.

Tetrapod - your imagination about the wolves at Whipsnade is awry, reproduction management is used to prevent them having cubs every year and they certainly dont breed animals just to euthanise young healthy animals once the crowd draw of the young has been diminished. With the dominance structure of wolf packs both in captivity and the wild, the young do struggle sometimes as they are obviously right at the bottom of the hierarchy to start with.

Last edited by zebedee101; 26-06-2009 at 10:24 PM.. Reason: added clarification
tetrapod's Avatar
Member
Offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sw england
Posts: 572
  #32
Old 27-06-2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by zebedee101 View Post
Like Tetrapod stated, the issue with wolves is, it is nigh on impossible to introduce new animals to an existing pack, so as stated surplus are hard to place unless a new pack is being formed at another location and the existing pack can be effectively split.

Tetrapod - your imagination about the wolves at Whipsnade is awry, reproduction management is used to prevent them having cubs every year and they certainly dont breed animals just to euthanise young healthy animals once the crowd draw of the young has been diminished. With the dominance structure of wolf packs both in captivity and the wild, the young do struggle sometimes as they are obviously right at the bottom of the hierarchy to start with.
I don't know the exact situation at Whipsnade so I cannot say with any proof. Having quickly checked the unreliable ISIS site Whipsnade has 7.1 animals. Therefore it would be reasonable to assume that the female is either neutered or on the pill. I assume zero breeding due to the aforementioned surplus problem and lack of births mentioned on ISIS. However don't be fooled that euthanasia is not used as a management tool by many collections, many with proud ethical reputations.

Pups generally do not struggle in established packs if they are born to the dominant bitch due to her position and assistance from related adults. Pups born to lower-ranking females however do struggle for resources, and often enough it is the dominant bitch who is responsible for dispatching the competing mouths.
zebedee101's Avatar
Member
Offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Yorkshire UK
Posts: 218
Photos: 254
  #33
Old 27-06-2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by tetrapod View Post
I don't know the exact situation at Whipsnade so I cannot say with any proof. Having quickly checked the unreliable ISIS site Whipsnade has 7.1 animals. Therefore it would be reasonable to assume that the female is either neutered or on the pill. I assume zero breeding due to the aforementioned surplus problem and lack of births mentioned on ISIS. However don't be fooled that euthanasia is not used as a management tool by many collections, many with proud ethical reputations.

Pups generally do not struggle in established packs if they are born to the dominant bitch due to her position and assistance from related adults. Pups born to lower-ranking females however do struggle for resources, and often enough it is the dominant bitch who is responsible for dispatching the competing mouths.
I only know about the Whipsnade situation, and indeed contraception used to be used for the female. Wolf cubs dont seem to have the appeal of other species, especially as they spend a lot of time underground. With the questionability about the Whipsnade wolves hybridisation heritage I wonder if they made a concious descision not to breed, to let the pack die out and to bring in an entirely new blood line of different wolf subspecies?

I haven't witnessed pups being born except to the alpha pair, in the rare cases I have heard where the beta female has also given birth (often when the alpha and beta are closely matched) I was aware that infancide usually took place. I guess the hierachical problems I mentioned is when the pups become juevenilles and because of management new pups haven't been born. These low ranking animals really get beaten up and if vetanarian intervention that requires removing the animal from the pack is required it is almost a death sentence for the individual as you already stated, extra wolf stock is hard to place because of the social dominance issues of the wolf pack structure.

I'm definately well aware of euthanasia as a management tool, for hoofstock especially, no zoo can have so much luck as breeding the female to male ratio that zoos keep naturally! Whipsnades batchelor paddock is really just an insurance policy against losing breeding males of any given species.

I remember about ten years ago that one of the zoos got a lot of bad publicity because it was butchering its excess hoofstock and using it for carnivore food (I cant remember which UK zoo it was, but it wasn't ZSL). I really couldn't understand the opposition, carnivores eat meat, why should it matter if its eating cow or horse meat against that of an antelope or deer? The meat is fresh, cheaper and the zoo has full records on the history of the animal before it become food. I think the emergence of BSE within the zoo community may have added to this practice as its easier to control from within.

I'm surprised that there isnt more public disquiet about euthanasia as a management tool, bull elephant births being the prime example. I actually fully support euthanasia as an animal management tool as there is only a finite amout of space available for captive breeding within the zoo community and after all, survival of the fitness is at its most basic level within nature. What I cant stand is the hyprocrisy from the public in thats its ok to butcher "farm" animals for consumption, but not exotics.

I'm off for my dinner - finch, chimps and mushy bees (all male excess stock of course from an already well represented gene pool)
Zambar's Avatar
Member
Offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hampshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,775
Photos: 1,022
  #34
Old 27-06-2009

Finch and Chips? Is there a major cod shortage?
zebedee101's Avatar
Member
Offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Yorkshire UK
Posts: 218
Photos: 254
  #35
Old 27-06-2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marwell Dalek View Post
Finch and Chips? Is there a major cod shortage?
In 2000, cod was placed on the list of endangered species by the WWF. The WWF issued a report stating that global cod catch had suffered a 70 per cent drop over the last 30 years, and that if this trend continued, the world’s cod stocks would disappear in 15 years.

I think chimps are in even shorter supply ;-(
Moderator
Offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: england
Posts: 8,430
Photos: 21
  #36
Old 27-06-2009

If Whipsnade really only have 7.1. wolves in their pack, there have been several losses or departures recently. There were probably 12-15 a year or so ago.
Member
Offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Swansea , UK
Posts: 796
Photos: 46
  #37
Old 27-06-2009

The ZSL Animal Inventory for 31st December 2008 confirms that there were 7.1 grey wolf - with no subspecies shown - at Whipsnade . A year earlier there were reported to be 10.0 . The ZSL do not show the usual arrivals , births , deaths and departures in their published inventories . It is not possible to determine what happened during 2008 , whether a female was obtained or there was a previous error in the sex determination of the group .
tetrapod's Avatar
Member
Offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sw england
Posts: 572
  #38
Old 29-06-2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by zebedee101 View Post
I only know about the Whipsnade situation, and indeed contraception used to be used for the female. Wolf cubs dont seem to have the appeal of other species, especially as they spend a lot of time underground. With the questionability about the Whipsnade wolves hybridisation heritage I wonder if they made a concious descision not to breed, to let the pack die out and to bring in an entirely new blood line of different wolf subspecies?

I haven't witnessed pups being born except to the alpha pair, in the rare cases I have heard where the beta female has also given birth (often when the alpha and beta are closely matched) I was aware that infancide usually took place. I guess the hierachical problems I mentioned is when the pups become juevenilles and because of management new pups haven't been born. These low ranking animals really get beaten up and if vetanarian intervention that requires removing the animal from the pack is required it is almost a death sentence for the individual as you already stated, extra wolf stock is hard to place because of the social dominance issues of the wolf pack structure.

I'm definately well aware of euthanasia as a management tool, for hoofstock especially, no zoo can have so much luck as breeding the female to male ratio that zoos keep naturally! Whipsnades batchelor paddock is really just an insurance policy against losing breeding males of any given species.

I remember about ten years ago that one of the zoos got a lot of bad publicity because it was butchering its excess hoofstock and using it for carnivore food (I cant remember which UK zoo it was, but it wasn't ZSL). I really couldn't understand the opposition, carnivores eat meat, why should it matter if its eating cow or horse meat against that of an antelope or deer? The meat is fresh, cheaper and the zoo has full records on the history of the animal before it become food. I think the emergence of BSE within the zoo community may have added to this practice as its easier to control from within.

I'm surprised that there isnt more public disquiet about euthanasia as a management tool, bull elephant births being the prime example. I actually fully support euthanasia as an animal management tool as there is only a finite amout of space available for captive breeding within the zoo community and after all, survival of the fitness is at its most basic level within nature. What I cant stand is the hyprocrisy from the public in thats its ok to butcher "farm" animals for consumption, but not exotics.

I'm off for my dinner - finch, chimps and mushy bees (all male excess stock of course from an already well represented gene pool)
Unfortunately I do have to agree that euthanasia must be a management tool used by zoo management of captive animals. It is too difficult to control breeding of all individuals, not to mention the problems of an unequal sex ratio.

I also agree that there should be some provision for zoo management to utilise surplus hoofstock to carnivores. For a start you at least know the provinence.
Member
Offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,209
Photos: 21
  #39
Old 02-07-2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by zebedee101 View Post

I remember about ten years ago that one of the zoos got a lot of bad publicity because it was butchering its excess hoofstock and using it for carnivore food (I cant remember which UK zoo it was, but it wasn't ZSL). I really couldn't understand the opposition, carnivores eat meat, why should it matter if its eating cow or horse meat against that of an antelope or deer?

I'm surprised that there isnt more public disquiet about euthanasia as a management tool, bull elephant births being the prime example. I actually fully support euthanasia as an animal management tool as there is only a finite amout of space available for captive breeding within the zoo community and after all, survival of the fitness is at its most basic level within nature.
I don't think you're correct about male elephant calves being euthanased. Unless you're talking outside of EAZA?

I think the issue is that, once that becomes acceptable, it kind of shifts the ethos of a collection slightly. IMO it wouldn't be long before some collections were overbreeding in order to harvest ungulates to feed carnivores. The logical next step would then be for some collections to start farming various species for profit, while exhibiting them as zoo stock. Ethically, it just gets a little cloudy as the boundaries are not clear. Speaking as a sworn vegan (I'll fight and win, don't even try me lol), I see the hipocrasy of the public being horrified at an animal being fed a day old chick before they trot off to the zoo cafe for burgers and sausages, but I still think its a dangerous path to go down. Especially as putting a surplus male calf down can be done humanely with a lethal injection administered by a vet, but obviously animals meant for meat will not be killed so humanely. People are being sold an experience, where they are encouraged to admire and want to conserve the animals shown to them, I think this experience would have to be radically re-marketed to make people pay to see farmed antelope that they know will be slaughtered to feed the carnivores on site.
zebedee101's Avatar
Member
Offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Yorkshire UK
Posts: 218
Photos: 254
  #40
Old 02-07-2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnstoni View Post
I don't think you're correct about male elephant calves being euthanased. Unless you're talking outside of EAZA?

I think the issue is that, once that becomes acceptable, it kind of shifts the ethos of a collection slightly. IMO it wouldn't be long before some collections were overbreeding in order to harvest ungulates to feed carnivores. The logical next step would then be for some collections to start farming various species for profit, while exhibiting them as zoo stock. Ethically, it just gets a little cloudy as the boundaries are not clear. Speaking as a sworn vegan (I'll fight and win, don't even try me lol), I see the hipocrasy of the public being horrified at an animal being fed a day old chick before they trot off to the zoo cafe for burgers and sausages, but I still think its a dangerous path to go down. Especially as putting a surplus male calf down can be done humanely with a lethal injection administered by a vet, but obviously animals meant for meat will not be killed so humanely. People are being sold an experience, where they are encouraged to admire and want to conserve the animals shown to them, I think this experience would have to be radically re-marketed to make people pay to see farmed antelope that they know will be slaughtered to feed the carnivores on site.
I dont know about EAZA, but it would not suprise me, the ratio of male to female elephants cannot be explained any other way unless you can point me at collections holding large batchelor herds of elephant. I dont have the time, but guess I should try and choose some examples and try and follow the lineage of random males in the elephant data base.

I think in certain collections the ethos have already been breached, its just that they are not publicised. You mention excess male calves being humanely euthanised by injection, but it being a less humane to be killed to enter the food chain. In my view, it is less ethical to euthanise the overstock of male calves from an endangered species and waste the meat and having to kill a non-endangered animal less humanely to feed the carnivore. In this case two lives are lost, not just one, the haziness comes if you value the life of one type of animal above that of another, should one hundred cows be killed to keep a lion over its lifetime, 100 crickets to keep a frog alive, it goes on and if humans didnt interfere it would just be accepted as nature. There really is no difference between farming antelope and breeding and saving rare exotic animals, animal management is key to healthy and stress free animals in naturalistic sized gender ratios and groups. Zoos signage and information is never going to lead the visitor to think about ethical dilemas where they might discriminate against the zoo, they will lead campains such as the bush meat issues and get you to sign a petition to save gorillas while they have no qualms about culling excess deer and antelope.

I'm not an advocate for euthanasia as the principle animal management tool, but I do think its a necessity where gender ratios in the wild are widely uneven and nature cannot be replicated where predators prey on single males that aren't protected by the herd structure. As for veganism, thats a personal choice and I'm not even going there!
Member
Offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,209
Photos: 21
  #41
Old 03-07-2009

Yes I'd be interested to see any anecdotal evidence of male elephants being culled at birth, I really don't believe any institution would risk the publicity. There are parks in Europe holding specifically bachelor groups, two chester-born bulls went to belgium, and two Rotterdam-born bulls that arrived as calves at Port Lympne went to a safari park in Spain.

I think the humane issue you were disagreeing with is down to how an animal is euthanased. It's not a case of a wasted carcass when animals are euthanased by injection.....they are contaminated with the medicine used to put them to sleep and cannot be fed to carnivores. That's where the ethical question comes up. Furthermore, there is a qualitative difference in taking a tractable, domestic animal to slaughter and doing the same to a kudu or deer. It's one thing for a deer farm in New Zealand or antelope ranch in South Africa to make that choice, but for a British zoological collection reliant to a large extent on gate revenue, I think it would be a difficult decision to justify. Th
Ash's Avatar
Ash
Member
Offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 3,972
Photos: 137
  #42
Old 03-07-2009

I doubt any zoo would euthanise a species such as an elephant just because it was a surplus male. An antelope could go un-noticed and not bother the public too much, but an elephant wouldn't and the zoo would be boycotted by everyone. And when I visited Dartmoor they did whole carcass feeding for the wolves. The number of people complaining about it was really shocking!
BTW, not vegan Jonhstoni (I think it would kill me, I'm too skinny already lol) but I am a veggie and I see what you're on about, example: You're in a restaurant and someone says "Kangaroo meat?! You can't serve that, it's cruel! Quarterpounder please"
Sorry to side track and that
zebedee101's Avatar
Member
Offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Yorkshire UK
Posts: 218
Photos: 254
  #43
Old 03-07-2009

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnstoni View Post
Yes I'd be interested to see any anecdotal evidence of male elephants being culled at birth, I really don't believe any institution would risk the publicity. There are parks in Europe holding specifically bachelor groups, two chester-born bulls went to belgium, and two Rotterdam-born bulls that arrived as calves at Port Lympne went to a safari park in Spain.

I think the humane issue you were disagreeing with is down to how an animal is euthanased. It's not a case of a wasted carcass when animals are euthanased by injection.....they are contaminated with the medicine used to put them to sleep and cannot be fed to carnivores. That's where the ethical question comes up. Furthermore, there is a qualitative difference in taking a tractable, domestic animal to slaughter and doing the same to a kudu or deer. It's one thing for a deer farm in New Zealand or antelope ranch in South Africa to make that choice, but for a British zoological collection reliant to a large extent on gate revenue, I think it would be a difficult decision to justify. Th
Sorry for the confusion, my ethical issue is why should a kudu get to be humanely euthanised so it cannot be used in the food chain, when it could be humanely slaughtered and prevent the death of a domestic species killed to feed the same carnivore. Is the life of a kudu any different of that of a sheep/cow/pig? Why have two deaths (one euthanised, one slaughter) when the animal being euthanised could have been used instead. I know animals cannot be used for food when they are euthanised on medical grounds, I am only on about healthy but excess stock.

I was relatively unaware how widespread feeding excess livestock was until the BSE outbreak. Herds of deer and antelope in british zoological collections were affected and this caused concern about the effect on carnivores and if any of these animals will get the disease from eating infected meat (especially as they are often fed the brain too) much like soem humans have been affected. I think that there are many such decisions taken that would not get public support but they are kept very quiet and it only becomes public when there is an accident or issue.
Member
Offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Leysdown, UK
Posts: 2
  #44
Old 14-07-2009

Hi all,

Here's some info regarding the Euros at the UKWCT and at Wildwood.

It all started in 1998 when Roger Palmer of the UKWCT used his contacts abroad to obtain three yearling wolves from Germany and Romania. The wolves were Luna and Athena (females) and Apollo (male). They were quarantined and the vet said that they were too young to breed, so no worries about keeping them in a single enclosure.

So much for that - Apollo and Luna bred in 1999 and there were six pups as a result. Two were stillborn, one was sent to the Paradise Wildlife Park (Luana) and the remaining three were kept by the UKWCT (Alba, Lunca and Letea - named after Romanian towns. Letea was called Latea by most, mistakenly, and the name stuck.)

The parents weren't fully socialised and they were transferred to Wildwood in Kent soon afterwards.

Wildwood was just starting back then and the wolves were a massive hit - so much so that Luna served as a mascot for the wildlife park and to this day she appears on their mailshots, site maps etc.

Luna died due to wounds sustained in pack dominance and Athena (always the underdog) was transferred to the Norfolk wildlife park. Apollo was neutered and is still to be found at Wildwood.

The UKWCT, meanwhile, used the Euros extensively for their activities - taking them to shows and the like. However, four years ago Alba, the male, broke his neck one evening by running into a tree (it's thought he was looking over his shoulder at his sisters at the time). He's made a good recovery but is still a bit wobbly. Lunca and Latea swapped positions three years ago and as of now Latea is the alpha female. She's also very friendly towards people.

Wildwood on the other hand bred their wolves. They had several litters and unfortunately some inbreeding went on - the family tree looks pretty chaotic! They've gone from having 16 wolves or so in a 1 acre enclosure down to 4 or 5 today, which is much more suitable. The majority of the excess Euros went to Wolf Watch in Shropshire (although they don't appear on their site for some reason) and some went with Athena to the Norfolk wildlife centre. Wildwood don't plan to breed their wolves any more - I'm not sure whether they'll replace them in years to come.

A side-effect of Wildwood's population boom was that two wolves, Nadja and Mischka, had to be rescued from a flooded den. They were hand-reared and are kept in a seperate (smaller) enclosure, albeit right next to the main enclosure. They're both very friendly towards visitors.

It's recently become "trendy" in UK zoos to go for European wolves over the (mixed ancestry) North Americans. There are two seperate strains of the latter in the UK, those used by Longleat, Howletts, Port Lympne, West Mids Safari Park and Woburn and those at Dartmoor. They're all classed as canis lupus occidentalis, the MacKenzie wolf not having existed since the 1992 North American Wolf Symposium declared it to be the same species as c. l. occidentalis. Interestingly all the North Americans I've seen in the UK have been on the small side for their species, much smaller than those on display in Seattle, Ely (Minnesota), Vancouver etc.

There are three North American / European hybrids in the UK, as far as I'm aware. The Anglian Wolf Society bred Sefka (NA) with either Cheyza / Peyto (never confirmed which, both Euros) and there were three pups as a result. They kept the two females and the male, Torak, was sent to the UKWCT. He's an oddity, with the colour of a European but the leggy stature of a North American. He's also shy, by far the most shy of the UKWCT's wolves.
Member
Offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Swansea , UK
Posts: 796
Photos: 46
  #45
Old 14-07-2009

Thanks for the fascinating detailed information Retron .
 


Bookmarks
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


All times are GMT +10. The time now is 02:49 PM.

Copyright © 2003-2008 Hampel Group Pty Ltd
(ACN 115 622 074)