Wild Asses in UK. » Africa Alive!

23-04-2008

Welsh Mountain Zoo had Kulan up until around 2004, the last one died and so far nothing has replaced them in their paddock. I can only remember 2 of them though im fairly certain there were more at some point.

23-04-2008

re Marwell

According to my notes (which may not be 100%!!)
The female from Hai bar is Tikya. The sire of both the recent female foals was Rodulpho who came to Marwell from Switzerland. He has now gone to Beauval zoo in France.

The other breeding female, Possa, also came to Marwell from Switzerland

As well as the 4 females there are currently 3 males:

Future - from Hai Bar
Berger - born @ Marwell in 1996 to Rodulpho and Possa
Malik - born @ Marwell in 2006 to Rodulpho and Tikya

23-04-2008

1. I did say VIRTUALLY indistinguishable which I think is a fairly accurate estimation. Marwell used to display both Kulan & Onager and no-one could tell the differences...

2. There's your answer Hornbill...

23-04-2008

So the stallion 'Future' is not related to the two female foals(or only distantly to one...) Do you think Marwell will keep them to make the group bigger?

23-04-2008

I guess that is a possibility - but I guess it depends on the recommendations of the stud book keeper.

It will be interesting to see what happens.

23-04-2008

I think if Marwell want to keep them to make a bigger group then they'll perhaps request that option.

24-04-2008

[quote=Pertinax;48408]1. I did say VIRTUALLY indistinguishable which I think is a fairly accurate estimation. Marwell used to display both Kulan & Onager and no-one could tell the differences...

Yet another case of sub-specification gone mad if you ask me......
If the animals are identical to look then its the DNA thats different, if the DNA is the same then we have to preserve both cause one has 2 more eyelashes than the other. At some point, you have to admit that they are the same. It is clear that zoos can only conserve a tiny % of all species under threat and if these are continually sub-divided into smaller and smaller 'pure-bred' geographically isolated groups then what we are really saying is that we should be conserve specific populations rather than species (which is an even bigger task). I'm not saying that we should cross-breed every sub-species (e.g. tigers which are clearly adapted to different environments) but you must remember that these classifications are artificial. They are 'pigeon holes' to assist people in understanding the natural world (and they also perpetuate a collector mentality). Populations which once mixed and bred now do not because of man-made isolation and therefore whatever slight differences between populations upon isolation from each other are preserved. This does not mean they are should be kept separate if a) the isolation is recent and b) the environments in which the populations live are similiar. A population is NOT a sub-species.