So a subject I thought would be good to discuss and be interesting to hear thoughts on. In the UK its not allowed to feed captive prey to predators; at least in so far as mammalian and avian life is concerned; insects it seems are except from this to some degree. However with reintroduction programs and zoos shifting from purely entertainment and into conservation I wonder if we need to consider allowing predators to hunt and deal with actual real prey if we are to reintroduce them back into the wild. Indeed whilst there is a huge amount of work done on this with stuffed toys and the like one has to wonder if a real prey animal is the really only way for an animal to learn even the most fundamental lessons. Of course this comes with many problems; 1) The prey animal is going to die; but its also going to likely suffer, possibly significantly at the claws/jaws of an inexperienced predator. This is a great concern as such a scheme would be putting predators above prey in a "rights" form; it also introduces suffering of animals into a sector of the world that has taken huge strides to avoid it and even campaigned against stresses and suffering to the point where we even have most major zoos now closed to the capacity to keep animals for entertainment. 2) Any hunt that deals with live prey is a risk to a predator; be it captive or in the wild. Thus reintroduction animals would be at significant risk during these "hunts". This poses a risky question as to the value of the lessons learned in actual hunting. Is the potential lessons learned greater in worth than the risk to harm or death of the reintroduction species; measured against the assumed potential of reduced risk when hunting in the wild by the same predator. Whilst risk of death in captivity through such a scheme would be a known risk there is no denying that reintroduction of captive stock into wild environments can meet with a high failure rate if the individuals lack awareness and skills in the wild to survive. It's what I feel is an interesting question, though one where I'm sadly lacking in researched fact as to the various numbers behind many reintroduction programs. I'm aware that early schemes were met with high failure and that a lot of work has gone on to improve teaching of captive stock to allow them to increase the survival rate (at least when considering non-man-made interactions in the wild). So should we consider sacrifice of some prey to allow endangered predators to have an increased chance of survival? Would even a few rabbits or hares - of low injury risk (and debateable reduced value in peoples eyes compared to say a zebra or wilderbeast) be enough to give a few choice real lessons.
I believe the law in the UK is that live vertebrates cannot be fed. So that obviously includes fish, reptiles and amphibians, as well as mammals and birds. Live invertebrates can be fed however (though if I remember correctly, octopodes are included along with vertebrates.)
I don't feel that there is any need for live feeding in a zoo, reintroduction is another thing but for the most part I don't think there is any need for live feeding in a zoo enclosure. You don't need to use live prey to give a predator adequate stimulation and if we do want to make them work for their food then there are other options for making them do this, such as putting food on a track they have to chase, wrapping it in a paper bag, etc. You would also be surprised how even a small prey animal can hurt a predator. for example did you know that mice, rats, and even insects are capable of inflicting serious injury on their predators in some cases bad enough that they have to be euthanized. Also, any animal in such a situation would inevitably die a horrible death because it would have no reasonable chance to escape. That means that live feeding conflicts with the need to look out for the welfare of both predator and prey.
I agree with what you said here. Also, it is evident that some animals don't need to be taught how to hunt. Addison, the cheetah who is mother of six cubsat the San Diego Zoo Safari Park, catches a bird every 1-3 days. Kia, the harpy eagle in Dallas, has caught opossums, raccoons, squirrels, and other small things, and pulled them through the chain link of her exhibit and eaten them. I'm sure the other raptors probably do the same. Could these animals survive in the wild with their current skills? Probably not. Do they need constant live food to begin to know how to hunt? No.
My personal feeling is that it is a good idea given proper conditions (massive enclosures) in order to keep generations of predators fit for potential reintroduction. However, my personal feelings aside, it could never happen in the USA and many other countries. Even now zoos are under attack by rights extremists as being cruel. If zoos were to adopt this practice, rights extremists would have ammunition to turn larger segments of the public against zoos. Also most zoo enclosures are too small to allow for a proper hunt (stalking, etc), which would be a necessary part of the experience. Live fish are sometimes used in USA to good effect (though it is illegal to do so in UK). As an alternative to live prey in general, I would favor lures and whole carcasses, something that is rarely done and should be done much more.
Agreed, Arizona Docent. Fish are a great option, though sometimes a pain. They are seemingly most effective with bears. The National Zoo tried Tilapia with their female gharial (since gharial eat fish) but they were too fast for her. Providing the correct species causes lots of problems depending on how readily available that species is. Carcass feedings are becoming more and more common.
I can't imagine animal rights activists would be able to rile people up if the prey animals used are things like fish and mice. After all, people don't think that zoo tigers are getting fed tofu. But I could see people getting mad over rabbits or something. I agree on the carcass thing, wish more zoos did that.
In a Dutch zoo (Dierenrijk Nuenen) fed dead rabbits to it's tigers. People appeared to be shocked by seeing this and the story even reached the newspapers.
A lot of people "know" that animals eat other animals. They see it on the telly regularly in documentaries. However for them that kind of activity is so far removed from their daily lives that its never something they "see" save for a spider or a mouse or a rat in their home. And to them a rabbit is purely a pet and nothing more and to some a member of the family. So when they see it in the zoo it shocks them. In a very sad way its a sign of how disconnected people are from reality. The idea that eating a rabbit, or any carcase by a zoo animal in a zoo should be shocking is something that many involved in conservation or the countryside wouldn't bat an eyelid at. So it comes as quite a real shock when people are shocked by it.
It isn't actually illegal to feed live prey in the United Kingdom, only discouraged. Following is a quote from the 'Secretary of State's Standards of Modern Zoo Practice': From here; https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...data/file/69596/standards-of-zoo-practice.pdf
I think it's been pretty well covered above that feeding live food (except invertebrates) in a zoo is to be discouraged unless absolutely necessary. There are the issues regarding the welfare of both predator and prey, and the public perception to consider. But the original question was about carnivores to be re-introduced into the wild. There have been many re-introductions around the world of birds, primates, ungulates, herps etc, but not many of carnivores (that I can think of). Many of these re-introductions have not succeeded or have had high initial mortality rates, and generally the animals need to be 'taught' how to be wild - how to find food, predator avoidance, non-reliance and avoidance of humans, how to behave in a social setting, dangers etc. etc. For carnivores that were born in captivity, they might have a hunting instinct but in most cases are not capable of stalking and catching their own prey, and for some that can catch large prey, they might not know how to kill it. And this is the question Overread asked - how do you teach a large carnivore how to catch (and kill) a large prey item? And it's a very good question. IMO I don't think it can be done in a zoo environment, it would have to be in situ and in very large fenced enclosures. I imagine every case will be different depending on a variety of factors, particularly the species you are trying to re-introduce. And at this point in time I don't think there are too many carnivores in a position to be re-introduced from captivity to the wild, as in many cases the threats to them are still present. And even if the threats were mitigated, in many cases it would be easier to repopulate by translocation instead. As Carl Jones has been involved in re-introduction projects in the past, I'd be very interested to hear his views on the subject. Hix
I believe in the UK captive bred, or at least hand raised orphans, of otters, possibly wildcats, and maybe others have been successfully reintroduced. If the lynx reintroduction ever goes ahead, they will presumably need teaching some how. Having said that, at Wildplace the wolves regularly catch their own voles and squirrels, so I suspect where the carnivore concerned is a rodent specialist most release pens will naturally allow sufficient prey to enter for the animal concerned to gain experience before release. The big problem is with predators which specialize in larger prey, especially social hunters like wild dogs or lions, and I am not sure how they would be handled.
Just to put in my opinion here I don't think that live feeding of large animals such as deer should be fed but I do agree that animals such as rabbits and fish could be an alternative to these as it does encourage hunting without a large amount of suffering.
Macaw that's a great link and very interesting fact! It seems that the recommendation has become more powerful than many mandates would and it wouldn't surprise me if many in the industry are also unaware that its only a recommendation not a requirement (excepting possibly those in the reptile world; although even they are more like to feed live insects but defrosted mice rather than live mice*). Hix - indeed its a very interesting question and Zoovolunteer is correct in that several captive bred small mammal predators have done well in the wild. Otters are a shining beacon in re-introductions to the point where most of the UK operations supporting reintroduction of otters have either changed focus or shut down because the reintroduction worked so well. That said I have to agree that large mammal reintroductions are rare. I'm reminded of the lion reintroduction programs I've seen on the TV which might well be one of the few case studies of large predator introductions. Granted for lions is more a case of propping up populations than full reintroductions to virgin areas. Thus I think there's a lot of social bonding and group support that has to take place that allows a less skilled hunter to establish themselves. I would think a creature like a tiger would be far more at risk because of the high independence. A tiger can't just fit into the lower ranking of a group and work its way up; it has to be up at the top to start with. For totally reintroducing a group hunter or loan hunter I think at present the system is relying on saturation; hit an area with lots and hope that enough survive and build up skills to start passing onto their offspring. Indeed the question of predator prey and training is a very interesting one and one where we are woefully ignorant. For generations animals were instinctive creatures who operated purely upon mystical knowledge they were born with. Which is daft when we think about it because generations of animals have also been trained by people; we've seen their capacity to learn even when their teachers don't speak the same language. We've seen them learn, adapt and gain new skills. Newer research has even shown localisations; different groups of the same species operating with different methods of hunting; or different prey preferences; even to the point of regional dialects in their language and vocalization. With this amount of information it stands to reason that a predator and a prey needs to learn how to survive. IF we don't equip them with that understanding we are risking a lot. We are risking inexperienced and basically stupid animals who have to blunder around and work it all out for themselves. The subject of lynx has come up and leaves an interesting question in my mind regarding them as the snowshoe=lynx predator prey dynamic is a well studied effect within certain populations of lynx that prey very heavily upon one prey species. If we were to understand this relationship better; to understand the mentality and training of a young lynx into this regime over others it could be a huge boon to reintroductions and toward training animals to respect or choose certain prey over others. In theory - and theory only - one could consider the possibility of predators who would prey upon select or at least only wild populations; whilst training into them a desire to avoid or totally ignore typical captive stock breeds. An interesting proposition and one that might prove impossible to achieve. *Though I respect the fact that that is part of the result of mice being sold frozen rather than live for feeding purposes.
As a former private reptile keeper I can say that frozen rodents are very convenient - you can keep a years supply at home and thaw them out as you need them. A snake that will only accept live food is a bit of an annoyance for private keepers (and especially newbies), although zoos are in a better position to handle this. Most authorities recognise that there are some individuals that will not take anything other than live food, and this is usually factored into legislation while the feeding of dead vertebrates is strongly encouraged. In Australia, at least. Hix
My apparently misinformed statement about UK making live feed illegal comes from a private conversation with a zoo official in England on one of my trips. I was at a fishing cat exhibit and asked if they ever fed live fish and was told they could not because live feeding is illegal in the UK. Last week I heard a talk from Laurie Marker of Cheetah Conservation Fund about how they reintroduce orphaned cheetahs to the wild. They live in huge enclosures - as in hundreds of acres - to hone their skills before release. After release they are monitored and given supplemental food if necessary. She said that females do better than males and after release need minimal supplements for about two weeks, after which they are completely independent.
I may be wrong, but I think that feeding live vertebrate animals to other animals used to be illegal in England and Wales (Scotland and Northern Ireland have different legal systems). It seems that this has been slightly altered by a Code of Practice under the Animal Welfare Act of 2006, as described in Macaw16's posting. I have been told on good authority that there are a few predatory fishes that cannot be induced to take dead prey, the examples quoted to me were the leaf fish (Monocirrhus) and the pike livebearer (Belonesox), and so a fishkeeper can only maintain these species by providing live 'feeder' fishes. Presumably this would qualify for an exemption for private individuals as well as for zoos. Alan
I have seen both those species take dead food but, of course, some individuals will be more picky than others. Don't be misguided by the wording of the legislation; if you feed live vertebrates without those ( very hard to get) permissions and recommendations, it is illegal. So technically legal in very specific circumstances but otherwise, against the law.
Sorry for the late reply.Live prey hunting is indeed a very disputable question.I think, saying it was illegal is really strange. Predators hunt live prey in the wild. So why they can't in captivity? I think that feeding animal with live prey will be more natural with their habitat. You will feed lizards with live insects, why not feed tiger with live mammals?
aardvark - saying it was illegal is linked to the the duty of care and quality of life that we impose upon animals under our care. There are restrictions and regulations as to how animals are to be treated in the UK which apply to both animals on the farming/meat trade as well as those in captivity in collections and households. There are regulations on how animals are to be slaughtered which aim to reduce stress and provide a quick clean death. So its no stretch of the imagination that such legislation could have been applied to the situation of live-prey feeding - since predators are not going to deliver a swift clean kill every time (indeed many work by attrition and wear the prey down - sometimes over hours). In the UK, as said above, its not illegal - but it is recommended against. Plus pretty much any site open to the public is not going to practice such feeding schemes (barring on insects) because the public would react very badly to them. I suspect many closed to the public would be cautious about it as well as any media coverage of such could very easily be used against them.
