In 1905, the Bronx Zoo set out to save the species from extinction through captive breeding and the eventual reintroduction of captive-bred animals. The first reintroductions started at the end of 1907 and lasted until roughly 1935. Due to the captive populations being relatively small at the time, some of the animals acquired for the breeding and reintroduction programs were sourced from ranches that bred them for Human consumption. Unbeknownst to the conservationist at the time, some of these bison had been crossbred with Domestic Cattle by the ranchers. These hybrids were thoroughly mixed in with the rest of the population. A study published in 2012 found that pretty much all the reintroduced populations and all of the captive animals in the US at the time had cattle genes present. If I recall correctly, a subsequent study found that these hybrid bison are actually less suited to survival in the wild than pure bison, and on average are killed by predators more often. Pretty much the only pure wild populations are the animals in Yellowstone National Park, and the few herds elsewhere that are directly descended from Yellowstone that were never mixed with other populations. I personally find it very hard to believe that certain European zoos have managed to maintain pure herds while most others have hybrids when the hybrids have been present in the US population for over 100 years now. When the Bronx program first began, there were only a few hundred bison left in the wild, so it's not as though they would have been readily available for European zoos to import in large quantities and obviously there have been a lot of imports from the impure US population since in order to maintain the European population. The presence of pure herds would have required extremely careful selective breeding from probably a fairly small number of pure bison starting from the late 1800s/early 1900s, which simply would have been impossible considering the impurities weren't widely identified until the 2010s. I'd be happy to be proved wrong, but I really can't see how it's possible unless certain zoos never brought in any additional animals from US imports after 1905 in which case I'd imagine the herds are highly inbred. All of the above pertains to B. b. bison, have no idea about the history of B. b. athabascae. ~Thylo
NZP has two female purebred bison. The Bronx Zoo has a herd of mixed and purebred bison. They have been working actively with a Colorado State University reproductive specialist who takes viable eggs from pure bison, fertilizes them with purebred sperm, and then rushes to the Bronx while it's still dress to implant in hybrid females. The Zoo showed this process and a follow-up visit to ultrasound for possible pregnancies. If I remember correctly, two of the possible six were pregnant. I wanted to ask when I visited on Members' Night, but there were no keepers around. This was far enough back that these two would have given birth by now. This is an article about the Colorado end of the partnership--and how successful they've become. Rare Colorado bison herd faces 'growing' problem, nears capacity near Fort Collins Rare Colorado bison herd faces 'growing' problem, nears capacity near Fort Collins
To clarify, NZP has two females, but also a larger herd at SBCI. The bison was the first animal at the zoo, when it was known as The Menagerie" in front of the Smithsonian Castle. Because of this, the zoo decided that it really should exhibit bison and brought in the two girls.
Hi, Im a former uk keeper who has worked in quite a few different collections..I now do native conservation. Im very similar to lots of us, in a sense that I like to see the weird and wonderful, but at the same time know of the practicality of species. So ill try to give example in logical way about the why's and wherefore.. If you go to german zoos and lots if European zoos there are some such as tierpark that follow the old traditions..ie. random strange species you have never seen. In fact I went there for that reason. To see brown hyenas partly! The reason that every zoo has amur leopard not Persian for example is of course breeding programmes..have to do it for license and support..education a big factor to. Another reason some boring exhibitions is the effort to keep a species alive and obtaining knowledge and specimens. Good example is giant water bugs..I worked with invertebrate for years, wanted the department to get the biggest, lethocerus maximus. We had abedus, not so impressive, but lot of husbandry success with them in the industry and easy to source..unlike the giant!. Money is another factor. We had about 4 species of scorpion, we did have fat tailed for a while, famed as considered the most venomous..why did they go, and why do we have to have latrodectus (widow) spiders not wandering spiders or funnel webs..answer..anti venom v expensive and short lived.so less venomous scorpion that requires less training and latrodectus venom available from other uk collections. PRACTICALITY..we had coconut Crabs, largest land invertebrate..problem is lousy exhibit a lot of the year because it moults for months underground. I worked with pygmy hippos for years, constantly the public made odd comments about the exhibit..our answer ..one of the oldest zoos so listed buildings..cant change them and no funds for new exhibit.they had no needs met and well cared for..even keepers hate some exhibitions..mine was mealworm beetle, part of a bugs in your home exhibit..lazy really! As for species hate to see for welfare.I spent a few years with a bird of prey collection..in fact one of the largest. I agree with Attenborough about the soaring eagles..forest species easier to exhibit if plenty of flying space..but then even some of them soar in display courtship. I am not a Attenborough fan, and think laymen on the sofa need to realise he has v limited knowledge of zoo husbandry and although he has done lot of fieldwork, he is not a specialist or expert to the highest degree with individual families and species. The heroes are the ones that sit in the Bush 5 years studying groups or working 15 hour days trying to breed difficult species and keep them well. To conserve.. Long post but great topic that keepers constantly have too. Ok..my suggestion. Elephants..people are starting to turn against them in captivity. I dont like them because..a degree 1. Need too much space,and in the wid travel distance not replicated..although if born in captivity different to a degree. 2. V dangerous. I have known elephant keepers. Once one turns on a keeper that keeper is target again 3. Have to work hands on with them, which draws controversy about handling methods from public..and risk..ideally animals that dangerous on other side of barrier..unless your attention seeking glory boys that lie next to "safe hand reared tiger"...who I have bottle fed from cub and never hurt me..que attack headline
The genus Androctonus is actually pretty common in the exotic pet trade; among others, I myself currently keep Androctonus australis. Funny enough, the local authorities seem to be unaware that there is actually a commercial Androctonus antivenom available and therefore do not require me to have it. As for Latrodectus mactans or L. hasselti antivenom: same situation. I know that there is still a bit of debate both among American and Australian doctors whether to use the respective antivenom; some studies confirm its efficiency, a few less are cautious in regard to potential allergic reactions.
a lot of people are kinda detached from reality. zoos can't just have obscure randos, they also need to have the big ticket animals.
I agree with you in general but I don't think this is strictly true. There are many zoos in both the US and Europe that have an extremely niche focus, such as herps or birds, that have found a lot of success without megafauna of any kind. ~Thylo
As a real neophyte of both birds and herps, I realize that the reason I've absorbed so little over the years is precisely because I've rarely been to zoos or aquaria without megafauna. Studying behavior is so much easier with larger species that it's very absorbing, distracting, almost at the expense of appreciating birds and herps. I've gotten a bit of up-close exposure from these new zoo shows on Animal Planet while twiddling my thumbs rehabbing from an injury. These focused niche places are probably just what I need now.
I actually quite like meerkats. They are fun to watch, always active, and as an important thing, don't usually take up too much space. Of course, given the choice between watching meerkats and watching a rarer species of mongoose, I'll usually pick the latter. I have more of a pet peeve with ring-tailed lemurs. There's literally no zoo in Denmark that doesn't keep them (except for those that cannot fit them into their theme, like native-species zoos and bird parks), while meerkats are at least absent here and there. I've never found them to be more active or interesting to watch than any other species of lemur, and unlike meerkats, their exhibits usually do take up a fair amount of space (especially walkthrough exhibits). But maybe my opinion would do a 180 if I moved to the UK where meerkats seem to outnumber ring-tailed lemurs.
I was saddened when Abilene Zoo replaced all the exotic birds in the aviary with native area species as part of the "Elm Creek" expansion. I mean the native birds are great, but were all species easy to see in the wild, most of them flying around the zoo or swimming wild in the adjacent lake. I really preferred all the tanagers and whydahs and parrots and bee-eaters. Some of the species Abilene use to hold were the only ones in accrdited TX zoos
If I had to quibble--having already expressed my outright disapproval of using valuable zoo space for domestic farm animals--I have to agree with #AbileneBoy that I find it a bit disappointing when local domestic species take the place of exotic species. It was one thing when NZP's America Trail still had black, polar, and grizzly bears, but now besides the pinnipeds, there are only the Bald eagle, wolves, otters, and the common beaver. The latter two are species any hiker can see anywhere. The zoo as a whole doesn't have a lot of hoofstook--why not use use the unused steep hill to the right on the path down into area for some steep-climbing species from the Rockies? Or another such species in the wolf enclosure? Why not some western American cat species? Or fix up those bear grottoes and exhibit black bear across from some local deer on the hill and use it to show how loss of habitat is making deer and black bear a daily sighting RIGHT HERE in the suburbs of NY, that habitat loss isn't just a vague concept affecting people and animals on faraway continents or rural America.
@AbileneBoy what you critique is actually the direction the more moderate wing of the anti-zoo lobby (and even some zoo people themselves) want (especially smaller) zoos want to take in the future - to focus on native wild species. Instead of showcasing exotic animals, visitors should instead be educated about their local dwindling wildlife. The idea in itself isn't bad, and there are great institutions like this already in Europe and North America (ADM and Innsbruck Alpenzoo, to name just two stellar examples). However, local wildlife isn't always that easy to keep and display, and quite often not "fancy" enough for the average visitor in comparison to exotic species. But that's of little interest to idealistic reformers...
There are very important conservation messages to be told when displaying native wildlife. Additionally, most people won't ever encounter species like eagles, otters, beavers, and wolves in the wild and this is especially true for people living in large metropolitan areas. While they may not be the most exciting species for us zoonerds to see when we live around and encounter these animals routinely (though I can't say I've personally encountered otters or wolves wild ever, and beavers only very rarely), they are an important part of any zoo for the joe public visiting as well as for any zoonerds not from that ecosystem. I know that, when I travel, I always try to visit a native species collection because I know I'm bound to see a lot of really cool species I won't be able to see back at home. It's a bit of an odd concept to think about, but remember what's common for you will always be exotic for someone else. Cue story about @TeaLovingDave and @ShonenJake13 getting all excited about a plain old White-Tailed Deer when we visited Berlin. ~Thylo
Important correction - multiple plain old White-Tailed Deer and just remember, there are US native species you had to cross the pond to see for the first time!
