The Black Panther Thread

Thanks. I assume you are referring to the post about halfway down with two men holding a black leopard lying on grass and the caption at top that says a black leopard shot in Ethiopia. If this is correct then that is good proof and I thank you for the link. The reason I say if this is correct is the photo was not posted by the original author and there is no link to indicate the source, meaning it theoretically could have been taken anywhere in Asia. Also the two men look almost more like researchers than hunters and the cat could just as easily be sedated as shot. I mean neither one of them are holding a rifle which is how hunters invariably pose for their trophy photos and there are no blood stains visible. It very may well be what it claims to be (a black leopard shot in Ethiopia) but then again it may not be. So I will call this tentative proof but not definitive proof.

 

If anyone's still interested I may have found some more "proof":
Scroll through the pics on the homepage
Bale Mountain Lodge

 

Assuming the black leopard shot was indeed taken in Bale Mountains, that is very nice. The lodge itself, which has been open less than two years and is the first lodge in Bale National Park, looks really great.

 

A black serval has been photographed in Serengeti, Tanzania. Black (melanistic) servals are well documented in the highlands of Aberdares in Kenya, but this is the first I have heard of one in the lowlands of Serengeti.
A rare and beautiful melanistic Black Serval.

 

Has anyone here heard of the Exmoor Beast? I would like to know more about it's reality. Sorry if I sound dumb here.

 

New footage of African black panthers:
Rare black leopard captured in new images from Kenya - CNN
Burrard-Lucas Wildlife Photography

 

A 'black panther' has been captured in France: Black panther found prowling on rooftops in France.

 

This was reported on the beeb site, saying it was confirmed as an illegal pet of someone in the building

Black panther found prowling roofs in French town

 

There is a separate thread on this. A few days ago I asked the moderators to combine these two threads, so we will see if they decide to merge or not.

 

Are there any melanistic leopards remaining in accredited American zoos? In the 1970s and 1980s they were quite common, but they seemed to have disappeared. Maybe that is due to almost all leopards beyond Amur leopards disappearing?

 

@DavidBrown When you say "accredited American zoos" I assume you mean AZA accredited and not also ZAA accredited? As you say these have gone with the Amur subspecies almost exclusively. Melanism in the Amur subspecies is exceedingly rare (I have never heard of it in the wild), but there are two black Amur leopards in captivity in the USA, both at AZA zoos. One is at San Diego Zoo (which I am sure you know about but forgot) and the other is at Beardsley Zoo. As for generic black leopards, there are a few dozen in non-AZA facilities, including Cat Haven (California), Great Cats World Park (Oregon), Capitol of Texas Zoo (Texas), Out Of Africa (Arizona), and more.

 

Will Burrard-Lucas, the photographer who captured the black leopard in Kenya (referenced above), has produced an autobiography called The Black Leopard: The Black Leopard - The Black Leopard (blackleopardbook.com)
It deals with how he became a wildlife photographer, how he developed new equipment for camera trapping, and culminates with his year-long project to photograph the black leopard. I just finished it and it is a worthwhile read if you are interested in wildlife photography. The photos are stunning.

 

I'm concerned that zoos worldwide are phasing out the "generic" leopards (and along with them the melanistic genes) in favour of a couple of purebred subspecies with unviable founder populations. I would have thought in the absence enough founders in the subspecies specific programs, having a seperate pool genetics (be them mixed or not) has conservation value.

 

You are not going to find many ZooChatters who share your concern.

 

I'll interpret that as you being amongst them. If you disagree I'd be interested to hear why?

 

Yes I am (among those who disagree). Not just with leopards but with any animal that has distinct subspecies, it is preferable IMO to maintain genetically distinct subspecies. I realize there are cases when this is not feasible, in which case maintaining generics may be better than nothing. But if possible it is better because it leaves open the door for future reintroductions into the wild, as I think is happening with the Persian leopard for example? It also leaves open the door for swapping wild animals with captive animals to increase the gene pool in both populations, as happens with Mexican wolf for example. For the record I am NOT opposed to color morphs like black leopard, but I would prefer someone starts a breeding program for pure-blooded Malayan black leopards.

 

I didn't advocate abandonment of the breeding programs for pure subspecies. I expressed concern that zoos are discarding subspecies hybrids on the false pretence that their pure subspecies programs have the genetic diversity to be viable in the long-term.

Its quite a different viewpoint.

If zoos where actively securing wild leopards to boost the genetic diversity of their founder groups it would be a different story, but thats not what I'm seeing.

To bring it back to melanistic leopards: melanism occurs in most leopard subspecies from my knowledge. Unlike some other colour mutations bred in zoos, I think its fair to call melanism a perfectly natural and advantageous part of the leopards genetic catalogue. Its a good thing that it exists in the leopard genetic pool as it gives some leopards an advantage in their respective habitats. And so if we are creating insurance populations its important that it is in the mix of those genetic pools. But i'm not sure this is happening.

My point is that not only does the captive hybrid leopard population hold much genetic diversity that is actually going to be very valuable from a conservation perspective if zoos fail to secure more purebred founders, these hybrid also hold most of the melanistic genes, which are also an important addition to any future reintroduced founding population.

 

Melanistic animals can occur in any mammal species that carry a black gene, but that doesn't mean it has. In leopards, it's been observed in half of the subspecies, but is extremely rare in at least two of those (amur and african). As with most melanistic cats, it occurs more commonly in jungle/forest individuals, so the Javan and Indochinese subspecies here. On Java, there's less than 250 leopards left in total, and they're critically endangered. The Indochinese is also CR. It has more numbers, 1-3,000, but they are spread out in different pockets around mainland southeast Asia and are heavily hunted for their body parts.

It can help them in the wild, but so do spots; evidence is still shaky on how much it helps overall, especially since it's far from the dominant color, even in dense jungle. If it was a big difference, it would be the more common of the colors/patterns.

Your last sentence is the core thing we disagree on. Melanistic genes aren't important to reintroduction populations. Just because a color mutation exists, doesn't mean it's necessary or advantageous.

 

A great article by a wildlife photographer published in Atlas Obscura magazine on the challenges of finding black panthers in the wild:

A Photographer's Pursuit of the Elusive Black Panther

Enjoy

 

This is an excerpt from the book that I reference in post 32 above.