Quaggas were a naturally evolved subspecies of Burchell’s Zebra (or probably I should say Plains Zebra), while domestic dogs, even though they are thought to be primarily descended from wolves, are a man-made, hybrid species, with DNA having been introduced from many sources, including other canid species. Dogs have been selected for domestic behavioral traits for thousands of generations, and even dogs which are nearly indistinguishable from wolves in appearance are much different from wolves in behavior. I disagree with those who consider domestic dogs to be a subspecies of wolf. They are a separate species; of that I have no doubt at all.

Subspecies are still members of the same species as the parent species in every way, with some small differences brought about by isolation of smaller populations within the whole, which allows some traits to become more pronounced or slightly different than other subspecies. But they still share basically the same gene pool.

The zebras being selectively bred by the Quagga Project are unquestionably zebras. They are drawing on the same gene pool from which the original Quaggas originated. I agree that the quagga-like animal which will eventually be produced by the Quagga project will be slightly different, genetically, than the original Quagga population. But I think that it will be very close, since they are selecting entirely from within the original species.

An interesting project which parallels the Quagga project in some ways is the “recreation” of the recently extinct Tarpan horse. “Primitive” domestic breeds of horse, known to have been descended from Tarpans, were selected and bred for Tarpan characteristics. Today an animal exists that is called a Tarpan, and they have all the characteristics that were attributed to Tarpans. They are identical to the extinct Tarpans in appearance and behavior. Whether they are actually Tarpans is largely a matter of opinion.

My personal opinion is that the recreated animals should be referred to by a different name, no matter how closely they resemble the original extinct animal. The main reason I say this is that I do not feel it would be wise to become complacent about extinction. If an extinct animal could ever be cloned, as a true clone with 100% of the genetic material coming from an extinct individual, I would consider that cloned animal to be a member of the original species. But when a species or subspecies is resurrected from selective breeding of hybrid animals, or animals of other subspecies, I think it should be designated as such. For instance, Modern Quagga as opposed to True Quagga.

I doubt DNA would totally match unless descendants of the exact animals that first produced a Qugga are the only animals used now. Most likely newer strains of zebra are being used. I would think based on that we have no idea what lines of Zebra went into the first Quaggas.

A very interesting situation to say the least and I hope he gets his animal back as there are hunters out there that shouldn’t own a gun let alone hunt animals with one.

Some purebred horses also have faint zebra striping on the legs but never so much as this hybrid’s.

The Quagga was a subspecies of the Burchell’s (Plains) Zebra, and its coloration is much more variable than that of other zebra species. From time to time individuals of Burchell’s Zebra are born that show more quagga-like features. The Quagga Project is attempting to use these more quagga-like zebras to re-establish the type. They are meeting with some success, although they have not yet produced a zebra that looks exactly like a Quagga.

The question also remains whether a Burchell’s zebra that looks like a Quagga is indeed a Quagga. Hopefully when and if a truly quagga-like zebra is born, its DNA can be compared to that of museum specimens of Quagga to determine whether it really is a Quagga.

Much more information is available on the Quagga Project website.