Comments on: Bronx Zoo Says Bye-Bye to Non-Celebs

By: Loren Coleman

Loren Coleman — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 11:23:52 +0000

Kolobe, the present status of a species is no indication of historical events. According to the history of the blesbok alone, I sense we are viewing two different sources. It was the captivity of blesboks and bonteboks that appears to have recovered both species from near extinction, historically. The blesbok (Damaliscus pygargus phillipsi) were first discovered in the 17th century. Indeed, because of the confusion between blesbok and bontebok, they appear to both be credited as to have been discovered and labeled as two species with the original name Antilope pygargus (Pallas, 1767), Cape Province, South Africa. "The blesbok ranged the treeless Highveld in countless thousands throughout the mid-19th century but was hunted nearly to extinction....An isolated related subspecies, the bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus dorcas), confined to the coastal plain of Western Cape province, came nearer to extinction and is still uncommon." ~ Britannica Encyclopedia The bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus) was first described after discovery by Pallas in 1767. "The Bontebok was historically confined to the coastal plain (60-200 m) of the Western Cape, South Africa, where overhunting reduced it from locally abundant to the verge of extinction." ~ IUCN 2008 Red List "The blesbok is Lower Risk/Conservation Dependent. Its distribution is largely artificial and it occurs in protected herds on fenced reserves and farms. The bontebok is Vulnerable. It was hunted almost to extinction in the nineteenth century, but was saved by protection from a few enlightened farmers. After the establishment of the Bontebok National Park in 1931, numbers increased and stocks were introduced to other farms and reserves." ~ Animal Encyclopedia, Answers.com

By: kolobe

kolobe — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 10:27:37 +0000

The blesbok is far from extiction and was never hunted to the verge of extiction, this was done to its cousin the Bontebok, unless you know how it is very difficult for the two to be told apart. The Blesbok was discovered long after the Bontebok as its range was mainly in the Western Cape and along the coastal areas, the Blesbok was discovered much later as it is more of plains species and found further inland. In South Arica where both the Blesbok and Bontebok are endemic, there are still big herds of Blesbok on most farms and reserves, although not nearly near the numbers previously recorded, they are a hardy species and have been moved to game farms all over the country where they are doing quite well, they seem to be able to survive anything, unlike the Bontebok where there are only 3 pure recognised herds in the country and which are not nearly as hardy as the Blesbok. One of the downfalls of the Bontebok has been cross breeding with the Blesbok where they have been introduced by farmers into the Bontebok range. For many years these two where considered the same animal, thus due to the number of Blesbok it was never considered that the Bontebok would become endangered or nearly exticnt. Three animals fall into this family group, Bontebok, Blesbok and Tessebbe

The Blesbok along with the Impala are the main species hunted by hunters in South Africa and thier numbers never dwindle. Along with Springbuck, Blesbok meat is commercially sold all over the world and particularly in Europe. Its commercial value today is high enough to ensure it a long a future

By: kittenz

kittenz — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 23:13:31 +0000

Yes crapple, that has always been a dream of mine too.

I would love to see a modern, large, state-of-the art zoo here in eastern Kentucky. There is plenty of reclaimed land available, and it would bring in a lot of tourism. The closest large modern zoos are Cincinnati, Louisville, Columbus, and Knoxville – all more than 100 miles away. It would draw local visitors from West Virginia, southwestern Ohio, Virginia, and Tennessee, as well as from Kentucky. Plus, it would bring jobs – good jobs, and most importantly, jobs unrelated to the coal mining industry.

I also would love to see some more conservation facilities built along the lines of The Wilds, which is a breeding facility for endangered wildlife built on reclaimed strip-mine land in southwestern Ohio. Some of these less charismatic, but just as important, lesser-known species could be maintained in such facilities.

By: crapple

crapple — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 21:49:05 +0000

it would still be a cool idea though….

By: crapple

crapple — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 21:33:36 +0000

I have always been interested in less-known species, especially the odd ones.

“I wanna see the Elephants, mommy!”

you can see elephants at almost ANY zoo.

If I ever get the money, like the lottery (or government assistance or other people helping out or a huge loan), I’m going to attempt to start one someday nothing but rare, endangered, and forgotten species.

~yeah right~

By: kittenz

kittenz — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 20:52:26 +0000

I guess the zoos if the zoos have to focus on caring for fewer species in order to care for them well, I can understand why they focus on those that draw in the highest number of paying customers. But with so much habitat destruction in the world today, zoos are one of the few realistic hopes for the survival of many species. I personally prefer zoos with more diversity of life, and I like to see not only the spectacular, charismatic species, but also the lesser-knowns.

Still, if I had to choose between seeing a snow leopard and seeing a blesbok, the snow leopard would have my vote . I just don’t like having to choose. Why not keep the existing exhibits, but not acquire any new animals for them, and so allow them to gradually phase out as animals live out their lives?

On the other hand, if there are zoos with good facilities elsewhere in the country which can take these animals and maintain them, then patrons of those zoos may have opportunities to see animals that they otherwise would not.

By: fossilhunter

fossilhunter — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 19:33:53 +0000

Greetings All!
WOW! On top of the wrongness of closing all those exhibits, releasing snow leopards into Central Park!! Is it to control the coyotes? Forest Park in St. Louis is two and a half times the size of Central Park, and I think it still would be small for a snow leopard home range! (Maybe we now know where the oryx, blesbok, deer etc will be going… )

By: Found_One

Found_One — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 19:12:17 +0000

The World of Darkness is my favorite part of the Bronx Zoo. Second to that is the gorilla experience. Which is a face to face with gorillas. I have been going to the Bronx Zoo since I was maybe 4 or 5. Used to be there every Wednesday during the summer. It’s terribly unfortunate that they have to close any exhibit in there, especially the World of Darkness. Now the only bats there will be the wild ones, and the ones in the Asia exhibit.

By: cryptidsrus

cryptidsrus — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 18:58:16 +0000

I saw this on the news, as well.

It says something when even zoos are not immune from harsh economic climates.

I always liked seeing the tapirs at the zoo. That’s just me.

I guess they would be considered “non-celebs.”

By: gkingdano

gkingdano — Sun, 26 Apr 2009 18:44:47 +0000

SAD DAY!