A baby Amur leopard was born last month in Serengeti Park in Hodenhagen, Germany. She made her first public appearance on Friday December 4.
Amurs, or Far East leopard have some very interesting characteristics. While their summer coats are about 2.5 inches long, their winter coats grow to 4 inches. A beautiful animal with widely spaced rosettes (“spots”) with thick border, Amurs have been reported to leap nearly 20 feet horizontally and 10 feet vertically in their pursuit of prey.
Unlike the better known African leopards, Amur leopards live in the temperate forests of Russia’s far eastern regions. Nearly 80% of their natural habitat has been destroyed during the past two decades. As a result, Amur leopards are critically endangered. It is estimated that less than 40 remain in the wild. At last count, there were 34.
Zoos may represent the last, and best hope, of preserving this magnificent species. This means that the final survivors will live in captivity.
Zoos often lead to conflicting thoughts and feelings in people. I know this is something some of us discussed during our visit to the Bronx Zoo. Given the critically endangered state of the Amur leopard – and other aniamals – what role do you think zoos should play in their preservation? Should the animals be placed on public display? Should they be maintained separately in more “respectful” environments?
Or should the last remaining members of the species be allowed to die in dignity in the last remaining vestiges of their natural environment?
8 comments:
They should use a combination of both. Some of the lepords or any animal should be in the public eye. At the same time some of them should be seperate.
The group that are living in full captivity may be a modivator for people. If they can see what the amimals are the can relate to them more, it becomes more personal. They may feel like they need to help more if they can connect with some of the animals.
The ones they are keeped seperate, can be trained to be more "wild" to depened on themselves. This way some of them will have a chance to return to the eviernment.
Gabriella
Holy crap! This is the cutest thing ever, if only there were tons of them to sell to the public. I feel that endangered animals that are kept captive should not be put on display. They should be kept in a more familiar habitat and not be kept in their quarantined areas as in zoos. Though it is nice to see pictures in their natural habitat.
-The Bird
When in Ladakh I visited the snow leopard capital of the world. I saw the amazing, glittering mountains and breathed in the fresh clear air. I could imagine them leaping around and playing. If I was content and happy then the snow leopards must be so peaceful.
Then I went to the bronx zoo, seeing them in the smoggy warm wrong habitat broke my heart. I saw people in penguin suits and ignorant people laughing and jeering at this amazing remarkable creature. I almost cried. This issue is so frustrating to me. I want the world to know and care about endangered species, but I don't wish the animal to be so unhappy. I want it to be happy. It is not worth it for the animal to be miserable.
I am defiantly one of those people who aren’t realty convinced by the captive breeding program deal. I think cording off a nice vast section of habitat and letting the animals do their there thing would be a more effective and far less intrusive approach. The real problem I have is the fact that zoos make vast amounts of money from both visitors and fundraisers (etc). So basically they are exploiting the fact that the animals are so rare to get cash out of well meaning people. Also the fact that they profit from the rarity of the poor cute little critters, well it seems like it would be against the zoos best interest for the critters to…remain endangered. Call it a conflict of interest and call me paranoid.
--chris
Whoops I meant it would be against the zoos best interest for the animal populations to increase
--chris
Its sad to see a beautiful animal like her in captivity because she might not be suited in the wild. She is one of the last of her kind, she is a legacy. How can we as a people help her to be in her rightful place? In the wild dominating the forests of Russia.
I feel there is a difference between letting a species die, with respect, and how they were driven to such low population. Who or what made them recede, hide, die out? Did something or someone disrupt the natural occurrence of events? Was their habitat destroyed, or cut back? What happened? Who is responsible? Can we fix the mistakes that have been made?
They say we should learn history so we do not make the same mistakes made before our time; yet time and again we see things happening, similar to histories stories. Of wars and hate, death camps, desertification, poverty, and extinction, we face again and again dilemmas.
Global warming, a widely accepted and by some rebuked theory. We see things changing, weather patterns eradicate the norm, and animals dying at an alarming rate (take for instance the polar bears!).
We can stop, we can help. Zoos at this point may be the best thing we have.
In N.Y.C. its possible to step from the noise and grit of the city into Africa, the Far North, or the tropics of Madagascar. Its a refuge for people, its a sanctuary of preservation.
Yes I think the use of Zoos is good. Its the resources we have. In the meantime we can only put land into conservation, go "green", and try not to disrupt the fine balance of what we have created and what predeceased us.
Save them!
This poem seems almost fitting...
The Libation Bearers
Oh, the torment bred in the race,
the grinding scream of death
and the stroke that hits the vein,
the hemorrhage none can staunch, the grief,
the curse no man can bear.
But there is a cure in the house,
and not outside it, no,
not from others but from them,
their bloody strife. We sing to you,
dark gods beneath the earth.
Now hear, your blissful powers underground-
answer the call, send help.
Bless the children, give them triumph now.
Aeschylus
-Caileigh Bryant
i dont really have any problem with zoos. i think theyre a good way for people to learn about the animals we dont see. however, i do normally have problems with endangered or close to endangered animals being brought into the zoo. i think that what the zoos are trying to do is nice. and i know that they mean well. but i dont think we should interfere with nature. we have already enough. however i also think we should fix what we have done. i think it is more important to try and fix the damage we have created. but then again we also could accidentally wipe out a population that have thrived due to the lesser population in the predator. i think this is more important that leaving it alone, after we have done something to effect the population. i truely wish that we have never interfered with their environment, but its too late and zoos should be helping the population increase in endangered animals. and i do think they should be on display, (a safe display where no trash can get thrown in) because then people will be able to see it before it may be extinct.
--keely
34 is not a lot.
My view on zoos is that they are great as far as making people aware of these problems. I think these animals need to be there for preservation. We may not be able to help what is happening in the wild. But we can at least preserve a few. I mean wouldn't it be neat ot be able to see a mamoth? But we cannot because we did not preserve it. But a panda, we can today. People can at least see what an animla was like because one is still around.... they can catch a glimpse anbd hopefully become compelled to help creatures ats imilar states before the same happens to them.
Outside is the zoo should eb used for research. This si where you can see what is happening where tehy are at. Not in teh zoo... because heck nothing is happening. They are sitting a a cage. Not sure how you can figure out why they are disappearing in population from that.
Research in teh wild. Preserve in the zoo.
Becca
Post a Comment