Thursday, May 15, 2008
Partial list of "names" of Siberian and Sumatran Tigers and their location in 1985
Posted by
Wade G. Burck
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
A Blog designed for discussion of topics related to, but not limited to, Circus, Zoos, Animal Training, and Animal Welfare/Husbandry. Sometimes opening up the dialog is the best starting point of all. And if for nothing else when people who agree and don't agree, get together and start discussing it, it will open up a lot of peoples minds. Debate and discussion even amongst themselves opens a window where there wasn't one before.
The Circus "NO SPIN ZONE"
Relevent Stops On The Information Highway
- Custom Motorcycle Accessories by Ian
- Bob Cline's Sawdust and Spangles
- Buckles Blog
- Christophe Roullin Circus News
- Gary Robinsons Circus Blog
- Jamie Clubbs Blog
- Marco Kristens Circus Williams
- Ryan Easley's ShowMe Elephants
- Showbiz Daves Blog
- The Bartlett Society
- Thomas Bohners Cage Act History
- World of Dancing Horses
Manure Pile/Post Archive
Consultants
Wade G Burck
Adam R Burck
Eric G Burck
Adam R Burck
Eric G Burck
Posts
18 comments:
Wade, where did this other list come from?
Mary Ann
Mary Ann,
The same 1985 International Stud Book.
Wade
Wade, now I see. This section comes before the listing by number in the North American Regional Studbook, but in the International Studbook it comes after. In 2005 each subspecies has its own list in its own section, unlike this 1985 list which has both Siberians and Sumatrans in the same list. Wade, were you aware that the Detroit tigers listed #1172, #1173, #1179, #1180 were two pairs of siblings, all euthanized on 27 March 1985, in accordance with Stephen Graham's policy of euthanizing surplus tigers? Is it easier if they are known by numbers rather than Natasha, Seraya, Prince, and Scheherezade? In addition, their parents #1167 and #266 were euthanized under the same policy on 3 November 1982. Their names were Nick and Czarina. The same day their son #1171, littermate to #1172 and #1173 was euthanized also. His name was Boris. There should be some kind of holocaust memorial to these tigers there, but of course there isn't.
Mary Ann
Mary Ann,
Often times names are "reused/changed" leading to a great confusion, and we have an infinite source of numbers.
Sometimes a notable Sire or Dam will be noted in the pedigree of of Eqyptian blood lines. Ibn Sultan is the son of Sultan, Bint Sudan is the daughter of Sudan, or Bint Bint Sudan who is the grand daughter of Sudan.
In reining horses, Hollywood Jac 86 is the father of Hollywood Jac, who is the father of Hollywood Dun It, who is the father of Hollywood Chic, who is out of mare with bloodlines to Chic O Lena.
A name is really only important for the training of an animal, so they know who you are talking to. Often names will be changed from their registered name for various reasons leading to confusion. A few years a go I trained 3 horses named Butterfly Kisses, Two Scoops, and Make My Day. My greatest pet peeve is the naming of magnificent animals with cute names, or people names. Butterfly Kisses became Monarch given his grace and beauty, Two Scoops became Samauri given his explosive nature, and the filly Make My Day, became Princess given her beauty and kind nature. "I" could quickly reference their pedigrees by association Monarch/Butterfly,Samauri/"S"coops,
and Princess/all good princess's Make My Day. The confusion came after I left those horses. When I visit the farm today, somebody will invariably ask, "I wonder what ever happened to Butterfly Kisses?" And I reply, "that's him in the 3rd stall" and they reply, "no, it isn't that's Monarch." Fortunately, he is a gelding and not utilized for breeding purpose. In the long run, when dealing with hundreds of "individuals" a number is much less confusing.
Wade
Mary Ann,
Euthanization is not a good alternative. But some frown on castration/hysterectomies or birth control. Plus, how do you justify the cost of feeding and housing something that has no use in the "overall" scheme of things, If eventual release is the ultimate purpose.
Wade
Wade, to me vasectomy is acceptable in big cats, castration is not. In fact, as you know, a male lion will lose his mane if castrated. It is my personal conviction that tigers should be treated the same way, and I have stood by that conviction.
Mary Ann
Mary Ann,
Just out of curiosity, why is vasectomy acceptable and castration is not?
Wade
Casey, I was referring to a particular instance in which the male and female tiger were housed together in a zoo, and the female was left intact. In this case, yes I felt that the male tiger should have been vasectomized and allowed to have recreational sex, instead of both of them being frustrated. Just my opinion. So what if the show would be R rated?
Mary Ann
Mary Ann,
Animals don't have recreational sex. They breed only to propagate. A female in heat will act the nut whether there is a male there or not. Young immature males or castrated males of many species, will in isolated instances, "shadow f***", for lack of a better word, briefly but nothing is "consummated" as it were. In any situation where there may be a need to breed again, the female is the most useful component. Look at Hawthorns situation in the past. 4 males and a female that couldn't breed. If we had 3 castrated males and one good female we would have been way ahead.
Wade
Wade-I think you are using a teleological argument. Animals do not breed to propagate even if that is the end result. There's no evidence that animals make any connection between sex and reproduction. Animals do have recreational sex. Just look at bonobos or dolphins. Dolphins try to have sex with sharks and sea turtles.
Paul,
Thanks for the new word teleolgical. I had to look it up. I didn't infer they knew they were having sex to procreate. They are having sex because of the estrous cycle of the female. I also think there may be a misinterpretation of what they are seeing in the isolated cases of the Bonobo and Dolphins. Or it wouldn't be a relatively recent phenomena, and we would see a consistant daily "raping" as it were of all species of animals. Were there females in heat in the area, which caused the behavior? Why did the dolphins not have sex with other dolphins? Were they bored, and wanting to experiment and try something different?
In bonobos all sorts of sexual behavior seems to relieve social stress. It has been said that in bonobos sex is the equivelant of a hand shake. In both animals and human beings (we are animals of course) sex may serve many different functions other than reproduction. Sigmund Freud said the only abnormal form of sexual behavior is abstinence.
I disagree with you Paul, animals don't have "recreational sex", they mate only to propagate, and only when the female is in heat, or the male as the case may be.I've seen female dogs almost bite a males head off if he tried to breed when she wasn't in heat.Of course it could have just been a case of PMS....LOL....
Paul,
I just don't see it. Why just Bonobo given the thousands of species, and are there females coming into estrous, in estrous, going out of estrous when this "pseudo" sexual behavior occurs. I believe it is just that, "shadow f******" triggered by a stimuli that we are not aware of, or a misinterpretation. I have a male tiger Shaman who used to live with his father, Paka. When he was a yearling one of my "new" staff came to me and said "two of the tigers are breeding. Not hearing anything that sounded like breeding, I said,"which ones"? They pointed me to Shamen and Paka. Shaman was sitting on Paka, who was sleeping, and pulling the scruff of his neck. I pointed out that Shaman does that all the time, he is just trying to get Paka up to play with him. Shaman was castrated when he was 2, and now lives with 2 intact males, 2 castrated males, and 6 females. At least once a week, somebody will tell me Shaman is breeding and it will be him sitting on an intact male, or a castrated male or one of the females, trying to get them up to play. One of dozens of examples that I have seen with just tiger, and similar with horses, and elephants in playing.
Wade
Margaret,
If you are suggesting that the male wanted to breed and the female wasn't in heat, you are suggesting at recreational sex. The very early stages of heat will trigger a male, and the female not being receptive "yet" will fight. As will the remnants of a heat cycle, cause the female to be non receptive. Add to this, who in the area was coming into, or going out of heat.
Wade
Animals do not mate to reproduce. Not ever. That is teleology. I don't know if "recreational" is the right word, but the fact that animals may have no interest in breeding except when one is in heat does not mean that they are doing it to reproduce. I am not an ethologist, and I can't answer all of your questions Wade. I can only tell you that animals never have sex to reproduce. That would imply that they want offspring and have made the connection between sex and reproduction, that they desire offspring and that's their motivation. Sex may result in offspring, but that is never it's intended purpose for animals. I seem to recall that when Europeans first encountered the Tasmanians, who were later exterminated by Europeans, the Tasmanians had'nt made the connection between sex and procreation.
Paul,
LOL. You and I are a lot alike I can see. What I am suggesting is that they don't know why they are breeding, only that the hormones of heat are triggering the action. They don't know why, and they don't know the end result. But it is defiantly not for the "feel good" orgasm.
Wade
Wrong choice of words, I meant to say what you said, I'm in an earlier time zone than you are,and I haven't had my coffee yet....LOL....
Post a Comment