Does it matter where animals are common in zoos for Planet Zoo (1 or 2) roster debates?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan_serow

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_serow

Linking these two from the earlier thread I put down about for a debate about 'redeeming animals'

https://www.reddit.com/r/PlanetZoo/comments/1unmaa7/what_would_it_take_for_you_to_warm_up_to_one_of/

As they are an interesting case study. So anyway, how common an animal is in zoos is a frequent bench mark debate for if an animal should be in-game or not. And while I have never seen debates on the Taiwan Serow, the Japanese Serow does come up and some might say 'but they are so uncommon in zoos'. Apparently they are no longer kept in zoos in Europe and are in like, three zoos between the US and Canada.

Not sure if anyone says that, but allow me my framing device.

BUT, the Japanese Serow is common in Japanese Zoos. So its kind of a Platypus situation, as I recall how rare they were outside of Australian Zoos was a debate point. And yes, same with the Taiwan Serow.

And fun fact, everyone's favorite in-game Black Bear Subspecies is also kept in Taiwanese Zoos for breeding programs.....

I remember hearing talk of how there was discourse during the Europe and North America pack days over the animals in focus and how common they were in zoos, though that was before I had the game so I wasn't there first hand. But given how talk goes here, I can believe it. So....

Does it matter where the animal is more common in zoos for inclusion debates? Is there a middle ground where, IDK, if Frontier sends staff to Taipei for research its fine but if they don't its not? Or is a lot of this just a matter of 'what is common around the troper's home country specifically'.