, .>I ••
29
Reintroduction Programs
DEVRA G. KLEIMAN
This ch;:ipter outlines the rnnditions that make J reintroduc Borner 1985). There have been some dear successes with r1on program using captive mammals of a threatened or en ungulates, mcluding the American bison, Bison htson, ;:ind dangered species an appropriate conservation strategy, and the Europe;:in wisent, Bison honasus (Conway 1980; Camp presents some basic guidelines for such an effort. IUCN bell 1980), Jlthough those efforts also involved mmimal ( 1987) Jlso provides criteria for these and related efforts. monitoring. Reintroduction is an appro;:ich that is attractive to zoo In the remainder of this chapter I will concentrate on conservationists, as well as to che general public, but such a ouclining chose factors that should be considered in plan ryrogram should be undertaken onlv with a dear under ning and implementing J reintroduction program involving ( nding of the costs and benefi.cs .. Be~ause reintroduction is the release of threatened or endangered captive mammals. '-"'~omplex endeavor that usually involves both a long-term There have been many more reintroduction programs for hnanci;:il commitment and active collaboration by govern- bird species (Campbell 1980), although they are neither less mental and nongovernmental agencies and inscicucions, it is complicated nor less expensive than reintroduction pro not a viable option for the ma1orirv of end;:ingered species grams for mammals. Long ( 1981) estimated, in a review of held in captivity. Indeed, .mempts to reintroduce J species, translocations. reintroductions, ;:ind introductions, that ap 1f poorlv conceived or implemented. mav accuallv obscure proximate!~· half of the attempts failed. CJde ( 1 986 ), Wem rhe conserv:mon issues rhat led to rhe de~line of the species mer ;:ind Derrickson 11987), Kleiman ( 1989), Stanley Price 1n rhe tirsr place-.ind rhu-. 111.1v derracr from, r.Hher than 11989\, Gipps 11991), Jnd Beck ct al. (1994) provide re .1dd to .•1 species· chanu:s ot sunw.111 IUCN 1987\. view'\ and hi bliograph1es on reintroductmn programs for The tirsr step 1n cons1denm: .1 re1nrroduct1on is to dcfinc cJpt1ve birds .ind mammals. rhe long-ti:rm conservation goals t>t thc program and the cn ..\ descnpt1on oi a release of animals into a naturJI h;:ib1- rcnJ tor 'iuccess ..\ims varv .1ccording to 1 l) the status of tac needs to specify ( 1) whether the rele;:ise occurs within cJch species 1n cJptivitv anj in the wild .ind (2) the politicJI the species' original geographic range, (2) whether there 1s '>ltuat1on within the receiving counrrv. Generallv, major J preexisting free-ranging population Jt the release sire, goals mdude mcreasmg the s11.e oi the wild population, es Jnd (3) the history of the specimens released (i.e., wild- or tablishing additional wild popul.mons, Jnd/or prescrving or captive-born. currentlv in the wild or in cJpt1vity, previous enhancing available habitat. ldeallv, reintroduction could cxpenence in the wild). There are differences among JU .ilso he used to cnhJncc the d~·mogr.1phic .rnd genetic man thors m their use of terms 1KonstJnt .rnd .\tittermeier .1gemcnt oi borh wild Jnd c.1pt1n· popul.Hions. While cnte 1982: !UC::--: 1987; Stanlev Price 1989). I Jm defining rein na ior success vary depending upon the aims oi eJch pro trod11ctio11 here as the rele~se of either captive-born or wild gram .•1 program 1s likely ro he 1uJged a success if the status c;:iughc animals into .rn area within their original range oi a species is signiticanrlv 1mpron:d hv the remtroducrion, where populations h;:ive declined or disappeared. Reintro even 1i cverv smgle rcleased indinduJI dies. Reintroductmn ductions mav involve moving (translocatmg) wild-caught '>olelv as a -.olution to rhe problem oi surplus uptive ani animals or releasing naive captive animals (both wild- Jnd mals 1s mappropnatc; Jn 1nregr.Hed plan to promote the captive-born), and m;:iy have a conservation or an economic preservation oi the species in rhc wild is also needed. purpose. Goals may include improving the status of the wild The success of manv earlv .Htempts ro reintroduce mam population by increasing numbers (sometimes termed re mals mro natur;:il habitJts c.rnnot he fairlv evaluated since stocking) or changing the population's genetic makeup. The l ·erc has been limited post·rele~1se moni~oring, cspeci;:illy latter goal may be appropriate when the species exists in '1..,-· r pnm:ne remtroducnons (:\vdmg and Mitchell 1982; small groups in insular habitats chat preclude oucbreeding.
297 298 l
1-IKLl - :->_I. I lcci,1011 .\ l.1k1m: Lo11ccrn1m: the K.e1mroJucr1on or l.1<>11 Lunann' 1 l.c·u11t I .conto(J1thcc11 s ms I. The reJsom tor the reJuct1on m srec1es 11umtlers have hecn ei11nmateJ (e.g., hum1111~. Jctorest.mon. commerce 1 '.'Jo 2. ~uttic1e1H hah1t:it" rrotec.:reJ .111J secure Yes l. Av.1il.1ble hab1tJt ex1'ts with low Jens1t1es of or wHhout n:it1ve .1111mals Yes Yes? 4. h 1s c.:erram that the release oi ammals will nm 1eorard1ze the ex1stmi.: wild roru!Jnon '.'Jo No No 'i. Suftic1enr 1ntorm:mon exists about the sre c.:1es· h1oloi.:y m the wilJ m evaluate whether the program 1s a success 1.5 3 6. Conservation eJucanon exists 5 2 4 7. The popul.1t1011 m c.:.1rnv1tv 1s secure, well rnan;11:cd. JnJ h.1s surplus .1111rnals Yes No No 8. Knowledge ot the tec.:hmques ot rcmtroJuc non CXIStS 3 q. Resources tor [l< l\trelcase momtormg arc .1va11Jhlc Yes '.'Jn 10. There" .1 nceJ to .1ui.:ment the s1ze/gcnet1c J1vermv or the wild ropul;mon Yes '.'Jn Yes? IS REINTRODUCTION RECOMMENDED? YES NO NO Source: B.ised on material provided hv C. jnd S. P.1JuJ. A. Rvl.mds. C. ,\Ives. J.• ind I...\. Dietz. J. Ballou. r. Simon, ll. Beck .•111d J. ~t.1llinson at the l.c·o11tnp1thcrns :\l.1nagement Workshop, Belo Homonte. Br:iz1I. June I q_zJ, 1990. Note: ~Gle: 5. best; \J, worst. \ ,,:978: Carter 1981: Aveling and \tirchell 1982; McGrew the Atlantic Coastal rJinforesrs of Brazil. All species are en 11111 1983: Borner 1985: Harcourt. m press). For newlv released dangered. mainly due ro habitat destruction and alteration. animals (as sin!detons or groups) unacquainted with an There are captive populations of three species, each at dif area and without established home ranges or territories. a ferent levels of development . ..:onfront:rnon w1rh .1daprcd wild .rn1mals in natural social Table 29.1 lists ten conditions that should be mer in or groups mav result •.lt hesr. 111 !light and dispersJI ro a mar Jer to recommend a remrroducr1on/rranslocar1on program. gm.il h.1lmat .. \t wor<.t. the n.ltl\'L' .1111mals mav attJck .md \ddirionalh·. 1r evaluates the posmon of the three lion rama 'cn Reinrroducrions should be encouraged onlv when there the appropriate governmenral agencies. cspec1allv those that is some certaintv that the release of animals from other re provide permits for the movements ot threatened and en gions I both captive and wild-born) will not 1eopardize the dangered species. Collaboration should also he sought from existing native population through transmission of disease the staffs of zoos. local universmes, and conservation orga or social disruption. We do nor have this contidence for the nizations 111 as well as outside the hosr counrrv. three torms of lion tamarins at this time due to our limited Continued success depends upon having the program knowledge of their biology and status. eventually involve local people rather than outsiders. re The evaluation of the success of a reintroduction can be gardless of its location. There should he obvious henetits to accomplished onlv by long-term monitoring and must be the community, or support will be half-hearted or nonexis based on a thorough knowledge of a species' biology, distri tent. An abstract benetit, such as saving a species from ex bution, and ecological requirements. On a scale of 1-5, tinction, is often not a compelling argumenr to a govern with 5 being the best-case scenario, I suggest that there 1s ment official without resources who 1s under pressure from sufficient information available for L. rosa/ia, and torallv starving landless peasants. Economic benetirs are obviously insufficienr information available for L. chrysome/as, with .i strong incentive for cooperation. In Oman. local tribes are L. chrysopygus somewhere m between. employed in the monitoring program for the Arabian oryx A conservation education program in conjunction with a (Stanley Price 1986, 1989). Educanonal benches (e.g., pro reintroduction can attract and inform the local populace viding advanced training abroad) and the transfer of tech and may well result in greater community support for the nology Jre additional inducements that also accelerate the effort. Both L. rosalia and L. chrysopygus conservation pro transfer of the management of the program into local hands. grams have strong educational components. The education There muse be a signed document containmg the aims program for L. chrysomelas is developing. and objectives of the program as well as rhe criteria for its A prerequisite to the reintroduction of animals currentlv success. The signed agreement should also stare the expec in captivity (whether captive or wild-born) 1s a secure, well tations, responsibilities. and degree of aurhorny of eJch managed captive population w1rh a long-term Masterplan parry, preferably with a preliminary schedule of work. At and available surplus animals. This condition is mer in L. the outset, the responsibility for decision making at each rosalia, bur nor yet in L. chrysomelas and L. chrysopygus. stage of the process must be made clear, Jnd a set of guide We have much still to learn about the methodologies of lines for making decisions should be provided. For example, preparation, adaptation, and release of lion tamarins. With animals mav die or be born Jfter the candidates for rein so many unanswered questions about the techniques that troduction ~re chosen, but before release. The authority for will ensure success-for example, for the injection of single changing the list of release candidates in these circumstances animals into established reproductive groups-I suggest that must remain with a single person. Similarly, only one person we still consider reintroduction an experimental approach. should decide whether ro "rescue" an animal that is doing Access to the resources necessarv to monitor rhe activi poorly after the release. Another issue that must be included ties and survivorship of released a~imals is essential for a in the formal agreement is the ownership of the specimens reintroduction effort, especially since we have nor yet per (will they continue to be owned by the provider or be trans fected our preparation and release techniques. The conser ferred to the receiver?). vation programs for L. chry•somelas and L. d1ry•sopyg11s are nor vet sufficienrly developed. w1rh respect to tinanc1.il sup Financial Support porc and the necessarv infrastructure. to warranr .i reintro .\ reintroduction program requires the long-term comm1r duction effort. The L rosalia program has a well-developed menr of manv individuals, including professionals living 111 mtrastrucrure and considerable resources to monitor the the tield for extended periods. Subsrannal funding 1s conse .ict1vit1es of released animals. quently required for ( 1) salaries; 12.) field headquarters and One major purpose of a reintroduction program is to subsistence; (3) vehicie(s), including fuel and maintenance augmenr the numbers or genetic d1vers1ty of a population. for transport in the area of the reintroduction; (4) animal L. rosa/1a currenrly needs such .iugmenration, while the caging and shipping costs; (5) equ1pmenr and supplies for situation for L. chrysome/us and L. d1ry•sopyg11s is not clear monitoring the released animals, such as binoculars, radio at this time. telemerry equipment (receivers, anrennas, and transmitters I, Weighing the degree to which the necessary conditions materials for mark mg animals. and traps for capturing ani .ire met for each species suggests that while reintroduction mals; (6) travel for the principals: and (7) long-distance efforts may he appropriate for L. rosalia. they are not yet communication. Klt:iman et al. ( 1991) provide examples of ,1ppropnate for L. chrysomel.is or L. chrysopygus. costs for the Golden Lion Tamarin Conservation Program, which includes ~1 reintroduction componenr. Expenses mount considerablv when the project involves additional HOW DO YOU START? components, such ~s a conservation education dforr. habi Negotiations tat protection, prerelease preparation and training of ani Most reinrroduct1ons start with individual interests hut ul mals, and extensive field studies of the srarus and behavioral timately involve multiple organizations, both governmental c:cology of the free-ranging wild population. and nongovernmental, local. nanonal • .ind multinational. Reinrroduction programs for large mammals rhar nor The tirsr step is to obtain the support and involvement of mally rJnge over great distances may be prohibitively ex- ~· '·I I. I .\I,\ N .301 [ll'ns1vl'. '>inc<.: kl'l'[lll11.! track ot the rl'i<.:J.sl'J .rn1mals rnav r<.: c.ause thcv believe that hvhrid1z;mon between the northern qu1rl' rhc Ll'>l' ot a1rcratt tor rad1ord<.:mctrv 1'->tanil'v Pnc<.: ,111d southern populat1ons will swamp the rema111111g fragile L I ':186, 198':11. Cost .1lon<.: can pr<.:v<.:m rl'111troduct1on pro population ot northern toxes and that the Colorado toxes grams trom h<.:111g usl'd for rhc preservation ot mosr species will be unJ.ble to survive the cold w111ters ot the north. Her I Bramhell I 977\. \\'ilJlifl' prorernon. hahirar preservation. rero, Schroeder. and Scott-Brown ( 1986) provide a conv111c and consl'rvat1on l'ducat1on mav hl' more cosr-ettect1ve con ing rqo111d<.:r and review the bases tor their decision. '>ervanon ml'asurl's than r<.:111rroduct1on 1Borner 198.5). Biologists must determ111e the age and sex classes most .1ppropriatc tor reintroduction. as well as the size and com Field Studies and Site Selection pos1t1on ot groups to he reintroduced. Previous studies ot Initial tield survevs will claritv the srarus of rhe populat1on the mating srtem. scH.:1al orga111zat1on. J.nd the spatial rela 111 rhe wild and the avadabilitv ot suitable hab1tat to support t1onsh1ps of individuals will provide guidelines for making the re111rroduced ammals and their descendants. Releases these dec1s1ons. For example. based on such information. -,hould cease as the carrvmg capac1rv of rhe habitat 1s the groups of Jamaican hut1as. Ceocapromys brnwmi, reached ••1s mav soon be the case for rhe orangutan. Pongu golden lion tamarms, and Arabian orvx chosen for reintro PYKmae11s. 111 Malavs1a and Indonesia ( Avcling and M itchcll Juction were stable and cohesive: the hut1as J.nd ramarins 1982). where rehabilitation centers for wild-born orphans were 111 monogamous families and the oryx m polygynous have been operating for manv years. herds !Oliver 1985: Kleiman et al. I ':186; Stanley Price A suitable release Site should be completclv protected 1986). Red wolves have been released as mated pairs (U.S. and accessible and should have a small (or no) resident Fish and Wildlife Service 1986; Point Defiance Zoo and populatmn of the target species. unless the goal of the rem :\quarium 1988 ), and European otters. L11tra l11tra. as mos troduct1on 1s to increase genetic divers1tv within an insular of a s111gle male and two females (Jeffries l't al. 1985). Ex population. Planners should know whether the rl'servl' J.rca cept tor the otters. rhese were J.11 r<.:111troducnons conducted can susta111 J genet1callv viable population 111 rhc tururc. and 1n locations devoid of the species. ot what size. field surveys mav be timc-consum111g and com In saturated areas a different strategy 1s necessary. For plex. especially if little is known of the behavioral ecology example, gorilla, Gorzlla gorilla, ecology and social behav .ind habitat preferences of the species. Bur ticld surveys are ior suggests that adult males or adult females with young crucial since thcv may 1dent1fv rhc causes of a species' de are not good choices for release due to the likelihood of cline 111 the wild and provide mformat10n necessarv ro elimi aggression from established groups; adolescent and adult nate the threats. If preliminarv tield studies 111d.icatc that females are probably the best candidates (Harcourt, in there 1s insufficient suitable habitat or continued ma1or press). Early experiences with chimpanzee reintroductions threats to the species. planners must be prepared to aban suggested that cohesive groups should he released in already don the proposed rc111troduct1 , -reparanon 1s planned. :\s rhc 1nd1v1duals urnsmunng rhc THE REINTRODUCTION l mvc popular1on of an endangered species are otrcn d1s ~urcd w1dclv to min1m1zc exnncr1on risks. coordinar1on Preparation of Animals wtll undoubredlv he rnmplicarcd. In all cases, vcterinarv We have verv little experience 111 reintroducing captive -;crcening and treatment prior to release 1s nccessarv and 1s mammals 1nro their native habitats. No general guidelines hest done at a sini.de insmunon tor cons1srencv. . exist tor prepanng species from the vanous raxa tor rein Cooperanng zoos must obtain health and i.mporr/cxporr troduction. However, there arc at least six ma1or areas of permtts and arrange transport well in advance of the ship behavior to consider in the development of anv preparation ment itself. lnstttut1ons at the n:ce1ving sire must be fullv 'chcmc. To survive, candidates for reintroduction muse be involved in the scheduling of shipments, cspec1allv if the re .1ble to I l) avotd predators; (2) acquire and pro.:css food; ceiving agencv needs to prepare facilities or holding cages I .3) interact socially with conspecifics; ( 4) find or construct for prerelease acclimanon. shelters and nests; ( 5) loco more on complex terrain: and (6) orient and navigate in a complex environment. Prepara Public Relations and Education tion also may involve acclimattzation of release candidates Public educanon and a broad base of public support are the ro the habitat and climanc condicions at the release site for only long-term solutions to rnnservation problems in both -,ome time pnor to the reintroduction. developing and developed rnunmes. Since the local rnm Species differences in the amount of prcrclease condition munirv often rnntnbutes s1gn1ficamlv ro the decline of a spe ing required are likely to be significant. Herbivores may cies through hunting or orher act1v1ties that result in habitat need little training in food acquisition and processing, while degradation, a strategy involving the local community as omnivores and carnivores mav require extensive training. collaborators rather than as obstadcs to the program 1s the Species that normally live in herds or are solitarv in the wtld most l1kelv to achieve success. C.irlev ( 198 l) and Dietz and mav need less preparation in the rules ot social etiquette ~agagara I 1986) describe conscrvanon education programs than forms that live m groups with a complex social struc acting in con1uncrion with the experimental release of red ture. Arboreal species may need more preparatton in loco wolves in South Carolina and the reintroduction of the motton and orientation than terrestrial forms. Migratory golden lion ramarin in Brazil, respectively. species or those with large home ranges mav need to learn Conservanonisrs need to be sens1t1ve to the pressures af- how to navigate and develop rouces through natural habi fecting the activities of local individuals, especially govern- tats; territorial forms may need to learn how to define the ' ,em officials, so that the latter are not put in impossible or limits of their ranges. We do nor know which of these behav l 1mpromising positions due to the activities of the reintro iors are learned and thus require training, and which are ~ucnon program. Although a successful conservation pro- genetically hard-wired. Examples of different approaches to gram clearly requires considerable baste biological knowl preparation (both recommended and tested) arc given by edge, 1t demands public relations .ind political skills even Kleiman ct al. ( 1986 ); Beck et al. ( 1991 ); Beck ct al. (tn more. Harcourt (in press I suggests .•ind l strongly agree. press I: Box ( t 991 ); Miller ct al. ( 1990a. l 990b); Stanlcv that rhc polittcs of rcintroducr1ons .ire as imporr:rnr as the Price 1 1986, 1989); Oliver ( 1985); Oliver et :ii. ( 19861; release method< >logy. Parker t 19861; Harcourt lin press); Riiksen 119741; )cott :\good rcintroductton program involves local collabor Brown. Herrero ..111d \ \amo ( 1986 ): .ind lJ .S. Fish .ind .mirs w1th a -,rake in tts tutu re >ucccss. In a developing coun WilJlifc )erv1ce 11982). rrv. there should be a commttmcm ro train a future cadre ot To prepare golden lion tamarins to toragc and feed. Beck protess1onal biologists in zoo h1ologv. reintroduction meth developed a tceding protocol that involved the gradual re odology, wildlife biology, .ind conservanon (Kleiman ct a I. placement of a single bowl of food with tood that was dis 19861. To this end. a percentage of the pro1ect's total budget mburcd in different locat10ns and hidden in "puzzle boxes," should be allocated for 'itudent support (or other forms of thercbv forcing the animals not only to search for tood, bur professional tr:11ning) (<,ee Kleiman ct al. 199 t). to work to cxtracc 1r. To improve locomotor abtlirv .rnd spa tial orientation, animals were exposed to exceedingly com Habitat Protection and Management plex rhree-dimcns1onal environments that were regularly The degradation of habttats 1s the chief cause of species dismantled and rebuilt. The overall survival r:ircs of prc losses. A successful re1ntroducr1011 requires a secure site: rared and unprepared tamarins did nor differ tBcck ct al. therefore an ~11.:t1ve program tor lub1tat protection must 1991: Beck et al., in press). Living for several months in exist. In some cases, habitat protection will denve from .1 free-r:inging condition on the zoo grounds, however, the activities of the remtroduct1on program 1Avding and -;eemed to confer an advantage on tamarins after release, \litchell 1982). :\dditionallv. re1nrroduct1on progr:ims nuv cspec1allv w1ch extensive post-release support through pro need to become involved in .1ggress1vc management of land \'IS1oning and post-release training (Beck et al. 199 l). and animals or even the restoration ot dcsrroved habitats. Red wolves have been preadapted to hunting by expos This need for aggressive man;1gcment derives from the is in~ them tirst to carcasses and then to live prey before rein landlike quality ot so many reserve .1rc:is, whose ecological troduction (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1982). Miller balan.:e 1s easily upset due to their small size. The manage et al. 1 l 990a. ! 990b) conducted one of the very few experi ment and restoration of habitats 111 the Tropics are ma1or ments to rest the effeccs of training protocols on the behav \...,.., hallcngcs for the future I Ehrli.:h .rnd Ehrlich 1981). ior of captive animals with the ultimate aim of applying the 103 rcchn1qucs ro rhe rrcpJrat1on ot endangered hlack-toored cl1v1dual ammal ro the pro1ect because ot 1rs social. cxpen •ers . .\lustclu l/l~npcs. tor rcmrroduct1on. fhev used cnnal. or genetic background: the pcr<.:c1ved reason tor the .1endangered Siherian polecats • .\lustc/,z ci•crsmanm1. JS .1mmal 's problem t e.g., disease. predation. !>o<.:1al umtlin, hu model srec1cs ro exJm111e rhe development ot predJtor man crror1; and the Jvadabditv ot captive hous111g tor rcs .1vrndance and rrev locanon skills 111 naive captives. The ..:ued individuals. It guidelines govern mg the res<.:ue ot re111- c:apt1ves 111 generJI spenr more time 111 surta<.:e acr1v1tv thJn rrodut:ed ammals arc dearlv spelled our hctore the release, 111 burrows when seJrch111g tor food. Thev also showed lirrle pro1ect personnel can avoid mak111g J rushed dc<.:is1on m a evidence ot J c.1rac1n· tor long-term me~or\' ot a neganve c.:ontused and poss1blv emononallv <.:harged climarc. experience wICh J porent1al predator. The long-tcrm mon1tor111g ot released am ma ls 1s a <.:ruc1al For manv <;pec1es. social preparation 1s ot considerable componenr of anv rc111trodu<.:t1on program. The zoos pro 1mporrance. C.1stro ct Ji. (in press! hJve noted that the nding the ammals for reintroduction have a special interest .1ud1torv commu111cat1on skills ot capnve-born golden lion 111 the results of momtonng s111<.:e 1t 1s imporrant tor them to tamarins differ from those ot wild tamarms. which could keep their consmuencies 111formed abour the progress of .itfecr the abilicv ot released captive-born mdividuals to 111- individuals from their collecnons that have heen rcinrro teract flropcriv With wild <.:onspec1tics. duced. Intensive mo111ror111g <.:an also facilitate rhe collection For great ape re111trodu<.:t1ons land introduct1ons), the of carcasses for pathological study and thus darify causes of ma1or preparanon has been so<.:1al. in that candidates have death of released ammals. A mo111tor111g program will indi been housed w1ch conspe<.:1tics pnor to release t Wilson and <.:ate how and when rhc behavioral rcperrrnre of captive Elicker 1976: Pfeiffer Jnd Kocl:mer 1978) after heing housed horn animals becomes <.:omparahle to that of wild speci .1lonc tor long periods. Crear Jpe releases hJve Jlso often mens. All of this information cm then he fed back into the involved rrov1ding ammals with exposure to a nJtural cn management of the captive population. \·1nmmenr while st1ll kccp111g them undcr human <.:Jre. HJn .\'lost re111trodut:t1on programs have 111cludcd the prov1- nah .111d .\tcGrew t l 491) summarize great ape rchabditJ .,1on of essential resources such as food. water, and shelter, rion pro1cccs. 111duding some preparation ce<.:hniques. both to provide support for the ammals and to conrrol their lncorporat111g preparanon techmques into rhe normal movements. Golden lion ramarins. Jama1<.:an hut1as, and zoo environment might result in more naturalistic and <.:om ..\rahian orvx were all released from enclosures with shel plex hJb1racs for capnve ammals. Ac the National Zuolog1- ters. with t.he hope that the ammals would rcma111 in the <.:al Park, camarin groups s<.:heduled for rcmtrodu<.:tion arc vicinitv (Kleiman et al. 1986; Oliver ct al. 1986; Stanley . 'lOW released on zoo grounds during the sprmg and summer Price 1.986. 1989). Sites where food and shelter are provided i mchs. They are free-rang111g for several months pnor to can be used for rrapping and examining the specimens. '-"'tpment I Bromkowski. Beck, and Power 1989). When to eliminate support is a ma1or decision. It is ex Becki 1991) po111ts out that our amrudcs coward ammal tremelv important to challenge the animals, but is also welfare may he an ohscadc to pro\'1ding Jn cnri<.:hcd envi easier to <.:ontrol their movemenrs if critical resources like ronment that would rn:pare ..:..ipnvc-horns tor survival in food are provided. Achieving a wild state may mean devel the \\ild. Real rrcparat1on would 111..:ludc exposure to food oping fear Jnd avo1dan..:c responses to humans • .1 condition ,horr.igcs. p.1rJs1Ccs .ind disease. predators. Jr.1mat1..: tlu<.: that most an1m:il managers tind difficult to rromote 111 their ruat1ons Ill .11nh1cnr co11d1c1011s ..rnd d.mgcr mdiviJuals: rcleJstng herbivores rJther thJn omnivores or REFERENCES l univores: and rcleJsing :rnimJls into areas without com \vehng, !Z., Jnd .\11rchcll, A. I '::182. h rch:ib1ltr:irmg Orang Ur:ins ~etttors. Stanlev Price 1 1989) discusses the charactenstics worth while? <)r.'X 16: 263-71. that mJke animals the most remtroducible: large animals !leek. B. II. I '::191 ..\lan:igmg zoo cnv1ronmcnrs ior rctntroduct1on. livtng tn cohesive groups, explorer species, nocturnJI spe AAZl'A Annual C"nlerence l'roceedm~s. 4 ~6-40. Wheeling, ues. and species tolerant of habitat change or extreme en W.Va.: :\menc:in :\~sm:1at1on of Zuologi<.:al P:irks Jnd vironmental varianon. :\quanums. Beck et al. ( 1994) suggest chat a remtroducnon pro1ecc llc:ck. 13. IL Kleim:in. D. G .• C:Jstro, I., Rcrrberg-lkck. B., and Car -,hould he counted as successful if the wild populanon valho. L. In pre\~. Prepararmn ot capnve-born golden lion tJ reaches .500 individuals chat are free of provisioning or marins tor release into the wild. In A case studv m conservatzon other human support, or 1f a formal genetic/demographic 11101010•: The gulden /um tamarm. ed. D. G. Kleiman. .malysis predicts that the population will be sclf-suscammg. Beck, 13. B., Kleiman, D. G., Dietz. J.M., CJstro, I., CJrvalho. C., By these smngent cmena, they found chat only 16 ( 11 'X,) Mamns, A., Jnd Rcrrberg-Beck. B. I '::191. Losses and reproduc tion m reintroduced golden lion ramarins, Lcuntop1thecus rosa of 145 animal reintroductions were successful. However, lta. Dodo 2 7: 50-61. many of these pro1ects are ongoing, Jnd their success or fail l~eck, II. B., Rapaport, L. G., Sr:inlev Price ..\I. R., Jnd Wilson, ure cannot yet be evaluJted. Also, a reintroduction attempt A- C. 1994. Reinrroduct1on of captive-horn :immals. In Creative can hJve tndirect, longer-term conservation benefits, such as conservation: lnteractwe management of 1v1/d and captwe ani tncreJsed public awareness, professionJI trnining, and en mals. Proceedings of the Sixth World Conference on Breeding hanced habitat protection (Beck et Ji. 1994 ). Endangered Species. ed. G. Mace, P. Olney, and A. feismer, Beck ct al. ( 1994) noted that the successful programs (by 265-86. London: Chapman and Hall. their definition l were longer and released more animals than Borner, .\1. I '::185. The rehabilitated chimpanzees ot Rubondo Is the unsuccessful programs (as did Griffith et al. 1989). Thev land. Orvx l'::I: 151-54. Jlso provided local employment and had community ed~ Box, H. 0 .. I '::191. Training for !tie airer rclc:asc: S1m1an prim ares :is c:xamples. In Be~mnd captwe hreedmg: Re-mtmducmg endan canon programs. Finallv, the successful pro1ects used medi gered mammals tn the wild, ed. J. H. W. Gipps, 111-23. Ox cal screentng and post-release provisioning than unsuc less ford: Clarendon Press. cessful pro1ects, a counterintuitive result. Bram bell. M. R. 1977. Reinrroducrmn. Int. Zuo Yrhk. 17: 112- 16. One issue requires clanficat1on. All reintroduced animals Brewer. S. 1978. The cl11mps o( Mt. Assertk. New York: Alfred A. will eventually die, as will all captive animals. The success Knopf. or failure of a program should not be measured bv the mor Bron1kowsk1, E. J. Jr., Beck, B. B., Jnd Power, .\1. 1989. Innova l '.ality of the original retntroduced cohort. ~1ore .important tion, exhibition. and conservation: free-ranging ramanns at rhe ~is the number and genetic variation ot the surviving descen Natmnal Zoological Park. AAZPA Annual Conference Proceed dants of the released animals and the degree ro which their ings, 540-46. Wheeling, W.Va.: Amenc:in Assrn.:1auon of Zoo genetic material is tntegrated with that of the original wild logical Parks and Aquariums. Cade, T. J. 1986. Reinrrodw.:t1on as a method of conservation. population. Raptnr Res. Rep. no. 5: 72-H4. Caldccorr. J. 0 .. Jnd Kavanagh. \I. I '::183. C.rn rr:rnslrn.::it1on help wild pnmares? On·x 17: IJ5- F. C:Jmphcll. S. I 980. h re1nrroducr10n .1 rc:1ltsc1c goal? In Crmserr•a• tmn Hwl"~": ;\11 /-:1•1J/11t11m.irv-Eoi/1Jg1c.il l'crs{Jat11•c. ed ..\I. E. 'Joule Jnd B.. \. \\'ilcox. 2.63-hY. Sunderland . .\l.iss.: '>1nauer ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Associates. This chJpter woulJ not have been possible without the wise C:arlev, C. J. I ':IHI. Rc:J wolt cxper1mcnral rranslo(Jrton summa .md thoughttul tnput of Benpmm Beck, James Dietz. and rized. \'(,'i/d C.imd Sun·n·al ..md Rese.inh (:enter B11/lct111. pJrr I: Lou Ann Dietz durtng the golden lion camann remtroduc 4-7, part 2.: 8-Y. C:Jrter, J. ..\. I ':181 ..\ 1ournev ro freedom. S1111thso111a1112:90-1 ()I. non pro1ect. Our work with golden lion t:im:irms has been CJsrro . .\\.I .. Beck. B. IL Kleiman. D. c; .. Ruiz-.\lir:inda. C:. •.ind '>Upported bv the Sm1thson1an lnsmut1on ( lnternJtional En Rosenherger, .\. L. In press. Environmental cnrn:hmenr tor vironmentJI Sciences Program: Educanon:il Outreach Pro golden lion r.1m:irin ( Leo11tn{11thec11s rosa/1ai rcinrroductton. gram), National Zoological Park. FrienJs of the National Prnceedmgs of th<• I st Conference on Em•mmmental F.1mch Zoo, WorlJ Wildlife rund, N.monal Ccogr::tphic Soc1etv. ment. cJ. D. Shepherdson. J. .\1ellcn ..rnd \\. Hurchtns. W.1sh- Nanonal Science foundJt1on, \\'ildlife Preserv::tnon Trust 1ngton. D.C.: Sm1thsoman lnsmutton Press. lnternanonal, Brazilian forestrv Development Institute Coimbra-filho, .\. f., Jnd :-.lirrerme1er. R. A. I '::178. Reinrroduc ilBDf-now lBAMAl, Rio Jc Janeiro Primate Center tton :ind translocanon oi lion ramarins: A realistic Jppra1sal. (CPRJ-FEEMA ), Br:mliJn Found.ttion for the ConservJtton In Biology .md hehavwur o( marmosets. cJ. H. Rothe, H. J. Wolters, anJ J. P. Hearn. 41-48. G1imngen: Eigenvi:rlag H. of Nature (rBC:Nl, frJnkfurr Znological Society, and the Rothe. Roberto :'vlarinho foundation. \\'e have also been sup Conwav. W. G. 1980. An overview of caprtve propagation. In Con ported by many of the zoos p.ut1c1p::tttng 111 the Interna serva.twn lnology: :\11 e1•0/11twnarv-ecolog1cal perspectn>e, ed. tional Colden Lion Tamarm t\l.111~1gement Program through M. E. Soule and B. A. Wilcox, 199-208. Sunderland. Mass.: financial contributions. Susan Lumpkin, Scott Derrickson, Sinauer Assoc1:ites. James Dietz, Lou Ann Dietz, .ind Benjamin Beck made Dietz, L. A., Jnd :-.Jagag:ita, E. 1986. Communitv conserv:mon many helpful suggestions on the manuscript, as did one i:ducarton program for the golden lion tamann. In Building 511(1- ancmymous reviewer. port f(Jr cunserz·atum 111 mral areas: Workshop Proceedings, '\05 rnl. I. L'J. I. .\tk1nson. S- 16. lp'>w1ch ..\ i.i'>'>.: \~l F ·.\t l.1nr1c Cen '. klircw. \\'. ( .. ! 'IX l. U111np.1nzcc-, c.111 he rchabd1t.lled. /...iii. l'n· ter tor rhc Env1ronrnenr. ntatc :\1cu1si. 22(2); 2- l. Ehrlich. I'., .111J Ehrlich .. \. I ':181. I.xt111cti1J11 . .'\,·w York: [{.111Jorn \Idler. ll .. l\1gg1ns. D .. \X'emmcr. l ... Powell. IL l..drn. l... Hane· Hou.,c. hurv. !. ...111d Wharwn. L I ':l':IOa. lJevcloprncnr ot survival skilb Fmer, R. I ':184. Oper:mon Orvx: rhc '>llCCC',\ U>lltlnlle'>. ( )rvx 1n capnvc-ra1\cd '>1hcnan polecHs 1,\f11s1c/,1 c1•crsmann11: II. 118:il6-)7, . l'redawr avo1J.111cc. /. Lt!}()/. 8: ':IS-104. < ;ipps, J. Ii. W .• eJ. 1991. /JcwmJ CufJlll'C hrecdinr.;: J<.e-mtrod11c111i.; \Idler. !\ .. ll1gg111-,, D .. Wc:mmer. L: .. l'owcll. R .. 11.rneburv. l. .. enda11i.;ered mummals to the wild. EDITORS Devra G. Kleiman Mary E. Allen Katerina V. Thompson Susan Lumpkin MANAGING EDITOR Holly Harris THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS CHICAGO AND LONDON Devra G. Kleiman is assisranr director for research, National Zoological Park, Smithsonian lnstitunon. Mary E. Allen is head of the Departmenr of Nutritional Resources, National Zoological Park, Smithsonian Institution. Katerina V. Thompson is assistant professor in the College of Life Sciences, University of Maryland. Susan Lumpkin is director of communications, Friends of the National Zoo, National Zoological Park. Holly Harris has worked as an editorial consultant for various zoo organizations, including Zoo Atlanta, and at present is editor of the Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund's newsletter. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago 60637 The University of Chicago Press, Ltd., London © 1996 by The University of Chicago All rights reserved. Published 1996 Printed in the United States of America 05 04 03 02 01 00 99 98 97 96 l 2 3 4 5 ISBN 0-226-44002-8 (cloth) ISBN 0-226-44003-6 (paper! Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data l Wild mammals in captivity : principles and techniques I editors, Devra ~ G. Kleiman ... [et al.]. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Captive mammals. 2. Captive mammals-Housing-Design and construction. I. Kleiman, Devra G. SF408.W55 1996 636.088'9- @The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requiremenrs oi the American National Standard for Information Sciences-Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials. ANSI Z39.48- I 984. •. '• 30 The Role of Conservation and Survival Centers in Wildlife Conservation CHRISTEN WEMMER, SCOTT DERRICKSON, AND LARRY COLLINS Humans have mvenred msmuc1ons to sustain wildlife since m other ways. This convergence stems pnmJniy from the rhe beginning of urbanizat1on and the decline of wilderness. rJpid 306 ', \'l.\l\llfl. l1IRRICr.\ ' ·mscrvation or Survival Centers to this 111dustrv. and 1n .:ountncs 111 which most ot the !Jnd ~le 1nvent1on ot the .:onscrvat1on or '>t1rv1val n:nter 1wc 1' pnvatelv owned. g;irne ranching cJn potent1allv provide use the terms 11Jtcn.:h:111gc::iblv1 rook pLKc 111 rhc e.irlv L'.:onom1c mcennves prornonng both spccics Jnd hJb1t::it 1970,. Thcsc .:cnters J1tfer trom traditional zoos 111 rh;t .:onservat1on I Luxmoore 1985). Uniorrunatelv. however. their prnnarv tunn1on 1s the hrced111g ot rare and endan game ranchim: .:Jn also have a number or adverse etfects gered wildlife as opposcJ to public cxh1bit1on and educ1- '>n conservanon. such ::is the elim111at1on ot predators Jnd t1on. Conse4ucnrlv. their arnm::il .:ollecnons norrnallv en other '>pec1cs. dornest1c::inon. hvhnd1zat1on, exposure of ..:omp::iss larger populJt1ons ot a '>m::iller selen1on ot species wildlifc to exotic Jise::ises. habitat JegradJt1on. develop than those 111 tr::idirnmal zoos. TJble 30.1 surnmanzes per ment ot illegJI markets m wildlife products. the social and t111ent 111form::inon on conservanon centers. Some ..:enters economic rnonopolizanon of wildlife, Jnd the pnvanzanon specialize: examples arc the lnsmute tor Herperologic::il Re of public !Jnds tLuxrnoore 1985: Geist 1985, 1988). Fur search in St::inford, CJiifornu, the Duke Univcrs1tv Prim::ite thermore, because commerce 111 selected n::inve or exotic Center m Durh::im, :--.:orth C:Jrolina. Jnd the D~ikcr Re '>pec1es is the pnrn::irv concern of game ranching, no serious search ::ind Brecd111g Center 111 Chip::ingali, Zimb::ibwe 1Pin etfort is usuallv rn::ide to ma111ta111 the composition of the chin 199 3). Breeding programs at conserv:mon centers em .1rea 's ongmal tlora and fauna unless the oper:mon secures phasize the preservation of genetic variabilitv .111d its pnnc1pal income from the public viewing of wildlife in Jdapt::it1ons to the n::irur::il ..:onditions 111 which species natural habit::it. evolved. These programs tvpicallv incorporate spec1tic ge netic. demographic. Jnd bch::iv1oral management protocols 1n order to minurnzc JrttticiJI selection ::ind progressive do CONSERVATION OR SURVIVAL CENTERS: mest1c::it1on t Foose Jnd Ballou 1988; Frankh::irn ct ::ii. 1986 ). GOALS AND COMMITMENT Such progr::imrn::it1c oh1cct1ves di ff er trorn those ot most prt v::ite Jnd commercial breeders ot wildlife. whose 111smut1ons General Goals might he more Jppropn::itelv called g::ime ranches or breed Susta111ed reproduction of wildlife 1s the pnmarv objective ing farms. Conservation ccntcrs cJn bridge the gap between of most conservanon centers. Biological research on wildlife the h1stonc::illv amticial cnvircmrnent of the urban zoo and species in capnvitv and in the tield is ::in equ::illv important that ot the national park. Often. thcv are closed to the pub go::il that 1s Jiso normally pursued. ldeJllv, J conservation lic, Jnd research ::ind tr::immg .1rc normallv fundamental ..:enter should suprorr multidimens1on::il programs that pro l omponcnts of their programs'. . mote the conservation of selected species through c::iptive """ Animals in conserv::inon ccnters mav he 1ointly owned propagation Jnd research. A well-rounded program might by several zoos, with the ownership of offspnng deterrnmcd include several of the following elements: hy legal documents known .1s breeding loJn agreements l. captive propagation with participation in cooperatively (see Block Jnd Perk111s. Jppcndix 5. this rnlume). In other organized programs instances. mvnersh1p mav rcs1dc -.olelv with the smglt: inst1- 2. cornp1LHion of ,1 detailcd husbandrv rnanuJI for the tut1on rc'ipons1hle tor the -.pecte'>' rL·.:overv ;111d rce~tahlish- species 111e1H 111 the wild .. \II hlJ.:k·loorcd ferrets . .\l11stc/,1111grrpcs. .l. .:ollect1on or blood or t1ssue for reproductive Jnd genetic tor L'\.1111plc ..ire owncJ h\· the '>Lltl' ot \X'vrnrnng. research 4. do.:umentat1on ot life h1srorv chJractcnst1cs through re '>C:Jrch .rnJ/or .:ollJbor.mve .:ornp1!Jnon ot JJta trorn Carne lbnchcs rnult1ple 1r1smut1ons In ni.111v parts of the world. n.1t1\·c or exotic wildlife 1s m:11n 5. 1nvest1gat1ons of reintroduction methods tJined on pnvate l.rnds tor .:ommcrual explo1rat1on. Fol h. surve\·s ot speues dismbunon and status 111 the wild lowing Ce1.,t t 19881. we ll'>e the term ··game ranch'" to de- -. irnplemenrat10n of educJnon Jnd tra111ing programs 111 11ote those .:ommcrci.11 l'llterpri'>c., that g.1111 supplernenral the nJnve range ot the species 1m:ome through the sale ot hreeJ111g .. rock. meat .111d hv proJuLts .•md/or the '>.lie or \'IL'\Vlllg or hunr111g privilegcs Though a ..:onservatiun center mav assume .1 leading role .md .1.,soc1Jted .1.:commod.1t1rn1';. ,\, .:urrentlv pra.:m:ed 111 hv 1111ti::inng .,everal such act1vities. a successful spec1es '.\Jorrh .\mcnc.1. '.\:cw l:cal.111J ..111d -;outhern :\tnc.i. g,1me "~1ented pr;igr::im will kindle the desire of other zoologic::il ranching encompas'>e'> ,1 w1Je spl'Ltrum ot enterprises. ~.111g- •>rganizJt1ons to particip::ite. Conservation of endangered 111g tmm '>1mple .:ull1ng <>PL'Lltll>l1' 11woln11g the harvestmg wildlife is tar more likelv to ~ucceed when it is conducted as ot wild .1111mab 1(;e1st I '!~5\ to L''\tremelv l.1rge-'i.:.1lc op .1 cooperanve sc1entitic program rather than as ::in 111dcpen erations 111volvmg 1mem1H· hu.,h.rndn· ;111d dorne.,t1.:Jt1011 dcnt ctforr. no matter how well the act1v1ty 1s endowed. I Haigh .111d Hudson 199 \). The Ll p1d expansion ot game Conservanon centers should nor focus a II of their re ranching 1n the pJst '>evnal de.:.1dcs 1., trace~1blc to hmh acs -;ourccs on cJ pm·e propagation of end::ingercd spel:ies. ~fanv thenc .ind tinanc1JI com1dcrat1011'i. In North AmenCJ. small uxa will Jisappe::ir before their biological characteristics /. ---= :: J -= ., - - ; '"' ·~ :;;--" ... :: :.: ~ 1- - c :.: :.c" .J ;:. 4..1 -:-... - .., ~ J ..., ::' ..., :,;- ~ -:2 - ~ - - --: ij ,., ~ ~ ... t -: :::::- "'"=' ;c '": 2. ~ ~ ~:; ;::... \..., ..... -; - .::: = ~] ~ ~ .., ~ ~ :ii t ~-;:; =-.... "= ~ ~ - :: ~ ~ ~~ - ~~ =c.. ~t ..c ~ ·J '-' 1:j .... = - c.. ~ - .,., ..... -·c '"'' c:. .,,<;;- 0 ·~ -· -· c .., ;::;" -; ..,c ';!. c.. JC ~ ~ ?: :; r..r. '.; C.: l""I Z2 1: ~ ~N J - ...::. "'1". ~ ~ - -- '::::: ~ ..-r: ·..;-.-: -:2 :i =- ~~ r :: ~ ~ r - .r. ~~ ~;:...= - --: .r. ..., - - ~ ..r. ;... ~ ~ ~ - - ,..., .., -¥ = J' 2 ..c '"' ... ~ .~ '-"' 1,:; ~~ ;: ~ j CQ ~ N ,... ;... N !:; ..:;; v ~ c "c .., _, N _;:; ~ ~ ~ > 2 lo.. ~ N ::::=::: ~ ij ~ - ~ s: g '-' ~ .s ;,,_;:.... '"'1 v z =' ~ _, r~- r r Tht• J_ubt't' I 111111,/.1t1u11 1 '18) :\ prl\.llt' l\u11p1~1tirt111111J.H111n; $2001': 9 'Ill .\l.1n1111.Jb: 12 >f'P· 1 l l 5) l· 11d.111gt·rni ')pe1.. IL'') prop.tt!..lt h ni .11ici 18401 NW Loun11· Kd. 112l1 .\.\Zl':\-~~I'r.ir11, 1p.1111 ! \'PP-I Birds: 11 spp. (441 re,c.irch 1n1.1m111.1lsand hird,1 (;ainn\ olle, fl l26t)'I l'~lluxc111\\ 'z/,J/1ft' R t'::.1 ·.u, /) ( _,·11tt'r l'.I lo l h\ nc,I .111,l111.111.1~, J 111 chc l 1.). l'"h $21\.I 172 bill) li1rd>: J J >pp. (2, I 881 l .lpll\L' prup.l~.lfl11ll.lll .. J fl·..,c.ir...L 1•11 Luird, :\ID 20708 .111d\X'oldhtc <,,·r\lce; 11<1c.111 .\.\ZP:\ sclc-1..:reJNonh ..\1ner1..:.111 111.1111111.tl.., ~'>I'p.11c1c1p.1111 and hird, l'u111t D,·/1.111<,. Luu R,·,J w;1// I '17) ( h\ lll'll .llh.l 111.lll.lgt·li b~lhl.' P1111H $1751': 2 .\l.1mmJb: I 'PP· (601 C.1prJ\ c pr11p.1g.1111 in .llh.1 rc...,t.11.._ !1 1111 /-.1<1/11v lleti.1111...t•/tHI Ill 1,..'0tlJ1L'f.l(l1)fl \\uh n.:J \\ ,iJ \ l'~ r, Poin1 l>di.Hll.-l. /1111 clw l IS J 1,h .111.I\\ d,ll1k ~,·111.c; 5400 North p,·.1rl )r. :\.\II':\ ~\I'p.ir11c1p.1111 (I >p.1 l.IColllJ, \\':\ ':184117 \.111 l>1egu lri/,/ :\111111.1//',ir/.: · I '172 ll\\11nl h) •II) .111.I111.111.1gnl h) S2181\1 415 l,!Hll l\.l.1111111.1b:12 7 >pp ( .1p11\l' pr11p.1g.111<111<>t h11,L .11i.I I 5 SOil ~an1'.1,qu.il \'.ilkl' Hd. z ..11log1<.1l '>"-'l'l) "' '>.111Diego; (l,644) ung11l.Hc' h.:ond1do, ( .:\ ':1202-, :\:\11':\-'>~I'p.irc1,1p.11H 12-1,pp.) l11rds: 29 l spp. (I, 5281 Rcpr1b: 3 srp. (31 )cJgu·ilk C.111111/y/.,., uff->11<' l'.176 Ow11l·d .111d111.111.1gnl hi chc )cdgwrLk $701' 2 .jl) :\1.1111111.d>:8 spp. (4bl ()tf . ...,Hl' br1..·clJ111g t.1 ... d1C} f111 11111 breeding /.i(/li/)' <:ouncy Z111.l11g1<.il""""!); A.\Zl':\ Bird>: I 0 'PP· (40J '1 ~cJg\\ii.:k Coull[} Lou '>'>I' p.irc1c1p.111r1 I 'P·I 55 55 Zo11 Bh·d. Wich1ra, l\S 6 7212 Sy/>11/c\\'il.J/if,· Re,.-.1rth Lt'llt.-r 1952 Owned .ind m.111.1gcJ hy chc \X\om111g $100K 8 I) l\.l.1mnul>: 11 'PP· (314) R1..",t:.Hd1 llll ljl~C.l~t")ot i\1111h ,., Wyoming Dcp!. of fish & (;ame Depr. ot fish .111dC.1111c; :\.\l'.l'A-SSP Amphihs: I >p. ( 16) An1eri..:.1n ungul.Ht'S; ..:ar1nT Box l l 12 l Jniver"C)' ~t.Hi11n r.1rtic1p.11H I I 'I'· 1 prop.1g.Hidll ol hl.i.:k-1<" 1c,·J k11 ,.h Laramie, WY 82071 Topek.i Zoo u{(-s11l' br<"Cd111g 1987 Owned .Jnd 111.111.1gnlhr che ·li>peb $1.31\.11• I till l\.l.imm.1b: I 'P· (91 l .lpll\1..' prup.1gJlh>H nt d11..· \...,Uli (.icil1ty Zoological 1'.irk; .\A/l'.\-SSI' wild ho1'e ':; Topeb Zo11loi;1..:.Jl 1'.irk p.1ml1p.1nc I I 'P-1 635 S. W. Cage Blvd. liipeka, KS 66hfl6-21Jtio \'11gelp.1rk w:1lsro.Jc 11f{->11l' 1985 Owned .rnd m.11ugcd hr che $5601' 12 51) Birds: 350 spp. (2,llllOi I l11ld1ng .1J1d hrccd111g t.1, d11) 1, 1r r h,· breeding f,w/ity Vogdp.irk \X'.11,rndc; .\AZPA-SSI' bird park ar \X alsrode l\1allorca p.1mlip.1111 (4 'l'I' I \'c1gclp.irk W.ilsrode u{(-s1/e /~wlity I ':ill I ( lwncd .111d111.111.1g,·d h) chc $311' 3 12 Bird>: Ill 'PP· Ioll l llrcc,ltn~t.i.:ol1C) 1<11 u1d.111gne,I DominK.Jn RepuhliL \'"gdp.1rk \X'.1l"11de; :\AZPA-'>)l' Sm11h .\mcr1c.1n .rnd C:.1r1hhe.1n p.lr!lc ip.111cI-, 'l'P I p.Hflll~ White O.ik l'/,1111,J/11111 1975 ( h' 11ed hy cl1,· ( .ol111.1111'.1pcr $8501': 16 4110 l\.l.Jm111.1b: 25 'PP· (350) Rc~1..·Jh.h.i11J prop.1g.H1l11t 11t 726 Owen' Road Co111p.1ny; ;\.\/l'.\·S'>I' p.1mC1p.111t Bird>: 32 'PP- (220) sdectcd cnd.111~cred'pec1e, Yuh, H. H097 (I 5 'PP-I Rcpc1ks: I sp. 18) \\'i/d A111111.1/f/,1/nr,11 • 1972 ( h\ nnl h) .\111l·11c.111I 111.1J1c1.d $9001' 12 12 5 1'.l.1111111.JI>:lb 'PP· (313) ( . .1pcn '--. pri )p.1g.u1011/rcpr11Ju ...II\ 1..' 6300 K111g' hi.Jnd Drive C "rrur.1ti11n; .\:\Zl':\·'>SP p.iruc1p.1111 Bird>: 8 spp. (-17) rese.udi. 1-:Ju.:arion.JI wur,, \X'ddl1tc King' Island, OH 4 rn H ('i 'PP I D"cm . 'icd1rv n:qu1remenrs. JrH.i nubile Jcccss. Virruallv all expert- rric tern:;mg t'>L'e l."llins I ':182. l SS1. One or rhe worst pre l nral >rue.lies Jemand 1-,olat1on trom rhe normal J1srur clat1on rhrears t;KeJ lw rural hreeJmg centers I'> rhat posed ~nces ot public 1nsrnut1ons. Behavioral. phvs1olog1cal. ;ind hv dogs. Both Jome'>rtc Jnd feral dogs wtll form packs that nutrmonal research generallv requires Lirgc sample sizes and can become JeJJlv and etticicnr killing machines. Ungulate .. randardizcd conditions and 1s best conJucrcd where the 111- pastures and barns, as well as primate. carnivore. and small tluencc ot extraneous tacrors can be mm1m1zed or selecnvelv mammal foctl1t1e'>. must he rendered Jog-proot. The el1m1- controlled. lnvest1gat1ons ot mammalian lacr:mon. tor ex nat1on ot resident Jog pJcks '>hould be accomplished w1rh ample. which require week Iv milk collect1ons. Jemand non the cooperation and J'>S1srance ot rhe locJI animal control .,tresstul cond1tions tor rhe maintenance of rhc mother-ort warden. >prmg relanonship, and week Iv handling ot rhe animals must Smaller mJmmaltan predators such as loxes. \'11/pes be earned out under predictable circumstances w1th minimal -,pp., raccoons, l'rncvon lotor. mmk. :\111stel..i 1•1son, and disturbance 1Sadleir 1980). Noninvasive urmarv and fecal cats. Fe/is c,1tLts. can he controlled using rhe devices men sampling techniques tor monitoring rcproJucrive hormones tioned above. bur 1r mav hccome necessary ro protect small are an alternative to traditional biomedical methods. which species from climbmg predators bv covering rhe rops ot rhe1r require physical or chemical restraint for blood sampling L'nclosures w1rh wire mesh. The same may hold true for pro ( .\1onfort ct al. 1990; .\Ion tort, Schwartz. and Wassi:r 199 3; recnng small mammals and the otfsprmg of ungulates from Wasser. Risler •.ind Steiner I 98 8 ). Long-term endocrine .1v1an predators. The poss1bilirv also cx1srs ot losmg small monitoring can now he carried out w1rhout animal handling. mammals ro snakes such as rhc black rat snake. U..iphe oh :\s prev1ouslv mentioned. nonendangcrcd surrogate species so/eta. Predarion hv pythons I Pvthonmae I and hoa constric can often plav an important rolt: m comparatl\'e studies and rors ( Boinae J 1s noc an uncommon problem tor zoos m the technique development. The surrogate studies hv Miller ct al. ()Id and New World Tropics. This potcnrtal problem should i I 990a. I 990bl on Siberian polecats clearlv demonstrate he c :\II animals should undergo a smcr quaranrme period. g:imzat1onal ob1ei.:t1ves ot the program arc expected to su L h1ch should mclude a complete health exammat1on and persede the md1vidual motives ot member msmut1ons. This ~eatmenr 1t needed, before entering the collection. Subsc- coordmat1on 1s perhaps the greatest challenge to rhe long 4uent management practices for conrrolling parasites and term success of anv cooperative program. diseases should include a thorough prevention program that In view of this, what role can propagation facilities play mtegrates periodic physical and fecal exammat1ons. diag to enhance rhe survival of endangered species? In fai.:t, i.:on nostic testmg, prophylactic admirnstrat1on of paras1ticides '>ervat1on centers have lmle to offer by themselves. William I Isaza, Courmcv, and Kollias l 990), and vaccmat10n (where Conwav I 1986) has remarked that all the world's zoos i.:an possible). All mortalities should be i.:arcfollv documented, deal with but a fracwm of the d1verstty ot threatened wild and necropsy results should be reviewed on ·a regular basis life. The existence of more survival i.:enters will not improve by the i.:urarors, vetermarians, and pathologists. The long rhe odds greatly. The mmimum viable size of the i.:aptive term preservation of tissue samples should be employed as populat1on required to mamram any single species is large, an integral part of the overall animal management program, Jnd is beyond the capacity of any smgle i.:enter. Like any as retrospective analyses could be important m detecting orher zoo, survival centers must pamcipate m collaborative ;ind analyzing causes of mortality. long-range programs. Husbandry practices naturally affect the ease of control ling parasites. Ungulates that range Ill large enclosures un Economic Challenges der semmatural conditions present special difficulties in as Survival centers that exclude the publii.: do not generate gate sessmg paramic infection because collectmg fecal samples fees, and miss a significant source of income. Those that ca from known animals is time-consuming ;:md individual ter to public viewing require much larger hudgets to accom dosages of vermicide are difficult to administer. "Barn modate rhe many requirements of visitors. At this [lme, it is trairnm(' uf ungulates emails considerable effort, especiallv fair ro say that survival centers will almost alwavs have to m lan~e enclosures, but its advantages often make it worth depend upon large zoos for their support, or finance their the effort. If animals are tramed to feed in individual stalls, operations through gate fees and recreational services. The fecal collection, administration of medicines, close-hand ex pure survival center generally is not a pamcularly satisfying ammanon, and capture for treatment or observation can be experience for the family seeking an entertaming weekend easily managed. at the zoo. Despite the ability of a few large zoos to support survival centers, spei.:ies survival plans often require funds far in excess of a zoo's normal operating budget. Unfortu ' MAJOR CHALLENGES TO CONSERVATION nately, donor conmbutions to captive breeding programs "-"'CENTERS are relatively uncommon, and recent changes in American Conservation centers have arisen ro augment captive breed tax laws make philanthropy an even less likely source of ing of endangered species on the scale practiced by tradi supplemental financial support in the future. tional zoos. The initial mot1vat10n for establishing i.:onser vat10n centers was to escape the tvpii.:al i.:ollect1on limitation ZOOS AND SURVIVAL CENTERS: DIFFERENT of ma1nrammg onlv a few mdividuals of eai.:h spei.:ies. In the INSTITUTIONS, DIFFERENT PROBLEMS followmg sei.:t10n we examme some of the factors that limit rroragat1on programs. The nature of an 111st1tut1on dcterm111cs the n:iturc of its problems ,md chalknges. Visitation bv the publi.:, anzm:il Inscicucional Coordination management, and rcseari.:h are three mteractmg tactors rhat Even l;irge survival centers can do little to preserve spei.:ics differ between zoos and propagation cenrers. by themselves hecause of size and economic lim1tat10ns. Of course, there have been notable exceptions. The Duke of Visitors Bedford 1s the hest-known example of an mdividual whose In traditional zoos, the visitor is a powerful determmanr of 1nst1rut1on single-handed Iv s,lVed a species-the Pere David's priorities Jnd e.:onomics, as the human needs assoi.:iated deer, Elaph11rus dav1dian11s-from the brink of extmction. with the educational and recreational experience must be But most institutions lack the means for such insmutional catered to at all rimes 1Hediger l 969). food, toilets, human heroism. and it was this realization that led to efforts bv convevancc, resting stations, first aid, polii.:e, and informa zoos to coordinate their mdividual propagation programs rion signage are all important concerns Ill a zoo that mm1s for pamcular species. ters to the urban population. These services are estimated to Cooperation and scienrdii.: management of endangered consume approximately 70% of the rypii.:al zoo's budget. In species of mammals did not progress signifii.:antlv until the a i.:onservation i.:cnrer m a rural setting the exclusion of visi beginnmg of the 1980s, when L·ooperat1ve hreeding pro tors can greatlv diminish costs. This is usuallv nor an option, grams. such as the North American SSP and European EEP however, because when the paying publii.: 1s excluded, the programs, were formalized. These programs aspire to man income of the i.:onservation cenrer is usually not sufficient to age captive populations si.:ientiticallv so as to minimize loss pay land taxes, salaries, and the costs of maintaining facili of genetic variability (see Rvder and Fleischer, i.:hap. 25, and ties and animals. This fact explains why the largest number Ballou and Foose, .:hap. 26, this volume). Participatmg zoos of institutions in the United States holding exotic ammals are expected to abide by the recommendations of the species are privately owned: the exotics are, in a sense, gratuitous coordinator and the management group, and thus the or- boarders. In Texas alone, numerous game ranches support ·;.;-r M MI R I J I RR I< K ~ {) N ,\ N !) ( l l I LI N \ .313 . v1ahlc hrcedmg populations ot a pprox1matelv a dozen spe- ,1reas ::ire often not th::it different trom the requirements in l ·cs. hut the exotics produce supplcmcnt:il income. zoos ( Neesham 1990). We have made the case elsewhere that """ The public th:it v1s1ts the tr:id1t1onal zoo :ilso affects its -,mall populat1011s ot vertebr::itcs m isolated reserves share ::i poltcv and practices. An anim:il th:it becomes a celebritv as number of m::in::igement problems with populations m zoos .1 result ot successful media coverage can also evoke a pu.blic 1Wemmer. Smith. ;,ind J\1ishra 1987). In c1cher setting, small hue and crv contr:irv to the hesc interests of a nationallv man wild populations ::ire sub1ect to founder etfects. genetic drift • .1ged breeding program. \lanagement decisions ~av he .ind inbreeding, and manipulating wild animals to counter viewed either as un1usufied and insensitive co che ani~al 's .Jct these effects is usually much more difficult than m the needs hv an uninformed zoo public. or as a violation of the 1.00. Imagine the skills and log1st1cs necessarv to capture ::i .m1mal's "rights" hy a mmomv of well-intentioned citizens. pnme breeding-age male tiger ::ind tr::insport it from one re While some public reactions to zoo policy can be avoided bv -;erve to another. We now know ch::it most tigers born into thoughtful publicity and planning, It is not possible to avoid Nepal's Chitwan tiger, Panthera ttgris, populat10n perish be crises completely. \lanagmg well-intentioned but m1sgu1ded fore m::iturity, ::ind that genetic interchange between popu public reaction occupies a definite but unmeasurable per lations 1s pract1cally impossible. Tigers coming of dispersal centage of zoo managers· time. Such concerns are unlikelv to age ( 18-24 months) usually die when they move into culti develop to che same extent at a facility closed to the pub.lie. vated land and kill livestock or peoplc (Smith 1984 ). In cap tive tiger populations, demogr::iphy ::ind gene flow are more Animal Management easily managed. A second sec of biolog1cal problems 1s a consequence of the It is fair to say th::it political faccors c::in be greater ob difference m the sizes of breeding groups maintained in stacles in zoos and reserves than the technic::il challenges of rrad1t1onal zoos and in conservauon centers. It is generally manipulating individuals within a popul;,icion. Given the easier ro manage, monitor reproduction and health in, magnitude of the global crisis in biodivers1tv. however. our .ind treat problems m small groups of animals. In survival ..:onservatton efforts must promote cooper::inon ::ind incor centers polygynous mammals are often managed in large porate ::i diverse spectrum of ::ict1vit1es. 111st1tutions, and mixed-sex herds for convenience and economv. Rarelv is it const1tuenc1es. possible. though, co monitor male parentage i~ large ~ulti male breeding herds, and chis problem grearly limits the ACKNOWLEDGMENTS value of the offspring in a propagation program managed We would like to thank Mary Allen, john Lucas, and Susan . under genetic and demographic guidelines. The preferred, Lumpkin for helpful editorial comments on ::in earlier draft; ~. but more cosrly and time-consuming, alternative is to main- Steve Monfort, john Behler, and Nate Flesness for informa ~ tain single males with small groups of females, which as- tion; ::ind Doug Myers, Jim j::ickson, Randy Caligiuri, Bob sures the identity of the sire and maintains higher levels of Reece. David Bamberger, Stefan P::itzwahl, Hugh Quinn. genetic mixing. With this method a large, productive popu Tom Thorne, Roland Smith, George Gee, Richard Ross, lation m a conservation center can have a far greater effect Claire \1irandc. Elwvn Simons. Bill Conwav, Steve Romo. on rhe age and genetic ..:ompos1tion of the cooperat1vely Tim Sulliv::in •.rnd \tark Reed for providing summ::irv managed popul.1cion .1s .1 whole. B~· virtue of the larger mform::ition on the conserv::itton centers listed in table 30.1. number CJt animals .1nd the chance CJt larger "errors." ..:on We .ire espcc1::illv gr::iteful to L.1ur::i Walker tCJr her -;ecre 'cn·arion ..:enters require more 1ntcns1ve populat10n man c::irt::il .1ss1st:ince ::ind p::it1ence . .1gement rhan urh::tn zoo-;. REFERENCES Research Biological mvcst1gac1on has become ~rn important function :\ndcrson, R. C. I 96.3. The 1m;1dcnu:. development . .ind expert· of the modern zoo, hue icw zoos can afford to reserve special mental transm1ss1on of l'ne11mnstrnng)'l11s tcn111s Dougherrv 1MetastrongyloiJea: Prorostrongylidaer of the mcnmges of the collecwins of exotic animals exclus1vclv for research. In the white-railed Jeer rOdocoile11s 1•1rgm1an11s l)()rea/zs! in Ontario. traditional zoo, libemcs cannot he taken with exhibit design Can.]. Zoo/. 41 :TS-91. purelv for the s.1ke of sc1entdic research, unless the benetits Baker. R. \I. . .ind George, C. C. 1988. Species management to rhe animals .rnd the public .He appreciable ..\bsence of programmes in Australia and :-.:ew Zealand. Int. Zoo Yrhk. v1s1tors and LHge numhers of animals are two important 2:':19-26. .1dvancagcs rh::it propag::itmn centers offer to n:search. Re Bennett. P. \ 1. 1990. Estahlishmg breeding programmes for threat '>e::irch j, mcre::ismgly hccoming .rn 1mport::int cool for im cned species between zoos. J. Zoo/. ( Lond.1 220: 5 13- 15. provmg the he;,ilch, man::igement •.rnd productivitv of wild Bildsrcm, K. !... Jnd Brisbin, I. L. Jr. 1990. LJnds for long-term .1nimals in capt1virv. Zoos cm no longer afford to neglect research 111 conservanon biology. Cunseri•. Bini. 4: .30 I - 8 . rhe s..:1ent1fic and conserv::it1on v.ilue of their collections. Boza . .\\. L 199]. Conservation in a..:non: P.1st. present . .ind fu ture of rhe Nanonal Park System in Costa Ri..:a. Conseri•. Biol. -:239-47. LESSONS FROM ZOODOM Carr, A. 1989. Lcrrcr ro rhe editor. Conseru. Biol. 3: 332-JJ. Collins. L. r,. 1982. Propagation and conservanon centers. In Zoo Zoos are commonly rcg::irdcd as unique institutions h::iving log1cal park and aquar111m fundamentals~ ed. K. Sausman. 141- little m common w1rh 11ac1on;il parks and other n::itur::il 68. Wheel in~, W.Va.: American Assoc1at1on ot Zoological Parks .irc::is. The settings and philosophies are different. but the .ind Aquarmms. needs for genetic ;,ind demogr;.iph1c management in natural Conwav, W. C. J 974. Ammal management models and long-term 314 ( ON'iERVATION AND ~URVIVAL C[NTERS capnve rroragar1on. rlAZI'A Annual Conference J'mceedzn~s. ;11sta1mn1< s"uetv. Wash111gton, D.C.: Sm1thson1an lnsrnunon . 141-48. Whcel111g, \'\'.Va.: American Assoc1ar1on ol Zoological l'ress. l. Parks and Aquariums. .'vlillcr, B., B1ggms, D., Wemmer. C., Powell. R., C.1lvo, I.., Hane ~· 1980. An overview ot capnve propaganon. In Conserva hury, I... Jnd Wharton, T. l 990a. Development ot survival skills tum hrology: An e1•nl11twnarv-ecolog1cal perspective, ed ..\1. E. 111 capt1vc-ra1sed Siberian rolecars I M11stclu eversman111/. II: Soule and B. A. Wilcox. 199-208. Sunderland, :\1ass.: Sinaucr Predator :wo1dance. j. Ethol. 8: 95- 104. Associates. .\1iller. B., B1ggms, D., Wemmer. L .. Powell. R., Hanehurv, I.., ---. 1986. The pracncal difficulnes and financial lim1ranons oi Horn, D., and Vargas, A. I 990h. Develormenr ot survival skills endangered species hreeding programmes. Int. Loo Yrhk. 241 111 capnvc-ra1sed Siberian polecats 1M11stelu ei•ersmanml. I: Lo 25 :210-19. carmg prcv. /. J:thol. 8: 89-94. ---. 1988. Can technology aid species preservanon? In Bio Monton, S. L., Schwarcz, C. C., and Wasser, S. K. 1993. Mumror dwersrty, ed. E. 0. Wilson, 263-68. Wash111gron, D.C.: :-.Ja ing reproduction m ca pt1ve moose us mg urina rv and fecal ster nonal Academv Press. oid metabolites./. Wild/. M!<(mt. 57: 400-407. Currin, C. G. 1993. The evolution of the U.S. National Wildlife :vloniorr, S. L, Wemmer, C., Kepler, T. H., Bush,,\!., Brown, J. L.. Refuge System and the docmne of companbiliry. Conserv. Biol. and Wildt, D. E. 1990. Mo111tor111g ovarian iunct1on and preg 7:29-38. nancy in Eld's deer (Cervus e/di thamrn/ by evaluanng urmarv Flesness, N. R .. and Mace, G. M. 1988. Population datahases and o;tero1d meraholite secretion. j. Repmd. Fertrl. 88 :271-81. zoologicalconservanon. Int. Zoo Yrbk. 27:42-49. Neesham. C. 1990. All the world's .1 zoo. New Scientist 127 Foose, T. J. 1987. Species Survival Plans and overall management (1730): Ji-JS. strategies. In Tigers nf the world, ed. R. L. Tilson and U.S. Seal, Nogge, G. 1989. lnrroduct10n on the historv and goals of EEP. In 304- 16. Park Ridge, N.j.: Noyes. Proceedrngs of the bth f.EI' Conference, ed. K. Brouwer and --. 1989. Status oi AAZPA SSP-1989. Proceedings of the L. E. M. de Boer, 15-18. Amsterdam: Nauonal l'oundanon ior 6th EEI' Conference. ed. K. Brouwer and L. E. :\!.de Boer, 27- Research in Zoological Gardens. 28. Amsterdam: NJtional Foundanon ior Research 111 Zoo Pinch111, A. 1993. The Pan-African decade oi du1ker research: An log1cal G..1rdens. integrated programme of field and capr1vc-hascd conservanon. Foose, T. )., .1nd Ballou, J. D. 1988. :\lanagemenr oi small popula Int. Zoo News 244: 16-21. tions. Int. Zoo Yrhk. 27:26-41. Platt, T. R. 1978. The life cycle and svsremancs of I'.irelaphostron Frankham. R., Hemmer. H., Ryder, 0. A., Cothran, E. G., Soule, gylus odncorlei (Nematoda: :-..tetasrrongylo1dea1. a parasite of M. E., Murray, N. D., and Snvder, .\!. 1986. Selecnon 111 small mule deer 10docmle11s hemmn11s hemwnusl. with special refer populations. Conserv. Biol. 5: 127-38. ence to rhe mrermediate molluscan host. Ph.D. thesis, Univermy Geist, V. 1985. Game ranching: Threat to wildlife conservanon 111 of A Iberra, Edmonton, 233. North America. Wild/. Soc. Bull. 13 :594-98. Polakowski, K. J. 1987. Zoo design: The reality of wild illuswns. t--. 1988. How markers 111 wildlife meat and parts, and the Ann Arbor: University of Michigan School of Natural Resources. ~ sale of hunt1~g privileges, 1eopardize wildlife conservation. Con· Rowley, M. A., Loker, E. S., Cullins, L., Jnd Montali, R. J. 1986. serv. Bml. 2. 15-26. The role of terrestrial molluscs in the transm1sswn of menrngeal Griffiths. H.J. 1978. A handbook of t•eterrnarv p.irasrtnloio·: Do worm at the Cunservat1on and Research Center rn Front Ro)•a/, mestic ammals of North America. :\linneapolis: Univermy of Virginia: A preliminary report. Research report. Front Royal, Minnesota Press. Va.: Conservanon and Research Center. Haigh, J.C., .1nd Hudson. R. J. 1993. F.irmrng w.iprtr ,md red deer. Rudran. R., Wemmer, C. M., .1nd Singh, .\I. 1990. Teaching ap Sr. Louis, Mo.: .\1oshv-Year Book. plied ccologv to nat10nals ot devclormg counmes. In R.icc tn Hediger, H. 1969. Man .md .immal 111 the ~uo: Loo hwlugv. Lon- S.ive the Tm/11cs. c.:d. R. Coodland, 125-40. W.1sh111gton. D.C.: don: K.ourlcdgc and Kegan Paul. . Island Press. Hutch1m ..\!., Hancm:ks, D ...ind Cro.:kett. l:. l 4X4. :\.m1ralisnc 'i.1dlcir. R.. \I. F. S. 1980. Energv .ind rrotcm 1make 111 relanon ,0Jur1ons rn hehav1oral rrohlcm~ ot c.1rr1n· .1111mals. Oa Luo to growth ot -;u.:klmg black-r.ided dc.:er t.1wm. <."..in. j. Zoo/. log1sche C.irtcn. n.t. 54:28-42. 58: 1347-54. Isaza, R., Courrnev, C.H., and Kol Ii.is, C. V. 1 990. Survcv oi p:ira Seal. U. S. 1988. Intensive technology 111 the care ot ex ~ltu ropu >ite control programs used 111 c.1privc wild rum111.1nrs. Zuo Bro/. lations ot vamshmg species. In Bwdwersrcv. ed. E. 0. Wilson. 9:385-92. 289-'lS. Wash111gron, D.C.: :-.;ational Academv Press. lnternanonal Union ior Conserv:mon oi ~./.aure and N.1rural Re Smirh, J. L. D. 1984. Dispersal, commu111cat10n, Jnd conserva sources ( JUCN ). 1987. The I UC.\: policy st.itcme11t on c.ipt11•c tion strareg1es ior rhe tiger I P.inther,1 t1gr1sl in Roval Chitw:in hreedmg. (;Jand, Switzerland: IUC;-.J. National Park, :-.Jcpal. Ph.D. thesis, Univers1tv of :\1innesora, Kleiman, D. G. 1980. The soc10hiology ot capnve propaganon. In St. Paul. Conser!'atron hiology: An c1•0/11tum.in"-ec<>log1c..i/ pcrspcct11'£'. Wasser, S. K .. Risler, L., .1nd Stemcr, R. :\. 1YX8. Excreted steroids ed. ,\.I. E. Soult: and B. Wilcox, 24J-td. Sunderland, :\l.iss.: 111 primate leccs over the menstrual cycle and pregnancy. Biol. Sinauer Assoc.:1ates. Rep rod. J Y: 862-72. L.inkester. :\I. W., .ind Anderson, R. C. 1968. C..1srropods as 1nrer Wemmer, C., Smith, J. L. D .• and Mishra, H. R. 1987. Tigers 111 mediare hosts oi I'neum"stro11g-y/11s tcm11s Doughcrrv ot whire the wild: The b1opolirical challenges. In Tigers of the world, tailed deer. C..in. j. Zoo/. 46: 3 7 3-83. ed. R. L. Tilson .111d U. S. Seal, 396-405. 1'.1rk Ridge, :-.;.J.: Loisel. G. 1912. Historre des menageries de /".i11tz.1111tc .i nos 1011rs. NcJVes. Annqu1re .\loyen Agc-Rena1ss.111ce, vol. 1. !'.ms: Octave Do111 Wem~er. C., Pickett. C., .1nd Teare, J. A. 1990. Trainmg zoo h1ol er l'ils. (English translanon bv S.1ad Pu bhc.mons. Karachi, ogy in tropical countries: A report on a method and progress. Pakistan.) Zoo Biol. 9: 461-70. Luxmoore, R. 1985. Game farm111g 111 South :\Inca .1s a force 111 Wemmer, C., Rudran, R .. Dallmeier, F., .ind Wilson. D. 1993. conservation. Oryx 19: 225-J I. Training developing country nationals is a crincal ingredient to McNeely, J. A., and Miller, 1'. R., eds. 1984 . .\'.it1011al p.irks. conserving global biodiversity. BioScience 43: 1-14. \...... , conservatron, und development: The role of protected areas m L WILD MAMMALS IN CAPTIVITY Principles and Techniques EDITORS Devra G. Kleiman Mary E. Allen Katerina V. Thompson Susan Lumpkin MANAGING EDITOR Holly Harris THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS L CHICAGO AND LONDON I I .. I I Devra G. Kleiman is assisranr direcror for research, National I ! Zoological Park, Smirhsonian lnsrirurion. Mary E. Allen is head I of rhe Deparrmenr of Nurrirional Resources, National Zoological Park, Smirhsonian Insrirurion. Katerina V. Thompson is assisranr I professor in rhe College of Life Sciences, University of Maryland. Susan Lumpkin is director of communications, Friends of rhe National Zoo, National Zoological Park. Holly Harris has worked as an editorial consulranr for various zoo organizations, I including Zoo Atlanra, and ar presenr is ediror of rhe Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund's newslerter. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago 60637 The University of Chicago Press, Ltd., London © 1996 by The University of Chicago All rights reserved. Published 1996 Printed in rhe United States of America 05 04 03 02 01 00 99 98 97 96 1 2 3 4 5 ISBN 0-226-44002-8 (cloth) ISBN 0-226-44003-6 (paper) Library of Congress Caraloging-in-Publication Data Wild mammals in captivity: principles and techniques I editors, Devra G. Kleiman ... [et al.]. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Captive mammals. 2. Caprive mammals-Housing-Design and consrrucrion. I. Kleiman, Devra G. SF408.W55 1996 636.088'9-Jc20 95-21376 CIP @The paper used in chis publication meers rhe minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences-Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Marenals, ANSI Z39.48-1984.