Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

1

Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

2 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

CONTENTS PAGE

Letter from the Chairman ...... 4

Introduction by RSG Primate Section Chair: Dr. Devra G. Kleiman ...... 5

Note from the Editors: Pritpal S. Soorae and Lynne R. Baker ...... 6

MESO & SOUTH AMERICA ...... 7 Re-introduction and translocation as conservation tools for golden lion tamarins in Brazil ...... 7 Translocation of black howler monkeys in Belize ...... 10

AFRICA ...... 12 Translocation of three wild troops of baboons in Kenya ...... 12 Habitat Ecologique et Liberté des Primates: a case study of chimpanzee re-introduction in the Republic of Congo ...... 16 The release of captive-bred black and white ruffed lemurs into the Betampona Reserve, eastern Madagascar ...... 18 Preparing for re-introduction: 10 years of planning for drills in Nigeria ...... 20

SOUTH & EAST ASIA ...... 24 Re-introduction of orang-utans in Indonesia ...... 24 Release of golden langurs in Tripura, India ...... 26

IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group: Guidelines for Nonhuman Primate Re-introductions, Prepared by the Re-introduction Specialist Group of the World Conservation Union (IUCN) Species Survival Commission (SSC) ...... 29

New Publications ...... 58

ILLUSTRATIONS: Primate illustrations by Stephen Nash, Conservation International, Washington D.C., USA.

CITATION: Soorae, P. S. & Baker, L. R. (eds.) 2002. Re-introduction NEWS: Special Primate Issue, Newsletter of the IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi, UAE. No. 21:60 pp. (ISSN: 1560-3709)

3 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

Letter from the Chairman, IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, Environmental Research & Wildlife Development Agency, UAE DR. FREDERIC J. LAUNAY he present newsletter entirely dedicated to primate reintroduction issues and challenges also includes the final product of an ambitious project of establishing guidelines for nonhuman primate reintroductions. The project was initiated and successfully completed by Lynne R. Baker with the assistance of Pritpal Soorae and an enthusiastic group of reviewers and a core review board. The initiative was also generously supported by the following organisations: Margot Marsh Biodiversity Foundation, American Society of Primatologists, Primate Society of Japan and the International Primatological Society.

Since the publication of the IUCN/RSG Guidelines for Re-introduction, a growing number of members and/or re-introduction practitioners have requested more specific taxon or species re-introduction guidelines that would give particular details on re-introduction. The primate guidelines are the first of these guidelines and we hope that they will prove a useful tool to the many people dealing with primate re-introduction.

In the process of drafting the guidelines, a number of interesting issues arose. One of the main challenges was to reconcile the various definitions of the term “re-introduction” between primatologists and re- introduction specialists. After lengthy discussion and exchange of opinion, the Re-introduction Specialist Group decided to stick to the definitions mentioned in the IUCN Guidelines for Re-introduction. The difference of opinion as to what constitutes a re-introduction or a translocation for primatologists versus the definition given by the IUCN Re-introduction Guidelines formed the core of the discussion.

From the various contributions and case studies presented in the newsletter, it is also obvious that even among primatologists, the definition of the term re-introduction and translocation is not agreed upon. Therefore, it was difficult to find a consensus among primatologists that would have strengthened the case for a revision of the terminology.

One of the main strengths of the definition given by IUCN Re-introduction Guidelines is that they make a clear distinction between re-introduction, introduction and translocation, based on conservation outputs.

The way primatologists are using the term re-introduction does not allow us to differentiate between release in the wild of captive individuals in an area the species disappeared from, or release in the wild of captive individuals in an area occupied by a native species and in which the captive species is alien to. In the first case, the conservation output is the re-establishment of a species in its former habitat, in the second case the conservation outputs could be the disappearance of a native species through competition with an exotic species. However, both will be termed re-introduction if we followed the definition given to us by the primatologists.

However, beyond the debate on definitions, what is by far the most important is that lessons are being learned from the various case studies presented in this newsletter, and that, hopefully, the primate re-introduction guidelines provides a useful tool for planning a re-introduction, introduction or restocking project.

4 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

Introduction by the RSG Primate Section Chair: Dr. Devra G. Kleiman

his special issue of the diversity of a threatened or endangered species in protected Re-introduction habitat, preferably within the species’ historic range. Re- Specialist Group introduction or translocation programs that release small Newsletter No. 21 is numbers of non-endangered individuals, unless clearly devoted to primate re- serving as a model or to develop technology for application introduction and translocation to threatened or endangered species for a larger and long- efforts. Authors were asked to term program, do not have much conservation impact. It is describe their programs and therefore important that the ultimate goals and objectives of projects using a similar format, a re-introduction project are clear before the program is detailing the methods, results, initiated. and lessons learned, so that the efforts could be compared. The translocations and re-introductions described in several Additionally, we hoped that the of the articles presented here were not necessarily an focus on methodology and essential element of a broader species conservation “learnings” would be useful for program. For example, Strum’s translocation of three baboon others who are thinking about re- troops was focused more on protecting the troops from introducing primates in the future. eradication and testing out translocation procedures. The rescue and release of confiscated orang-utans and The publication of these articles coincides with the chimpanzees had “animal welfare” as one prime objective, publication of the IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist and more important, a law enforcement objective as range Group: Guidelines for Nonhuman Primate Re-introductions countries attempt to reduce the illegal traffic in primates. In developed and revised by Lynne Baker after comments by a the past, the conservation value of the orang-utan effort was Core Review Board. This document is the most extensive reduced by the fact that the orang-utans were released into ever developed for a single taxon and will certainly provide already occupied habitat, and there was no monitoring. practitioners with a basic framework for developing a re- introduction program for primate species. The re-introduction programs for primates, described in the following articles, are diverse, but they have found many of The definitions in the Guidelines follow the IUCN/SSC Re- the same kinds of problems. There are few cases of a well- introduction Specialist Group (RSG) Guidelines for Re- monitored release of primate individuals or groups into introductions, published in 1998. Readers of the articles in already occupied habitat where there were not negative this issue, however, may notice that some authors have used interactions with existing animals, usually resulting in group the term re-introduction to refer specifically to the release fissions, deaths and disappearances (but see Strum on page back into the wild of captive-born animals or animals long- 12 for positive impact of release into occupied areas). This habituated to captivity. This is in contrast with the primate suggests that special techniques need to be developed for guidelines definition for “Re-introduction”: the re-introduction inserting individuals into areas already inhabited by the same of a primate taxon in an area from which it has been species. The transmission of disease between populations of extirpated or become extinct ("re-establishment" is used to the same species and between humans and primates due to indicate that the re-introduction has been successful). a release becomes an ever more serious problem, which means that all primate re-introduction programs must have The terminological differences derive from the focus of the wildlife veterinarians as consultants. Thorough pre-release definition. The official IUCN/SSC Guidelines for Re- screening and, where relevant, medical treatment (including introduction and the IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist vaccinations) should be the norm for a primate re- Group: Guidelines for Nonhuman Primate Re-introductions introduction. guidelines definition of re-introduction both focus on the long- term objective (...in an area from which it has been Additionally, the smaller and more fragmented primate extirpated…) and especially the condition of the receiving populations are, the more important genetic management is. habitat, i.e. vacant or with the species already present. Re-introductions should ensure that they contribute to the Primatologists, however, have traditionally used the origin maintenance of genetic diversity, but do not mix genetically (i.e., captive-born or captive-held) of the animals being distinct populations. Finally, I cannot say enough about how released as the major focus, regardless of whether animals essential long-term monitoring is in any re-introduction or are released into vacant original habitat or not. translocation program. Without monitoring the results of our actions, we cannot learn and make changes in The IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group provides methodologies. The science of re-introduction is sufficiently guidance to those planning to re-introduce or translocate new that we all have much to learn from each other. animals or plants, mainly for conservation purposes. For example, efforts to release small numbers of captive non- endangered primate species back into the wild would not Contributed by Devra G. Kleiman, RSG Primate Section Chair, normally be considered to have a conservation objective. For Chevy Chase, Maryland 20815, USA. a program to have significant conservation value, it must E-mail: [email protected] result in a significant increase in the numbers and genetic

5 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

Note from the Editors: Pritpal S. Soorae and Lynne R. Baker

n July 2000 we set out to develop guidelines for re- Biodiversity Science, Conservation International), Pritpal S. introducing nonhuman primates into the wild. Soorae (IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group), Aware of the increasing number of disparate Shirley C. Strum (Dept. of Anthropology, University of primate releases worldwide, we believed that California-San Diego), Caroline Tutin (Centre International written standards, designed as an ideal “code of conduct” by de Recherches Medicales de Franceville-Gabon and Dept. which practitioners could design and implement re- of Biological and Molecular Sciences, University of Stirling, introduction projects, were not only needed, but also Scotland), and Michael Woodford (Working Group on overdue. Wildlife Diseases, World Organisation for Animal Health, Office International des Epizooties). The task seemed reasonable enough, though it was essentially uncharted territory. At that time there did not As the guidelines were being completed, we decided to exist re-introduction guidelines specific to a particular taxon. maximize their effectiveness by not only publishing them as To help us get started, we were able to use other IUCN a standalone booklet, but also printing them in conjunction policy documents, such as the IUCN Guidelines for Re- with a special primate issue of the Re-introduction Specialist introductions (1998), but the complexities of taxon-specific Group newsletter, Re-introduction NEWS. The current issue re-introductions–particularly for primates–quickly became features case studies of primate re-introduction projects evident. worldwide, with an emphasis on project status and “lessons learned” – in other words, what knowledge have we gained We soon learned that the many facets of primate re- from the process and how it can help other re-introduction introductions and translocations are generally easier to efforts. There are articles from the three main IUCN discuss among colleagues and “mull over” than to put down statutory regions: Meso and South America, Africa, and on paper and garner a seal of approval from a large South and East Asia. community of experts. Our 10-month project soon turned to 12, then 15, then 20…. But we strongly feel the end result The Meso and South America section (page 7) covers the was worth the time and energy invested: The Guidelines for long-running re-introduction programme of golden lion Nonhuman Primate Re-introductions is a thorough and tamarins in Brazil, as well as the translocation of black comprehensive document that will aid practitioners who are howler monkeys in Belize. Articles from Africa (page 12) implementing or considering a primate re-introduction or include a translocation of baboons in Kenya, release of translocation project. The guidelines (see page 29) are chimpanzees in the Republic of Congo, re-introduction of extensive because they have been written as a “best-use black and white ruffed lemurs in Madagascar, and the model.” We strongly encourage practitioners to use the preparation of drill monkeys for re-introduction in Nigeria. guidelines as their principal guide to developing and The South and East Asia section (page 24) is represented executing re-introduction and translocation projects. by articles on orang-utan releases in Indonesia and the re- introduction of golden langurs in India. The guidelines are divided into 11 sections: Executive Summary; Context of Guidelines; Introduction; Definition of The entire guidelines project would not have been possible Terms; Aims, Objectives, & Precautionary Principle; without the generous support of four organisations that Planning for Re-introduction; Disease Transmission & provided the funding for this special newsletter and for the Veterinary Requirements; Transport & Release booklet. We would like to extend our appreciation to: Implementation; Post-Release Monitoring; Considerations for Translocation; and Acknowledgements. Four annexes ? American Society of Primatologists, follow these main sections: Key References, Husbandry ? International Primatological Society, References, Key Contacts, and Core Review Board. ? Margot Marsh Biodiversity Foundation, and

? Primate Society of Japan. We are particularly grateful to the Core Review Board members who read several versions of the draft and contributed valuable comments and suggestions. The board We hope the Guidelines for Nonhuman Primate Re- members are Benjamin Beck (National Zoological Park/ introductions proves beneficial to those involved in primate Smithsonian Institution), Thomas M. Butynski (Eastern re-introduction and translocation projects. As more and Africa Biodiversity Hotspots, Conservation International), more re-introductions take place, the data obtained from Ardith A. Eudey (Asian Section, IUCN/SSC Primate these programmes, particularly information from post- Specialist Group), Elizabeth L. Gadsby (Pandrillus, Drill release monitoring, will aid us with future updates to the Rehabilitation & Breeding Center), Kenneth Glander (Dept. guidelines. We welcome any comments or suggestions on of Biological Anthropology and Anatomy, Duke University), this newsletter or the guidelines – or on primate re- William B. Karesh (Wildlife Conservation Society), Devra G. introduction in general. We can be reached at the following Kleiman (National Zoological Park/Smithsonian Institution), e-mail numbers [email protected] (Pritpal) and John Lewis (International Zoo Veterinary Group), Russell M. [email protected] (Lynne). Mittermeier (Conservation International), John F. Oates (Dept. of Anthropology, Hunter College-City University of Pritpal & Lynne New York), Anthony B. Rylands (Center for Applied 6 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

MESO & SOUTH AMERICA Re-introduction and translocation as conservation tools for golden lion tamarins in Brazil

NOTE: In this article, the origin of the released golden lion releases were inside Poço das Antas Reserve and involved tamarins (Leontopithecus rosalia) will be distinguished by pairs and intact family groups; later releases were all of using the term re-introduction for captive-born animals (or intact family groups to promote more rapid reproduction. wild-born animals that spent significant time in captivity). The earliest releases provided considerable pre-release The term translocation is used for those wild-born golden training in traditional zoo cages to reduce deficits in lion tamarins transferred from forests threatened with locomotion, foraging, and locomotor skills common to deforestation into protected habitat. By the IUCN (1998) captive-born animals. Beginning in 1986, tamarins were definition, both activities should be considered re- instead provided with one to two summers of free-ranging introductions since the tamarins were nearly all released experience in wooded habitats on zoo grounds as pre- into habitat from which the species had been extirpated. release training; all re-introduced tamarins now have such free-ranging experience prior to release. he golden lion tamarin was almost extinguished in the wild because of habitat destruction and Currently, field researchers make daily visits to provide food, intense hunting pressure, mainly for the zoo and observe behavior, and provide special treatment, if pet market. By 1975, estimates necessary, following the initial re- suggested that only 100-200 individuals introduction of tamarin family groups. As might survive. The emergence of a self- the re-introduced lion tamarins begin to sustaining captive population of golden lion eat natural foods and to expand their tamarins in the early to mid-1980s, the home range, the visits are progressively establishment of the Poço das Antas reduced from daily to three days a week, Biological Reserve for the species in 1975, then to weekly, and finally monthly. and the beginning of a long-term study of Thirteen of the 50 groups in the re- the behavioral ecology of the wild lion introduced population are now totally tamarin population in Poço das Antas in independent of provisioning and 1983, converged to make possible the re- management, and eight groups are introduction of captive-born golden lion provisioned only two or three days a tamarins into native Brazilian forest, week. beginning in 1984 (Kleiman et al., 1986; Beck et al., 1991). The translocation, In 1994, six groups of wild-born golden initiated in 1994, followed a full census of lion tamarins were translocated into the species in 1991-1992 and was initiated protected habitat devoid of tamarins in to protect the genetic diversity of numerous Golden lion tamarin Fazenda União. They were never tamarin groups living in isolated forest (Leontopithecus rosalia) provisioned, but were monitored regularly fragments threatened with deforestation. © Stephen Nash / Conservation to follow their adaptation to the new International environment. Presently, visits to The re-introduction and translocation translocated groups are mainly for programs for the golden lion tamarin have had somewhat behavioral monitoring. Several individuals within each family different rationales and emphases, although both are group of both the re-introduced and translocated considered projects that combine research and populations carry radiocollars to facilitate monitoring. conservation. The re-introduction in and around Poço das Antas was carefully planned to provide new genetic stock Results from the captive population and to increase the size of the wild population. By contrast, the translocation was an emergency measure to save the genetic variability from After 17 years, the re-introduced population as of December several isolated and severely threatened wild groups, in 2000 numbered 359 animals in 50 groups, including addition to establishing a new population. surviving "founders" and their offspring (Beck et al., in press) (see Table 1). About 35% of the current estimate of 1,000 golden lion tamarins surviving in the Atlantic Forest Methods are the re-introduced captive-born individuals and their descendants. The total translocated population and their Since 1984, 146 zoo-born and seven confiscated wild-born offspring numbered 120 animals in 16 groups in December animals have been released primarily on privately owned 2000 (Kierulff et al., in press). ranches around Poço das Antas Reserve. The earliest

7 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

Both the re-introduction and translocation programs have population is theft and vandalism by humans. There are also contributed to the protection of habitat for golden lion problems of adaptation to the new environment, readily tamarins. Re-introduced noticeable after the release of captive-born tamarins, e.g. “Pre-release training has no groups have been deficits in food-finding, locomotion, and orientation cause discernible effect on post- established in forest losses from other factors (starvation, injury, and predation fragments on 21 private for example) (Beck et al., 1991). For the translocated release survival (Beck et al., ranches adjacent to the population, mortality mainly has been due to social strife in press).” Poço das Antas and predation. Biological Reserve, which represents about It took 12 years for the number of golden lion tamarins in the 19% of the total forest remaining with protected golden lion re-introduced population to exceed the number actually re- tamarins. The translocated groups were released into a 24 introduced, whereas it took only three years for the number km² forest, which was decreed a Federal Biological Reserve of golden lion tamarins in the translocated population to (União Reserve) in April 1998. This also represents 19% of exceed the number translocated. the total area currently containing golden lion tamarins. Costs Evaluation of Success Efforts to rehabilitate and re-introduce captive animals are Success can be measured by the survival of the released extremely expensive to develop, although the costs are animals and their rate of successful reproduction. The reduced as techniques are refined (Kleiman et al., 1991). mortality of re-introduced golden lion tamarins is high in the Translocation and re-introduction share many techniques, first year (70%), but then levels off to match the age-specific but in general re-introduction requires more intensive mortality typical of wild populations. However, in lion management over longer periods and is therefore more tamarins born in the wild to re-introduced parents, mortality expensive. Kleiman et al. (1991) estimated that after the first is considerably lower in all age-classes than for captive-born 6 years of the re-introduction project, each surviving re- re-introduced tamarins (Beck et al., in press). For the introduced tamarin cost US$22,000. These costs also original translocated lion tamarins, mortality has been low, included the total costs of program research and with the average annual survival rate of monitored adults development, including zoo management, methodology being approximately 82%. development, associated studies of ecology and behavior of the wild and re-introduced tamarins, population monitoring, The main single cause of loss among the re-introduced local community conservation education programs, and

Table 1. Golden lion tamarin re-introduction program

Year Number Cumulative Number Number Total re-introduced number re-introduced wild-born alive re-introduced still alive still alive 1984 14 14 9 1 10 1985 12 26 15 1 16 1986 0 26 2 3 8 1987 21 47 22 5 27 1988 20 67 37 12 49 1989 7 74 29 22 51 1990 7 81 24 34 58 1991 11 92 27 51 78 1992 34 126 42 62 104 1993 7 133 31 87 118 1994 3 136 24 96 120 1995 5 141 22 147 169 1996 6 147 24 176 200 1997 0 147 20 208 228 1998 0 147 14 265 279 1999 0 147 14 288 302 2000 6 153 18 341 359

8 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

administrative infrastructure. After release, the procedures Conclusion and expenses for re-introduction and translocation are quite similar. Considering only the direct expenses in Brazil, a Although similar in single re-introduced golden lion tamarin currently costs their overall about US$7,000 to monitor and manage after release, objective of compared with US$4,600 per translocated animal, including establishing new capture and post-release monitoring. populations of lion tamarins in otherwise Lessons learned unoccupied but appropriate Social disruption following translocation and re-introduction habitats, we was not uncommon, especially when groups were released emphasize that the too close to one another. In some translocated family re-introduction and groups, breeding males in established groups were replaced translocation by immigrant males. In the earliest re-introduction releases, programs in this groups had encounters that resulted in group fission and case had different disappearances. Tamarin home ranges average 40 ha, thus specific objectives. releases are best sited 1 km from each other. Re-introduction was used to increase the The most expensive stage of the translocation is the capture size and genetic of a group in an isolated forest fragment. All traditional diversity of the wild methods used to capture wild tamarins (e.g. traps baited population, whereas with fruits) were unsuccessful, possibly because these translocation was isolated groups were harassed more by humans than the used to rescue study populations within Poço das Antas Reserve. threatened wild sub- Golden lion tamarin (Leontopithecus rosalia) with young populations For the re-introduced population, the most expensive stage © Stephen Nash / Conservation undoubtedly International is post-release monitoring and management. Through representing intense behavioral monitoring and an analysis of post- significant genetic release mortality and reproductive success, we determined diversity for the species. Both programs have been that the key to success of the re-introduction, i.e. post- successful as measured by golden lion tamarin survival and release survival and reproduction, was using a "soft" reproduction after release. Both techniques have achieved release. This including the following: growing populations.

1. Intensive post-release monitoring to "rescue" the Survival (especially in the early stages of the program) and occasional sick or injured individuals and then re-release reproduction of translocated golden lion tamarins were them, and higher in comparison to the captive-born, re-introduced 2. Provisioning of food and critical resources, such as nest tamarins, and the population increased in size more rapidly. boxes. Pre-release training has no discernible effect on Population growth was achieved more quickly through post-release survival (Beck et al., in press). translocation than through re-introduction.

Infants born to re-introduced parents seem to be less Both techniques can be considered expensive, especially in affected by behavioral deficits than the original captive-born the first year post-release. Re-introduction is more re-introduced individuals and thus survive better. The best expensive on a per-animal basis because the lion tamarins re-introduction strategy for this species is therefore intensive need intensive post-release training and management. This support of the re-introduced captive-born animals to re-introduction, however, benefited from its connection with maximize their chances of survival and reproduction, with the zoo community (not all re-introduction efforts are the aim of seeing wild-born offspring become truly affiliated with zoos), resulting in substantial financial and independent. technical contributions, and allowing for the zoo community's direct participation in in situ conservation, a The time necessary for a re-introduced group to become benefit for both golden lion tamarins and zoos. fully independent varies, but all groups were independent by five years after re-introduction. The translocated population Models of metapopulation management are now being was self-sustaining immediately after release, in that it was analyzed in order to evaluate the future use of re- totally independent of provisioning or additional introduction and translocation for this species, considering management. Neither re-introduction nor translocation especially the demographic and genetic management of the would have been successful without the support of the local species, and as a means of responding to catastrophes, and federal staff of the Brazilian agency for the environment, such as fires or disease epidemics. Despite the positive IBAMA, or the local landowners who accepted family groups growth rate of both the re-introduced and translocated of tamarins onto their land; their support was facilitated populations, golden lion tamarins are still critically through the golden lion tamarin conservation education endangered because each of the existing fragmented program. populations is too small for long-term viability and only 1,000 individuals exist in the wild.

9 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

References educational strategies, and reintroduction. Pp. 959-979. In: Primates: the road to self -sustaining populations (K. Benirschke, Beck, B. B., Kleiman, D. G., Dietz, J. M. Castro, I., Carvalho, C., ed.). Springer-Verlag, New York. Martins, A. & Rettberg-Beck, B. 1991. Losses and reproduction in re-introduced golden lion tamarins (Leontopithecus rosalia). Dodo, Kleiman, D. G., Beck, B. B, Dietz, J. M. & Dietz, L. A. 1991. Costs of J. Jersey Wildl. Preserv. Trust 27: 50-61. a re-introduction and criteria for success: accounting and accountability in the Golden Lion Tamarin Conservation Program. Beck, B. B., Castro, M.I., Stoinski, T. & Ballou. J.D. In press. Effects In: Beyond captive breeding: Reintroducing endangered mammals of pre-release environments on survivorship: A case study of re- to the wild. Symposia of the Zoological Society of London. 62: 125- introduced golden lion tamarins. In: The Lion Tamarins of Brazil (D. 142. G. Kleiman and A.B. Rylands, Eds.), Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C. Contributed by Maria Cecília M. Kierulff, Conservation International do Brasil /IESB, Ilheus, Bahia, Brazil, E-mail: Kierulff, M.C.M., Oliveira, P., Beck, B.B. & Martins, A. In press. Re- [email protected]; Benjamin B. Beck, Smithsonian National introduction and translocation as conservation tools for golden lion Zoological Park, Washington DC, USA 20008, E-mail: tamarins. In: The Lion Tamarins of Brazil (D.G. Kleiman and A.B. [email protected]; Devra G. Kleiman, Smithsonian National Rylands, Eds.), Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C. Zoological Park, Washington, DC, USA 20008, E-mail: [email protected] & Paula Procópio, Associação Mico-Leão- Kleiman, D. G., Beck, B. B., Dietz, J. M., Dietz, L. A., Ballou, J. D. & Dourado, Casimiro de Abreu, Brazil, E-mail: ppobio@alternativa. Coimbra-Filho, A. F. l986. Conservation program for the golden com.br lion tamarin: captive research and management, ecological studies,

Translocation of black howler monkeys in Belize

ecause translocations are controversial, difficult, Also, as part of the project, we wanted to develop costly, and often fail, they require careful translocation methods as a tool for howler conservation. We evaluation and planning. While the value of found that careful planning for these potential problems was primate translocations has been questioned by critical to the success of the project. some, we believe their use as a management tool will be more important as forests are decimated and rates of Seven aspects hunting increase, leaving isolated primate populations in smaller forest fragments. While at least 10 species of proved essential primates have been translocated, there has been little long- term monitoring and evaluation, or reports on the management of such projects. 1) Proven capture techniques: As part of another ecology project, 47 black howlers were successfully captured by chemical Planning immobilization without loss or major injury.

This project was part of a broader 2) Howler survey and conservation conservation effort for howler monkeys assessment: (Horwich et al., 1993). The goal was to A feasibility study found translocation to establish a viable population of black be a viable conservation tool because the howlers (Alouatta pigra), listed as causes of the prior local extinction (yellow threatened under the U.S. Endangered fever, hurricanes, and over-hunting) were Species Act, Appendix II of CITES, and no longer present in Cockscomb. insufficiently known by IUCN, in the Additionally, there had previously been an Cockscomb Basin Wildlife Sanctuary alarming rate of deforestation in the area (CBWS) where howlers had become (Koontz et al., 1994), which was no longer locally extinct many years prior. The occurring. Also, natural colonization in the project involved translocating a founding Cockscomb Basin was deemed population from the Community Baboon improbable because howlers had not Sanctuary (CBS) of approximately 50 been seen or heard in the area since animals over a relatively short period of 1978. Thus, because hunting was now two years. Two potential problems controlled within the 100,000-acre park, influenced planning decisions: and yellow-fever epidemics had not been reported for nearly 40 years in the 1) how to maximize troop cohesion immediate area, it seemed reasonable to and limit dispersal, and Black howler monkey attempt re-introduction of the species into (Alouatta pigra) the protected area. 2) how howlers would respond to new © Stephen Nash / Conservation

foods. International 10 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

3) Evaluation of Release Area: Captivity The Cockscomb Basin Wildlife Sanctuary was selected because it was part of the species’ historic range and was and release large enough for population expansion. Its topography, lack of other primates, adequate food, and park facilities also made it attractive (Koontz et al., 1994). Each year, three cages were 4) Mapping and selection of release sites: constructed 1 km In January 1992 15 km of paths encompassing 16 km2 were apart and over 1.5 mapped. Three release sites, each over 1 km apart, were km from core areas selected in 1992. containing other howlers. In most 5) Caging and captive care: cases groups were Cages (2.4 m x 4.8 m x 3.0 m or larger) were built for maintained in observation, health, and acclimation reasons. Howlers were captivity for two kept in the cages two days in a soft release and three days and released groups were released without caging in a hard release. during the late afternoon. Most 6) Telemetry equipment and marking methods: animals took some These were evaluated for the project, as monitoring of the food and water. All pushed against the released individuals was deemed essential. Black howler monkey on branch wire to try to escape (Alouatta pigra) 7) Social and legal logistics: initially, but these © Stephen Nash / Conservation Prior permission was obtained from the Belize Ministry of attempts declined International Natural Resources, the Community Baboon Sanctuary rapidly. A cage door managing committee and local landowners, as well as the was then opened, allowing them to leave at will. Belize Audubon Society, which managed the Cockscomb Basin Wildlife Sanctuary. Permits for blood sample During 1993-1994, three groups of three individuals each importation were obtained from the Center for Disease were released the same late afternoon in a "hard release.” Control, CITES, and U.S. Public Health Service (Koontz et Individuals were placed in their traveling cages in a circle at al., 1994). the foot of a large tree, in view of each other and “Because translocations are Translocation methods vines hanging controversial, difficult, and costly, from the tree, and and often fail, they require careful Transmitters on ball and chain collars were used on with a guard planning and evaluation” females, and ankle chains were used for males following posted nearby. At capture, prior to transporting them to the new site. In 1992, 5 pm the doors transmitters were implanted subcutaneously in some males were opened simultaneously, allowing the animals to and juveniles. All implants failed because they worked their escape up the vine into the tree. Once released, all groups way out and were lost and so were not used again in 1993- were radiotracked and observed with short visual checks 1994. All adults were tagged with small Plexiglas donuts on every one to three days and with prolonged observations ankle chains. Some chains slipped off, and a few caused leg after a month. injuries when the chain wore into the skin. Results Captures Of the 68 animals selected for translocation, two died in Groups were located prior to capture and followed until dusk capture; one infant was abandoned by its mother and three to ensure finding them before dawn the next day. No groups escaped capture. Sixty-two animals from 14 groups were were selected that had juveniles too small to be individually translocated, including 19 adult males, 30 adult females, darted (Glander et al., 1991). Groups with large adult and 13 immatures. female/male ratios were selected. In 1994, four groups were studied three months prior to the capture and monitored Data were recorded on a continual basis through mid-1996. continually for one year post-release (Silver et al., 1998 & A final survey in 1997 identified 56 individuals within the 9 2 Ostro et al., 1999). km study area. Of these, 32 were from the founding population. An additional 13 other founders had been Following measurements, blood sampling, health checks, located in 1996. The location of 14 of the founder monkeys ankle tagging, and transmitter attachment, all howlers were in the western population could not be confirmed, but it was placed singly in air pet kennels. These were then loaded in assumed most were alive. Thirty-four births occurred from vans and driven five hours to the release site. On two 1992 to 1997, six of which died or disappeared. Only three moves, the kennels were carried by a helicopter for the 45- adults were known to have died. During this period, the minute flight to Cockscomb. population, excluding the additions of translocated animals, increased at a rate of 14.7% per year bolstered by a high infant survival rate (82%). The founding population male: female ratio was 44:56 immatures. By 1997, the ratio had

11 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

somewhat evened to 40:49. dispersal. 5. Release within uninhabited areas or over 1 km from Of the 14 groups released, three immediately disbanded. other groups reduced stress and maintained troop Two groups moved away from the study site, one of which cohesion. Distances of greater than 1 km would be was located intact a year later. Some adults dispersed from better but distances greater than 1 km were logistically their groups within three months, resulting in 14 groups not practical in Cockscomb. having one adult male and one or two adult females with 6. Release late in the day reduces initial wandering. With their young (Ostro et al., 1999). Four new groups formed small groups, caging is unnecessary but prudent to after the translocation. Two or three groups left the study ensure full recovery from chemical immobilization, fitting area to settle 12 km west of the study area and have not of telemetry devices, and transport. been seen or heard by Cockscomb staff and tourists. 7. Careful long-term monitoring is very important. Pre- release monitoring is also advised Groups dispersed on an average of 3 km from the release site; however, two groups dispersed 15 km. Within six References months, all groups had settled into a core range, but continued to explore their range boundaries for up to a year Glander, K.E., Fedigan, L.M. Fedigan, L. & Chapman, C. 1991. (Ostro et al., 1999). By the end of the second or third year Capture techniques and measurements of three monkey species in the home ranges had reduced in size and centered around Costa Rica. Folia Prim., 57:70-82. streams and rivers. Horwich, R.H., Koontz, F.W., Saqui, E., Saqui, H. & Glander, K. 1993. A Re-introduction program for the conservation of black Some of the dispersal may have been related to food howler monkeys in Belize. Endangered Species 10(6):1-6. selection. However, although the discrepancy between food resources in the two habitats was greater than originally Koontz, F.W., Horwich, R., Saqui, E., Saqui, H., Glander, K., thought due to follow-up studies, the translocated monkeys Koontz, C. & Westrom, W. 1994. Reintroduction of black howlers adapted immediately to their new habitat and food sources monkeys (Alouatta pigra) into the Cockscomb Basin Wildlife (Silver et al., 1998). Thus, their diet composition changed Sanctuary, Belize. Pp 104-111 in American Zoo and Aquarium Association Annual Conference Proceedings. AZA, Bethesda, MD. radically in the new Cockscomb Basin Wildlife Sanctuary habitat. Ostro, L.E.T., Silver, S.C., Koontz, F.W., Young, T.P., & Horwich, R.H. 1999. Ranging behavior of translocated and established Conclusions and groups of black howler monkeys (Alouatta pigra) in Belize, Central America. Biological Conservation 87:181-190.

recommendations Silver, S.C., Ostro, L.E.T., Yeager, C.P., and Horwich, R.H.. 1998. Feeding ecology of the black howler monkey (Alouatta pigra) in 1. Careful planning is critical for primate translocation northern Belize. American Journal of Primatology 45:263-279. success. 2. For howlers, a release site close to rivers is probably Contributed by Robert H. Horwich, Community Conservation, Inc., Gays Mills, Wisconsin, USA, E-mail: [email protected]; Fred beneficial due to the occurrence of figs and other riverine Koontz, Wildlife Trust, Palisades, New York, USA; Ernesto tree species. Saqui, Belize Audubon Society, Belize City, Belize; Linde Ostro 3. Release during a peak fruiting season also contributed to & Scott Silver, Wildlife Conservation Society, Bronx, New York, the success. USA and Ken Glander, Duke University, Department of 4. Capture and release of smaller, complete social groups Biological Anthropology and Anatomy, Durham, North improved group stability and cohesion and limited Carolina, USA.

AFRICA Translocation of three wild troops of baboons in Kenya

n the midst of the controversy over whether to which are humanitarian efforts to get captive animals back subsume translocation under re-introduction (IUCN into the wild. 1998 & 2002), the reality is that there have been very few primate translocations (sensu Konstant & In 1984 we conducted a successful translocation of three Mittermeier, 1982) where an intact wild group of primates wild groups of baboons (Papio anubis) in Kenya. Preliminary has been moved from one part of their historical range to results are reported in Strum & Southwick (1987) and in another without routing through captivity. The acceleration Strum (1987, reprinted 2001). Details of long-term of the biodiversity crisis has produced an increasing number adaptation, survival, sources of mortality, reproduction, of primate re-introductions and introductions, the majority of foraging strategies, and home range use are currently in

12 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

WBY (Wabaya renamed Malaika [MLK] after translocation) split from Pumphouse Gang in 1981 because of a conflict about whether or not to raid. The third troop CRP (Cripple Troop) was added to the focal study after agricultural settlement.

Finding a suitable site was difficult because of the general hostility toward baboons and toward scientists by Kenyans, both black and white. The suitability of the habitat in terms of the availability of food, sleeping sites, and water and the potential for future conflict were key considerations in the selection of the target areas. Colcheccio and Chololo, both about 194 km away from Kekopey on the Laikipia Plateau of northern Kenya, were finally chosen. Preliminary ecological surveys suggested that both sites contained baboon foods, of which 50% would be familiar to the monkeys. However, the baboons would have to construct the remainder of their diet from unknown items, including those critical during the frequent droughts that occur.

Capture and release

We employed standard trapping procedures, making modifications based on our understanding of baboon behavior. A long period of habituation and strategic placement of traps Baboon were essential. In “The suitability of the habitat in (Papio anubis) addition, we © Stephen Nash / Conservation International insured that the terms of the availability of food, number of traps sleeping sites, and water and the exceeded the potential for future conflict were preparation. number of animals (counting mothers key considerations in the The troops had been studied since 1970 at Kekopey in the with dependent selection of the target areas” Central Rift Valley of Kenya. In 1979 the land was sold to an infants as one). agricultural cooperative, and small-holder farmers settled. This meant that for From 1980 to 1984, the Gilgil Baboon Project studied the larger troops we had to dart and trap a few animals development of crop-raiding in this previously naturally separately and away from the main troop before the general foraging population in order to assess the effectiveness of capture time. As a result, we captured all of three troops traditional techniques and to test alternative control methods instead of the usual 50% success rate experienced by (Strum, 1994). The decision to translocate three troops was professional trappers. Each troop was captured, held for an attempt to save valuable research animals and to one day for biomedical evaluation, and then transported and investigate the feasibility of translocation as a primate released separately and in sequence: Cripple Troop to conservation and management tool, albeit with a very Colcheccio and Wabaya and Pumphouse Gang to Chololo. adaptable and not endangered species. Site fidelity was a major concern. Our strategy involved Three troops were translocated (Table 1). PHG holding the males captive for a few days while the rest of the (Pumphouse Gang) animals had been studied since 1970. troop was released, thus playing on the different proclivities

Table 1. Demographic breakdown of translocated baboons

TROOP Male Female Adult Sub-adult Juvenile Infant Adult Sub-adult Juvenile Infant TOTAL Cripple 3 2 9 7 9 4 1 3 38 Troop

Wabaya 4 2 3 10 10 0 2 5 36 * Pumphouse 5 4 9 7 16 5 6 6 58 Gang

TOTAL 131 * * - adult male AO escaped from traps and was not translocated

13 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

of male and female baboons. In addition, the troops were lightly provisioned with commercially prepared primate food cubes for six weeks. Three or four animals in each troop were collared for radiotracking and animals were ear-tagged for ease of recognition in case they disappeared and died. The troops were monitored continuously: Cripple Troop through 1989 and Pumphouse and Wababa (renamed Malaika) to present.

The translocation of each troop had unique aspects (Strum, 1987 & Strum and Southwick, 1987), and we have the rare opportunity to assess the success of this experiment during 17 years. The last translocated animal was preyed upon in 2001; she was 24 years old - comparable to the typical Baboon troop in the savannah (Papio anubis) female life span in this habitat. © Stephen Nash / Conservation International

Lessons learned during capture given all other constraints, but animals should never be released immediately after transport to the new site; and release some holding is necessary to reduce stress and increase acclimatization. 7. Types of foods selected for provisioning are important 1. Clear-cut procedures and trained personnel are needed. and should be chosen carefully. They are likely to be Participants in the capture and release should be distinct different for each stage of the translocation (habituation from those who might do follow-up monitoring or who to traps, holding immediately after capture, holding at have done pre- release site, creating site fidelity, helping to get through “The baboon translocation capture difficult post-translocation periods). observations. provides a model for other 8. A site fidelity strategy needs to be developed based on 2. Proper that species characteristic behavior. primate translocations since the habituation of 9. Fall-back plans should be designed in advance for each main issues and general design animals to well- important stage of the translocation in case the original designed and for all primate species will be design proves ineffective. having sufficient 10.Moving “pest” primates requires special considerations in similar” traps to capture each stage of the translocation: which foods to use, all animals in a where to release, and the probability of exporting the troop simultaneously insure greatest success. Additional problem to a new location settings of traps should be avoided. 11.Post-translocation monitoring should extend for at least 2 3. The holding site needs to be out of sight of the capture years or for a period that covers both seasonal variation site and preferably out of the group’s home range, in necessary resources and some reproductive particularly if traps have to be reset because not all of parameters. (The interbirth interval for baboons in the the animals are caught the first time. target area is 2 years. There are two wet and two dry 4. Housing of animals during holding and transport should seasons in an average year.) reflect the species natural proclivities, for baboons, individuals should be housed separately, but within sight of each other, except for mothers and infants who should Discussion be housed together. 5. Primate groups in poor physical condition should be The baboon translocation illustrates the importance of provisioned for a longer time at the capture sites or held moving intact social groups as the group itself appears to be captive for more days. Pre-capture improvement of the most important resource individuals have during the condition seems preferable to extended post-capture process of adaptation. The success of this translocation and provisioning in most cases. Animal condition at release the many failures of re-introduction of captive primates affects resistance to the new pathogens they will suggest that more than knowledge and skills are lost in encounter. captivity. Wild primates, like baboons, retain a special ability 6. Holding (i.e. captivity) should be as short as possible which goes beyond generalized primate intelligence. They 14 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

Figure 1. Cumulative proportion surviving to age Figure 2. Cumulative proportion surviving to 16 years 12 years (PHG females before and after translocation) (translocated and indigenous females—PHG, MLK vs. INDIGENOUS STT1 )

1 1

0.9 AT BT 0.9 0.8 0.8 PHG STT1 MLK 0.7 0.7

L 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4

0.4 SURVIVAL SURVIVA 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0 0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 AGE IN DAYS AGE IN DAYS

not only know what they are supposed to learn but how to Recent changes in land use combined with demographic learn it even in new situations. This makes them effective shifts from rural to urban settings by the human population actors in otherwise difficult situations. and recent successful conservation initiatives to save biodiversity using many different approaches have created The historical and ecological indicators suggested our new opportunities for translocation now than were present insertion of additional animals would not and did not even 20 years ago. For some primate species, there exists compromise the resident population of baboons. The area good habitat that is now safe and appropriate for restoration had experienced a serious decline in all wildlife populations through translocation of groups from more vulnerable areas. during the extended droughts of the 1970’s, but populations Finally, the success of this baboon translocation and the were rebounding in the early 1980’s, suggesting that the difficulty of other diverse primate re-introduction efforts (see resident baboons were below carrying capacity. In addition, IUCN bibliography) suggest that it may be unrealistic to more permanent dams had been constructed, opening up expect once-captive animals to ever be truly wild and free of areas previously too far from water to utilize. In fact, the human management. presence of indigenous animals turned out to be very advantageous as they were an important source of References traditional knowledge of the area. The newcomers could learn by observation rather than just trial and error about IUCN. 1998. Guidelines for Re-introductions. Prepared by the such things as water sources, the distribution of foods, and IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. 10 pp. & IUCN/SSC Re- critical baboon resources. introduction Specialist Group, 2002 (draft), Guidelines for Nonhuman Primate Re-Introductions, IUCN/SSC Re-introduction The three troops have survived as intact groups for 17 Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi, UAE. years. Comparison of the standard lifetable statistic (cumulative proportion surviving) for the 12 years before and Konstant, W.R. & Mittermeier, R.A. 1982. Introduction, re- after translocation for PHG (see Figure 1 above) shows no introduction, and translocation of Neotropical primates: past significant difference. The baboons survived as well before experiences and future possibilities. International Zoo Yearbook 22: and after the move. Their survivorship curves, sources of 69-77. mortality, group size, socio-economic sex ratio, inter-troop Strum, S.C. 1987. Almost Human, New York: Random House. relations, foraging strategies, diet, and home range size (reprinted 2001 University of Chicago Press with new introduction have converged on that pattern found in the indigenous and post-translocation epilogue). troops (see Figure 2 above). Strum, S.C. 1994. Prospects for management of primate pests. In The baboon translocation provides a model for other Commensal Primates, Sylvan Biquand and J. P. Gautier, eds. primate translocations since the main issues and general Revue d’Ecologie (Terre Vie) 49:295-306. design for all primate species will be similar. However, each Strum, S.C. & Southwick, C. H. 1987. Translocation of primates. translocation must be tailor-made to the requirements of Pages 949-958, In Primates: the road to self-sustaining populations. individual species and situations. Translocation is an K. Benirschke, ed., New York: Springer-Verlag. appropriate primate conservation technique and has advantages over re-introduction. Taking wild animals from Contributed by Shirley C. Strum, Professor of Anthropology, one place in their historic range to another increases the University of California, San Diego, California, USA, E-mail: chances of success. Captivity seems to rob primates of the [email protected] & Director, Uaso Ngiro Baboon Project, very skills, knowledge, and aptitudes they need to survive in Kenya, E-mail: [email protected] the wild. The costs of translocation relative to re-introduction are also modest. The success of this translocation to a marginal habitat may mean that for some species there is greater latitude in release sites than previously thought.

15 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

Habitat Ecologique et Liberté des Primates: a case study of chimpanzee re-introduction in the Republic of Congo

himpanzees are endangered, and while Veterinary Protocol conservation efforts have concentrated on habitat Pre-release screening involved routine monitoring (full protection, some attempts to re-introduce physical examination, identification (I.D.), intra-dermal chimpanzees have been made. They have tuberculin test, vaccination against polio and tetanus) in focused primarily on islands as release sites, but only one conjunction with hematological and blood chemistry project, Rubondo island, Tanzania, initiated in 1966, which analysis; serological screening for retroviruses, filoviruses, was an introduction, has led to an ecologically self-sufficient Hepatitis A and B, blood parasites, and hair samples for population (Borner, 1985). The first attempt to re-introduce genetic analysis and individual identification (Goossens et chimpanzees into mainland habitat showed initial promise al., accepted). Furthermore, each month for three months since the chimpanzees demonstrated increasing self- pre-release, stools were screened for intestinal parasites sufficiency, but was abandoned following attacks by wild (resulting in treatment if necessary). At release the routine conspecifics (Brewer, 1976). In an attempt to find a long- monitoring procedure was repeated, in addition to repeat term solution, in 1991 Habitat Ecologique et Liberté des serological screening, booster vaccinations if needed, and Primates (H.E.L.P), Republic of Congo, placed wild-born injection of vitamins and antibiotics as preventative orphaned chimpanzees initially onto three islands in the measures against stress-related infection (Tutin et al., Conkouati Lagoon (180 km from Pointe-Noire) where they 2001). Veterinary protocol included post-release medical lived for several years (ranging from four to 10) prior to intervention if deemed necessary. being re-introduced. The islands provided the opportunity for the chimpanzees to forage on natural Capture and release process vegetation, build nests, and develop social Exact timing and release location took into bonds. Additionally, observers could account seasonal food availability, areas assess individual suitability for re- of food abundance, and distance from the introduction and decide who should be resident wild population. Chimpanzees released with whom. were captured from the islands, medically examined (as detailed above), and fitted Methods with a radio collar. They were transported fully anaesthetised to the release site, placed in a cage where they woke up Release site under the supervision of veterinarians, and Surveys were conducted to find an area of released the same or following day. Post- suitable habitat: one that provided release, the chimpanzees were followed, sufficient food resources without and data were collected on ecology and negatively impinging on the requirements behaviour. On release, some of resident fauna, had a low-density wild chimpanzees were initially nervous of chimpanzee population, was situated at a human presence and would flee if distance from human settlements, and Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) approached. In such cases, observers could be adequately protected. An area of © Stephen Nash / Conservation maintained visual contact while keeping as biologically diverse habitat known as the International far from the chimpanzee as possible. Triangle (21 km²), bound by rivers on all However, by an observer gradually sides, but accessible to the rest of the Conkouati-Douli reducing this distance, it was possible to get within a few National Park (5,045 km²) by crossing canopy and fallen metres of most chimpanzees in a few days. Newly released trees, was judged suitable. Botanical surveys identified 605 individuals and all male chimpanzees were followed from species of plants including 100 known wild chimpanzee nest to nest daily. After the first year post-release, the foods, high densities of “fallback” plants (that sustain female chimpanzees were followed for shorter periods on a chimpanzees during periods of food scarcity), and a low- near daily basis. density resident chimpanzee population (Tutin et al., 2001). Although some evidence of hunting was found, the implementation of a conservation and development plan for Results the park by IUCN in 1994 promised much improved levels of protection to the area. · Since 1996, 34 chimpanzees (10:24) have been released with a mean age of 8 years. Twenty-five are Furthermore, the presence of ‘Habitat Ecologique et Liberté confirmed alive and well, including six that were released des Primates’ (H.E.L.P.) infrastructure and personnel was over four years ago. Three have died: one male fled considered likely to prove an effective deterrent to human immediately post-release (skull and collar found); a incursion in the release site. The park is now managed by second was killed by wild chimpanzees 2.5 years post- the Wildlife Conservation Society, New York, USA. release; and an infant disappeared five months after being released with her mother and is presumed dead. 16 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

· The status of six chimpanzees remains unknown. Three several years females fled immediately post-release and have not before being been seen since. A male disappeared five months after released. being released, and two females disappeared Finding an approximately two years after being released. However, appropriate some of the released females have disappeared for release site is several months and then returned, particularly during difficult, and the periods of oestrus. unique situation at Conkouati · All chimpanzees were nutritionally independent (eg., ideal pre- immediately post-release. They eat a wide range of plant release and animal foods, and they build nests that resemble environment, those of wild chimpanzees (Vacher-Vallas et al., in prep). high female/ · The released chimpanzees have met wild conspecifics male sex ratio) on many occasions. Interactions range from peaceful may not be intermingling to fights, resulting in the death of one re- available to Chimpanzee introduced male. Medical intervention following an attack chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) by wild chimpanzees resulted in one re-introduced housed in more © Stephen Nash / Conservation chimpanzee being removed from the release site, traditional caging International treated, and re-released. However, health of the and enclosures. released animals is generally good, and veterinary · Confirmed mortality of 9% (possible 26%) was primarily intervention is rare. Females associate regularly with due to attacks by wild conspecifics on males. Male wild males, especially during periods of oestrus. mortality presently exceeds that of females. The latest Recently, a 12-year-old female re-introduced in 1996 has release of nine individuals includes three males; this re- given birth. Genetic analyses have revealed that a introduction will be particularly closely monitored. At the released male is the father. time of disappearance, in four “status unknown” cases, · The chimpanzees quickly became habituated to being radio collars were either not functioning or had been followed and generally ignored observers. removed by the chimpanzees, “A confirmed 74% (possible emphasizing the 91%) survival rate, together Lessons learned importance of radiotelemetry in with diet and activity budgets 1. The chimpanzees are most vulnerable immediately the monitoring resembling those of wild following release; the stress has caused some to flee. process. conspecifics, indicate that Observers known to a chimpanzee can facilitate initial · To date, one chimpanzees have been post-release contact. Radio collars have proven to be released female valuable. However, some individuals removed the chimpanzee has successfully re-introduced to collars; implantable transmitters may be a future become the wild” solution. pregnant. 2. Due to the increased risk of attacks on males by wild Nursing females on the islands show that they have chimpanzees (one and possibly a second killed; one some of the necessary skills to be successful mothers. seriously injured), all males are now followed on a daily basis from nest to nest. · Systematic measurement of the ecological impact of the 3. To reduce stress and facilitate adaptation, chimpanzees re-introduced chimpanzees on resident fauna and flora should be released with familiar individuals. The number is presently lacking. Initial observations look of available personnel for post-release monitoring should encouraging. There are no signs of excessive depletion be considered when deciding how many chimpanzees to of food plants, and due to the additional protection of the release; the released group may divide, and each sub- site, sightings of monkeys and elephants have increased group or individual will need to be assigned an observer. (Tutin et al., 2001). 4. When individuals known to one another (e.g., originating from the same island, with little time apart) have met Conclusion post-release, reunions have generally been positive. Even some meetings between unfamiliar individuals have been positive and provided experienced ‘mentors’ This project has shown that chimpanzees can successfully for newly released individuals. be re-introduced to the wild. However, a pre-release environment that facilitates acquisition of important skills and post-release monitoring and support appear paramount Discussion to survival.

· A confirmed 74% (possible 91%) survival rate, together References with diet and activity budgets resembling those of wild conspecifics, indicate that chimpanzees have been Borner, M. 1985. The rehabilitated chimpanzees of Rubondo Island. successfully re-introduced to the wild. Since the original Oryx 19:151-154. objective of the project was re-introduction, contact with humans was minimal; chimpanzees were placed in Brewer, S. 1976. The rehabilitation of captive chimpanzees into the groups and lived in natural vegetation on islands for wild in Niokolo Koba National Park, Senegal. Unpublished report. Goossens, B., Funk, S.M., Vidal, C., Latour, S., Jamart, A.,

17 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

Ancrenaz, M., Wickings, E.J., Tutin, C.E.G. & Bruford, M.W. Vacher-Vallas, M., Goossens, B., Farmer, K. Vallas, P., Ancrenaz, Measuring genetic diversity in reintroduction programs: principles M., Paredes, J., Vidal, C., & Jamart, A. Feeding behaviour of and application to a chimpanzee release project. Accepted to reintroduced chimpanzees, Conkouati-Douli National Park, Animal Conservation. Republic of Congo. In prep.

Tutin, C.E.G., Ancrenaz, M., Paredes, J., Vacher-Vallas, M., Vidal, Contributed by Kay H. Farmer, Scottish Primate Research C., Goossens, B., Bruford, M. & Jamart, A. 2001. The conservation Group, University of Stirling, Stirling FK9 4LA, Scotland, E- biology framework of the release of wild-born orphaned mail: [email protected] & Aliette Jamart, H.E.L.P, BP 335, chimpanzees into the Conkouati Reserve, Congo. Conservation Pointe-Noire, Republic of Congo, E-mail: [email protected] Biology No. 5: 1247-1257. & Web site: http://www.help-primates.org

The release of captive-bred black and white ruffed lemurs into the Betampona Reserve, eastern Madagascar

ince November 1997 the Madagascar Fauna Group employed to (MFG) has released 13 captive-bred black and white minimize early ruffed lemurs (Varecia variegata variegata) into the losses and allow the Réserve Naturelle Intégrale de Betampona in lemurs to habituate Toamasina Province, eastern Madagascar (Britt et al., to their new 2000). The release program has three major aims: environment. The lemurs were held for 1. to assess the ability of captive-bred black and white a minimum of two ruffed lemurs to adapt to a wild existence, weeks in cages at 2. to attempt to reinforce the small, isolated resident wild the Madagascar population at Betampona of approximately 35 to 40 Fauna Group base individuals (Welch & Katz, 1992), and camp, and at least 3. to contribute to the protection and conservation five days in cages in management of this lowland rainforest reserve. the forest prior to release. During this The black and white ruffed lemur is currently classified as period forest fruits Endangered by IUCN Red List criteria. Mittermeier et al. were provided. (1992) provide an order of magnitude estimated population Release areas were size of 1,000 to 10,000 individuals, which is severely carefully selected in fragmented and declining due to loss of habitat. the reserve after detailed botanical Release method survey work to identify the presence of Three releases of black and white ruffed lemur groups have sufficient food been carried out to date: resource tree 1. November 1997 - three males and two females (3:2), species. 2. November 1998 - one male and three females (1:3), and 3. January 2001 - three males and one female (3:1). Further selection Black and white ruffed lemur criteria included the (Varecia variegata variegata) All of the lemurs had varying degrees of free-ranging absence of a © Stephen Nash / Conservation experience in forest habitats prior to their release, either at resident wild group International the Duke University Primate Center, North Carolina, USA or and proximity to the at the Wildlife Conservation Society’s St. Catherine’s Island, project base camp for ease of monitoring. Although lemurs nd Georgia, USA. All were at least 2 generation captive-bred. are hunted locally, the daily presence of project personnel in Nine of the lemurs where born in free-ranging environments the release areas, combined with a public awareness and four in cage environments. Free-ranging experience campaign in local villages, were considered to minimize this ranged from two months to 11 years. The lemurs were risk. transported to Madagascar by air in pet sky kennels with an accompanying veterinarian. Each lemur was fitted with a radio transmitter collar prior to release. The lemurs were (and still are, if necessary) A “soft” release, including provisioning post-release, was provisioned with commercial primate diet and water was

18 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

Table 1. Pre- and post-release histories of black and white ruffed lemur (Varecia variegata variegata) released at Betampona Individual Date of birth Institution Born Release date Post-release free-range survival Male 1 24th Apr 1985 D.U.P.C. Yes 10th Nov 1997 35 months

Male 2 31st Mar 1993 D.U.P.C. Yes 10th Nov 1997 Surviving

Male 3 14th Apr 1996 D.U.P.C. Yes 10th Nov 1997 8 months

Male 4 29th Apr 1991 Los Angeles Zoo No 25th Nov 1998 23 months

Male 5 7th May 1999 D.U.P.C. Yes 18th Jan 2001 Surviving

Male 6 13th May 2000 D.U.P.C. Yes 18th Jan 2001 Surviving

Male 7 13th May 2000 D.U.P.C. Yes 18th Jan 2001 Surviving

Female 1 8th Apr 1986 D.U.P.C. Yes 10th Nov 1997 32 months

Female 2 3rd Apr 1991 D.U.P.C. Yes 10th Nov 1997 3 months

Female 3 1st May 1993 W.C.S. St.Cath.’s Yes 20th Nov 1998 3 months

Female 4 1st May 1991 Hogle Zoo No 25th Nov 1998 23 months

Female 5 1st May 1991 Hogle Zoo No 25th Nov 1998 19 months

Female 6 2nd May 1993 Santa Ana Zoo No 18th Jan 2001 Surviving

LEGEND: D.U.P.C. = Duke University Primate Center, North Carolina, & W.C.S. St. Cath.’s = Wildlife Conservation Society Facility at St. Catherine’s Island, Georgia provided in baskets suspended in the forest canopy. Such yet to reproduce (male 2). Five of the released lemurs (male supplemental feeding has been deemed necessary during 1, male 4, female 1, female 2, and female 5) fell victim to the winter months when marked falls in body weight have predation by Fossa (Cryptoprocta ferox). One died of been recorded. Veterinary intervention is provided if animals malnutrition show clear signs of physical distress. A non-invasive (male 3); one method of weighing the lemurs was developed to enable disappeared “Captive-bred black and white ruffed close monitoring of their condition. from the lemurs are particularly vulnerable reserve; to predation by Fossa Madagascar Fauna Group personnel, who are trained in the (female 3); collection of behavioral data, closely monitor the released and one was Cryptoprocta ferox” lemurs. Data are also collected from the wild population to withdrawn allow a comparison of behavioral and habitat use variables from the release program (female 4), due to poor adaptation between the two groups. after two years in the wild.

The following measures of success were employed: Two of the released lemurs (male 1 and male 2) have survived for more than one year without supplementary 1) Successful adaptation to the natural habitat: feeding. One pair (male 1 and female 1) bred twice. The first Survival for one year without supplementary feeding and/or infants did not survive, but on the second occasion, triplets successful reproduction. were successfully raised beyond weaning. One female triplet is still surviving and has paired with a wild male. 2) Successful contribution to the wild population: Integration into a wild group and successful reproduction Lessons learned with a wild individual. 1. Integration and reproduction with the resident population will not occur quickly by the current release method. It Results appears that male black and white ruffed lemurs emigrate from their natal group (White et al., 1993). Five of the 13 are currently surviving (see Table 1), Given the success of male 2 in integrating into the wild including one who has integrated into a wild group, but has population, it is suggested that a more effective strategy

19 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

for reinforcing small, isolated populations would be the although losses will be high, and integration with the wild release of young males in a location peripheral to wild population will be a lengthy process. The project is currently groups. entering its second phase where the progress of the 2. Captive-bred black and white ruffed lemurs are remaining lemurs will continue to be closely monitored. No particularly vulnerable to predation by Fossa releases are planned during the next three years. At the end (Cryptoprocta ferox). In the course of the release of this monitoring period a decision will be made on the programme (4.5 years) none of the wild study group (n = necessity for and advisability of future releases. 10) was lost to predation. No realistic method of training captive-bred Varecia to avoid predation by the Fossa References has yet been devised. The best option would be to encourage rapid integration of released animals into wild Britt, A., Katz, A. & Welch, C. 2000. Project Betampona: groups (see point 1 above), where they could learn Conservation and Re-stocking of Black and White Ruffed Lemurs (Varecia variegata variegata). Pp. 87–94. In T. L. Roth, W. F. predator-avoidance skills directly from their wild Swanson & L. K. Blattman (eds.) Proceedings of the Seventh World conspecifics. Conference on Breeding Endangered Species, May 22-26 1999, 3. Free-ranging experience during early development Cincinnati, Ohio. appears to increase the likelihood of successful adaptation post-release. Mittermeier, R. A., Konstant, W. R., Nicoll, M. E. & Langrand, O. 4. Free-ranging experience does not necessarily increase 1992. Lemurs of Madagascar: An Action Plan for their the likelihood of survival until integration with wild Conservation. 1993-1999. IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist Group, individuals occurs (due to point 2 above). Gland, Switzerland.

5. During the austral winter, supplementary feeding is Welch, C. R. & Katz, A. S. 1992. Survey and census work on necessary for the released black and white ruffed lemurs lemurs in the natural reserve of Betampona in eastern Madagascar due to loss of weight and condition at this time. with a view to reintroductions. DODO, Journal of the Wildlife Preservation Trusts 28:45-58.

Discussion and Conclusion White, F. J., Balko, E. A. & Fox, E. A. 1993. Male transfer in captive ruffed lemurs, Varecia variegata variegata. Pp. 41-49. In Lemur Despite a mortality rate of 61.5%, certain measures of Social Systems and Their Ecological Basis. P. M. Kappeler & J. U. success have been achieved. The ability to survive beyond Ganzhorn (eds.). Plenum Press, New York. one year without provisioning, to reproduce successfully, Contributed by Adam Britt, Madagascar Fauna Group, and to integrate with the resident population have been Toamasina, Madagascar & Charlie Welch and Andrea Katz, demonstrated by some of the released lemurs. To date the Madagascar Fauna Group and the Duke University Primate released lemurs have made no contribution to the gene pool Center, Durham, North Carolina, USA. of the wild population. However, there is reason to be E-mail: [email protected] confident that this will occur in time.

In conclusion, it has been demonstrated that captive-bred black and white ruffed lemurs can adapt to a wild existence,

Preparing for re-introduction: 10 years of planning for drills in Nigeria

rills (Mandrillus leucophaeus) are the highest The project evolved as a conservation initiative with priority African primate for conservation action concomitant education, professional training, economic (Oates, 1996), occurring across < 50,000 km2 in benefits for habitat-area communities, and a release site Cameroon, Nigeria, and Bioko Island, Equatorial protection program. Adequate protection from hunting is the Guinea. This highly restricted distribution, reduced by last goal to be realized before re-introduction will occur. habitat loss and fragmentation, and intense hunting have caused drill numbers to decline in all known areas; perhaps Rationale - is a re-introduction as few as 3,000 animals, isolated in 12 or more habitat islands, remain (Gadsby & Jenkins, 1998). project necessary for drills?

This article describes work since 1991 to develop an in situ captive breeding facility for drill monkeys in Nigeria. Five By 1991 national parks in Cameroon and Nigeria 2 ecologically functional, medically screened, natural-sized, encompassed nearly 5,000 km of drill habitat. However, reproducing drill groups have been created from orphaned survey results indicated drills urgently required protection. animals and are ready for release to restock depleted Low total numbers, population fragmentation, decline in habitat where the extant drill population may be non-viable. group size and density, and suspected breakdown of super- 20 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

grouping behavior suggested that wild drills could soon face inbreeding and viability loss, even if hunting was controlled.

How could we justify a captive breeding/re-introduction project when real protection should be enough to safeguard the species? It was uncertain how soon protection would occur, and we were unable to affect park policies, despite our interest and intent. With a declining captive population (Böer, 1987) and very low conservation profile, the opportunity to promote the species in situ while establishing a viable captive Drills population seemed adequate (Mandrillus leucophaeus) justification. The project was © Stephen Nash / Conservation International thus conceived as a component of a species recovery strategy, using the intervening years before re-introduction to raise Cross River gorilla (Gorilla gorilla diehli) (Grubb et al., the drill’s profile, protect habitat, establish a viable captive 2001). population, and produce basic biological data. We could not Þ Habitat “The recent visit of Nigerian assume that the parks would deliver sufficient protection in island isolated time. Ten years later hunting indeed continues in the parks. from drill’s President Obasanjo to see the core wild drills in their forest enclosures is Designing for success - can population, so such an example: People any mistake we cover every base? with released recognized it was wildlife that animals will brought the head of state to visit

not jeopardize their tribal area for the first time The Drill Rehabilitation & Breeding Center was designed species’ with re-introduction as its logical conclusion. Rather than critical in history” create a program to meet the needs of existing captive populations. animals, we purpose-built a program to address the needs of the species. Some ideas were: Þ Implement early protection program for the release site (now gazetted as Afi Mountain Wildlife Sanctuary). Þ Provide early economic benefits for release site · Collaborate with all levels of government, traditional communities to engender positive attitudes toward tribal rulers and communities, other NGOs, advisory wildlife as an element of sustainable protection. bodies, and existing captive management schemes (the Drill SSP in North America and the Drill EEP in Europe). Every management and project development decision had · Adhere to legislation regarding possession, movement, to affirm the question, “What is in the best interest of drills and placement of endangered species. as a species?” · Conduct intensive medical screening with assistance from the International Zoo Veterinary Group (Lewis, Animal stock - why was it 1998); testing is ongoing and increasingly in-depth as new tests are available. Drills not 100% “clean” remain not there? at the urban facility. A drill posing a health risk to others may be euthanized. Concomitant screening of wild drill At project inception there were 52 drills in EEP and SSP feces is undertaken to assess endemic parasite loads. institutions (Böer, 1987). With few breeding animals, a · Limit breeding to mainland subspecies (Mandrillus viable, genetically diverse captive population did not exist. leucophaeus leucophaeus). Due to their small natural During fieldwork we saw drills in villages, captured as range, drills are unlikely to have distinct races. (The only infants when their nursing mothers were shot for the member of the possible Bioko subspecies Mandrillus commercial meat trade. These orphans were an exceptional leucophaeus poensis is sterilized and lives in a group.) genetic and educational resource, and led to government collaboration in 1991 to found the Drill Rehabilitation & · Pre-select release site for final location of captive facility. Breeding Center (DRBC). Funding was independently Criteria included: sourced from external donors. Þ Last major habitat outside protected areas in Nigeria, so project can bring needed conservation initiative. In contrast to zoos, the Drill Rehabilitation & Breeding Þ Presence of other endangered taxa, especially the Center has had tremendous breeding success. Since 1994

21 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

we have recorded 85 (31:54) live births to 19 wild-born and keeper who is virtually accepted as a group member and 15 captive-born mothers, and 11 wild-born fathers. Thirty who would lead the animals gradually in a set direction. wild-born founders are currently represented in a total Animals are tattooed, and keepers recognize each population of 125 drills. Survival of full-term births is 87% individual. While perhaps imprecise and open to mishap, and 100% are mother-reared. The Drill Rehabilitation & this is considered less risky than capturing 30+ drills in the Breeding Center still recovers about four wild-born founders rainforest and physically carrying them to a desired location. per year by donation or after confiscation by authorities. No Release should coincide with optimal food and water animals are purchased or removed from the wild. Wild-born availability and a trough in the annual parturition curve. founders are given priority and non-intervention for captive- bred infants is Post-release monitoring will include: “Provide early economic benefits strict policy. for release site communities to · Data collection and analysis from transmitters and Why did we ground-tracking to observe dispersal and travel. engender positive attitudes succeed in towards wildlife as an element of breeding drills · Group dynamics: cohesion, fission, emigration, contact/ sustainable protection” when those fusion with wild drills. with resources · Survival to reproduce, reproduction with wild drills, and and experience comparison of pre- and post-release reproductive rates. faltered? Using what little is known of drill ecology, we attempted to simulate the drills’ complex, multi-storeyed, · Avoidance of humans and human settlements. dynamic, and mobile environment; feeding patterns; and · Avoidance of possible predators, such as chimpanzees demography (particularly multimale and not harem group (leopards are believed to be locally extinct). composition). We sought to preserve behaviors by providing · General health, fecal analysis, observed or measured the drills with sexual, social, and behavioral choices often body weight changes. managed against in captivity. In our favor were the species’ native climate, seasonal variation, and founder diversity. · Survivorship, and post mortem of deceased animals if possible. After five years the first drill group was moved to the Afi Mountain facility where four groups now live in individual, Anticipating failure - what may multihectare, solar-powered electric fence enclosures of high forest with natural water sources. The drills adapted be unavoidable? readily, sleeping in trees at night, foraging, utilizing all vegetation storeys, and avoiding poisonous plants and hostile interactions with animals. They are provisioned with While the drills’ present behavior in their forest enclosures is farm produce, wild fruits and nuts purchased from villagers. perceived as adequate for survival in the wild, what could go Presently, the largest group enclosure is about 9 ha. The wrong? drills become “wilder” with each generation: wildborn · Inability to find water during the long dry season. orphans are hand-reared and remain ‘manageable’, while · Inability to adapt to little-understood seasonal patterns of most F1 and F2 animals have never been handled, avoid movement. humans, and have lived entirely in a forest environment. · Failure to avoid hunters and snare traps, assuming Release - the final protection is incomplete. · Negative interaction with wild drills resulting in injury or step & monitoring mortality of native animals. · Failure to develop super-grouping behavior with existing Actions to be taken pre-release: wild group(s).

· Determine if protection at release site is adequate. Conservation benefits - a · Experimental radio-collaring of at least two group members, including dominant males, to determine different measure tolerance to collars, signal distance, transmitter of re-introduction success? longevity, social effects, and potential hazards to a collared individual. Should we evaluate a re-introduction scheme by more than Rough census of current drill numbers in release site (Afi · survival and reproduction? Can we build in benefits at the Mountain), which are currently believed to be well below release site, perhaps more important to conservation of carrying capacity. biodiversity? Given the high investment, re-introduction · Assess villagers’ attitudes to release of animals and should benefit conservation regardless of the released address issues as needed. animals’ success, and it should serve the needs of species · Final veterinary screening. over those of individual animals or institutions.

Release can occur by opening the enclosure fence and The Drill Rehabilitation & Breeding Center has not yet re- passively herding the drills, over days or weeks, the few 100 introduced drills but has enhanced wildlife conservation in meters to the wildlife sanctuary. Each group has at least one situ by providing:

22 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

Job alternatives to hunting, logging, and farming as the Acknowledgments · largest private employer in the tribal area. We acknowledge the long-term collaboration of the Forestry · Community revenues from lease payments, animal food Commission (Ministry of Environment) of the Cross River State purchases, and eco-tourism. Government of Nigeria. Our lasting thanks to the Drill Rehabilitation & Breeding Center’s dedicated supporters, and especially Mobil · Workshops and meetings to resolve forest fires and Producing Nigeria, San Diego Zoo, Glaser Family Foundation, other habitat issues. Rettet den Drill, and M. B. Slade.

· Small-scale developments like a native-tree nursery and road and bridge maintenance. References

· Professional training in animal husbandry, veterinary, Böer, M. 1987. International studbook for the drill. Zoo Hannover, and wildlife management, thus developing a new Germany. national capacity. · Field opportunities for Nigerian university students. Gadsby, E.L. & Jenkins, Jr., P.D. 1998. The drill-integrated in situ and ex situ conservation. African Primates 3 (1 & 2):12-18. · Encouragement to authorities to enforce existing wildlife laws enabling them to fulfill their mandate. Grubb, P., Butynski, T.M., Oates, J.F., Bearder, S.K., Disotell, T.R., Groves, C.P., & Struhsaker, T.T. 2001. An assessment of the · An educational resource to elevate the value of drills and diversity of African primates. Draft manuscript in review. natural heritage. Open free to the public, the Drill Rehabilitation & Breeding Center annually receives tens Lewis, J.C.M. 1998. Drill Rehab & Breeding Center Project, of thousands of local visitors, including school groups. Veterinary Resource Manual. 1 & 2. Updated. Internal project text. · Means to attract government attention to an overlooked International Zoo Veterinary Group, UK. rural area. Oates, J.F. 1996. African Primates: Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. Revised Edition. IUCN, Gland.

Ex situ gains include: Contributed by Elizabeth L. Gadsby, Pandrillus, Calabar, Nigeria, E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]

· Increased knowledge of drill biology, behavior and reproduction and an uncommon south-north transfer of expertise. · Captive-bred drills that may participate in breeding loans/ exchanges. · Impetus for creating protected habitat that did not exist before the project.

These benefits add value to the target species and its habitat, before re-introduction occurs and regardless of its success. Our role in protecting and gazetting the Afi Mountain Wildlife Sanctuary is the project’s proudest achievement.

What is the future?

The success of drill protection and re-introduction will depend largely on the cooperation of people living around the release site. Our public awareness message highlights that the captive project and wildlife sanctuary have brought economic benefits and positive interest. The recent visit of Nigerian President Obasanjo to see the drills in their forest enclosures is such an example: People recognized it was wildlife that brought the head of state to visit their tribal area for the first time in history. An insular program, which focused only on captive breeding and re-introduction rather than an open project that functions as a conservation initiative with high visibility, could not have achieved this measure of worth in people’s minds, nor contributed to conservation beyond the value of the re-introduced animals themselves.

Despite accomplishments the project is not the solution for the survival of drills as a species - it is but one tool in the box. Sustainable protection of drills and other wildlife remains the most important action.

23 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

SOUTH & EAST ASIA Re-introduction of orang-utans in Indonesia

rang-utans (Pongo pygmaeus and Pongo necessary for survival in their natural habitat. abelii) are highly endangered. It is currently feared that wild orang-utans may become In 1978, rehabilitation of orang-utans at Ketambe was extinct within several decades. It is discontinued due to concerns that rehabiliated orang-utans estimated that 85% of the distribution range of orang-utans had transmitted respiratory diseases, acquired from lies within Indonesia (Sumatra and Kalimantan), with small humans, to wild orang-utans. There were also concerns that populations found in Sarawak and Sabah (Malaysian the rehabilitated orang-utans could potentially disrupt the Borneo), and none inhabiting Brunei (Rijksen & Meijaard, existing carrying capacity of local wild populations. The 1999). Bohorok and Tanjung Puting Rehabilitation Centres continued to function from 1973 until 1995, when new There is evidence that orang-utans were hunted throughout government legislations prevented the release of history by humans. During the early part of the 20th Century, rehabilitated orang-utans into habitat containing existing wild hunting of orang- populations. It is estimated that since their establishment, “It is currently feared that wild utans for trade the Bohorok Rehabilitation Centre has received 204 orang- orang-utans may become occurred primarily utans (Rijksen & Meijaard, 1999), and Tanjung Puting to satisfy the Rehabilitation Centre has received over 180 ex-captive extinct within several decades” demands from orang-utans (Yeager, 1997), which were released into zoos, museums, Gunung Leuser National Park and Tanjung Puting National scientific institutions, and private collectors. Infant orang- Park, respectively (Rijksen & Meijaard, 1999). utans were considered desirable pets; however, the adult female had to be killed by poachers in order to obtain the Records concerning exact numbers of individuals received offspring. It was estimated that for every infant that survived at centres, numbers released, release dates, success or the journey to the market, at least three or perhaps as many failure of releases, extent of post-release monitoring and as 10 (Rijksen & Meijaard, 1999) orang-utans (infants and numbers of deaths are poor (Yeager, 1997 and Rijksen & their mothers) died due to shock and injury. Orang-utans Meijaard, 1999). There are no publications regarding continue to be hunted illegally for the pet trade, for food, for releases and outcomes from these rehabilitation centers. religious and cultural purposes, and also because they are regarded as agricultural pests (Rijksen & Meijaard, 1999). Lessons learned

Method of release During the early 1990s, the Bohorok and Tanjung Puting Rehabilitation Centres became the focus of international By the 1970s, orang-utan populations were declining scientific criticism because the centres did not test orang- dramatically, with habitat destruction as the primary threat utans for infectious diseases nor establish their genetic (Rijksen & Meijaard, 1999) and poaching as a secondary origins. Furthermore, both centres released captive orang- threat that continued to take a toll on the wild population. utans back into national parks that contained viable wild International concern for the survival of orang-utans led to orang-utan populations. There was no standard method of the establishment of three rehabilitation centres in Indonesia releasing animals, and individuals were usually able to in the early 1970s. These centres were located at Ketambe move back and forth between the cages and release site in and Bohorok in North Sumatra and at Tanjung Puting the forest. Both centres provided supplementary food to the National Park in Central Kalimantan. The history of orang- rehabilitated orang-utans at the forest release site. utan rehabilitation in Indonesia and changes to Indonesian regulations regarding orang-utan rehabilitation will be Primatologists shared the concerns, first raised by discussed in this article. researchers at Ketambe, that release of rehabilitated orang- utans of unknown genetic origin or disease status into The Ketambe, Bohorok, and Tanjung Puting Rehabilitation forests containing wild orang-utan populations could be Centres developed as a consequence of law enforcement detrimental to these populations and concluded that the initiatives and aimed to return confiscated animals to the risks associated with introduction of diseases and creation forest to boost the declining wild populations. Law of genetic hybrids of Sumatran and Bornean orang-utans in enforcement involved confiscation of captive orang-utans, the wild could not be justified (Yeager, 1997). The Bohorok most of which were juveniles. Juvenile orang-utans are and Tanjung Puting Rehabilitation Centres were also visited normally dependent on their mothers for up to six years, and by large numbers of tourists. The mismanagement of eco- confiscated individuals often develop adverse psychological tourism at these centres and the problems arising because and behavioural traits associated with captivity. of interaction between tourists and orang-utans had adverse Consequently, housing and group socialisation of effects on the rehabilitation process. confiscated individuals at rehabilitation centres for varying periods of time prior to release, as well as pre-release The history of the Bohorok and Ketambe rehabilitation exposure to forest habitat, were considered essential for centres proved that the effectiveness of rehabilitation these individuals to acquire the mental and behavioral skills centres was conditional upon: 24 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

1. the primary objective being the facilitation of law enforcement, 2. enforcement of the law by authorities being done in a continuous and consistent manner, and 3. the provision of financial support for the rehabilitation process to ensure that the centres did not have to generate funds themselves (Rijksen & Meijaard, 1999).

Indeed, many of the problems associated with orang-utan rehabilitation were due to poor project management and inadequate financial support. It was clear that orang-utan rehabilitation centres needed to have standardised practices involving quarantine, disease testing, genetic screening, socialisation process, pre- release behavioural monitoring to determine release groups, release of rehabilitated orang-utans in release Orangutans with young groups into forest that does not contain (Pongo spp.) a wild orang-utan population, © Stephen Nash / Conservation International supplementary feeding of released individuals, and post-release monitoring. hepatitis B virus in orang-utans is not of human origin, but is Discussion a hepadnavirus (OHV) indigenous to orang-utans and distinctly different from the human virus (Warren et al., 1999). This dispelled the myth that viral infection had been Following consideration of the criticisms of orang-utan transmitted from humans during captivity. These findings rehabilitation and the potential adverse effects of these have important implications for quarantine and management practices on wild orang-utan populations, the Indonesian policies in rehabilitation centres. Government created a new decree in 1995 regulating the practice of re-introduction of orang-utans. This decree Recently, the orang-utan has been reclassified as two declared that orang-utans must be released into suitable species, Pongo pygmaeus and Pongo abelii, due to the habitat that does not contain, and is geographically isolated significant genetic variation between Bornean and Sumatran from, populations of wild orang-utans. The regulations also orang-utans. It has also been found that at least four declared that orang-utans intended for release must genetically distinct populations of Bornean orang-utans undergo medical examinations and that the genetic origin of occur (Warren et al., 2001). It is important that these individuals must be determined. subpopulations be protected in each geographic region to ensure that the genetic diversity of wild Bornean orang- In the last decade, three new rehabilitation centres which utans is maintained. These results strengthen arguments for operate under the new regulations have been established in further conservation efforts to protect greater areas of Indonesia: The Wanariset Orang-utan Project in East orang-utan habitat. Kalimantan in 1991, Nyaru Menteng Orang-utan Project in Central Kalimantan in 1999, and the Sumatran Orang-utan Determination of genetic origin of rehabilitated orang-utans Project in Jambi, Sumatra in 2001. The rehabilitation efforts should involve species identification (Sumatran vs. Bornean) of the Tanjung Puting Rehabilitation Centre have been only. Genetic analysis to determine origin should be continued in accordance with the new regulations by the performed on all individuals at rehabilitation centres prior to Orang-utan Care and Quarantine Centre in Central release. Orang-utans identified as Sumatran or Bornean Kalimantan. must be re-introduced onto their respective islands of origin.

Research on diseases of rehabilitated orang-utans has Rehabilitated orang-utans can only be released into a clarified important health issues in re-introduction projects specific release forest that is geographically isolated from, (Warren et al., 1998 & Warren et al., 1999). It had long been and does not contain, wild orang-utan populations. assumed that diseases in captive orang-utans were Therefore, establishment of large rehabilitated populations, transmitted from humans, or domestic animals, during by mixing Bornean orang-utans from different geographic captivity. The research has shown that orang-utans are origins together in specific release forests, is considered to susceptible to some human diseases, including parasites be a suitable management solution for release of and tuberculosis, and testing for diseases during quarantine rehabilitants. is a necessary component of health management at re- introduction centres. The research also showed that Recommendations on orang-utan re-introduction and

25 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

conservation were prepared by a veterinary working group orang-utans. Rehabilitation centres play an important role by at the IUCN/SSC Orang-utan Re-introduction and Protection working with local forestry departments to expand and Workshop held in Balikpapan, East Kalimantan in June protect the forest regions where the orang-utans have been 2001 and are included in the Workshop Report. re-introduced and serve as a constant reminder to the local and international community of the plight of the orang-utan Conclusion and the need to conserve its habitat (Rijksen & Meijaard, 1999).

Rehabilitation of orang-utans is a controversial issue. It has References been argued that rehabilitation centres divert funding and attention away from protection against habitat destruction, Rijksen, H. & Meijaard, E. 1999. Our Vanishing Relative: The Status the real issue threatening orang-utans. However, without of Wild Orang-utans at the close of the Twentieth Century, Kluwer rehabilitation centres, the fate of large numbers of orang- Academic Publishers, Wageningen.

utans that are confiscated in Indonesia each year would Warren, K.S., Niphuis, H., Heriyanto, Verschoor, E.J., Swan, R.A. & raise major logistical, ethical, and welfare issues. The Heeney, J.L. 1998. Seroprevalence of specific viral infections in apparent failure to stem the illegal trade in juvenile orang- confiscated orang-utans (Pongo pygmaeus), Journal of Medical utans, in particular during the last five decades, is a Primatology 2 (1):33-37. reflection of the lack of law enforcement by authorities, as well as issues associated with poverty and the continued Warren, K.S., Heeney, J.L., Swan, R.A., Heriyanto & Verschoor, E. economic incentive for local people to participate in illegal J. 1999. A new group of Hepadnaviruses naturally infecting orang- logging or poaching activities. utans (Pongo pygmaeus), Journal of Virology, 73: 7,860-7,865.

Warren, K.S., Verschoor, E.J., Langenhuijzen, S., Heriyanto, Swan, Rijksen and Meijaard (1999) argue that rehabilitation R.A., Vigilant, L. & Heeney, J.L. 2001. Speciation and intra- centres are still required as they facilitate law enforcement subspecific variation of Bornean orang-utans, Pongo pygmaeus efforts, which remain fundamental for the survival and pygmaeus, Molecular Biology and Evolution 18 (4): 472-480. conservation of orang-utans. In addition to assisting law enforcement, rehabilitation centres are considered to have Yeager, C.P. 1997. Orang-utan rehabilitation in Tanjung Puting an important role in the education of local communities National Park, Indonesia, Conservation Biology 11(3): 802-805. about nature conservation and in fostering public respect for the system of law enforcement and government Contributed by Kristin S. Warren & Ralph A. Swan, Division of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, Murdoch University, conservation agencies. Orang-utans can be used as South Street, Murdoch, WA, Australia. “flagship” species in developing proposals for habitat E-mail: [email protected] protection, and re-introduction of orang-utans into new regions can facilitate reclassification of suitable areas of unprotected forest, therefore increasing the extent of protected habitat. Rehabilitation centres can also develop managed eco-tourism projects that allow visitors to observe (but not interact with) rehabilitated orang-utans, providing a preferable option to eco-tourism that is focused on wild

Release of golden langurs in Tripura, India

e-introductions are coming into increasing use The distribution of the endangered langur (herein after (Kleiman, 1989) as one of the most important referred as golden langur) is restricted to areas along Indo- conservation measures following fast depletion of Bhutan to the west of the Manas river in India. The golden natural habitats. Among approximately 300 langur is highly endangered and is placed in Schedule I of primate species, barring few well-monitored re-introductions, Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, although the IUCN i.e. orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus) (Aveling and Mitchell, Red Data Book has ranked it as Data Deficient species. Its 1982), chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) (Brewer, 1978), and distribution in India is limited to only a small portion of golden-lion tamarins (Leontopithecus rosalia) (see articles Assam and adjoining area of Bhutan. this issue), most have been unintentional, unmonitored, or both. Of the total 15 There are no records to suggest the presence of a wild primate species in population of golden langurs in Tripura in spite of suitable “Presence of infants and sub- India, only three re- habitat conditions and the presence of seven other primate adults in 1993 was an indication introduction species (Gupta, 1997). The available reports in the state on of their successful breeding in examples are the distribution of different primate species do not indicate available: lion-tailed their presence. But given the kind of habitat available in the wild” macaque (Macaca Tripura and presence of other colobines that share the silenus), rhesus same habitat in areas where golden langurs are reported, it macaque (Mulatta mulatta), and golden langur can be safely inferred that golden langur have occurred in (Trachypithecus geei). This paper reports on the third Tripura in the past. The cause of decline could have been species, which is the first example of a colobine re- the destruction of habitat and poaching by tribal populations introduction in India. In 1988, 10 captive langurs were re- in Tripura, which constituted about 80% of the total human introduced into two wildlife sanctuaries. population in Tripura until 1982. Moreover, the striking coat 26 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

color of golden langurs would have made them more visible and conspicuous in the forests compared to the other primate species (for example, Phayre’s and capped langurs and a gibbon).

There was no definite reason for the release of these golden langurs in the wild except to release an additional species in to the wild that can co-exist with the other seven species of primates in Tripura. Both the release sites contained wild population of six to seven other primate species, but no golden langurs. Both the sanctuaries are otherwise well protected from poaching and other biotic pressure through Golden Langur regular protection measures and other day-to-day (Trachypithecus geei) management initiatives. No measures specifically for the © Stephen Nash / Conservation International golden langurs were taken for this purpose. A veterinarian monitored the health of all the released individuals regularly at the zoo before their release into the wild. No training was Sanctuary, respectively, in June 1988. The langurs were imparted to the golden langurs before their release. transferred to transit squeeze cages (3 m x 1.2 m x 1.2 m with iron wheels). Local laborers who are apt in catching the Both the sites are very good for food availability, habitat golden langurs did this job without any chemical restraint condition, and protection from hunting and logging. methods. In Sepahijala sanctuary, the release site was near However, the Trishna site is more disturbed due to the the zoo and only involved sliding the cage on its wheels, collection of minor forest products by the local human while in the case of the Trishna sanctuary (about 85 km population. from the zoo), the cage was transported in a lorry early in the morning, and the golden langurs were released well Method of release before dusk.

From a captive stock of 15 golden langurs (5:10) in Results Sepahijala Zoo in Tripura, the State Forest Department released 10 langurs in two groups of four (1:3) and six (1:5) Systematic monitoring protocols were not developed along into the Sepahijala Wildlife Sanctuary and Trishna Wildlife with the release process at either releases site. However,

Table 1. Group composition of released golden langurs in Tripura since 1988

Name of Original released stock Future addition in original stock Dead (D) or Current sanctuary Missing (M) status Date Number Age / Date Number Age / Sex Date Number Age / Number Age/ Sex Sex Sex Trishna June 1 AM Not known Not known Not known WLS 1988 4 AF Sepahijala June 1 AM Nil Nil 1 AM WLS 1988 3 AF Jan 3 AF escaped 3 AF Not 3 AF 1991 from known captivity 1992 1 INF new birth - - - 1 SA M 1993 1 INF new birth - - - 1 INF

1993 1 INF new birth - - - 1 INF

Jan 1 INF new birth 1 INF Not - - 1994 (D) known 1997- - - 1 AM Not 1 AF 1999 2 AF known 1 SAM 2 INF LEGEND: AM = Adult Male / AF = Adult Female / SAM = Sub-Adult Male / INF = Infant

27 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

the author undertook surveys at both sites during 1993-1994 colonizing even a sub-optimal habitat. Moreover, their ability and 1997-1999. to descend to the ground for movement and feeding would give them an edge in resource utilization. Due to year-round In Trishna sanctuary, the group of released golden langurs availability of food and roosting sites and an absence of was not located during two surveys conducted in December predators and biotic pressures, and because the release 1993 and during different surveys from 1997 to 1999. Local stock was not of captive-bred origin, the golden langurs forest staff also could not report any sighting of the golden quickly adapted to the wild habitat in Sepahijala sanctuary. langurs in this sanctuary. It is assumed by the staff that The presence of infants and sub-adults in 1993 was an either these golden langurs were killed by predators or indication of their successful breeding in the wild. hunted for meat by the local tribal groups in this area.

The release in Sepahijala sanctuary was within the zoo Conclusion boundary, so the release group was well protected from hunting and natural predators. Therefore, the release group could be located easily by the author both during 1993-1994 Although the release operation of golden langurs in Tripura and 1997-1999. was not undertaken in a planned manner, the initial success at one site is an indication of the possibilities of future These two sites were selected as they are wildlife successful release operations with proper planning. The sanctuaries and are protected from various kinds of biotic author recommends that a captive stock of proper age/sex disturbances by Wildlife (Protection) Act of India. There was composition be maintained in Sepahijala Zoo for future not much risk in either of the sanctuaries. But at Trishna releases into the wild. The Forest Department should Wildlife Sanctuary due to lack of monitoring of the released undertake long-term research and monitoring of the golden langurs, the group was lost and might have fallen released animals. prey to a leopard or died due to unnatural reasons. Since the released golden langur group at Sepahijala was References monitored regularly, it survived and increased in numbers Avling, R. & Mitchell, A. 1982. Is rehabilitating orangutans over the years. worthwhile? Oryx 16:263-270.

The composition of the released population of golden Brewer, S. 1978. The chimps of Mt. Asserik, New York, Alfred langurs in 1993 (Table 1) was seven individuals. The Knopf. surveys conducted during 1997-1999, however, revealed the presence of only one adult female in close proximity with Gupta, A. K. 1997. Conservation Ecology of Non-human Primates a capped langur (Trachypithecus pileata) group in the area. and Human Impact in Tripura, Northeast India., Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom. Some forest staff believed, however, that a male infant was born to this female and an adult male capped langur. The Kleiman, D. 1989. Reintroduction of captive mammals for author, however, did not find any morphological conservation. BioScience, 39:152-161. resemblance to a golden langur. Konstant, W. R., & Mittermeier, R. A. 1982. Introduction, re- introduction and translocation of Neotropical primates: Past Lessons learned experience and future possibilities. Int. Zoo. Yearbook 22:69-77.

1. The failure of release in Trishna and partial initial Contributed by Dr. Atul K. Gupta, IFS, Professor and Head Department of Population Management, Capture & success in Sepahijala sanctuary is due to lack of proper Rehabilitation, Wildlife Institute of India, Chandrabani, planning and total absence of monitoring protocols Dehradun, Uttaranchal, India. E-mail: [email protected] following release. 2. A proper, scientific, well-established procedure should have been followed. 3. A proper survey of the potential release site was needed to assess the availability of food, absence of natural predators and level of human hunting pressures. 4. As a follow up to the release processes, a time-bound monitoring protocol was needed. 5. It would have been worthwhile to radio-collar a few animals for proper monitoring and subsequent necessary actions.

Discussion

Golden langurs use about 20 hectares as their home range, which they share with Phayre’s langurs (Trachypithecus phayrei), capped langurs (Trachypithecus pileata), pig-tailed macaques (Macaca nemestrina) and rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) (for further details on feeding ecology and behavior, see Gupta, 1997). Being a folivorous and generalist feeder, the golden langur may succeed in

28 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group:

Guidelines for Nonhuman Primate Re-introductions

Prepared by the Re-introduction Specialist Group of The World Conservation Union (IUCN) Species Survival Commission (SSC)

Edited by Lynne R. Baker

29 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

CONTENTS PAGE

I. Executive Summary ...... 32

II. Context of Guidelines ...... 33

III. Introduction ...... 33

IV. Definition of Terms ...... 33 Re-introduction Approaches ...... 33 Release Strategies ...... 34 Release Stock Types ...... 34

V. Aims, Objectives, & Precautionary Principle ...... 34

VI. Planning for Re-introduction ...... 34 A. Habitat & Release Site ...... 35 B. Species’ Socioecology & Behaviour ...... 36 C. Socioeconomic, Financial, & Legal Requirements ...... 36 D. Release Stock ...... 37 E. Genetic Assessment ...... 37

VII. Disease Transmission & Veterinary Requirements ...... 38 A. Management & General Considerations ...... 38 B. Quarantine & Disease Screening ...... 38 C. Staff Screening & Health ...... 41

VIII. Transport & Release Implementation ...... 41

IX. Post-Release Monitoring ...... 42

X. Considerations for Translocation ...... 43

XI. Acknowledgements ...... 44

30 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

CONTENTS PAGE

Annex I: Key References ...... 44 General Re-introduction & Translocation ...... 45 Veterinary & Capture/Transport ...... 46 References by Region ...... 48 Asian Primates ...... 48 African Primates & Lemurs ...... 49 Neotropical Primates ...... 50

Annex II: Husbandry References ...... 52 Bonobo ...... 52 Chimpanzee ...... 52 Cotton-Top Tamarin ...... 52 Golden Lion Tamarin ...... 53 Loris ...... 53 Mangabey ...... 53 Mixed Species ...... 53 Orang-utan ...... 53

Annex III: Key Contacts ...... 54 IUCN Species Survival Commission ...... 54 CITES Secretariat ...... 54 IUCN/SSC Disciplinary Specialist Groups ...... 54 Primate Taxon Advisory Groups ...... 54 Other Contacts ...... 55

Annex IV: Core Review Board ...... 56 About the IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group ...... 56

Decision Tree: Nonhuman Primate Re-introductions ...... 57

31 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

I. Executive Summary been operating for some time, so managers of these projects should attempt to integrate the guidelines as soon as possible into their current operating procedures and The IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group: Guidelines protocol. for Nonhuman Primate Re-introductions is intended as a guide to re-introduction programmes. The priority has been Before initiating any re-introduction project, managers must to develop standards that are of direct, practical assistance clearly define why that project is needed and conduct a to those planning, approving, or implementing re- rapid overall assessment to ensure key requirements, such introductions. The primary audience of these guidelines is as habitat suitability, can likely be met. The main goal of the re-introduction practitioner. any re-introduction effort should be to re-establish self- sustaining populations of primates in the wild and to Because re-introduction projects are often restricted by maintain the viability of those populations. Although location, resources, and other limitations, this document is exceptions to this, such as trial re-introductions of common meant as a "best-practice" model, or an ideal code of species and rescue/welfare releases, should also adhere to conduct. Re-introduction managers are strongly encouraged these guidelines as much as possible, such projects are not to use this document as their principal guide to primate re- considered true re-introductions or conservation approaches introductions. and are not specifically covered in these guidelines.

Each re-introduction project should develop written Re-introduction practitioners are strongly encouraged to guidelines that apply specifically to its taxon, region, legal contact the IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group structure, etc. These customised documents should be (RSG) and present and discuss their re-introduction updated over time and eventually result in a re-introduction proposals and results (see Annex III, Page 54). As a result, manual for the taxon of interest. They should also directly a network of contacts can be developed and information relate to this existing document, so these guidelines can be from various projects shared. regularly updated with new information and techniques. Note that details regarding the care of animals held in Guidelines for Nonhuman Primate Re-introductions covers captivity prior to release, such as enclosure enrichment, are the main steps of a re-introduction effort. The steps are not specifically covered in these guidelines. However, where listed in a suggested order of execution, although some appropriate, important points regarding these topics will be steps overlap with one another (see "Basic Principles of Re- noted. introductions," below). It is realised that many projects have

Basic Principles of Re-introductions (see “Decision Tree”, page 57)

1) Identify the need for re-introduction and conduct a rapid overall assessment (determine if the key requirements-habitat, socioeconomic, financial, legal, management, release-stock suitability, veterinary, post-release monitoring-are likely to be met). 2) Define aims, objectives, and time frame.

3) Establish a multidisciplinary team. Begin development and 4) Assess the proposed release-site habitat and determine its suitability. implementation of a quarantine and 5) Review the socioecological and behavioural data on the taxon of interest. veterinary programme

6) Determine if the socioeconomic, financial, and legal requirements can be met in the short and long terms. 7) Assess the suitability of the release stock.

8) Evaluate the genetic status of the release stock.

9) Ensure release stock has been cleared for release by a qualified veterinary team.

10) Develop strategy and time frame for transport and final release of animals. Co-ordinate 11) Establish and enact post-release monitoring and other follow-up activities. simultaneously

12) Document project outcomes on an ongoing basis.

NOTE: Some steps such as 4-8, will likely overlap. 32 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

II. Context of Guidelines protection from hunting pressure, habitat preservation, and other approaches are underway. One such measure is the restoration of primates to their natural habitats. Worldwide The IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group was there are several facilities with aims to re-introduce captive established in 1988 in response to an increasing number of primates or translocate wild primates, with some projects plant and animal re-introductions worldwide. Although the already well established. IUCN Guidelines for Re-introductions covers key issues regarding re-introductions, it is a general policy document Some primate re-introduction projects have been scrutinised that applies to both plants and animals. Due to the many for not adhering to proper standards for veterinary unique aspects of re-introducing primates, it was determined clearance, tourism management, and prevention of that taxon-specific guidelines were needed. ecological risks to wild conspecifics. Although the issues involved with re-introduction can vary greatly depending on The Guidelines for Nonhuman Primate Re-introductions has the taxon and region, general rules do apply. Developed in been prepared for the Re-introduction Specialist Group by response to the increasing occurrence of primate re- Lynne R. Baker. It is based on current IUCN policy introduction projects and thus the growing need for specific documents, a review of case histories, and consultation policy guidelines, this document will help ensure that such across a range of disciplines. Comments were solicited from re-introduction efforts achieve their intended conservation a large group of experts and interested parties, and a benefit without causing adverse side effects of greater thorough review was done by a Core Review Board (see impact. Annex IV, Page 56). NOTE: In the context of these guidelines, references to "primates" It is important that these guidelines are implemented in the refer to nonhuman primates. context of IUCN's broader policies pertaining to biodiversity conservation and sustainable management of natural resources. The philosophy for environmental conservation IV. Definition of Terms and management of IUCN and other conservation bodies is stated in key documents such as Caring for the Earth (IUCN, 1991) and Global Biodiversity Strategy (WRI, 1992). RE-INTRODUCTION APPROACHES Other valuable resources are the IUCN/SSC Primate NOTE: For the purpose of this document, unless stated otherwise, Specialist Group's Action Plans for Africa, Asia, and "re-introduction" is used to refer to any of the approaches listed below, except Translocation and Rescue/Welfare. Madagascar, as well as its regional newsletters: Lemur

News, Neotropical Primates, African Primates, and Asian a) Re-introduction: the re-introduction of a primate Primates. taxon in an area from which it has been extirpated or

become extinct ("re-establishment" is used to indicate Primate re-introduction projects should be conducted in that the re-introduction has been successful). accordance with these guidelines, and the following IUCN policy documents: IUCN Guidelines for Re-introductions b) Reinforcement/Supplementation: the addition of (1998), IUCN Guidelines for the Placement of Confiscated individuals to an existing population of conspecifics Animals (2002), IUCN Guidelines for the Prevention of ("re-stocking" is a synonym). Biodiversity Loss Caused by Alien Invasive Species (2000),

Translocation of Living Organisms (IUCN Position c) Conservation Introduction: the introduction of a primate Statement, 1987), as well as the CITES Guidelines for the taxon, for the purpose of conservation, outside its Disposal of Confiscated Live Species (1997). recorded known distribution, but within an appropriate

habitat and eco-geographical area. This is a feasible

conservation tool only when there is no suitable habitat III. Introduction remaining within a primate's historic range. Because of the risks associated with introducing a non-native The latest release of the IUCN Red List of Threatened species into an area, this approach should be Species (Hilton-Taylor, 2000) reveals that the greatest considered a last resort. change among mammals is the number of threatened primates. The total number of primate taxa currently d) Substitution: the introduction of a primate closely related recognised is 621, according to Conservation International. to another taxon that has become extinct in the wild and Of these, 52 are considered critically endangered; 92 are in captivity. The introduction occurs in suitable habitat endangered; and 80 are vulnerable. within the extinct taxon's historic range.

Because primate taxonomy is rapidly changing, the IUCN/ e) Translocation: the deliberate movement of wild SSC Primate Specialist Group recommends that the primate primates from one natural habitat to another for the "unit of conservation action" should be the lowest-named purpose of conservation or management. taxon, which includes subspecies and not just currently recognised species. Re-introduction managers and others f) Rescue/Welfare: the movement of wild primates involved in primate conservation should thus recognise and from one area to another to rescue them from a work toward the conservation of all named taxa of primates. hazardous situation or to resolve human-primate conflicts, or the release of captive primates, such as Because many primates worldwide are facing extinction, orphaned or surplus animals, to attempt to improve conservation measures beyond or in conjunction with their welfare.

33 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

? NOTE: Rescue/welfare is not considered a re-introduction be undertaken according to conservation guidelines, the possibility, however unlikely, of inadvertently introducing a disease or approach because the aim is motivated by goals other than behavioural or genetic aberration not already present in the conservation of the taxon. Thus, rescue/welfare is not environment should rule out implementation of a re-introduction or specifically addressed in this document. translocation programme.

RELEASE STRATEGIES VI. Planning for Re-introduction a) Soft: animals held in enclosures at or near the re- introduction site prior to release, to assist them in Þ Identify the need for re-introduction; define project adjusting to their new environment. Post-release aims, objectives, and time frame; and establish a support, such as supplemental feeding and protection multidisciplinary team. from predators, is usually provided. When done correctly, primate re-introduction is usually very b) Hard: animals not held in enclosures prior to release, complex and expensive. Each re-introduction proposal except during transport. Animals are immediately should be rigorously reviewed on its individual merits. released at the re-introduction site, and generally there is no post-release support. In the planning stages, it should be considered whether available funds might be better used to finance protection RELEASE STOCK TYPES efforts of current wild populations and their habitats. The benefits of a re-introduction project should outweigh the a) Captive born: animals born in captivity. benefits of new or additional conservation and protection measures for current wild populations, as well as any risks b) Wild born: animals born in the wild (natural habitat). (In involved. In some cases, re-introduction can be an effective a translocation or rescue effort, wild-born primates are component of an overall conservation scheme or an often held in enclosures for brief periods during alternative to other ineffectual conservation efforts. Also, transport and prior to release. They are not some approaches, such as a rescue, may be necessary and considered captive animals as a result.) thus the only option. c) Captive: animals held in captivity, such as in The potential benefits of returning primates to the wild enclosures or semi-wild environments, for a prolonged include: period. Captive stock can be wild-born or captive-born. 1) When the existing wild population is severely threatened, d) Mixed Wild/Captive: captive social groups that re-introduction might improve the long-term conservation comprise both wild-born and captive-born primates. potential of the taxon as a whole, or of a local The aim is usually to promote survival of the captive- population. born animals after re-introduction. 2) Re-introduction can make a strong political and educational statement concerning the fate of animals and may serve to promote local conservation values. V. Aims, Objectives, & 3) Re-introduction can positively affect the conservation of all the fauna and flora within the release area due to Precautionary Principle increased public awareness, presence of project personnel, improved law enforcement, and integration and support of local communities. AIMS & OBJECTIVES 4) The recovery of a primate taxon in an area due to re- The principal aim of any primate re-introduction or introduction may allow local communities to re-establish translocation should be to re-establish a viable, self- certain economic or cultural practices, in a sustainable sustaining population in the wild. The principal objective and managed way. should be conservation - to enhance the long-term survival of a taxon. Secondary objectives may include re- In contrast, the risks of re-introducing primates can be high. establishing a flagship species in an ecosystem, maintaining Re-introduction should be undertaken only if it does not or restoring natural biodiversity, enhancing genetic variation threaten existing populations of conspecifics, populations of of a taxon, promoting conservation awareness, or similar. other interacting taxa, or the ecological integrity of the area in which they live. The conservation of the taxon as a whole, PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE and of other animals already living free, must take With the re-introduction of primates, there is always a level precedence over the welfare of individual animals in of risk to the released individuals, indigenous wild captivity. populations if they exist, and their habitats. Consequently, this "precautionary principle" should guide all re-introduction In considering the welfare of potential release animals, note efforts: that previous re-introductions of animals released from

1 captivity have shown that mortality is often high. Poorly If there is little conservation value in releasing primates to the wild, planned or executed release programmes may equate to or no management programme exists in which such a release can

1 : It is recognised that “conservation value” may not always be easy to assess and may be a function of the taxon’s status at the national or regional level as much as international level (for example, listed as threatened by IUCN). 34 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

simply dumping animals in the wild and should be strongly introduction. If such a restoration effort is not possible, a opposed. new release site should be selected.

Re-introduction requires a multidisciplinary approach · Previous causes of a taxon's decline must be identified involving a team of people drawn from various backgrounds and eliminated, or reduced to a safe level. Such causes and with a range of expertise. The team may include may include disease, hunting pressure, pollution, primatologists, representatives from governmental natural- poisoning, competition with or predation by exotic resource agencies, nongovernmental organisations, local species, habitat loss, climate change, adverse effects of communities, funding bodies, universities, veterinary earlier research or management programmes, institutions, and zoos. Project leaders should be responsible competition with domestic livestock, or a combination of for co-ordinating among the various bodies. these. · To assist managers in determining the ideal time of year Previous re-introductions of the same or similar taxa should for release, studies of seasonality of climate and be thoroughly researched, and contact should be made with vegetation of the proposed release site, including people and organisations having relevant expertise, seasonal availability of foods preferred by the primate particularly the IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group taxon of interest, are recommended. and the IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist Group, prior to and while developing re-introduction protocol. Short- and long- · If no suitable habitat remains in the taxon's historic term success indicators and predictions of programme range, a conservation introduction (see "Definition of duration should be identified, in the context of the agreed- Terms," Page 33) can be considered. Such an upon aims and objectives. introduction should be a last resort when no opportunities for re-introduction into the natural range ? The following covers a suggested pattern of evolution and exist and when a significant contribution to the decision-making for a re-introduction project. Some conservation of the taxon will result. Before a programmes have been operating for several years, so conservation introduction is considered, consult the managers of these projects should integrate these guidelines IUCN Guidelines for the Prevention of Biodiversity Loss where appropriate and attempt to rectify any activities that do Caused by Alien Invasive Species (2000). not adhere to the steps listed below.

? The following points are interrelated with the subsequent A. HABITAT & RELEASE SITE section: "Species' Socioecology & Behaviour." The proposed release site must be evaluated in conjunction with the critical Þ Determine if the proposed release site is suitable needs of the taxon of concern. habitat in which to re-introduce or translocate primates. · Re-introductions should take place only when the

taxon's habitat requirements are satisfied and likely to be · The release site should be within the taxon's historic, sustained for the foreseeable future. If the taxon's basic documented range. Because situations vary among habitat and ecological requirements cannot be primate taxa, interpretation of historic range should be determined, animals should not be released. (Although made on a case-by-case basis with the help of experts. many primate taxa are known to fare poorly in secondary or logged forest, a few survive well in marginal habitats. · The vulnerability and regulations of the release site must Some species are also highly adaptable and flexible. Re- be known and evaluated. For example, some release introduction managers should consider such data on the areas are in well-protected national parks, while others taxon of interest when evaluating release sites.) are on private land. The release area and the wildlife within should have assured, long-term protection. · Carrying capacity must be determined. The release site should be sufficient to sustain growth of the re- · When the taxon of interest has been extirpated from the introduced population and support a self-sustaining potential release site, the possibility of a habitat change population in the long run, particularly if there could be a since extirpation must be considered. The introduction of major population expansion. Important is the presence of non-native species that may have altered the habitat to corridors that connect the release site with other areas. such a degree as to affect released animals must be evaluated. Likewise, any change in the legal/political or · The build-up of the released population should be cultural environment needs to be determined and modelled under various sets of conditions to specify the evaluated. optimal number and composition of individuals to be released, such as per year, and the number of years · If any species has filled the void created by the loss of necessary to promote establishment of a viable the primate taxon concerned, the effect the re-introduced population. A Population and Habitat Viability Analysis taxon might have on the ecosystem must be (PHVA) may aid in identifying environmental and investigated. Although a re-introduction is likely to population variables and assessing their potential disrupt established species to some degree, the interactions, which would guide long-term population disruption should not be significantly negative. management. (For more information on PHVA, contact the IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group. · Where a release site has undergone substantial See Annex III, Page 54). degradation caused by human activity, a habitat restoration programme should be initiated before re- · With a reinforcement project, size of the resident primate

35 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

population relative to carrying capacity and density, treatment of animals. There should be a reasonable habitat use, and social structures of the resident assessment of the survival prospects of the release population must be determined. It is also important to animals to justify the risks involved. Specifically, survival assess the potential impact to this population due to a prospects for released primates should at least re-introduction. approximate those of wild animals of the same sex and age. When survival is a major concern, a soft release is · Because reinforcement presents a risk of disease considered more appropriate. transmission, social disruption, and introduction of alien genes to wild populations, there should be no or only a C. SOCIOECONOMIC, FINANCIAL, & LEGAL few remnant individuals in the release site - unless the REQUIREMENTS main goal is to increase genetic variation of a taxon or population. Surveys done to confirm or disprove Þ If suitable habitat exists, and if it has been extirpation should be conducted prior to release. determined the taxon's socioecological and behavioural needs can be met, then assess · An analysis of available food resources and seasonal whether the project can meet the socioeconomic, variations in food availability in the release site should be financial, and legal requirements. made to confirm the presence and availability of foods consumed by wild populations of the taxon of interest. Certain species are more adaptable than others to · Primate re-introductions are usually long-term efforts changes in diet, so each taxon's dietary requirements that require the commitment of continual public, political, must be considered. Re-introduction managers should and often financial support. An assessment of cost-per- provide captive primates foods similar to those they will surviving-animal is important to fully understand the encounter in the release site, as well as limit or avoid expenses involved and to help measure success. feeding crop foods grown by communities adjacent to Consultation with other release practitioners and a the release area (to help deter possible crop-raiding review of the costs of previous projects are advised so episodes). that the actual monetary investment, time commitment, and similar requirements are fully understood before a · Studies of natural and introduced predators in the re-introduction is initiated. proposed release site should be made. The released animals' ability to cope with predation must be · Re-introduction must take place with the full permission considered. and involvement of all relevant government agencies. This is particularly important for re-introductions in border areas; for those involving more than one state or B. SPECIES' SOCIOECOLOGY & BEHAVIOUR province; or when a re-introduced population can expand into neighbouring states, provinces, or territories. Þ In conjunction with habitat assessment, review or (Consider consulting the Convention on Migratory gather socioecological and behavioural data on the Species (CMS): UNEP/CMS Secretariat, Martin-Luther taxon of concern. King St. 8, D-53175 Bonn, Germany. E-mail: [email protected] / Web site: www.wcmc.org.uk/cms) · To determine the critical needs of the taxon of concern, · Government policy toward re-introductions and the taxon the status, ecology, and behaviour of wild populations concerned must be assessed. This may include must be considered. For primates, such data might checking existing provincial, national, and international include habitat preferences, intraspecific variation, legislation and regulations and working toward the adaptations to local ecological conditions, social provision of new measures and acquisition of required behaviour and system, emigration/immigration patterns, permits. group composition, carrying capacity, density, home range, shelter and food requirements, foraging and · Socioeconomic studies should be made to assess the feeding behaviour, predators, and diseases. Also, impact, costs, and benefits of the re-introduction to local population studies that reveal rate of increase, sex ratio, human populations. and ratio of young in a population provide baseline data to help measure project success. Overall, a good · A thorough assessment of attitudes of local communities knowledge of the natural history of the taxon is important to the proposed project is necessary to ensure long-term to the entire re-introduction scheme. protection of the re-introduced population and its habitat, especially if the original cause of the taxon's decline was · If socioecological and behavioural data are not available, due to human factors. studies to obtain this information should be carried out prior to re-introduction. If current wild populations are · The re-introduction programme should be understood, extinct, too few, or too shy to be sufficiently studied, accepted, and supported by local communities prior to information on the natural history of extant subspecies or initiation. other related wild taxa may be employed. Information on · If there is a risk of human-wildlife conflict or interaction captive animals of the taxon concerned should be developing post-release, an action plan for managing applied only as supplementary data. In such cases, and solving such situations should be agreed upon and consultation with experts is necessary to determine the fully understood by all project staff and relevant minimum amount of natural history data needed. authorities. · Re-introduction projects must consider the humane

36 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

D. RELEASE STOCK acquisition of animals from wildlife traders or foreign zoos, the exact origin of a taxon (including country of Þ If the socioeconomic, financial, and legal origin) may be difficult to determine, even with genetic requirements can be met, continue assessment of testing. Primates whose geographic origin cannot be the suitability of the release stock. confirmed should not be considered for re-introduction, except under exceptional circumstances as determined ? If animals have been confiscated, the IUCN Guidelines for the by experts, and they should never be considered for a Placement of Confiscated Animals (2002) should initially be reinforcement programme. consulted. These guidelines offer three options for disposition of confiscated or otherwise acquired animals: maintain in captivity · For issues concerning animals acquired from zoos, for the remainder of the animals' lives, return to the wild, or consultation with the appropriate regional Primate Taxon euthanasia. If these guidelines have been reviewed, and Advisory Group may be of assistance (see Annex III, release to the wild is an option, then continue assessment of Page 54). release-stock suitability.

· Captive or artificially propagated stock must be from a E. GENETIC ASSESSMENT population that has been soundly managed as much as Þ If stock is deemed suitable for release, conduct a possible, both demographically and genetically, genetic assessment of the taxon. according to the principles of contemporary conservation biology. · An assessment should be made of the genetic and Inbreeding in captive populations can make some · taxonomic status of individuals to be re-introduced, as individuals more susceptible to disease, decrease their well as the potential for revision of the currently accepted reproductive ability, etc. Caution should be taken to taxonomy. ensure that highly inbred animals are not released. · With reinforcement projects, genetic assessment Removal of individuals for re-introduction must not · (variation, kinship, etc.) of wild populations of the taxon endanger the captive or wild source population. In the of interest is recommended. Non-invasive collection of case of zoo breeding programmes for re-introduction, samples, such as hair or faeces, is highly advised. animals must be guaranteed available on a regular and predictable basis to meet the specifications of the project · To avoid the mixing of distinct genetic lineages or protocol. introduced behavioural or other abnormalities, release animals should be of the same species or subspecies as Possible behavioural aberrations of release stock due to · those currently residing in the release area or of those time in captivity must be considered. Captive-held that were extirpated. primates can acquire an inappropriate behavioural repertoire. Also, because of their association with and · In case of doubt as to taxonomic status, an investigation reliance on humans during captivity, captive primates of historical information about the loss and fate of generally have diminished capacity to survive in the wild individuals from the re-introduction area should be after re-introduction. undertaken. A study of genetic variation within and among populations of this and related taxa can be Prior to release captive animals should be given the · helpful. Special care is needed when the population has opportunity to acquire the necessary skills to enable long been extinct. survival in the wild. Re-introduction managers should consider "training" environments, such as semi-wild · Caution should be taken to ensure that interspecific enclosures with limited human contact or uninhabited hybridisation (offspring produced by different species, islands (after confirmation the primates would not subspecies, or races) in the wild that would not have negatively affect the island's present fauna and flora), to occurred naturally is avoided, and that no hybrids are test adaptation skills from holding cages to more natural present in the release stock. Hybrids are often not easily environments. determined by morphology. Genetic testing is generally considered the best form of assessment. Captive animals held and released in groups with a · composition similar to the taxon's natural groupings in the wild are more likely to be successful after release than those released in unnatural groupings. (Minor deviations are possible due to the variability and flexibility in intra- and intergroup associations.) · Consideration should be given to taxa that are especially prone to becoming human-oriented and, in turn, less able to survive after re-introduction. Care should also be taken to ensure that potentially dangerous animals (for example, large primates such as the great apes) are not so confident in the presence of humans that they might be a danger to local inhabitants. · In some instances, such as the confiscation or

37 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

VII. Disease Transmission & recommendations of qualified veterinary personnel. · Protective clothing, such as disposable gloves, Veterinary Requirements facemasks, etc., should be worn whenever handling primates. Þ While preparing for a re-introduction project, a strict · Primates in good general health are less likely to carry or quarantine and veterinary programme must be suffer from infectious diseases than those living on developed and implemented. Qualified veterinarians inadequate diets or in sub-optimal physical or social should be part of the re-introduction management conditions. Constant attention should be paid to good team and included in planning, implementation, and husbandry practices (see Annex II, Page 52). follow-up activities. · Managers of re-introduction projects should ensure that all primates are readily, reliably, and permanently ? The considerations listed in this section pertain primarily to re- identifiable by the use of transponders, tattoos, introductions of captive primates. Veterinary issues specific to the translocation of wild-born, free-ranging primates are photographs, or similar means. presented in the subsequent section on translocations. · Medical records should always be kept current and

backup copies made and safely stored. The issue of potential disease transmission- anthropozoonotic and zoonotic-is one of increasing concern.

When it comes to re-introductions, the issue is particularly important: Humans and primates come in contact. B. QUARANTINE & DISEASE SCREENING The following recommendations represent an ideal Transmission of disease-causing agents is more likely when veterinary programme for captive primates intended for primates have been in captivity. (Anthropozoonotic release. Consultation with veterinary experts to devise exchange is disease transmission from humans to animals, baseline requirements for a specific re-introduction and zoonotic exchange is from animals to humans.) programme is advised.

Animals held in captivity or transported, even for a short period of time, may be exposed to a variety of pathogens Quarantine Quarantine is the separation of newly received animals from and thus be potential carriers of infectious organisms. those already in a facility until the health of the new animals Releasing such animals to the wild may result in the can be reviewed. The purpose of such isolation is to prevent introduction of disease to conspecifics or unrelated taxa with the introduction of infectious disease to the resident captive potentially severe effects. Even if there is a very small risk population. In addition, during this period new animals can that release animals have been infected by exotic become accustomed to their new diets and environment, pathogens, the impact that such diseases could have on and baseline veterinary data can be gathered. wild populations is usually unknown. This risk should preclude releasing animals that have not been disease- · A minimum quarantine period of 31 days is required. A screened. 60-day period is preferred, with a 90-day period being the ideal length. An initial stabilisation period of at least It is also important to consider that there are known, and one week to allow an animal to adjust to its new unknown, natural diseases in wild primate populations. environment is recommended prior to the animal's first Natural diseases present in wild populations can have a exam, except in cases where emergency treatment is different, sometimes negative, effect on other taxa. necessary. In certain circumstances, it is wise to increase the quarantine period to 6 months; for example, Financial and practical considerations may limit the degree longer periods should be considered for animals with no to which disease-screening tests can be applied. medical history or with known exposure to infectious Consequently, the protocol described below represents an disease. Quarantine length should be based on origin ideal situation toward which re-introduction projects should and medical history, if any, of the animal in question and aim. potential diseases or problems. Experts must be consulted to determine the appropriate quarantine period and procedures. A. MANAGEMENT & GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS · Primates originating from the same provenance can be For any re-introduction approach, the potential for · quarantined together to help diminish stress brought on disease transmission must be eliminated or minimised by seclusion. If any individual in a quarantine group as much as possible. Following a thorough risk contracts an infectious disease, that individual must be assessment, a clearly defined veterinary protocol should isolated, and all animals in the group must remain in be established and strictly followed. The protocol should quarantine for at least 30 additional days and be tested include details of testing procedures. appropriately. When primates are quarantined together, · Re-introduction managers and veterinarians should have an "all in-all out" rule should apply: If animals are added to a current quarantine group, then the quarantine length a solid understanding of anthropozoonotic and zoonotic is reset for all quarantine animals to the arrival date of diseases and their prevention, symptoms, and the newest animals. treatments. Quarantine facilities should be physically isolated from · Proper veterinary equipment must be available and · other animals, particularly breeding groups or animals maintained. Equipment requirements should follow the 38 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

intended for release. Ideally, at least 20 metres should available to screen for the key agents recommended by a separate newly arrived animals from resident animals qualified veterinary team. If budgets do not permit extensive and a physical barrier placed between them. Appropriate testing, project managers should at least establish serum barriers and pest-control measures should be used to banks of animals intended for release so further studies can prevent insects and other animals from easily entering be carried out in retrospect. the quarantine area. Quarantine facilities should also be sited downwind of other animals, where wind is During the quarantine period, the following actions are predictable, and downstream of other animals, where recommended: water flow is predictable. · Personnel working with quarantined primates must · Under a general anaesthetic, a full clinical examination observe established procedures to prevent cross- of animals should be conducted, including assessment contamination to other resident animals. Such of dentition, eyes, weight, reproductive organs, external procedures should include strict personal hygiene, use parasite burden, previous injuries, etc. of separate equipment (such as cleaning materials), use of separate footwear and clothing, and thorough · Primates should be given permanent identifiers, such as disinfection of all such items after use. Particular a tattoo, subcutaneous microchip transponder, or other attention should be paid to avoiding the mechanical marker. transmission of infective material via clothing, footwear, · Whole blood and serum samples should be collected for and equipment. routine haematology, blood parasite detection, serum · Ideally, a separate staff would care only for quarantined biochemistry profiling, and serological testing for a animals. If this is not possible, then contact with variety of diseases. It is recommended that serum be quarantined animals should always follow contact with tested for a range of human and primate viruses using resident animals and never vice versa. Such isolation the most appropriate tests available. Deciding which test procedures should also be applied to any animal in to use depends on many factors, including availability, resident groups that becomes ill and requires treatment. cost, validity for the taxon, etc. Project veterinarians should advise on a case-by-case basis. · Direct handling of conscious animals in quarantine should be avoided. · It is recommended primates be screened (usually by antibody testing) for Alpha-herpes viruses, Disease Screening Cytomegaloviruses, Foamy viruses, Hepatitis C, HTLV/ During quarantine a variety of screening tests should be STLV, and HIV/SIV. (Where available, more specific performed to determine health status, vaccination status antigen tests for SIV, HTLV/STLV, Foamy viruses, and reviewed, and a serum bank established for each individual. Hepatitis C should be employed.) Screening for Hepatitis Disease screening should test new animals for infectious B should be done by an antigen test for Hepatitis B agents not found naturally in wild populations of the taxon of surface Ag. concern (such as pathogens acquired from people or other · To establish a serum bank, serum should be collected animals) and agents that may result in the introduction or and stored at -20oC or below in a refrigerator/freezer that spread of potentially dangerous diseases. does not self-defrost. For long-term banking (more than

6 months), a -70oC freezer or liquid nitrogen storage is To determine which infectious agents (bacteria, viruses, advised. (Because technology is rapidly changing, parasites, etc.) are normal or abnormal for a certain taxon, project veterinarians or geneticists should be consulted re-introduction programmes should opportunistically screen to determine the best storage method.) Additional serum wild conspecifics, particularly in the region of the release samples should be taken and banked opportunistically, site and only with the help of experts. Non-invasive methods both within the quarantine period and afterward. A serum that pose no or very little risk to wild populations are strongly sample from each animal should be taken and banked recommended. immediately prior to transfer to the release site.

Some viruses, such as Simian Immunodeficiency Virus · To test for tuberculosis (TB), three intradermal (SIV) and Foamy viruses, are endemic in many African Tuberculin skin tests, using the eyelid or abdominal wall primate taxa and may play a role in natural population area, should be administered. For a 60- or 90-day dynamics. So the presence of such viruses in certain quarantine period, the tests should be conducted at no animals would not necessarily preclude the release of these less than 1-month intervals (for a 60-day period, conduct animals. Similarly, the release of parasite-free animals is not the first test on day 1, the day of arrival). For a 31-day always recommended, though re-introduction managers quarantine period, the tests should be administered on need to establish the types of parasites that are acceptable days 1, 14, and 28. Mammalian Old Tuberculin is and in what numbers for a particular taxon. Because recommended. Animals with three negative test readings parasite type and quantity is often dependent on seasonal are considered free of tuberculosis and can be variations, screening of wild populations should occur at introduced into a resident group after all other quarantine different times of the year in an ongoing monitoring procedures have been carried out. programme. Note on TB: Intradermal skin tests are not foolproof, so The infectious agents that are ultimately tested for depend results should be interpreted with caution. Because false on the geographical region, taxon of concern, available positive results can occur under certain circumstances, technologies, funding, and other such factors. Re- experienced veterinary personnel should be consulted introduction managers should ensure adequate funding is

39 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

regarding these circumstances and to assist with the females in quarantine should be treated as any other reading of TB tests. For example, TB testing using animal in quarantine and thus are subject to disease Mammalian Old Tuberculin was designed to be highly screening and sample collection. sensitive to reduce the chances of false negative tests. As a result, false positives occasionally occur, often due to host Species-Specific Considerations exposure to other Mycobacterium species. False positive Expert advice should be sought regarding the types of reactions are common in orang-utans and chimpanzees, diseases and infectious agents that are relevant for the and false negative reactions may occur in animals suffering taxon of interest. Such agents are often determined by from advanced tuberculosis due to anergy, a condition in taxonomy, geographic region, and similar factors. Some which immunological responses are depressed. False examples include: negative results are more likely with emaciated or otherwise weak animals or those suffering from chronic respiratory · Macaque species should be tested for Herpesvirus disease. So any such animals should be treated with great simiae (Herpes B) and related viruses and Simian care and suspicion. Retroviruses (SRVs). Although all macaques should be considered positive for Herpes B, they should still be It is also recommended that whenever possible, other types tested due to the potential danger presented to animal of TB tests be utilised in addition to intradermal Tuberculin care staff, local human populations, and other primates. tests. Such tests include thoracic radiography, comparative (Note that Herpes B is a normal pathogen present in intradermal testing using other Tuberculin types, tracheal Rhesus macaques, and positive serology tests for swabbing and/or lung washing followed by mycobacterial Herpes B are common in free-ranging Pig-tailed and culture, lymphocyte transformation test (LTT), gamma Long-tailed macaques. However, the true status of interferon enzyme immunoassay, and the mycobacterial Herpes-B-like viruses in other macaque taxa is not culture of faeces and gastric washings. clearly established.) · Squirrel monkeys can asymptomatically carry · Screening for endoparasites should be done at least Herpesvirus tamarinus, which can be fatal to owl and titi three times during quarantine by testing faecal samples monkeys and marmosets, as well as Herpesvirus saimiri, via both direct microscopy and flotation techniques. which can be fatal to owl and spider monkeys, Faecal samples should also be submitted for marmosets, and howlers. microbiological culture to test for the presence of · Spider-monkey herpes (Herpesvirus ateles) can be fatal potentially pathogenic bacteria, such as those of the to owl monkeys and marmosets. genera Salmonella, Shigella, Campylobacter, and Yersinia. If undesirable parasite loads or bacteria are · Spider monkeys should be tested for yellow fever detected and determined to be abnormal for wild because they can be carriers of this virus, which is fatal populations of the taxon, appropriate treatment should to howler monkeys. be administered and its effectiveness confirmed by further tests. · Many primate taxa are susceptible to measles, particularly marmosets, tamarins, and colobine Biological samples, including blood and hair, should be · monkeys, so experts should be consulted regarding the taken for genetic analysis. It is recommended to collect possible need for vaccination. at least 10 body hairs with intact follicles per animal. Samples may be frozen, dried, or preserved in alcohol or · Clinical poliomyelitis has been reported in chimpanzees, other solutions used for preserving genetic material. To gorillas, and orang-utans, so experts should be determine which method to use, consult project consulted regarding the possible need for vaccination. veterinarians or a geneticist. Other taxa are known to be susceptible experimentally.

In the case of animals testing positive for any infection, · Vaccination advice should immediately be sought from project veterinarians. Due to the occurrence of test sensitivity, · Vaccination should be given as appropriate during screening protocols and interpretation of disease- quarantine as determined by project veterinarians. The screening results should be subject to ongoing reviews type, batch number, and source of the vaccine should be and updates to account for new findings and recorded in an animal's medical records, as well as the technologies. site of vaccination in the case of injectable products. · All animals that die while in captivity must be necropsied · Consideration should be given to vaccinating monkeys and samples collected for further analysis. The necropsy against measles and poliomyelitis, although the case for should be performed as soon after death as possible to polio is not as strong. Great apes should be vaccinated minimise the adverse effects of tissue degeneration and against both of these and possibly mumps. Injectable bacterial decomposition. Any necropsy should be done killed vaccine should be used for polio because the use with special consideration for human health and safety, of oral vaccine may result in faecal shedding of live as the potential to contract diseases via careless post- virus. mortem techniques is high. · If there is a high risk of rabies, it may be necessary to Animals Born in Captivity vaccinate against it using killed vaccines only. There is some evidence, as in Rhesus macaques, that such · Infants born in captivity to post-quarantine animals are vaccines produce high antibody titres and protection normally exempt from disease screening. Infants born to against death from "street virus." 40 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

members are free of the disease cannot be conducted. · It is not recommended to vaccinate against tuberculosis as it interferes with the Tuberculin skin test for TB and · New staff members should not have any contact with probably induces only a limited period of immunity. primates for the first 2 weeks of employment. This allows sufficient time for development of most infectious · It is not recommended to use the triple vaccine known as diseases that a new employee may be incubating when DPT or DTP (diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis). A large hired and for completion of medical tests. number of adverse reactions have been recorded in primates, and primates are likely not susceptible to · Pregnant staff members should be extremely careful diphtheria or pertussis. Vaccination for tetanus is when working with primates and should seek an expert's advised using standard human tetanus toxoid. advice. · Serum samples from vaccinated primates should be · In general, staff members should not be employed at opportunistically tested to establish the effectiveness of other primate-holding facilities or be exposed to primates the vaccine schedules. outside of their work with the re-introduction project.

Post-Quarantine & Prior to Release · Project managers should record all staff accidents, injuries, and illnesses. · An ongoing preventive medicine programme should be in place for all captive primates after they have cleared Other Considerations quarantine and before final release. The programme should include regular faecal testing for pathogenic · Other people who have access to captive release stock bacteria and parasite loads, annual review of vaccine may pose a threat to the animals and may themselves status, opportunistic collection of serum for banking, and be at risk of infection. So the role and management of regular TB testing if appropriate. volunteers, students, temporary staff, visiting zoo personnel, contractors, and even visitors needs careful consideration. C. STAFF SCREENING & HEALTH

· All staff members should be in good general health. Staff VIII. Transport & Release who are ill should not work with animals or prepare food. People who are ill are far more likely to contract Implementation infectious diseases than healthy individuals. Also, colds, influenza, measles, viral hepatitis, herpes viruses, Þ Following completion of the planning stage and salmonellosis, and many other infections can be passed clearance of animals for release, design and to primates and may cause serious disease. High implement transport and final release. standards of personal hygiene and facility cleanliness

are required of animal care staff to avoid the transmission of infectious disease. · A thorough transport and release strategy (hard or soft · Members of animal care staff, other project personnel, release) and a backup strategy should be developed and understood by all parties involved. and anyone who may come in contact with the primates should undergo regular health checks for the safety of · Development of transport plans for delivery of animals to both the staff and the animals. Ideally done pre- the country or site of re-introduction should place special employment, medical checks have advantages for staff emphasis on ways to minimise stress and avoid injury or and employer and should be developed in co-operation illness. Primates should be transported in secure with a health advisor. The checks should include such containment with clear specifications on caging, number tests as faecal bacteriology and parasitology; Hepatitis in cages, etc. A, B, and C; tuberculosis; and HIV. (Because HIV- infected people can become severely · Qualified personnel should accompany the release stock immunosuppressed and would thus be at high risk of during transport and be prepared to deal with contracting disease from primates, they should not work emergencies (veterinary emergencies, escapes, etc.). directly with primates.) Tuberculosis should be routinely tested for via skin test or, for staff previously vaccinated · For most primate taxa, individuals should be separated with the BCG vaccine, acid-fast sputum test or chest X- during transport to prevent them from inflicting injuries ray. on one another. Females with nursing infants are an exception. In some cases, moving females with nursing · Staff should be made aware if primates in their care are infants is not acceptable. This would depend on several known or suspected to be suffering from potentially factors, such as the taxon of concern. Experts should be zoonotic infections. Additional measures (if any) to consulted in such cases. prevent transmission of infection should be explained. · Project managers should consider transporting diurnal · The vaccine status of staff members should be regularly primates at night due to the cooler temperatures and reviewed. When possible, vaccinations against Hepatitis animals' low activity level. Moves that occur in the A and B (especially if working with apes), measles, morning or evening also avoid higher daytime mumps, polio, rabies, rubella, tetanus, and typhoid temperatures, but many primates are more active during should be current. Tuberculosis vaccinations are these times. Experts should be consulted regarding the necessary only if routine testing to ascertain if staff best time of day to transport nocturnal primates.

41 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

· The release strategy should include such details as IX. Post-Release Monitoring acclimatisation of release stock to the re-introduction area, behavioural training required (such as foraging), group composition, number of animals released, release Þ After animals have been cleared for release, develop patterns and techniques, and timing. The strategy should a long-term post-release monitoring programme in also provide for "site fidelity," such as short-term food conjunction with development of a release strategy. provisioning, to ensure the released animals do not The programme should be executed during and well immediately disperse. after final release. · With soft-release strategies, all parties involved should · Long-term post-release monitoring is one of the most fully understand the procedure. Some soft releases keep important components of a re-introduction or animals in transport cages at the release site, while translocation project, so all (or a sample of) released others require the construction of enclosures or other individuals should be monitored for an extended period. temporary holding facilities. Such enclosures should Such monitoring should include behavioural, provide a natural, commodious pre-release environment demographic, and ecological studies and take into to help minimise stress to the primates. Supplementary account social changes (for example, group stability and feeding stations, such as suspended platforms, should intergroup interactions), health, reproductive behaviour also be constructed. and success, mortality, impact on habitat (vegetation), etc. A study of the processes of long-term adaptation by · Upon arrival at the final release site, primates should be the released population is also important. closely observed. Individuals that have developed serious physical ailments or behavioural abnormalities · Public relations activities, particularly conservation during transport should not be released immediately. education and awareness, must be continued and their Observation should continue and any appropriate impact assessed. An evaluation of attitudes of local treatment administered. If the animal recovers, it may be communities to the project over time is necessary to released only with approval by project managers and assist in determining project success in the short and veterinary personnel. Animals that recover slowly and long terms. are not released with the main group may no longer be Socioeconomic studies should be made over time to releasable. · determine the impact, costs, and benefits of the re- · With reinforcement projects, released primates should introduction programme to local human populations. be widely separated from resident populations to Habitat protection should be ongoing and its minimise the chance of an encounter soon after release. · The distance chosen should be based on the natural effectiveness monitored. ranging behaviour of the primate taxon involved, with · Non-invasive techniques to monitor changes in released groups being separated by at least one home-range primates' physical condition, such as weight, should be area typical of that taxon. However, if the aim of the developed without a need for recapture. Protocols for reinforcement is to increase genetic variability, the observational assessment of released animals' physical release distance should not be so wide that newly condition should be developed. introduced animals have little chance of contact with resident groups. Interaction with resident individuals can · Genetic monitoring of released and wild populations is also assist once-captive individuals in learning survival strongly advised. For reinforcement projects, such methods in their new wild environment. monitoring can help determine the genetic impact (increase in or loss of genetic diversity), if any, of the The exact release site should not be close to human · released animals on existing wild conspecifics. Genetic dwellings, roadways, or similar locales to minimise the monitoring of re-introduced populations is also important chance of animals dispersing to areas where humans to ascertain changes in genetic composition over time. are present. Non-invasive techniques, such collection of hair or · The release site should be mapped and possibly faeces for DNA analysis, are advised. demarcated. It may be useful to cut trails and mark trees · Re-introduction managers should consult with veterinary or other key points to facilitate post-release monitoring and medical experts to develop strict human health and exercises, such as recording distance of dispersal after sanitation standards, such as proper burial of faecal release. material and disposal of trash, for any field research site · All tracking equipment should be checked to ensure it is used as a base from which to study released in good working condition. Prior to release, tracking populations. equipment should be tested in the release site to identify · Field research staff should be subject to medical testing locations where reception is strong or poor, where as required in "Staff Screening & Health" in Part C, signals bounce, etc. Section VII. Field staff should not work if they are ill. · Thorough documentation of the release implementation, · Researchers and others should try to maintain a including behaviour of the animals before, during, and distance of 10 metres from released and wild fauna, and after release, is vital for future planning and to share with they should not smoke, drink, or eat within 200 metres of other re-introduction practitioners. wild primates. Released primates, particularly those previously held in captivity, may be more apt to

42 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

approach people. A plan of action for dealing with risk assessment should be conducted. It may involve a released animals that approach humans in the field must review of relevant literature and records of diseases in be developed and enforced. the region and related taxa, as well as a health examination of a sample set of individuals of the taxon to · Intervention may be necessary if a post-release situation be moved. A similar assessment of the area in which the proves unfavourable. A documented plan for animals will be released should be made to ensure that intervention, such as the removal of "problem" potentially harmful diseases to which the new animals individuals, should be developed with decision-makers have no immunity are not present or are addressed by clearly identified. This plan should be developed prior to some other means. Such analyses will provide the data release, reflect a wide variety of possible circumstances on which to base risk analysis for the translocation and in which intervention may be necessary, and be reveal any desirable veterinary intervention, such as understood by all parties involved. vaccination or necessary quarantine period. · For a primate that requires medical or other attention · An external multidisciplinary group should review after release, capture and any subsequent treatment proposed veterinary plans to ensure that proper done under anaesthesia require that all participating staff precautions for the health and welfare of the animals to wear protective clothing and minimise stress to the be moved, as well as other animals living in the release animal. area, are taken. · All dead animals in the release area should be collected · Protective clothing, such as disposable gloves, and investigated whenever possible. facemasks, etc., should be worn whenever handling wild · On a regular basis, the overall success of the re- primates. introduction project should be evaluated according to the · Invasive veterinary screening should be avoided. During success criteria determined at the project outset by the capture procedure, rapid physical examinations participating experts, managers, and other project should be conducted on all individuals by experienced personnel. This information should be distributed to the handlers who themselves are free of infectious disease. re-introduction and scientific community, local When possible, blood, hair, and faecal samples should communities, and appropriate governmental bodies, so be collected for genetic and veterinary analysis; a that other re-introduction practitioners may benefit from permanent identifier should be applied; and full facial the results. When necessary, decisions should be made photographs should be taken (when appropriate for the for revision, rescheduling, or discontinuation of the taxon). In general, an anaesthetic should be used to programme. minimise stress to the animals. Serum samples can help determine which infectious agents are present in the population. Findings may yield clues to the success or X. Considerations for failure of the translocated animals and may provide valuable information for future translocations. Translocation · If primates are moved to areas where it is likely that different infectious agents occur, then more intensive Þ The following issues apply specifically to screening should be considered along with an appropriate quarantine period. Quarantine should be at translocations - the deliberate capture and movement least 30 days, or more in cases where certain infectious of wild primates from one natural habitat to another. diseases with longer incubation periods (such as Translocations should adhere to the guidelines listed tuberculosis or rabies) are suspected. previously in this document. Some requirements,

such as veterinary, vary from project to project. Other Considerations Project veterinarians and associated experts should determine the appropriate translocation protocol for a · A thorough capture strategy, including detailed capture particular project and taxon. techniques, must be developed, practised, and fully understood by all involved parties. The capture of wild Veterinary Considerations primates is very difficult. Injury or loss of animals must When moving wild primates directly from one area to be avoided as much as possible. Trial captures should another, diseases can in turn be transported. Some of these be considered. diseases may interfere with the primates' ability to cope with the move, or they may infect other animals living in the · Groups to be moved should be studied in advance to release area. Testing for such diseases is important, and it assist in analysis of their behaviour and adaptability in also provides a picture of what infectious agents occur the new environment. For example, data on known or naturally in a population. However, the additional stress assumed relationships among individuals, such as animals often experience due to unnecessary veterinary parent-offspring, should be recorded. procedures should be avoided. · Smaller groups should generally be targeted for The following steps list the minimum veterinary actions that translocation, such as groups that are too small to form should be conducted when translocating primates. Experts independent social units or are isolated from other should always be consulted and a more detailed plan groups and thus unable to form a viable population. developed. However, groups that are significantly smaller than the average size for wild populations of the species of · During the planning stages, a comprehensive veterinary

43 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

concern may be incapable of stabilising or adapting after ANNEX I - Key References translocation. Management plans should account for any animals of a group not captured in the projected time frame. CITES. 1997. Resolution Conf. 10.7: Disposal of Confiscated · Care should be taken when targeting groups with Live Specimens of Species Included in the Appendices. recently weaned juveniles or individuals that are too Adopted at the 10th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to small to be safely darted, particularly with arboreal taxa. the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (This may be difficult with taxa that breed year-round.) of Wild Fauna and Flora (Harare). ? Available from CITES Secretariat or www.cites.org Wild primates should be moved quickly to minimise any · alteration in their skills, behaviours, and knowledge. Hilton-Taylor, C. (compiler). 2000. 2000 IUCN Red List of · If more than one group is moved simultaneously, each Threatened Species. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, United Kingdom. group's holding cage(s) at the release site should be widely separated to minimise the chance groups will ? Available from IUCN Publications Services Unit or www.redlist.org encounter one another soon after release. The distance

chosen should be based on the natural ranging IUCN. 1987. The IUCN position statement on translocation of behaviour of the primate taxon involved, with groups living organisms: introductions, re-introductions, and restocking. being separated by at least one home-range area typical IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. of that taxon. ? Available from IUCN Publications Services Unit or

www.iucn.org/themes/ssc/pubs/policy

XI. Acknowledgements IUCN, UNEP, and WWF. 1991. Caring for the Earth: A Strategy for Sustainable Living. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. Sincere appreciation goes to the numerous reviewers who ? Available from the IUCN Bookstore or contributed their comments to these guidelines. Special www.iucn.org/bookstore/WorldconStrat.htm thanks to the Core Review Board members (Annex IV, Page 56) and to Devra Kleiman, John Lewis, and Anthony IUCN. 1998. IUCN Guidelines for Re-introductions. Prepared Rylands for their additional contributions of assistance. by the IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, United Kingdom. The IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group would also ? Available from IUCN Publications Services Unit or like to recognise and thank the sponsors of the guidelines: www.iucn.org/themes/ssc/pubs/policy American Society of Primatologists, International Primatological Society, Margot Marsh Biodiversity IUCN. 2000. IUCN Guidelines for the Prevention of Biodiversity Foundation, and Primate Society of Japan. Loss Caused by Alien Invasive Species. Prepared by the IUCN/SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. ? Available from IUCN Publications Services Unit or www.iucn.org/themes/ssc/pubs/policy

IUCN. 2002. IUCN Guidelines for the Placement of Confiscated Animals. Prepared by the IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and ERWDA, Abu Dhabi, UAE. ? Available from IUCN Publications Services Unit, www.iucn.org/themes/ssc/pubs/policy, or www.erwda.gov.ae

IUDZG/CBSG. 1993. The World Zoo Conservation Strategy. The Role of Zoos and Aquaria of the World in Global Conservation. IUDZG-The World Zoo Organisation.

WRI, IUCN, and UNEP. 1992. Global Biodiversity Strategy. Guidelines for Action to Save, Study and Use Earth’s Biotic Wealth Sustainably and Equitably. World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C. ? Available from WRI or www.wri.org/biodiv/gbs- home.html

44 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

The following references do not form a comprehensive list. Conway, W.G. 1989. The prospects for sustaining species They are a collection of some relevant publications and articles. and their evolution. In Conservation for the 21st Century, pp. 199-210 (D. Western and M.C. Pearl, eds.). Oxford University Press, New York. GENERAL RE-INTRODUCTION & TRANSLOCATION Earnhardt, J.M. 1999. Reintroduction programmes: genetic trade-offs for populations. Animal Conservation 2:279-286.

Agoramoorthy, G. and Hsu, M.J. 2001. Rehabilitation and Foose, T.J. 1991. Viable population strategies for rescue centers of the world. In Encyclopedia of the World’s reintroduction programmes. In Beyond Captive Breeding: Zoos, pp. 1,052-1,053 (C. Bell, ed.). Fitzroy Dearborn, Re-introducing Endangered Mammals to the Wild, pp. 165- Chicago. 172 (J.H.W. Gipps, ed.). Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Ballou, J.D. 1992. Genetic and demographic considerations Gipps, J.H.W. 1991. Beyond Captive Breeding: Re- in endangered species captive breeding and reintroduction introducing Endangered Mammals to the Wild. Symposium programs. In Wildlife 2001: Populations, pp. 262-275 (D. of the Zoological Society of London 62. Clarendon Press, McCullough and R. Barrett, eds.). Elsevier Science Oxford. Pp. 304. Publishing, Barking, United Kingdom.

Griffith, B., Scott, J.M., Carpenter, J.W., and Reed, C. 1989. Ballou, J.D., Gilpin, M., and Foose, T.J. (eds.) 1995. Translocation as a species conservation tool: status and Population management for survival and recovery: strategy. Science 245:477-480. Analytical methods and strategies in small population conservation. Columbia University Press, New York. Pp. Harcourt, A.H. 1987. Options for unwanted or confiscated 375. primates. Primate Conservation 8:111-113.

Beck, B.B. 1991. Managing zoo environments for Kleiman, D.G. 1989a. Reintroduction of captive-born reintroduction. Proceedings of the 1991 AAZPA Annual animals. Bioscience 39:102-109. Conference, pp. 436-440.

Kleiman, D.G. 1989b. Re-introduction of captive mammals Beck, B.B., Castro, M.I., Kleiman, D.G., Dietz, J.M., and for conservation: Guidelines for reintroducing endangered Rettberg-Beck, B. 1988. Preparing captive-born primates for species into the wild. Bioscience 39:152-161. re-introduction. International Journal of Primatology 8:426.

Kleiman, D.G. 1990. Decision-making about a re- Beck, B.B., Rapaport, L.G., Stanley-Price, M.R., and Wilson, introduction: Do appropriate conditions exist? Endangered A.C. 1994. Reintroduction of captive born animals. In Species UPDATE 8(1):18-19. Creative conservation: Interactive management of wild and captive animals, pp. 265-286 (P.J.S. Olney, G.M. Mace, Kleiman, D.G. 1996. Reintroduction programs. In Wild and A.T.C. Feistner, eds.). Chapman and Hall, London. mammals in captivity: Principles and techniques, pp. 297-

305 (D.G. Kleiman, M.E. Allen, K.V. Thompson, and S. Box, H.O. 1991. Training for life after release: simian Lumpkin, eds.). University of Chicago Press, Chicago. primates as examples. In Beyond Captive Breeding: Re- introducing Endangered Mammals to the Wild, pp. 111-123 Kleiman, D.G., Stanley-Price, M.R., and Beck, B.B. 1994. (J.H.W. Gipps, ed.). Clarendon Press, Oxford. Criteria for reintroductions. In Creative conservation:

Interactive management of wild and captive animals, pp. Caldecott, J. and Kavanagh, M. 1983. Can translocation 287-303 (P.J.S. Olney, G.M. Mace, and A.T.C. Feistner, help wild primates? Oryx 17:135-139. eds.). Chapman and Hall, London.

Caldecott, J. and Kavanagh, M. 1988. Strategic guidelines Lacy, R.C. 1993/1994. What is Population (and Habitat) for nonhuman primate translocation. In Translocation of wild Viability Analysis? Primate Conservation 14-15:27-33. animals, pp. 64-75 (L. Nielsen and R.D. Brown, eds.).

Wisconsin Humane Society, Milwaukee. Leberg, P.L. 1993. Strategies for population reintroduction:

effects of genetic variability on population growth. Campbell, S. 1980. Is re-introduction a realistic goal? In Conservation Biology 7:194-199. Conservation biology: an evolutionary-ecological perspective, pp. 263-269 (M.E. Soule and G.A. Wilcox, MacKinnon, K. and MacKinnon, J. 1990. Habitat protection eds.). Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Mass. and re-introduction programs. In Beyond Captive Breeding:

Re-introducing Endangered Mammals to the Wild, pp. 173- Chivers, D.J. 1991. Guidelines for re-introductions: 198 (J.H.W. Gipps, ed.). Clarendon Press, Oxford. Procedures and problems. In Beyond Captive Breeding: Re- introducing Endangered Mammals to the Wild, pp. 89-99 Mallinson, J.J.C. 1995. Conservation breeding programmes: (J.H.W. Gipps, ed.). Clarendon Press, Oxford. An important ingredient for species survival. Biodiversity and

Conservation 4:617-635. Clewell, A., Rieger, J., and Munro, J. 2000. Guidelines for

Developing and Managing Ecological Restoration Projects.

Society for Ecological Restoration, Tucson, Ariz.

45 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

May, R.M. 1991. The role of ecological theory in planning Brack, M. 1993. Virus infections in nonhuman primates: reintroduction. In Beyond Captive Breeding: Re-introducing Survey. Erkrankungen Der Zootiere 35:5-38. Endangered Mammals to the Wild, pp. 145-163 (J.H.W. Gipps, ed.). Clarendon Press, Oxford. Brack, M., Goeltenboth, R., and Rietschel, W. 1995. Diseases of zoo and wild animals: primates. In Krankheiten Nielsen, L. and Brown, R.D. (eds.). 1988. Translocation of Der Zoo-Und Wildtiere, pp. 25-66 (R. Goltenboth, ed.). Wild Animals. Wisconsin Humane Society, Inc., Milwaukee, Blackwell, Wissenschafts-Verlag, Berlin. and Caesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Institute, Kingsville, Texas. Pp. 333. Bush, M. 1996. Methods of capture, handling, and anesthesia. In Wild mammals in captivity: Principles and Oates, J. 1999. Myth and Reality in the Rainforest. techniques, pp. 25-40 (D.G. Kleiman, M.E. Allen, K.V. University of California Press, Berkeley, Calif. Thompson, and S. Lumpkin, eds.). University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Rasmussen, D. 1998. Notes on stranger introduction and group formation in nonhuman primates. Bush, M., Beck, B.B., and Montali, R.J. 1993. Medical www.fsu.edu/Panama/ipsp/introduction.htm. considerations of re-introduction. In Zoo and Wild Animal Medicine: Current Therapy 3, pp. 24-26 (M.E. Fowler, ed.). Shepherdson, D.J. 1994. The role of environmental W.B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia. enrichment in the captive breeding and re-introduction of endangered species. Unpublished manuscript. Cunningham, A.A. 1996. Disease risks of wildlife translocation. Conservation Biology 10:349-353. Snowdon, C.T. 1989. The criteria for successful captive propagation of endangered primates. Zoo Biology de Thoisy, B., Vogel, I., Reynes, J.M., Pouliquen, J.F., Supplement 1:149-161. Carme, B., Kazanji, M., and Vié, J.C. 2001. Health evaluation of translocated free-ranging primates in French Stanley-Price, M.R. 1991. A review of mammal re- Guiana. American Journal of Primatology 54(1):1-16. introductions and the role of the Re-introduction Specialist Group of IUCN/SSC. In Beyond Captive Breeding: Re- Fiennes, R. 1967. Zoonoses of primates. The epidemiology introducing Endangered Mammals to the Wild, pp. 9-25 and ecology of simian diseases in relation to man. Cornell (J.H.W. Gipps, ed.). Clarendon Press, Oxford. University Press, Ithaca, N.Y.

Strum, S.C. and Southwick, C.H. 1986. Translocation of Furley, C.W. 1997. The shipment of primates to Europe: the primates. In Primates: The road to self-sustaining threat of infectious disease. Journal of British Veterinary populations, pp. 949-957 (K. Benirschke, ed.). Springer- Zoological Society 2:27-36. Verlag, New York. Glander, K.E., Fedigan, L.M., Fedigan, L., and Chapman, Yeager, C.P. and Silver, S.C. 1999. Translocation and C.A. 1991. Field methods for capture and measurement of rehabilitation as primate conservation tools: Are they worth three monkey species in Costa Rica. Folia Primatologica the cost? In The Nonhuman Primates, pp. 164-169 (P. 57:70-82. Dolhinow and A. Fuentes, eds.). Mayfield Publishing, Mountain View, Calif. Glenn, M.E. and Bensen K.J. 1998. Capture techniques and morphological measurements of the mona monkey (Cercopithecus mona) on the island of Grenada, West VETERINARY & CAPTURE/TRANSPORT Indies. American Journal of Physical Anthropoloy 105(4): 481-491. American Society of Primatologists Bulletin. 2000. American Society of Primatologists policy statements on protecting Goeltenboth, R. 1982. Special section: Diseases of zoo primate health in the wild. September 24:9. animals. Nonhuman primates (apes, monkeys, prosimians). In Handbook of Zoo Medicine, pp. 46-85 (H.G. Kloes, ed.).

Agoramoorthy, G. and Rudran, R. 1994. Field application of Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York. Telazol (Tiletamine and Zolazepam) to immobilize wild red howler monkeys (Alouatta seniculus) in Venezuela. Journal Hiong, L.K., Sale, J.B., and Andau, P.M. 1996. Capture of of Wildlife Diseases 30:417-420. wild orangutans by drug immobilization. Tropical Biodiversity 3(2):103-113. Ballou, J.D. 1993. Assessing the risks of infectious diseases in captive breeding and re-introduction programs. Journal of Homsy, J. 1999. Ape Tourism and Human Diseases: How Zoo and Wildlife Medicine 24(3):327-335. Close Should We Get? International Gorilla Conservation Programme, Kampala, Uganda.

Bittle, J.M. 1993. Use of vaccines in exotic animals. Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine 24(3):352-356. International Air Transport Association. 2000. Live Animals Regulations. IATA, Montreal. (To obtain a copy: Secretary, Brack, M. (ed.). 1987. Agents transmissible from simians to Live Animals & Perishables Board, IATA, 800 Place Victoria, man. Springer-Verlag, New York. Pp. 454. P.O. Box 113, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H4Z 1M1. Tel: 514-390-6770; E-mail: [email protected]; Web site: www.iata.org/cargo/live.htm.)

46 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

Janssen, D.L. 1993. Diseases of great apes. In Zoo and Roberts, J.A. 1993. Quarantine. In Zoo and Wild Animal Wild Animal Medicine: Current Therapy 3, pp. 334-338 Medicine: Current Therapy 3, pp. 352-356 (M.E. Fowler, (M.E. Fowler, ed.). W.B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia. ed.). W.B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia. Johnson-Delaney, C.A. 1996. Common disorders and care of nonhuman primates. Michigan Veterinary Conference of Sapolsky, R.M. and Share, L.J. 1998. Darting terrestrial the Michigan Veterinary Medical Association, Lansing, Mich. primates in the wild: A primer. American Journal of Primatology 44(2):155-167. Karesh, W.B. 1993. Cost evaluation of infectious disease monitoring and screening programs for wildlife translocation Scott, N.J., Scott, A.E., and Malmgren, L.A. 1976. Capturing and reintroduction. Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine and marking howler monkeys for field behavioural studies. 24:291-295. Primates 17:527-34.

Karesh, W.B. 1995. Wildlife rehabilitation: additional Sleeman, J.M., Cameron, K., Mudakikwa, A.B., Anderson, considerations for developing countries. Journal of Zoo and S., Cooper, J.E., Hastings, B., Foster, J.W., Macfie, E.J., Wildlife Medicine 26:2-9. and Richardson, H.M. 1998. Field anesthesia of free- ranging mountain gorillas (Gorilla gorilla beringei) from the Karesh, W.B. and Cook, R.A. 1995. Application of veterinary Virunga Volcano region, central Africa. AAZV/AAWV Joint medicine to in situ conservation efforts. Oryx 29:244-252. Conference Proceedings, pp. 1-4.

Karesh, W.B., Wallace, R.B., Painter, R.L.E., Rumiz, D., Smith, A.J. 1995. Vaccination recommendations for Braselton, W.E., Dierenfeld, S.E., and Puche, E. 1998. nonhuman primates. In Proceedings of the North American Immobilization and health assessment of free-ranging black Veterinary Conference, pp. 714-715. Eastern State spider monkeys (Ateles paniscus chamek). American Veterinary Association, Gainesville, Fla. Journal of Primatology 44:107-123. Spalding, M.G. and Forester, D.J. 1993. Disease monitoring Litchfield, C. 1997. Treading Lightly: Responsible Tourism of free-ranging and released wildlife. Journal of Zoo and with the African Great Apes. Travellers’ Medical & Wildlife Medicine 24:271-280. Vaccination Centre (TMVC), Australia. Various. 1993. Proceedings on a workshop on the risks of Loomis, M.R. 1990. Update of vaccination disease and animal movements. Journal of Zoo and Wildlife recommendations for nonhuman primates. AAZV (Amer. Medicine 24(3). Assoc. Zoo Vet.) Annual Proceedings 1990:257-260. Vié, J.C., de Thoisy, B., Fournier, P., Fournier-Chambrillon, Lowenstine, L.J. and Lerche, N.W. 1988. Retrovirus C., Genty, C., and Keravec, J. 1998. Anesthesia of wild red infection in non-human primates: a review. Journal of Zoo howler monkeys (Alouatta seniculus) with medetomidine- and Wildlife Medicine 19:168-187. ketamine and reversal by atipamezole. American Journal of Primatology 45:399-410. McClure, H.M., Brodie, A.R., Anderson, D.C., and Swenson, R.B. 1986. Bacterial infections of nonhuman primates. In Wallis, J. and Lee, D. R. 1999. Primate conservation: the Primates: The road to self-sustaining populations, pp. 531- prevention of disease transmission. International Journal of 556 (K. Benirschke, ed.). Springer-Verlag, New York. Primatology 20: 803-826.

Montali, R.J., Bush, M., Hess, J., Ballou, J.D., Kleiman, D.G., Woodford, M.H. (ed.). 2001. Quarantine and health and Beck, B.B. 1995. Ex situ diseases and their control for the screening protocols for wildlife prior to translocation and reintroduction of the endangered lion tamarin species release into the wild. Office International des Epizooties, (Leontopithecus spp.). Verh. Ber. Erkrg. Zootiere 34:93-98. Veterinary Specialist Group/Species Survival Commission of the World Conservation Union (IUCN), Care for the Wild Munson, L. 1999. Necropsy Procedures for Wild Animals. International, Geraldine R. Dodge Foundation, and Wildlife Health Center, School of Veterinary Medicine. European Association of Zoo and Wildlife Veterinarians. University of California, Davis. Web site: [Copies can be obtained from Care for the Wild Defence www.vetmed.ucdavis.edu/whc/Necropsy/TOC.html. Fund, 1 Ashfolds, Rusper, West Sussex RH12 4QX, United Kingdom. E-mail: [email protected], Fax: (01293) Ott-Joslin, J.E. 1993. Zoonotic diseases of nonhuman 871022. Cost: £8 or $12. Postage: £1.50 (Europe), £4.50 primates. In Zoo and Wild Animal Medicine: Current (outside Europe).] Therapy 3, pp. 358-373 (M.E. Fowler, ed.). W.B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia. Woodford, M.H., Butynski, T.M., and Karesh, W.B. 2002. Habituating the great apes: the disease risks. Oryx 36(2): Parrott, T.Y. 1997. An introduction to diseases of nonhuman 153-160. primates. In Practical Exotic Animal Medicine, pp. 258-263 (K.L. Rosenthal, ed.). Veterinary Learning Systems, Woodford, M.H., Keet, D.F., and Bengis, R.G. 2000. Post- Trenton, N.J. mortem procedures for wildlife veterinarians and field biologists. Office International des Epizooties, Care for the Popilskis, S.J. and Kohn, D.F. 1997. Anesthesia and Wild International, and IUCN/SSC Veterinary Specialist analgesia in nonhuman primates. In Anesthesia and Group. [Copies can be obtained at: Analgesia in Laboratory Animals, pp. 233-255. Academic www.careforthewild.org/shop/books.asp Press, San Diego. or from: Care for the Wild Defence Fund, 1 Ashfolds,

47 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

Rusper, West Sussex RH12 4QX, United Kingdom. E-mail: Brockelman, W.Y., Ross, B.A., and Pantuwatana, S. 1974. [email protected], Fax: (01293) 871022. Cost: £5 Social interactions of adult gibbons (Hylobates lar) in an or $7.50. Postage: £1.50 (Europe), £4.50 (outside Europe).] experimental colony. Gibbon and Siamang 3:137-156. de Silva, G.S. 1971. Notes on the orang-utan rehabilitation Woodford, M.H. and Kock, R.A. 1991. Veterinary project in Sabah. Malayan Nature Journal 24: 50-77. considerations in re-introduction and translocation projects. In Beyond Captive Breeding: Re-introducing Endangered de Silva, G.S. 1971. Training orang-utans for the wild. Mammals to the Wild, pp. 101-110 (J.H.W. Gipps, ed.). Oryx 10(6):389-393. Clarendon Press, Oxford. Eudey, A.A. 1994. Temple and pet primates in Thailand. Woodford, M.H. and Rossiter, P.B. 1994. Disease risks Revue d'Ecologie (La Terre et la Vie) 49:273-280. associated with wildlife translocation projects. In Creative conservation: Interactive management of wild and captive Eudey, A.A. 1996. Captive gibbons in Thailand and the animals, pp. 178-200 (P.J.S. Olney, G.M. Mace, and A.T.C. option of re-introduction to the wild. Primate Conservation Feistner, eds.). Chapman and Hall, London. (1991-1992) 12-13:34-40.

Fernando, R. 2001. Rehabilitating orphaned orang-utans in REFERENCES BY REGION north Borneo. Asian Primates 7(3-4):20-21.

Frey, R. 1975. Sumatra’s red apes return to the wild. Wildlife Asian Primates 17: 356-363.

Aggimarangsee, N. 1992. Survey for semi-tame colonies of Gupta, A.K. and Mukherjee, S.K. 1994. A note on the macaques in Thailand. Siam Natural History Society Bulletin release of the golden langur (Presbytis geei, Khajuria) into 40:103-166. the wild in Tripura, India. Indian Forester 120:915-919.

Agoramoorthy, G. 1997. Wildlife rescue and rehabilitation Imam, E., Yahya, H.S.A., and Malik, I. 2002. A successful centers in Southeast Asia. International Zoo News 44:397- mass translocation of commensal rhesus monkeys (Macaca 400. mulatta) in Vrindaban, India. Oryx 36(1): 87-93.

Agoramoorthy, G. 2002 (in press). Exhibiting orangutans on Lackman-Ancrenaz, I., Ancrenaz, M., and Saburi, R. 2001. a natural island in Malaysia. International Zoo News. The Kinabantangan Orangutan Conservation Project (KOCP). In The Apes: Challenges for the 21st Century, Andau, P.M., Hiong, L.K., and Sale, J.B. 1994. Conference Proceedings, May 10-13, 2000. Brookfield, Ill. Translocation of pocketed orang-utans in Sabah. Oryx 28(4):263-268. Lardoux-Gilloux, I. 1994. Rehabilitation centres: Their struggle, their future. In Proceedings of the International Aveling, R.J. and Mitchell, A. 1982. Is rehabilitating Conference on “Orangutans: The Neglected Ape,” pp. 61-68 orangutans worthwhile? Oryx 16:263-271. (J.J. Ogden, L.A. Perkins, and L. Sheehan, eds.). Zoological Society of San Diego, San Diego. Ayathan, V. 1998. Management of orangutans at wildlife rescue centers. Zoos’ Print 13(8): 38-39. Malik, I. and Johnson, R.L. 1991. Trapping and conservation: Development of a translocation in India. In Berkson, G., Ross, B.A., and Jatinandana, S. 1971. The Primatology Today, pp. 63-64 (A. Ehara, T. Kimura, and M. social behavior of gibbons in relation to a conservation Iwamoto, eds.). Elsevier, Amsterdam. program. In Primate Behavior: Developments in Field and Laboratory Research 2, pp. 225-255 (L.A. Rosenblum, ed.). Malik, I. and Johnson, R.L. 1994. Commensal rhesus in Academic Press, New York. India: The need and cost of translocation. Revue d'Ecologie (La Terre et la Vie) 49:233-243. Brockelman, W.Y. 1994. Factors to consider in a gibbon reintroduction program. In Population and Habitat Viability Marshall, J.T. 1992. Gibbon release in Thailand. Asian Analysis Report for Thai Gibbons: Hylobates lar and H. Primates 2(1): 4-5. pileatus, pp. 1-4, Ch. 4 (S. Tunhikorn, W. Brockelman, R. Tilson, U. Nimmanheminda, P. Rantanakorn, R. Cook, A. Morin, T.D. 1994. Gibbon rehabilitation procedures in Teare, K. Castle, and U. Seal, eds.). IUCN/SSC Phuket. Journal of Wildlife Rehabilitation 17(3):3-6, 11. Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, Apple Valley, Minn. Morin, T.D. 1994. Gibbon Rehabilitation Project, Phuket, Thailand. Asian Primates 4 (2-3):4-8. Brockelman, W.Y., Ross, B.A., and Pantuwatana, S. 1973. Social correlates of reproductive success in the gibbon Nadler, R.D., Galdikas, B.M.F., Sheeran, L.K., and Rosen, colony on Ko Klet Kaeo, Thailand. American Journal of N. (eds.). 1995. The Neglected Ape. Plenum Press, New Physical Anthropology 38:637-640. York.

48 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

Peters, H. 1995. Orangutan reintroduction? Development, African Primates & Lemurs use, and evaluation of a new method: reintroduction. Wanariset Technical Report No. 1995-4, Internal Report, Agoramoorthy, G. and Hsu, M.J. 1999. Rehabilitation and Balikpapan, Indonesia. release of chimpanzees on a natural island. Journal of Wildlife Rehabilitation 22:3-7. Rijksen, H.D. 1974. Orang-utan conservation and rehabilitation in Sumatra. Biological Conservation 6: 20-25. Attwater, M.J. 2001. Challenging Developments in Primate Rehabilitation Programmes in Africa. Re-introduction Rijksen, H.D. and Meijaard, E. 1999. Our Vanishing NEWS, Newsletter of the IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Relative: The Status of Wild Orang-utans at the Close of the Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi, UAE, No. 20. 20th Century. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. Borner, M. 1985. The rehabilitated chimpanzees of Rubondo Island. Oryx 19:151-154. Rosen, N., Russon, A., and Byers, O. (eds.). 2001. Orangutan Reintroduction and Protection Workshop: Final Borner, M. 1988. Translocation of 7 mammal species to Report. IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, Rubondo Island National Park in Tanzania. In Translocation Apple Valley, Minn. Pp. 180. of Wild Animals, pp. 117-122 (L. Nielsen and R.D. Brown, eds.). Wisconsin Humane Society, Milwaukee. Siregar, R.S.E., Kyes, R.C., Smits, W.T.M., Russon, A.E., et al. 1998. The orangutan rehabilitation program at Wanariset Brewer, S. 1978. The Chimps of Mt. Asserik. Knopf, New Station, Samboja-East Kalimantan. American Journal of York. Primatology 45(2): 208. (Abstract). Britt, A., Iambana, B.R., Welch, C.R., and Katz, A.S. 2002 Smits, W.T.M., Heriyanto, and Ramono, W.S. 1995. A new (in press). Project Betampona: Re-stocking of Varecia method for rehabilitation of orangutans in Indonesia: A first variegata variegata into the Betampona Reserve. In The overview. In The Neglected Ape, pp. 69-77 (R.D. Nadler, Natural History of Madagascar (S. Goodman and J. ed.). Plenum Press, New York. Benstead, eds.). University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Soorae, P.S. 2001. Orangutan re-introduction and protection Britt, A., Katz, A., and Welch, C. 1999. Project Betampona: workshop, East Kalimantan, Indonesia. Re-introduction Conservation and Re-stocking of Black and White Ruffed NEWS, Newsletter of the IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Lemurs (Varecia variegata variegata). In Proceedings of the Specialist Group, Abu Dhabi, UAE, No. 20:11 7th World Conference on Breeding Endangered Species (T.L. Roth, W.F. Swanson, and L.K. Blattman, eds.). Southwick, C.H., Malik, I., and Siddiqi, M.F. 1998. Cincinnati. Translocations of rhesus monkeys in India: Prospects and outcomes. American Journal of Primatology 45:209-210. Britt, A., Welch, C., and Katz, A. 1998. The first release of captive-bred lemurs into their natural habitat. Lemur News Tingpalapong, M., Watson, W.T., Whitmire, R.E., Chapple, 3:8-11. F.E., and Marshall, Jr., J.T. 1981. Reaction of captive gibbons to natural habitat and wild conspecifics after Britt, A., Welch, C., and Katz, A. 1999. Re-stocking of release. Natural History Bulletin of the Siam Society 29:31- Varecia variegata variegata: the first six months. Laboratory 40. Primate Newsletter 38(2):20-22.

Tunhikorn, S., Brockelman, W.Y., Tilson, R., Britt, A., Welch, C., and Katz, A. 2000. Ruffed Lemur Nimmanheminda, U., Rantanakorn, P., Cook, R., Teare, A., release update. Lemur News 5:36-38. Castle, K., and Seal, U. (eds.). 1994. Population and Habitat Viability Analysis Report for Thai Gibbons: Hylobates lar and Butynski, T.M. 2001. Africa’s great apes. In Great Apes and H. pileatus. IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Humans: The Ethics of Coexistence, pp. 3-56 (B. Beck, T.S. Group, Apple Valley, Minn. Stoinski, M. Hutchins, T.L. Maple, B. Norton, A. Rowan, E.F. Stevens, and A. Arluke, eds.). Smithsonian Institution Press, Ware, D. 2001. Gibbon rehabilitation and reintroduction: the Washington, D.C. problems along the road before use as a viable conservation tool. In The Apes: Challenges for the 21st Gadsby, E.L. and Jenkins, P.D. 1998. The Drill–Integrated Century, Conference Proceedings, May 10-13, 2000. In Situ and Ex Situ Conservation. African Primates 3(1- Brookfield, Ill. 2):12-18.

Warren, K.S., Smits, W.T.M., Swan, R.A., and Heriyanto. Gonzalez-Martinez, J. 1998. The ecology of the introduced 1995. New approaches to orangutan rehabilitation; patas monkey (Erythrocebus patas) population of comparative analysis of data from Wanariset and Bohorok southwestern Puerto Rico. American Journal of Physical orangutan reintroduction. Wanariset Technical Report No. Anthropology 45(4):351-365. 1995-P8. Internal Report, Balikpapan, Indonesia. Hannah, A.C. and McGrew, W.C. 1991. Rehabilitation of captive chimpanzees. In Primate Responses to Environmental Change, pp. 167-186 (H.O. Box, ed.). Chapman and Hall, London.

49 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

Redshaw, M.E. and Mallinson, J.J.C. 1991. Stimulation of Beck, B.B., Kleiman, D.G., Dietz, J.M., Castro, M.I., natural patterns of behaviour: Studies with golden lion Carvalho, C., Martins, A., and Rettberg-Beck, B. 1991. tamarins and gorillas. In Primate responses to Losses and reproduction in reintroduced golden lion environmental change, pp. 217-238 (H.O. Box, ed.). tamarins (Leontopithecus rosalia). Dodo (journal of the Chapman and Hall, London. Wildlife Preservation Trusts) 27:50-61.

Shalukoma, C. 2000. Attempt to re-introduce a young gorilla Beck, B.B. and Martins, A.F. 2001. Update on the golden to the Kahuzi-Biega Forest. Gorilla Journal 21:3-4. lion tamarin reintroduction program. Tamarin Tales 5:7-8.

Strum, S.C. 1987. The Gang moves to a strange new land. Beck, B.B., Castro, M.I., Stoinski, T.S., and Ballou, J.D. National Geographic 172:677-690. 2002 (in press). Effects of pre-release environments on survivorship: A case study of reintroduced golden lion Strum, S.C. 1998. Moving the Pumphouse Gang. tamarins. In Lion Tamarins: Biology and Conservation (D.G. International Wildlife Magazine 28:12-21. Kleiman and A.B. Rylands, eds.). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. Treves, A. and Naughton-Treves, L. 1997. Case study of a chimpanzee recovered from poachers and temporarily Bush, M., Beck, B.B., Dietz, J.M., Baker, A.J., Everitte released with wild conspecifics. Primates 28:315-324. James, Jr., A., Pissinatti, A., Phillips, Jr., L.G., and Montali, R.J. 1996. Radiographic evaluation of diaphragmatic defects Tutin, C.E.G., Ancrenaz, M., Paredes, J., Vacher-Vallas, M., in golden lion tamarins (Leontopithecus rosalia rosalia): Vidal, C., Goossens, B., Bruford, M.W., and Jamart, A. Implications for reintroduction. Journal of Zoo and Wildlife 2001. Conservation biology framework of the release of Medicine 27(3):346-357. wild-born orphaned chimpanzees into the Conkouati Reserve, Congo. Conservation Biology 15:1,247-1,257. Carvalho, C. 1983. Re-introduction of golden lion tamarins. Solitaire (Wildlife Preservation Trusts post-training newsletter) 3:8-9. Neotropical Primates Castro, M.I., Beck, B.B., Kleiman, D.G., Ruiz-Miranda, C.R., Affonso, A.G., Ruiz-Miranda, C.R., and Beck, B.B. 2002 (in and Rosenberger, A.L. 1998. Environmental enrichment in a press). Interações ecológicas entre mico-leão-dourado reintroduction program for golden lion tamarins (Leontopithecus rosalia Linnaeus, 1758) reintroduzido e (Leontopithecus rosalia). In Second nature: Environmental mico estrela (Callithrix jacchus Linnaeus, 1758) introduzido enrichment for captive animals, pp. 97-128 (D.J. m fragmentos de mata Atlântica, RJ. In A primatologia no Shepherdson, J.D. Mellen, and M. Hutchins, eds.). Brasil 8 (S.L. Mendes and A.G. Chiarello, eds.). Sociedade Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. Brasileira de Primatologia, Santa Teresa, ES. Coimbra-Filho, A.F. and Mittermeier, R.A. 1978. Reintroduction Agoramoorthy, G. 1995. Red howler monkey (Alouatta and translocation of lion tamarins: A realistic appraisal. In seniculus) reintroduction in a gallery forest of Hato Flores Biology and behaviour of marmosets, pp. 41-46 (H. Rothe, H.J. Moradas, Venezuela. Neotropical Primates 3:9-10. Wolters, and J.P. Hearn, eds.). Eigenverlag H. Rothe, Göttingen. Ballou, J.D., Lacy, R.C., Kleiman, D.G., Rylands, A.B., and Ellis, S. (eds.). 1998. Leontopithecus II: The Second de Vries, A. 1991. Translocation of mantled howler monkeys Population and Habitat Viability Assessment for Lion (Alouatta palliata) in Guanacaste, Costa Rica. Master’s Tamarins (Leontopithecus). IUCN/SSC Conservation thesis. University of Calgary, Alberta. Breeding Specialist Group, Apple Valley, Minn., Dietz, L.A. 1985. Captive-born golden lion tamarins released Ballou, J.D. and Valladares-Pádua, C. 1990. Sub-population into the wild: A report from the field. Primate Conservation 6:21- extinction model for the lion tamarins in protected areas. In 27. Leontopithecus: Sub-population viability analysis, pp. 79-94 (U.S. Seal, J.D. Ballou, and C. Valladares-Pádua, eds.). Dietz, L.A. 1998. Community conservation education project IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, Apple for the golden lion tamarin, Brazil: Building support for Valley, Minn. habitat conservation. In Culture: The missing element of conservation, pp. 85-94 (R. Hoage and K. Moran, eds.). Beck, B.B. 1984. The great escape. On the Edge National Zoological Park/Smithsonian Institution. (newsletter of the Wildlife Preservation Trusts) 25:11, 17. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co., Washington, D.C.

Beck, B.B., Dietz, J.M., Kleiman, D.G., Castro, M.I., Lémos Dietz, L.A. and Nagagata, E.Y. 1995. Golden Lion Tamarin de Sá, R.M., and Luz, V.L.F. 1986. Projeto Mico-Leão IV. Conservation Program: A community education effort for forest Reintrodução de micos-leões-dourados (Leontopithecus conservation in Rio de Janeiro state, Brazil. In Conserving rosalia Linnaeus, 1766) (Callitrichidae, Primates) de wildlife: International education and communication cativeiro para seu ambiente natural. In A primatologia no approaches, pp. 64-86 (S.K. Jacobsen, ed.). Columbia Brasil 2, pp. 243-248 (M.T. de Mello, ed.). Sociedade Brasileira University Press, New York. de Primatologia, Brasília.

50 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

Dietz, L.A. and Nagagata, E.Y. 1997. Programa de Koontz, F.W. 1993. Trading places: reintroduction of black conservação do mico-leão-dourado: Atividades de educação howler monkeys into the Cockscomb Basin, Belize. Wildlife comunitária para a conservação da Mata Atlântica no Rio de Conservation May-June:52-59. Janeiro. In Educação ambiental: Caminhos trilhados no Brasil, pp. 133-146 (S.M. Pádua and M.F. Tabanez, eds.). Koontz, F.W., Horwich, R.H., Saqui, E., Saqui, H., Glander, Fundo Nacional do Meio Ambiente, IPÊ- Instituto de K., Koontz, C., and Westrom, W. 1994. Reintroduction of Pesquisas Ecológicas, Nazaré Paulista, SP. black howler monkeys (Alouatta pigra) into the Cockscomb Basin Wildlife Sanctuary, Belize. In American Zoo and Garcia-Orduna, F., Canales-Espinosa, D., Rodriquez-Luna, quarium Association Annual Conference Proceedings, pp. E., Silva-Lopez, G., Jimenez-Huerta, J., Benitez-Rodiguez, 104-111. AZA, Bethesda, Md. J., and Hermida-Lagunes, J. 1987. Translocation program for the howler monkey (Alouatta palliata): A report. Medici, P. 2001. Translocação como ferramenta para o American Journal of Primatology 12:363-364. manejo populacional de mico-leão-preto, Leontopithecus chrysopygus (Mikan, 1823). Master’s thesis, Universidade Horwich, R.H., Koontz, F.W., Saqui, E., Saqui, H., and Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte. Glander, K. 1993. A reintroduction program for the conservation of black howler monkeys in Belize. Neri, F.M., Rylands, A.B., Fraiha, V.T., and Ferreira, M.B. Endangered Species UPDATE 10(6):1-6. 1997. Use of radiotelemetry on titis, C. personatus, rescued during the installation of the Nova Ponte hydroelectric plant, Kierulff, M.C.M. 2000. Ecology and behaviour of Minas Gerais. Neotropical Primates 5(2):50-52. translocated groups of golden lion tamarins (Leontopithecus rosalia). Ph.D. Thesis, University of Cambridge, United Nogge, G. 1995. Zeitschrift des Kolner Zoo 38:37-41. Kingdom. Ostro, L.E.T. 1998. The spatial ecology of translocated Kierulff, M.C.M. and Procópio de Oliveira, P. 1994. Habitat black howler monkeys (Alouatta pigra). Ph.D. Thesis, preservation and the translocation of threatened groups of Fordham University, New York. golden lion tamarins, Leontopithecus rosalia. In Neotropical Primates 3 (supplement):15-18. Ostro, L.E.T., Silver, S.C., Koontz, F.W., Young, T.P., and Horwich, R.H. 1999. Ranging behavior of translocated and Kierulff, M.C.M., Procópio de Oliveira, P., Beck, B.B., and established groups of black howler monkeys (Alouatta pigra) Martins, A. 2002 (in press). Reintroduction and translocation in Belize, Central America. Biological Conservation 87:181- as conservation tools for golden lion tamarins. In Lion 190. Tamarins: Biology and Conservation (D.G. Kleiman and A.B. Rylands, eds.). Smithsonian Institution Press, Pinder, L. 1986a. Translocação como técnica de conservação Washington, D.C. em Leontopithecus rosalia. Master’s thesis, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brasília. Kleiman, D.G., Beck, B.B., Castro, I., Rettberg-Beck, B., and Carvalho, C. 1989. Tutoring Tamarins. On The Edge Pinder, L. 1986b. Projeto Mico-Leão III. Avaliação técnica de (newsletter of the Wildlife Preservation Trusts) 39:11-13. translocação em Leontopithecus rosalia (Linnaeus, 1766) (Callitrichidae, Primates). In A primatologia no Brasil 2, pp. 235- Kleiman, D.G., Beck, B.B., Dietz, J.M., and Dietz, L.A. 1991. 241 (M.T. de Mello, ed.). Sociedade Brasileira de Primatologia, Costs of a reintroduction and criteria for success: Accounting Brasília. and accountability in the Golden Lion Tamarin Conservation Program. In Beyond Captive Breeding: Re-introducing Redshaw, M.E. and Mallinson, J.J.C. 1991. Stimulation of Endangered Mammals to the Wild, pp. 125-142 (J.H.W. Gipps, natural patterns of behaviour: Studies with golden lion ed.). Clarendon Press, Oxford. tamarins and gorillas. In Primate responses to environmental change, pp. 217-238 (H.O. Box, ed.). Kleiman, D.G., Beck, B.B., Dietz, J.M., Dietz, L.A., Ballou, Chapman and Hall, London. J.D., and Coimbra-Filho, A.F. 1986. Conservation program for the golden lion tamarin: captive research and management, Richard-Hansen, C., Vié, J.C., and de Thoisy, B. 2000. ecological studies, educational strategies, and reintroduction. Translocation of red howler monkeys (Alouatta seniculus) in In Primates: The road to self-sustaining populations, pp. 959- French Guiana. Biological Conservation 93:247-253. 979 (K. Benirschke, ed.). Springer-Verlag, New York. Kleiman, D.G. and Mallinson, J.J.C. 1998. Recovery and Rosenberger, A.L. 1991. The Cabo Frio Four. Zoogoer July- management committees for lion tamarins: partnerships in August: 20-24. conservation planning and implementation. Conservation Biology 12:1-13. Ruiz-Miranda, C.R., Kleiman, D.G., Dietz, J.M., Moraes, E., Grativol, A.D., Baker, A.J., and Beck, B.B. 1999. Food Konstant, W.R. 1986. Second re-introduction of golden lion transfers in wild and reintroduced golden lion tamarins, tamarins a huge success! On The Edge (newsletter of the Leontopithecus rosalia. American Journal of Primatology Wildlife Preservation Trusts) 29:3-5. 48:305-320.

Konstant, W.R. and Mittermeier, R.A. 1982. Introduction, Silver, S.C. 1997. The feeding ecology of translocated reintroduction, and translocation of Neotropical primates: howler monkeys (Alouatta pigra) in Belize. Ph.D. Thesis, Past experiences and future possibilities. International Zoo Fordham University, New York. Yearbook 22:69-77.

51 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

Stoinski, T.S. 2000. Behavioral differences between captive- ANNEX II - Husbandry References born, reintroduced golden lion tamarins (Leontopithecus rosalia rosalia) and their wild-born offspring. Ph.D. Thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta. Bonobo

Stoinski, T.S., Beck, B.B., Bowman, M., and Lehnhardt, J. Mills, J., Reinartz, G., De Bois, H., Van Elsacker, L., and 1997. The Gateway Zoo Program: A recent initiative in golden Van Puijenbroeck, B. (eds.). 1997. The Care and lion tamarin zoo introductions. In Primate conservation: The Management of Bonobos in Captive Environments. role of zoological parks, pp. 113-129 (J. Wallis, ed.). American Zoological Society of Milwaukee County, Milwaukee. Society of Primatologists, Norman, Okla. To obtain, contact: Valladares-Pádua, C., Ballou, J.D., Saddy Martins, C., and Lisa A. Ellis Cullen Jr., L. 2002 (in press). Metapopulation management Assistant Conservation Coordinator for the conservation of black lion tamarins. In Lion Tamarins: Zoological Society of Milwaukee Biology and Conservation (D.G. Kleiman and A.B. Rylands, 1421 N. Water St. eds.). Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, D.C. Milwaukee, WI 53202 U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected] (or Gay Reinartz at Valladares-Pádua, C., Martins, C.S., Wormell, D., and Setz, [email protected]) E.Z.F. 2001. Preliminary evaluation of the reintroduction of a Cost: Free to institutions holding bonobos ($50 for others) mixed wild-captive group of black lion tamarins (Leontopithecus chrysopygus). Dodo (journal of the Wildlife Preservation Trusts) 36:30-38. Chimpanzee

Vié, J.C., Richard-Hansen, C., and Fournier-Chambrillon, C. Brent, L. (ed.). 2001. The Care and Management of Captive 2001. Abundance, use of space, and activity patterns of Chimpanzees. American Society of Primatologists, Texas, white-faced sakis (Pithecia pithecia) in French Guiana. U.S.A. American Journal of Primatology 55(4):203-221. To obtain, contact: Vié, J.C. 1998. Les effets d’une perturbation majeure de Steve Schapiro l’habitat sur deux espèces de primates en Guyane American Society of Primatologists Française: translocation de singes hurleurs roux (Alouatta UTMD Anderson Science Park seniculus), et translocation et insularisation de sakis à face Route 2, Box 151-B1 pâle (Pithecia pithecia). Ph.D. Thesis, Université Montpellier Bastrop, TX 78602 U.S.A. II, France. E-mail: [email protected] Fax: 512-332-5208 Vié, J.C. 1999. Wildlife rescues: the case of the Petit Saut Cost: $25 U.S., plus shipping hydroelectric dam in French Guiana. Oryx 33(2):115-126.

Vié, J.C. and Richard-Hansen, C. 1997. Primate Cox, D., Rosen, N., Montgomery, C., and Seal, U.S. (eds.). translocation in French Guiana: A preliminary report. 2000. Chimpanzee Sanctuaries: Guidelines and Neotropical Primates 5(1):1-3. Management Workshop Report. IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, Apple Valley, Minn., U.S.A. Vié, J.C., Richard-Hansen, C., and Taube, E. 1997. Wildlife translocation in French Guiana: A preliminary report. Re- To obtain, contact: introduction NEWS (newsletter of the IUCN/SSC Re- IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group introduction Specialist Group) 13:7-9. 12101 Johnny Cake Ridge Road Apple Valley, MN 55124 U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected] Fax: 952-432-2757 Cost: $35 U.S.

Cotton-Top Tamarin

Available on the Internet: www.csew.com/cottontop

To obtain, contact: Anne Savage Cotton-Top Tamarin SSP Co-ordinator Disney’s Animal Kingdom P.O. Box 10000 Lake Buena Vista, FL 32830 U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected]

52 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

Golden Lion Tamarin Orang-utan

Golden Lion Tamarin Management Committee and Sodaro, C. (ed.). 1997. Orang-utan Species Survival Plan Rettberg-Beck, B. 1996. Husbandry Protocol for Golden Husbandry Manual. Chicago Zoological Park, Brookfield, Ill. Lion Tamarins. Pp. 198.

To obtain, contact: To obtain, contact: Jennifer Mickelberg Lori Perkins National Zoological Park Orang-utan SSP Co-ordinator, International Orang-utan Smithsonian Institution Studbook Keeper Washington, D.C. 20008 U.S.A. Zoo Atlanta E-mail: [email protected] (or Jon Ballou at 800 Cherokee Ave., S.E. [email protected]) Atlanta, GA 30315-1440 U.S.A. Cost: None E-mail: [email protected] Cost: $25 U.S.

Loris

Fitch-Snyder, H. and Schulze, H. (eds.). 2001. Management of Lorises in Captivity: A Husbandry Manual for Asian Lorises (Nycticebus and Loris ssp.). Center for Reproduction of Endangered Species, Zoological Society of San Diego, San Diego.

To obtain, contact: Helena Fitch-Snyder c/o Zoological Society of San Diego P.O. Box 120551 San Diego, CA 92112-0551 U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected] Fax: 619-557-3959 Cost: $10 U.S.

Mangabey

Field, L. (ed.). 1995. AZA Mangabey SSP Husbandry Manual (Cercocebus and Lophocebus). Sacramento Zoo, Sacramento, Calif.

To obtain, contact: Leslie Field Sacramento Zoo 3930 West Land Park Drive Sacramento, CA 95822-1123 U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected] Fax: 916-264-5013 Cost: $15 U.S.

Mixed Species

Lester, B. (ed.). 2001. Mixed Species Resource Manual. AZA Old World Monkey Taxon Advisory Group. Houston Zoo, Houston.

To obtain, contact: Barbara Lester Houston Zoo 1513 N. MacGregor Houston, TX 77030 U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected] Fax: 713-284-1329 Cost: None

53 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

ANNEX III - Key Contacts Re-introduction Specialist Group Frederic Launay, Chair Pritpal Soorae, Executive Officer IUCN Species Survival Commission IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group Species Survival Programme Environmental Research & Wildlife Development Agency IUCN-The World Conservation Union (ERWDA) Rue Mauverney 28 P.O. Box 45553 1196 Gland, Switzerland Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates Tel: 41-22-999-0152 Tel: 971-2-6934650 Fax: 41-22-999-0015 Fax: 971-2-6817361 E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Web site: www.iucn.org/themes/ssc Veterinary Specialist Group CITES Secretariat Richard A. Kock, VSG Co-Chair 15, Chemin des Anémones Technical Assistant - Wildlife Veterinary Expert 1219 Châtelaine PACE Epidemiology Organisation of African Unity Genève, Switzerland InterAfrican Bureau for Animal Resources Tel: 41-22-9799139/40 P.O. Box 30786 Fax: 41-22-797-3417 Nairobi, Kenya E-mail: [email protected] Tel: 254-2-334550 Web site: www.cites.org Fax: 254-2-226565 E-mail: [email protected]

IUCN/SSC Disciplinary Specialist Groups William Karesh, VSG CO-Chair Department Head, Field Veterinary Program Conservation Breeding Specialist Group The Wildlife Conservation Society Ulysses S. Seal, Chair 2300 Southern Blvd. IUCN/SSC CBSG Program Office Bronx, NY 10460-1099 U.S.A. 12101 Johnny Cake Ridge Road Tel: 718-220-5892 Apple Valley, MN 55124 U.S.A. Fax: 718-220-7126 Tel: 952-997-9800 E-mail: [email protected] Fax: 952-432-2757 E-mail: [email protected] Web site: www.cbsg.org Primate Taxon Advisory Groups

Invasive Species Specialist Group African Preservation Program (APP) Mammal TAG Mick Clout, Chair F.R. Schoeman Maj De Poorter, Programme Officer National Zoological Gardens of South Africa School of Environmental & Marine Sciences Pretoria, South Africa University of Auckland, Tamaki Campus Tel: 27-12-28-3265 Private Bag 92019 Fax: 27-12-323-4540 Auckland, New Zealand Tel: 64-9-3737-599 ASMP (Australasian) Primate TAG Fax: 64-9-3737-042 Amanda Embury E-mail: [email protected] Royal Melbourne Zoological Gardens Melbourne, Australia Primate Specialist Group Tel: 6-139-285-9419 Russell Mittermeier, Chair Fax: 6-139-285-9330 Conservation International E-mail: [email protected] 1919 M St. N.W., Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20036 U.S.A. AZA (North American) Ape TAG Tel: 202-912-1031 Randy Fulk E-mail: [email protected] North Carolina Zoological Park 4401 Zoo Parkway Africa Section: Thomas M. Butynski, Asheboro, NC 27203 U.S.A ([email protected]) Tel: 336-879-7600 Asia Section: Ardith A. Eudey ([email protected]) Fax: 336-879-2891 Madagascar Section: Jorg Ganzhorn, E-mail: [email protected] ([email protected]) Neotropical Section: Anthony B. Rylands, AZA (North American) New World Primate TAG ([email protected]) and Andrew Baker Ernesto Rodriguez-Luna Philadelphia Zoological Gardens ([email protected]) Philadelphia, PA 19104 U.S.A. Tel: 215-243-5245 Fax: 215-243-0219 E-mail: [email protected]

54 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

AZA (North American) Old World Monkey TAG EAZA (European) Old World Monkey TAG Dennis Pate (also British & Irish Primate TAGs) Lincoln Park Zoological Gardens Neil Bemment Chicago, IL U.S.A. Paignton Zoo Environmental Park Tel: 312-742-2031 Totnes Road, Paignton Zoo Fax: 312-742-2211 Devon TQ4 7EU United Kindgom E-mail: [email protected] Tel: 44-1803-697521 Fax: 44-1803-523457 Eve Lyon E-mail: [email protected] San Francisco Zoo San Francisco, CA U.S.A. EAZA (European) Prosimian TAG Tel: 415-753-7144 Achim Johann Fax: 415-681-2039 NaturZoo Rheine E-mail: [email protected] Salinnestrasse 150 48432 Rheine, Germany AZA (North American) Prosimian TAG Tel: 49-5971-16148-0 Ingrid Porton Fax: 49-5971-16148-20 St. Louis Zoological Park E-mail: [email protected] St. Louis, MO 63110 U.S.A . Tel: 314-781-0900 ext. 358 Fax: 314-647-7969 Other Contacts E-mail: [email protected] International Association for Primate Refuges and EAZA (European) Ape TAG Sanctuaries Bengt Holst Web sites: www.primatesofpanama.org/iaprs.htm & Copenhagen Zoo http://groups.yahoo.com/sanctuaries_for_primates S. Fasanvej 79 E-mail: [email protected] DK-2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark Tel: 45-72200220 Office International Des Epizooties/World Organisation Fax: 45-72200219 For Animal Health E-mail: [email protected] 12 rue de Prony 75017 Paris, France EAZA (European) Callthrichid TAG Tel: 33-01-44-15-18-88 Bryan Carroll Fax: 33-01-42-67-09-87 Bristol Zoo E-mail: [email protected] Clifton Web site: www.oie.int Bristol BS8 3HA United Kingdom Tel: 44-117-970-6176 Pan African Sanctuaries Alliance Fax: 44-117-973-6814 27 West St. E-mail: [email protected] Wilton, Salisbury Wilts SP2 0DL United Kingdom EAZA (European) Cebid TAG Tel: 44-0-781-8407420 Frank Rietkerk Fax: 44-0-172-2744844 Apenheul Primate Park Web site: www.panafricanprimates.org P.O. Box 97 7300 AB Apeldoorn, The Netherlands Tel: 31-55-35-75700 Fax: 31-55-35-75701 E-mail: [email protected]

EAZA (European) Gibbon TAG Jean-Marc Lernould Parc Zoologique et Botanique de la Ville de Mulhouse 51 Rue du Jardin Zoologique 68100 Mulhouse, France Tel: 33-3-89-31-85-10 Fax: 33-3-89-31-85-26 E-mail: [email protected]

55 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

ANNEX IV – Core Review Board

The following people comprise the Core Review Board for the Guidelines to Nonhuman Primate Re- introductions.

1) Benjamin Beck, National Zoological Park/Smithsonian Institution 2) Thomas M. Butynski, Eastern Africa Biodiversity Hotspots, Conservation International 3) Ardith A. Eudey, Asian Section, IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist Group 4) Elizabeth L. Gadsby, Pandrillus, Drill Rehabilitation & Breeding Center 5) Kenneth Glander, Department of Biological Anthropology and Anatomy, Duke University 6) William B. Karesh, Wildlife Conservation Society 7) Devra G. Kleiman, National Zoological Park/Smithsonian Institution 8) John Lewis, International Zoo Veterinary Group 9) Russell M. Mittermeier, Conservation International 10) John F. Oates, Department of Anthropology, Hunter College-City University of New York 11) Anthony B. Rylands, Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation International 12) Pritpal S. Soorae, IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group 13) Shirley C. Strum, Department of Anthropology, University of California-San Diego 14) Caroline Tutin, Centre International de Recherches Medicales de Franceville-Gabon; Dept. of Biological and Molecular Sciences, University of Stirling, Scotland 15) Michael Woodford, Working Group on Wildlife Diseases, World Organisation for Animal Health, Office International des Epizooties

About the IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group

The IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group (RSG) is a disciplinary group covering a wide range of plant and animal species (as opposed to most SSC specialist Groups that deal with single taxonomic groups). The RSG has an extensive international network, a re-introduction projects database, direc- tory, and re-introduction library. The RSG publishes a biannual newsletter, Re-introduction NEWS.

If you are a re-introduction practitioner or interested in re-introductions, please contact:

Pritpal S. Soorae Executive Officer IUCN\SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group c/o Environmental Research & Wildlife Development Agency (ERWDA) P.O. Box 45553 Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates (UAE)

Tel: +971-2 693-4650/ Fax: +971-2 681-0008 / E-mail: [email protected]

56 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

DECISION TREE: Nonhuman Primate Re-introductions

Q1: Is there a need for re-introduction? Will the re-introduction make a contribution to the survival of the No species, restore natural biodiversity, promote conservation If no, discontinue plans awareness, or similar? Is the intent to re-establish viable, self- for re-introduction. sustaining populations in the wild? Do the benefits clearly outweigh any potential risks?

Yes

? Rapid overall assessment: Determine if the key requirements- habitat, socioeconomic, financial, legal, management, release- No If no, discontinue plans stock, suitability, veterinary, post-release monitoring-can likely for re-introduction. be met.

Yes

Q2: Multidisciplinary team: Can a multidisciplinary team be No If no, discontinue plans established to execute a clearly defined set of aims and objectives for re-introduction. in a proposed time frame?

Yes No Q3: Veterinary programme: Can a quarantine and veterinary If no, discontinue plans programme be developed, implemented, and followed? for re-introduction. Yes

Q4: Habitat suitability: Can the proposed release site be properly No If no, discontinue plans assessed? If so, is it considered suitable habitat in which to release for re-introduction. the species?

Yes

Q5: Socioeconomic & legal requirements: Can the No If no, discontinue plans socioeconomic, financial, and legal requirements be met in the short for re-introduction. and long term?

Yes If no, screen animals Q6: Release-stock suitability: Has the stock been deemed according to veterinary suitable for release (cleared veterinary screening, received No protocol and ensure stock appropriate vaccinations, exhibits no abnormal behaviours, etc.)? receives clearance for Has the stock’s genetic status been determined, and is the stock release by veterinary still considered suitable for release? personnel; otherwise, discontinue plans. Yes If no, revise plans to No Q7: Transport & final release: Can the stock be expeditiously and accommodate transport safely transported and released to a specific site? and final release requirements; otherwise Yes discontinue plans.

Q8: Post-release requirements: Can the released animals be No If no, revise plans to monitored and follow-up activities implemented and executed? Can ensure documentation of project outcomes be documented on an ongoing basis and shared project results; otherwise with others in the conservation community? discontinue plans.

57 Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

. . . . lications New Pub

IUCN Guidelines for the Placement of Confiscated Animals

The IUCN Guidelines for the Placement of Confiscated Animals were developed after an extensive review process and became official IUCN Policy at the 51st Meeting of IUCN Council in February 2000. These guidelines are designed to provide options for the placement of animals confiscated from illegal or irregular trade.

The Environmental Research & Wildlife Development Agency (ERWDA) in Abu Dhabi, UAE kindly assisted in translating these guidelines into Arabic and printing a bi-lingual English-Arabic booklet. This booklet will be extensively distributed amongst Arabic speaking countries in the Middle East and North Africa. Limited copies are available from the IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group (RSG) Secretariat, c/o ERWDA, P.O. Box 45553, Abu Dhabi, UAE, Fax: +(971-2)-681-0008 / E-mail: [email protected]

Quarantine and Health Screening Protocols for Wildlife Prior to Translocation and Release into the Wild M. H. Woodford (Ed.) In this booklet, many of the disease risks attending wildlife translocation projects are described. Suggestions are made for the development of systematic procedures for the reduction of these risks at both the source of the founder animals and at the release site.

“These considerations are in perfect harmony with the principal missions of the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE)” Bernard Vallat, Director General, OIE, Paris

This booklet covers the following taxa: Artiodactyla/Perissodactyla/Primates/Carnivora/Marine Mammals/Rodentia/Lagomorpha/Marsupialia (New & Old World)/Monotremata/Chiroptera/Aves/Reptilia & Amphibia/Piscidae

This booklet is available from: Care for the Wild International, Ashfolds, Rusper, West Sussex RH12 4QX, UK. Phone: +(44)-1293-871596 / Fax: +(44)-1293-8715022 E-mail: [email protected]

58

Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

59

Re-introduction NEWS No. 21 June 2002

60