bs_bs_banner 232 THE DEVELOPING ZOO WORLD Int. Zoo Yb. (2012) 46: 232–238 DOI:10.1111/j.1748-1090.2011.00160.x Research in African zoos: stepping up to the plate? A. KOTZE1,2 & D. MORGAN3 1Manager, Research and Scientific Services, National Zoological Gardens of South Africa, PO Box 754, Pretoria 0001, South Africa, and 2Affiliate Professor, Genetics Department, University of the Free State, PO Box 339, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa, and 3Executive Director, African Association of Zoos and Aquaria (PAAZAB), PO Box 754, Pretoria 0001, South Africa E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] Following a membership-generated requirement, in The southern African Office of the Conser- 2009, the African Association of Zoos and Aquaria vation Breeding Specialist Group was com- (PAAZAB) initiated a Research Committee to coordi- nate and guide research activities at African member missioned to facilitate the workshop. zoos. The first step was to conduct a survey of research The workshop was implemented at the activities in PAAZAB member institutions. An analysis Annual Conference of PAAZAB in Oudt- of such research activities is provided. While the total shoorn, South Africa, during June 2003. With response was disappointingly low (20·8%), the survey limited time available and a large group of was nonetheless able to demonstrate that respondent zoos in the region actively contribute to and participate people participating, it was clear that produc- in relevant research. ing a comprehensive strategic plan was not a realistic expectation of the process. Instead, Key-words: Africa; African Association of Zoos and it was made clear that the process would Aquaria; PAAZAB; research; zoos. deliver the makings of a ‘strategic frame- work’ from which a strategic plan could INTRODUCTION later be developed. Six broad thematic areas were identified: Legislation; Conservation With the appointment of a permanent Execu- and Partnerships; Education and Training; tive Director to the African Association of Research; Marketing; Membership. Specific Zoos and Aquaria (PAAZAB) during the first working groups then generated framework half of 2003, the Executive Committee of the recommendations per theme. Association felt that a close review of the The research working group produced the Association’s validity to the regional conser- following recommendations. vation community and its membership was necessary. Further to this, the Association 1. Establish a PAAZAB subcommittee on wanted to identify means of being more research to promote a better under- proactive in the zoo-orientated conservation, standing of and significance for research education and research fields within the prac- and/or monitoring within zoos (directors; tical bounds of its resources and capacity. A conservators). workshop approach was seen as the best 2. The Research Committee needs to facili- medium to identify such needs and poten- tate and encourage member institutions to tials, and to give the newly established develop research plans and methodology, Executive Office a coherent and cogent direc- and to include ‘research’ in staff training tion to pursue on behalf of the membership. curricula. It should strive to include Int. Zoo Yb. (2012) 46: 232–238 © 2012 The Authors. International Zoo Yearbook © 2012 The Zoological Society of London RESEARCH IN AFRICAN ZOOS 233 ‘research’ in the member institution research activities within the different accreditation criteria. institutions, staff and their involvement in research activities, financial support for In the ensuing years, the Association estab- research and research contents. Nineteen lished various priorities in terms of the questions were drafted, and the average time framework strategy according to capacity and to complete the form was estimated at 15 member interest. Although a research and minutes. monitoring working group was established following the 2003 workshop, real activity RESULTS within this group did not gain momentum until 2006 leading to the formation of a Questionnaires were sent to 77 members, 16 formal standing PAAZAB committee on of which returned completed forms, which is research in 2008. a response rate of 20·8%. EAZA had a Following the publication of the World Zoo response rate of 44% (133 completed ques- and Aquarium Conservation Strategy in 2005 tionnaires were returned from a total of 301 (WAZA, 2005) and its vision that modern sent to all members) (Reid et al., 2008). zoos should make a significant contribution Although the response rate for the PAAZAB to effective biological research, the latterly questionnaires was disappointingly low, it renamed PAAZAB Conservation Science was decided to continue with the analysis and Research Committee was mandated to as it would provide a first assessment of provide guidance and an overview of relevant research activities in the region. Table 1 research in African zoos. To this end, follow- indicates all participating institutions. Only ing consultation with the Research Commit- three institutions outside of South Africa tee of the European Association of Zoos and responded. At least two reminders were sent Aquaria (EAZA), the PAAZAB committee to members. Most of the questionnaires were commenced a survey on research activities received within a month after the second taking place in PAAZABmember institutions. reminder. The method used to collect information was a questionnaire. This questionnaire was Research capacity and structure based on an adapted version of the EAZA Research Committee questionnaire of 2005, Six of the 16 institutions have a research which was used to develop an EAZA department. Of all 16 responding institutions, Research Strategy (Reid et al., 2008). The three had more than five full-time equivalents mid- to long-term intent of the PAAZAB (FTE), three had two to five FTE, one had questionnaire is to facilitate the development one to two FTE, one had a half to one FTE of a similar PAAZAB Research Strategy. and one had less than half a FTE of staff In February 2009, the Executive Office of employed for research activities. Of the ten PAAZAB gave the go ahead for the distribu- members with no research department, five tion of the questionnaire to all PAAZAB indicated that research is part of the job member institutions. To ensure awareness descriptions of staff. and cooperation from member institutions, Only two institutions had a written the intent and concept of the questionnaire research policy, which indicates that 87·5% was introduced to the delegates at the of members that responded to the question- 2009 Annual Meeting and Conference of naire do not have a research policy. Close to PAAZAB held in Entebbe, Uganda. Subse- two-thirds of institutions did have some quent to this, the questionnaire was electroni- means of recording research protocols and/or cally distributed in June 2009 to all senior projects [i.e. 11 institutions (68·8%)]. managers of PAAZAB facilities. Five institutions had formal relation- The questionnaire was designed to identify ships with universities, conservation organi- coordinators (focal point) responsible for zations or scientific institutions. A formal Int. Zoo Yb. (2012) 46: 232–238 © 2012 The Authors. International Zoo Yearbook © 2012 The Zoological Society of London 234 THE DEVELOPING ZOO WORLD ORGANIZATION Lory Park Zoo, Midrand, South Africa Cango Wildlife Ranch, Oudtshoorn, South Africa Mitchell Park Zoo, Durban, South Africa Two Oceans Aquarium, Cape Town, South Africa Johannesburg Zoo, South Africa Antelope Game Park, Gweru, Zimbabwe Bloemfontein Zoo, South Africa Mystic Monkeys and Feathers Zoo, Pretoria, South Africa Bayworld, Port Elizabeth, South Africa Bester Bird & Animals Zoo, Pretoria, South Africa South African Foundation for the Conservation of Coastal Birds (SANCCOB), Cape Town, South Africa UShaka Seaworld, South African Association for Marine Biological Research (SAAMBR), Durban, South Africa Hoedspruit Cheetah Research Centre, Kapama, South Africa Marwell Trust Zimbabwe, Dambari Field Station, Zimbabwe Parc Zoologique d’Ivoloina, Tamatave, Madagascar National Zoological Gardens of South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa Table 1. List of member institutions responding to the survey questionnaire sent out by the African Association of Zoos and Aquaria (PAAZAB). UNIVERSITIES OTHER ORGANIZATIONS University of Kwa-Zulu Natal Birdlife SA University of Cape Town KZN Wildlife University of Pretoria South African Institute for Aquatic Biodiversity Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University Endangered Wildlife Trust University of the Witwatersrand Oceanographic Research Institute Rhodes University Valbio Ranamafana, Madagascar GRENE, University of Toamasina, Madagascar Port Elizabeth Museum The Jane Goodall Institute Table 2. List of organizations with formal relationships with African Association of Zoos and Aquaria (PAAZAB) member institutions on research activities. relationship was defined as a signed docu- out on average more than 65% of the ment between parties; for example, a memo- research. Nine institutions indicated that randum of agreement or understanding. The staff members (curators, keepers, other) are five respondents indicated formal relation- responsible for 14% of research being con- ships with 16 universities, museums, ducted in the institution. One institution non-governmental organizations (NGOs) or indicated that part-time veterinarians and conservation bodies (Table 2). Listed in veterinary nurses conduct 40% of their Table 3 are organizations with which research. Student involvement