Research in African Zoos: Stepping up to the Plate? A

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 framework’ 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

‘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

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 ranged from PAAZAB institutions have informal relation- 45% within 13 institutions to 100% in three ships. Two institutions had no informal rela- institutions. tionships with either a research organization or university but expressed a willingness to become involved. Financial support for research Half of the responding institutions have dedi- Types of researchers cated budgets for research, although we did The six institutions with research depart- not request budget amounts. Three institu- ments have dedicated researchers carrying tions indicated increases in their budgets

AFRICAN UNIVERSITIES INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITIES ORGANIZATIONS University of Cape Town, Bristol University, UK Baltimore Zoo, MD, USA South Africa University of Pretoria, South Africa: Appalachian State University, NC, Bristol Zoo, UK Onderstepoort Veterinary Faculty, USA Mammal Research Institute, Zoology & Genetics Depts Rhodes University, South Africa Stirling University, UK South African Institute for Aquatic Biodiversity Fort Hare University, South Africa University of Adelaide, Australia South African Foundation for the Conservation of Coastal Birds Dept Vegetal Ecology, University of Swansea University, UK Oceanographic Research Institute, Antananarivo, Madagascar South Africa Veterinary School, University of University Exeter, UK uShaka Sea World, South Africa Antananarivo, Madagascar Tshwane University of Technology, University of Oslo, Norway Two Oceans Aquarium, South Africa South Africa University of the Witwatersrand, University of East Anglia, UK Onderstepoort Veterinary Institute, South Africa South Africa University of Natal, South Africa University of Newcastle, UK National Research Foundation, South Africa North West University, South Africa University of Glasgow, UK Bayworld Centre for Research & Education, South Africa UNISA, South Africa University of Zurich, Switzerland National Veterinary Institute, Norway University of Johannesburg, University of Miami, FL, USA Marine Coastal Management, South Africa South Africa University of the Free State, University of Vienna, Austria Mabula Ground Hornbill Research South Africa and Conservation Project, South Africa Central University of Technology, National Research Center for De Wildt Cheetah and Wildlife South Africa Protozoan Diseases (NRCD), Trust, South Africa Obihiro University of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine, Japan University of the Western Cape, Oklahoma State University, Centre for Research and South Africa Stillwater, OK, USA Conservation, Royal Society of Antwerp, Belgium National University of Science & University of Estacion Biologica de Research Institute for Wildlife and Technology, Bulawayo, Donana, Spain Ecology, Vienna, Austria Zimbabwe Bindura University of Science Faculty of Veterinary Science, Gauteng Department of Agriculture, Education, Bindura, Zimbabwe Parasitology, University of Conservation and Environment, Zaragoza, Spain South Africa University of Stellenbosch, Royal Veterinary College, London, Biodiversity Research Section, Free South Africa UK State Department of Tourism, Environment & Economic Affairs, South Africa University of Limpopo, South Mpumalanga Parks and Tourism Africa Agency, South Africa University of Venda, South Africa National Department of Agriculture, South Africa South African National Parks Board

Table 3. List of organizations with informal relationships with African Association of Zoos and Aquaria (PAAZAB) members on research activities.

Int. Zoo Yb. (2012) 46: 232–238 © 2012 The Authors. International Zoo Yearbook © 2012 The Zoological Society of London 236 THE DEVELOPING ZOO WORLD from 2005 to 2008. The other 13 institutions only had increases linked to inflation. MODE Nine institutions receive external funding In situ research on Civic duty – give back for research that include sources such as zoo- aquarium species to the natural world supported organizations, private individuals, Core function Aids in protection of reserves local, regional and national governments, and Evaluation of role as Benefits wild population national and international NGOs. Mention conservation facility management was also made of financial support from Euro- pean and American zoos. External sources Table 4. Other means by which institutions benefit from research activities. contributing most to research funding were international NGOs, followed by the zoos’ support organizations and private individuals. Local and national government and national OTHER RESEARCH PRIORITIES NGOs featured very low on the list. Species-specific research An estimated average of ZAR131 000 Veterinary research (ϮUS$16 300) is spent annually on research Field studies in the ten institutions with no research Biodiversity research department. The least estimated amount Evaluation and assessment spent by one institution on research was less Nutrition Public interface research than ZAR1000 (US$125). The estimated Visitor studies funding spent on research annually by institutions with research departments ranged Table 5. List of other research priorities identified by from more than ZAR100 000 (US$12 500) to institutions. ZAR3·5 million (US$437 500). These esti- mates took into account staff time, other resources as well as funding spent over the and population biology and education (8). period 1 January 2005 to date. Additional research priorities identified by institutions are listed in Table 5. Fourteen (87·5%) institutions indicated Benefit of research that they contribute to research by making Several benefits of research were indicated animal records available to zoo and aquarium by the respondents. The contribution to researchers. This confirms that databases improved management ranked the highest such as International Species Information (81·3%), followed by a raised profile as a System and Zoological Information Manage- worthwhile institution (75%) and, thirdly, ment System are the most powerful research that research produces information that can tools available (WAZA, 2005). These institu- be used in educational programmes for the tions also indicated that contributing biologi- public (68·8%). Benefits of research to the cal material offers a huge research resource participating institutions are listed in Table 4. for universities and research institutions, and The most frequently mentioned was that provides valuable support to researchers and research fulfils either the stated or perceived animal managers. The frequency with which institutional mission. biological material is made available for research is indicated in Table 6. In addition, these institutions allow researchers to carry Research contents out their research at their facilities. In total, 82·3% (13 institutions) of the Most institutions communicate the results responding institutions identified research of their research one to five times per year in priorities. Of these, 12 regard conservation as scientific journals, non-scientific journals or a priority, followed by husbandry/animal professional magazines, newsletters and as welfare research (10), animal behaviour (9) oral or poster presentations at conferences/

<1 1–5 5–20 >20 FREQUENCY NEVER TIME/YEAR TIMES/YEAR TIMES/YEAR TIMES/YEAR Making animal records available for research 2 1 4 6 3 Making biomaterials available for research 2 4 4 2 4

Table 6. Frequency of contributions to research: n = 16 institutions.

<1 1–5 5–20 >20 TIME/ TIMES/ TIMES/ TIMES/ FREQUENCY NEVER YEAR YEAR YEAR YEAR Articles in scientific journals 3 2 5 1 1 Articles in non-scientific journals/professional magazines 1 3 8 1 Articles in non-scientific journals/non-professional magazines 3 2 6 2 Institution newsletter/magazine 2 1 5 4 Oral presentations at scientific conferences/meetings 2 3 4 3 Poster presentations at scientific conferences/meetings 5 1 5 1

Table 7. Frequency of research communication by 16 institutions of the African Association of Zoos and Aquaria (PAAZAB). meetings. Table 7 illustrates the overall (Morgan, 2004, 2010), with the highest frequency of research communication by density of all being in South Africa. responding institutions. Notwithstanding, it is especially hearten- ing that the survey indicates that zoos in the DISCUSSION African region are starting to step up to the plate. Where they are able, some African In its 20 year history, this initiative represents zoos can and do actively contribute to and a significant step for PAAZAB. Many authors participate in relevant research. However, the have stated that research is a core mandate of emphasis here is upon the statement ‘where the function of a modern zoo (Conway, 1969, they are able’. African zoos experience con- 2003; Boyle, 1989; Hutchins et al., 2003; siderable capacity issues, ranging from lack Wharton, 2007; Hutchins & Thompson, of adequate funding through to a paucity 2008). In keeping with this ethos, this survey of qualified staff, that influence not only has been the first step in what has been to date research capability but also basic zoo opera- a 6 year journey to encourage and promote tion at its simplest form (Morgan, 2010). research as a fundamental activity in African Indeed, for many African zoos, research as zoos. The fact of a greater predominance of such is regarded as an unattainable luxury. South African responses to the survey under- The observations made of North American lines the disproportion of membership geo- zoos by Stoinski et al. (1998) have a strong graphical distribution on the continent. Of a parallel. Furthermore, Lawson et al. (2008) total 77 institutional, associate and affiliate comment on the negative perceptions held of members within the association in 14 African science and scientists by animal care staff countries, 58 (i.e. 75%) are located in South and, certainly, for some zoos within the Africa. This in turn is also a reflection of the African region, this mindset is manifest. The distribution of zoos in Africa, whereby of the outcomes of this survey should consequently 200-odd zoo-type facilities in 48 African be seen not as an apparent lack of commit- countries, the majority are restricted to three ment to research activities by African zoos clusters in North, West and southern Africa but quite the contrary.

The need to pursue an active policy of (WAZA, 2005), perhaps, the research commit- research promotion in zoos north of the tees of the larger and more active regional zoo Zambezi River as an integral part of the associations could consider fostering such PAAZAB Research Strategy is then moot. In extra-regional research relationships. this regard, this study has made a good start in identifying the emerging role of research REFERENCES within African facilities. Although the initial BOYLE, P. (1989): The role of aquariums in education, results may be less than electrifying, they do, conservation and research. Bulletin de l’Institut Oceano- nonetheless, represent an encouraging indi- graphique Monaco Special Issue No. 5: 317–323. cation of a potential trend. On this basis, CONWAY, W. G. (1969): Zoos: their changing roles. Science 163: 48–52. PAAZAB will initiate a follow-up to foster CONWAY, W. G. (2003): The role of zoos in the 21st collaborations between zoos and other century. International Zoo Yearbook 38: 7–13. research facilities and expand upon this criti- HUTCHINS,M.&THOMPSON, S. D. (2008): Zoo and cally important element of zoo function. An aquarium research: priority setting for the coming excellent example of African zoo-based decades. Zoo Biology 27: 488–497. HUTCHINS, M., SMITH,B.&ALLARD, R. (2003): In defense research activities with multiple collabora- of zoos and aquariums: the ethical basis for keeping tors is presented by the National Zoological animals in captivity. Journal of the American Veterinary Gardens of South Africa (Kotze & Nxomani, Medical Association 223: 958–966. 2011). Developmental models of research KOTZE,A.&NXOMANI, C. (2011): The National Zoologi- cal Gardens of South Africa; a national research facility. collaborations from this institution will be International Zoo Yearbook 45: 30–37. used to foster similar approaches with aca- LAWSON,D.P.,OGDEN,J.&SNYDER, R. (2008): Maximiz- demic facilities in other African countries. ing the contribution of science in zoos and aquariums: Any future attempt to gather information organizational models and perceptions. Zoo Biology 27: on research activities using a questionnaire 458–469. MORGAN, D. R. (2004): WOZA Africa – the African zoo system will involve a more aggressive and aquarium renaissance of the African Association of approach to solicit a better response rate. Per- Zoos and Aquaria (PAAZAB). In WAZA conferences: sonal telephone calls following questionnaire proceedings of the 58th annual meeting, hosted by distribution to senior zoo management, with AMACZOOA, San Jose, Costa Rica, 16–20 November 2003. Cooperation between zoos in situ and ex situ con- repeated telephonic follow-up, is likely to be servation programmes: 182–183. Dollinger, P. (Ed.). more successful. Despite some electronic and Bern: World Association of Zoos and Aquariums. land-based communication difficulties within MORGAN, D. R. (2010): African zoos: partnering a nec- Africa, mobile cellular phone technology is essary renaissance. International Zoo Yearbook 44: 1–6. freely available throughout the continent and REID,G.MCG., MACDONALD, A. A., FIDGETT, A. L., HID- DINGA,B.&LEUS, K. (2008): Developing the research most people possess such equipment. potential of zoos and aquaria. The EAZA research strat- The ongoing challenges and the necessity for egy. Amsterdam: EAZA Executive Office. http:// research prioritization in zoos and aquariums as www.eaza.net/about/Documents/EAZA_Research_ expounded by Hutchins & Thompson (2008) Strategy_2008.pdf STOINSKI, T. S., LUKAS,K.E.&MAPLE, T. L. (1998): A have a pointed relevance here. The function survey of research in North American Zoos and Aquari- of the PAAZAB Conservation Science and ums. Zoo Biology 17: 176–180. Research Committee going forward will be the WAZA (2005): Building a future for wildlife. The world identification of the relevant priorities. zoo and aquarium conservation strategy. Bern: WAZA. http://www.waza.org/en/site/conservation/conservation- Possibly, some excessive detail of the strategies. responses received in our questionnaire survey WHARTON, D. (2007): Research by zoos. In Zoos in the has been given in this presentation. However, 21st century: catalysts for conservation?: 178–191. this is a deliberate ploy on the part of the Zimmermann, A., Hatchwell, M., Dickie, L. A. & West, authors in the hope of encouraging research C. (Eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Zoological Society of London. collaborations between African zoos and partners outside the region. In keeping with the cooperative ethos espoused by the World Manuscript submitted 21 June 2010; revised Zoo and Aquarium Conservation Strategy 10 June 2011; accepted 24 October 2011