DOCSLIB.ORG

Return to the Wild: the Cliffhanger Story of Red Wolf Recovery

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Return to the Wild: the Cliffhanger Story of Red Wolf Recovery Return to the wild: The cliffhanger story of red wolf recovery In the case of the Red Wolf Recovery Program, the drama could hardly have been more gripping. Red wolf restoration has been a lot like an Indiana Jones cliffhanger film, full of narrow escapes from situations that looked like sure death. The red wolf just barely dodged the bullet of extinction, not once but several times. Steve Grooms explains. When wildlife managers give progress reports on their programs, they typically exude confidence. "Well, we face some challenges," they will report, "but we've got this thing going the right way." Sometimes, however, the truth behind those blandly optimistic reports is dramatic. The managers never report about those nights they stumble home after a disastrous day and admit to anyone patient enough to listen, "Oh man, I think we've had it." A stunning revival lost from the wild. Managers could not be able to breed. When those red wolves began sure that it would ever be politically possible reproducing, managers were faced with In one sense, it was sheer luck that saved the to reintroduce wolves, one of the most reviled daunting problems. Where could they red wolf from extinction in the 1960s. For species on earth. They could not be sure that reintroduce red wolves to the wild? It had to decades, US federal policy had been to wolves would survive the transition from zoo be a place where humans would accept them, extirpate wolves. That process had eradicated life in captivity to life in the wild. No predator if such a place existed. And it had to be a place red wolves from all but a sliver of vile habitat species had ever been successfully restored. where coyotes wouldn't hybridize with the along the Texas and Louisiana Gulf coast. This decision was a massive gamble analogous red wolves, although coyotes are ubiquitous to putting a man dying of cancer in a cryogenic in the former range of the red wolf. Then, just before the red wolf was wiped out chamber, hoping that some day the forever, more sophisticated thinking about technology for predators led to a stunning reversal. The thawing and curing animal that had been considered a menace to him would appear. be eradicated would, under a new program, be protected and managed as a critically And then things got endangered species. So abrupt was the worse. When change that for one year the red wolf was managers began listed as endangered while federal agents examining the 400 or continued to trap and destroy them. If so "wolves" they had management had drifted for another decade managed to trap and before the great change, the red wolf would confine, they saw the probably have been pushed off the cliff of taint of coyote blood extinction. in many. They culled away dubious wolves Studies done in the 1960s revealed that until there were just humans weren't the only threat to red wolves. 43. But at that time, The new and more insidious threat was there was no test to 1 hybridization. Red wolves were mating with indicate which of coyotes. After passage of the federal those animals were Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, pure wolves. managers tried to save the red wolf from Managers went being genetically swamped with coyote genes. through a second Agents trapped and destroyed coyotes in the anguishing round of last remaining red wolf habitat. That effort culling. As managers failed. The supply of coyotes was virtually destroyed the endless. The situation was so dire that it animals suspected of seemed the red wolf was doomed to being hybrids, they disappear as a distinct species. That drove had to worry if they managers to an extreme remedy. They would were killing authentic save the red wolf from extinction by trapping red wolves-one of all remaining wolves and putting them in the most endangered captive breeding centers. Consider how species in North desperate that was. Removing the last free America. After the red wolves was the opposite of the intent of last cull there were the ESA. Red wolves might be saved from just 17 wolves, only genetic extinction, but at the price of being 14 of which were 2 24 UKWCT WOLF PRINT RED WOLVES • at a glance • Legal and politcal challenges Just when it looked like the program was a success, disaster struck again. In the mid- The next challenges to the program were legal 1990s, coyotes began infiltrating the recovery and political. Managers struggled to find an area, and where there were not established area where people would tolerate wolves. red wolf pack territories, dispersing wolves Meanwhile, critical changes had to be made began breeding with coyotes. While program to the ESA, which was so rigid in its original leaders maintained determined optimism in Where do red wolves live today? form that it imposed a straight jacket on public, some insiders believed that the red Approximately 100-130 wild red wolves inhabit restoration programs. wolf program was doomed. It hadn't been 1.7 million acres of public and private land in possible to keep wolves and coyotes apart in northeastern North Carolina. An additional The US Fish and Wildlife Service finally found the 1970s, and now it was proving just as 190 red wolves live in captive breeding facilities. a place to release a few wolves: The Alligator difficult to keep coyotes from obliterating the Why should red wolves be protected? River National Wildlife Refuge release site in red wolf species through hybridization. The red wolf is a unique species of wolf. Once northeastern North Carolina was a peninsula. an important member of the southeastern US The presence of water on three sides reduced Adaptive Management ecological community, this top predator the chances that wolves would run away or contributes to the overall biological diversity of that coyotes would enter the restoration area. Just in time, in 1999, managers crafted a new the region where it now lives. The first reintroduction release happened in management protocol called "adaptive What are the most important steps to 1987. That began another harrowing time for management." It focused intensive control on securing the future of red wolves? Ÿ the red wolf program. In spite of determined coyotes in the zone where they were most Coyote control measures must continue in optimism by managers, everyone knew that likely to encounter wolves. In spite of the order to preserve distinctive red wolf the wolves faced daunting odds against discouraging precedent, this new protocol genes. Ÿ Two other areas where wild red wolves survival. It takes more than claws and teeth to succeeded, and the program survived another can live must be found. survive as a predator. Above all, what is crisis. Ÿ A Red Wolf Center must be built to required is knowledge. Wild wolves have to educate the public about red wolves and know how to find and kill food. They must Although Indiana Jones almost dies about to promote public acceptance of red know what animals or objects are life- twenty times in each of his films, somehow he wolves. threatening. They need to know to avoid is always alive when the final reel has run and How can you help red wolves? humans. The reintroduced wolves were they roll the credits. Today, in spite of all the The Red Wolf Coalition's mission is to advocate dangerously naïve. As expected, mortality close brushes with extinction, the red wolf is for the long-term survival of red wolf rates were high. Wolves were hit by cars, had still with us. Don't let anyone suggest it was populations. The Coalition is grateful for the accidents, drowned, succumbed to disease, easy! UK Wolf Conservation Trust's generous hung out around humans or just disappeared. support! You can help the Red Wolf Coalition ensure that the howl of the red wolf will never About 80 percent of the reintroduced wolves Steve Grooms has been writing about wolves be silenced by extinction. died shortly after being released. and wolf management since 1976. He is the Ÿ Learn more about red wolves. Go to author of the critically acclaimed book Return www.redwolves.com (a new website is in In spite of that, managers kept releasing more of the Wolf, and he serves on the International the works!) and to www.fws.gov/redwolf. captive-bred wolves. Eventually, a few wolves Wolf Center magazine advisory committee. Ÿ You can donate online at survived long enough to mate and raise www.redwolves.com. You can also young. And then a few wild-born wolves contact Kim Wheeler, RWC Executive began rearing their own young. With that, the Reprinted with Director, at [email protected]. red wolf made the treacherous passage from permission from The RWC is able to accept transfers of money from outside the US. zoo-born dummies to wild wolves. The wild- the International Ÿ The RWC is raising funds to build a viewing born pups of wild-born wolves were the real Wolf Center, enclosure so that people can see red deal. www.wolf.org. wolves "up close and natural" in a spacious habitat. Contact Kim Wheeler about ways 1. Chris finds a red wolf den you can help make that happen for red 2. Red wolf pups wolves! ISSUE 39 SPRING 2010 25.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Management and Breeding of Birds of Paradise (Family Paradisaeidae) at the Al Wabra Wildlife Preservation
    Management and breeding of Birds of Paradise (family Paradisaeidae) at the Al Wabra Wildlife Preservation. By Richard Switzer Bird Curator, Al Wabra Wildlife Preservation. Presentation for Aviary Congress Singapore, November 2008 Introduction to Birds of Paradise in the Wild Taxonomy The family Paradisaeidae is in the order Passeriformes. In the past decade since the publication of Frith and Beehler (1998), the taxonomy of the family Paradisaeidae has been re-evaluated considerably. Frith and Beehler (1998) listed 42 species in 17 genera. However, the monotypic genus Macgregoria (MacGregor’s Bird of Paradise) has been re-classified in the family Meliphagidae (Honeyeaters). Similarly, 3 species in 2 genera (Cnemophilus and Loboparadisea) – formerly described as the “Wide-gaped Birds of Paradise” – have been re-classified as members of the family Melanocharitidae (Berrypeckers and Longbills) (Cracraft and Feinstein 2000). Additionally the two genera of Sicklebills (Epimachus and Drepanornis) are now considered to be combined as the one genus Epimachus. These changes reduce the total number of genera in the family Paradisaeidae to 13. However, despite the elimination of the 4 species mentioned above, 3 species have been newly described – Berlepsch's Parotia (P. berlepschi), Eastern or Helen’s Parotia (P. helenae) and the Eastern or Growling Riflebird (P. intercedens). The Berlepsch’s Parotia was once considered to be a subspecies of the Carola's Parotia. It was previously known only from four female specimens, discovered in 1985. It was rediscovered during a Conservation International expedition in 2005 and was photographed for the first time. The Eastern Parotia, also known as Helena's Parotia, is sometimes considered to be a subspecies of Lawes's Parotia, but differs in the male’s frontal crest and the female's dorsal plumage colours.
    [Show full text]
  • THE CASE AGAINST Marine Mammals in Captivity Authors: Naomi A
    s l a m m a y t T i M S N v I i A e G t A n i p E S r a A C a C E H n T M i THE CASE AGAINST Marine Mammals in Captivity The Humane Society of the United State s/ World Society for the Protection of Animals 2009 1 1 1 2 0 A M , n o t s o g B r o . 1 a 0 s 2 u - e a t i p s u S w , t e e r t S h t u o S 9 8 THE CASE AGAINST Marine Mammals in Captivity Authors: Naomi A. Rose, E.C.M. Parsons, and Richard Farinato, 4th edition Editors: Naomi A. Rose and Debra Firmani, 4th edition ©2009 The Humane Society of the United States and the World Society for the Protection of Animals. All rights reserved. ©2008 The HSUS. All rights reserved. Printed on recycled paper, acid free and elemental chlorine free, with soy-based ink. Cover: ©iStockphoto.com/Ying Ying Wong Overview n the debate over marine mammals in captivity, the of the natural environment. The truth is that marine mammals have evolved physically and behaviorally to survive these rigors. public display industry maintains that marine mammal For example, nearly every kind of marine mammal, from sea lion Iexhibits serve a valuable conservation function, people to dolphin, travels large distances daily in a search for food. In learn important information from seeing live animals, and captivity, natural feeding and foraging patterns are completely lost.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainability of Threatened Species Displayed in Public Aquaria, with a Case Study of Australian 1 Sharks and Rays 2 3 Kathryn
    https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11160-017-9501-2 1 PREPRINT 1 Sustainability of threatened species displayed in public aquaria, with a case study of Australian 2 sharks and rays 3 4 Kathryn A. Buckley • David A. Crook • Richard D. Pillans • Liam Smith • Peter M. Kyne 5 6 7 K.A. Buckley • D.A. Crook • P.M. Kyne 8 Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, NT 0909, 9 Australia 10 R.D. Pillans 11 CSIRO Oceans and Atmosphere, 41 Boggo Road, Dutton Park, QLD 4102, Australia 12 L. Smith 13 BehaviourWorks Australia, Monash Sustainable Development Institute, Building 74, Monash University, 14 Wellington Road, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia 15 Corresponding author: K.A. Buckley, Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin 16 University, Darwin, NT 0909, Australia; Telephone: +61 4 2917 4554; Fax: +61 8 8946 7720; e-mail: 17 [email protected] 18 https://www.nespmarine.edu.au/document/sustainability-threatened-species-displayed-public-aquaria-case-study-australian-sharks-and https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11160-017-9501-2 2 PREPRINT 19 Abstract Zoos and public aquaria exhibit numerous threatened species globally, and in the modern context of 20 these institutions as conservation hubs, it is crucial that displays are ecologically sustainable. Elasmobranchs 21 (sharks and rays) are of particular conservation concern and a higher proportion of threatened species are 22 exhibited than any other assessed vertebrate group. Many of these lack sustainable captive populations, so 23 comprehensive assessments of sustainability may be needed to support the management of future harvests and 24 safeguard wild populations.
    [Show full text]
  • Captive Breeding Genetics and Reintroduction Success
    Biological Conservation 142 (2009) 2915–2922 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Biological Conservation journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon Captive breeding genetics and reintroduction success Alexandre Robert * UMR 7204 MNHN-CNRS-UPMC, Conservation des Espèces, Restauration et Suivi des Populations, Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, CRBPO, 55, Rue Buffon, 75005 Paris, France article info abstract Article history: Since threatened species are generally incapable of surviving in their current, altered natural environ- Received 6 May 2009 ments, many conservation programs require to preserve them through ex situ conservation techniques Received in revised form 8 July 2009 prior to their reintroduction into the wild. Captive breeding provides species with a benign and stable Accepted 23 July 2009 environment but has the side effect to induce significant evolutionary changes in ways that compromise Available online 26 August 2009 fitness in natural environments. I developed a model integrating both demographic and genetic processes to simulate a captive-wild population system. The model was used to examine the effect of the relaxation Keywords: of selection in captivity on the viability of the reintroduced population, in interaction with the reintro- Reintroduction duction method and various species characteristics. Results indicate that the duration of the reintroduc- Selection relaxation Population viability analysis tion project (i.e., time from the foundation of the captive population to the last release event) is the most Mutational meltdown important determinant of reintroduction success. Success is generally maximized for intermediate project duration allowing to release a sufficient number of individuals, while maintaining the number of generations of relaxed selection to an acceptable level.
    [Show full text]
  • News Release
    News Release Contact: Sondra Katzen, Chicago Zoological Society, 708.688.8351, [email protected] John Bradley, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 505.248.6279, [email protected] Regina Mossotti, Endangered Wolf Center, 636.938.5900, [email protected] Tom Cadden, Arizona Game and Fish Dept., 623-236-7392, [email protected] October 24, 2016 Mexican Wolf Recovery Program Finds Evidence of Cross-Fostering Success Phoenix, AZ.— In their native habitat of the southwestern United States, the success of cross- fostered pups among the Mexican wolf population is being documented due to dedicated and collaborative efforts among several agencies and organizations, including the Arizona Game and Fish Department, the Chicago Zoological Society (CZS), the Endangered Wolf Center (EWC), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). The organizations are working together to reintroduce the species to its native habitat in the American Southwest and Mexico. In April 2016, five Mexican wolf pups were born at Brookfield Zoo in Illinois. As part of the Mexican Wolf Recovery Program, two of the pups were placed in the den of the Arizona-based Elk Horn Pack of wild wolves with the intention that the pack’s adults would raise the two with its own litter. In this process, known as “cross-fostering,” very young pups are moved from a captive litter to a wild litter of similar age so that the receiving pack raises the pups as their own. The technique, which has proven successful with wolves and other wildlife, shows promise to improve the genetic diversity of the wild wolf population.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Partners Starting Captive Breeding Program in Race Against Time to Prevent Extinction of Florida Grasshopper Sparrows
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Partners Starting Captive Breeding Program In Race Against Time to Prevent Extinction of Florida Grasshopper Sparrows Vero Beach, Fla. -- In an effort to prevent extinction of the Florida grasshopper sparrow, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and many partners are establishing a captive breeding program for this species. Many believe that if current population trends continue the species could go extinct in three to five years. The Rare Species Conservatory Foundation and the Service will be collaborative leaders of this captive breeding effort. The captive breeding program will consist of trained volunteers and staff from the Service, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) and the Department of Environmental Protection going into the field during April, May and June at specified locations looking for eggs in nests. When and if eggs are found, some of them will be collected and taken to the Rare Species Conservatory Foundation in Loxahatchee, Fla. There, they will be placed in incubators, where the hope is hatchlings will emerge in 11-13 days, after which around-the-clock care will be provided to facilitate their survival. Ultimately, the hatchlings will be kept in captivity in the hopes that they will mate and breed. “Captive breeding is labor intensive and challenging. It is generally done as a last resort and there are no guarantees. But we have to try,” said Larry Williams, the Service’s Florida State Supervisor of Ecological Services. “This is an emergency and the situation for this species is dire. This is literally a race against time.” “The FWC is working closely with the Service and other partners to prevent the disappearance of the Florida grasshopper sparrow,” said Thomas Eason, Director of the FWC’s Habitat and Species Conservation Division.
    [Show full text]
  • Gray-Headed Chickadee Captive Flock and Propagation a Scoping Report
    Gray-headed Chickadee Captive Flock and Propagation A Scoping Report Aaron Lang Dr. Rebecca McGuire Wildlife Conservation Society, Arctic Beringia Program 3550 Airport Way, Suite 5 Fairbanks, AK 99709 Photo Credit: Aaron Lang [email protected] A report to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) in fulfillment of cooperative agreement 19-054 under State Wildlife Grant T-33 Project 10.0, April, 2020. ADF&G and the Wildlife Conservation Society have co-ownership of all content. Recommended Citation: McGuire, R. 2020. Gray-headed Chickadee captive flock and propagation: A scoping report. A report by the Wildlife Conservation Society to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, in fulfillment of cooperative agreement 19-054, Fairbanks. Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1 2.0 TRIGGERS FOR MOVING FORWARD ................................................................................ 2 3.0 REVIEW OF SELECT (PRIMARY) LOCATIONS OF CAPTIVE CHICKADEES OR SIMILAR SPECIES ........................................................................................................................ 3 4.0 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS OF A CAPTIVE FLOCK FACILITY, INCLUDING CAPTIVE PROPAGATION ........................................................................................................... 7 5.0 OPTIONS FOR LOCATION OF CAPTIVE HOUSING ....................................................... 14 6.0 INITIAL STOCKING ............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Captive Breeding Facilities in the Context of Their Contribution to Conservation of Biodiversity
    Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat National Capital Region Science Advisory Report 2008/027 EVALUATION OF CAPTIVE BREEDING FACILITIES IN THE CONTEXT OF THEIR CONTRIBUTION TO CONSERVATION OF BIODIVERSITY Figure 1: Department of Fisheries and Oceans’ (DFO) six administrative regions. Context : The maintenance of genetic diversity within populations and species is a key component of conservation biology, and acknowledged as an important goal in major international agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity. It is often a particular concern for species at risk, where there can be a high risk of loss of genetic diversity when populations are reduced to low numbers. Conservation biology principles encourage consideration of genetic diversity when planning and implementing recovery efforts for species at risk. DFO maintains facilities for live-gene banking of endangered units of Atlantic salmon in Atlantic Canada, and there are discussions about the role of hatchery facilities in the Pacific Region with regard to recovery of species and population units at risk. As one component of a review of the potential costs and benefits of such programmes DFO Science struck a national Working Group to review a number of questions about the performance of captive rearing facilities with regard to maintain genetic diversity and supporting recovery of naturally breeding wild populations. The key scientific questions to be addressed were: What is the role (if any) of hatchery facilities in conservation of biodiversity, particularly of salmonids?
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Aspects of Ex Situ Conservation
    Genetic aspects of ex situ conservation Jennie Håkansson Email: [email protected] Introductory paper, 2004 Department of Biology, IFM, Linköping University ___________________________________________________________________________ Abstract More than 50 percent of all vertebrate species are classified as threatened today and this has become a central concern for people all over the world. There are several ways of dealing with preservation of species and one of the techniques receiving most attention is ex situ conservation. In ex situ conservation animals are bred in captivity in order to eventually be reintroduced into the wild when their habitats are safer. This is often called conservation breeding. Since threatened species usually have small and/or declining populations, the effect of small population size is a major concern in conservation breeding. The aim of the present paper is to review genetic aspects of ex situ conservation and to discuss how populations should be managed in captivity in order to be successful in a reintroduction situation. Populations in captivity may deteriorate due to loss of genetic diversity, inbreeding depression, genetic adaptations to captivity and accumulation of deleterious alleles. These factors could seriously jeopardize the successfulness of ex situ conservation and need to be investigated thoroughly in order to optimize conservation breeding programs. Keywords: Genetics; Ex situ conservation; Conservation breeding ___________________________________________________________________________ Introduction which extinction occurs today is at least partly due to human influences. It is possible It has been estimated that there are that up to 18 000 species have become between 3 and 30 million species of various extinct since 1600AD (Magin et al., 1994). life living today (May, 1992).
    [Show full text]
  • Overview Directions
    R E S O U R C E L I B R A R Y A C T I V I T Y : 4 0 M I N S Captive Breeding and Species Survival Students research captive-breeding programs and species-survival plans and explore the pros and cons of each. G R A D E S 9 - 12+ S U B J E C T S Biology, Geography, Human Geography, Physical Geography C O N T E N T S 2 Links, 1 PDF OVERVIEW Students research captive-breeding programs and species-survival plans and explore the pros and cons of each. For the complete activity with media resources, visit: http://www.nationalgeographic.org/activity/captive-breeding-species-survival/ DIRECTIONS 1. Have students research captive breeding programs and species-survival plans. Have small groups use the Smithsonian and Association of Zoos and Aquarium websites to research and answer the following questions: What is a captive-breeding program, and what are the goals of this type of program? (Captive breeding programs breed endangered species in zoos and other facilities to build a healthy population of the animals and, sometimes, to reintroduce endangered species back into the wild.) / What is a species-survival plan, and what are the goals of this type of plan? (Species- survival plans coordinate with zoos around the world to bring species together for breeding that ensures genetic diversity.) How can captive-breeding programs and species-survival plans contribute to biodiversity and the health of ecosystems? (They ensure large, healthy, and genetically diverse populations that otherwise would not exist.) 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Species in the CARES Preservation Program and the Role of Aquarium Hobbyists in Freshwater Fish Conservation
    fishes Article Assessing the Species in the CARES Preservation Program and the Role of Aquarium Hobbyists in Freshwater Fish Conservation Jose W. Valdez 1 and Kapil Mandrekar 2,* 1 Department of Bioscience—Biodiversity and Conservation, Aarhus University, Grenåvej 14, 8410 Rønde, Denmark; [email protected] 2 Department of Environmental and Forest Biology, SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry, 1 Forestry Drive, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 30 June 2019; Accepted: 17 September 2019; Published: 29 September 2019 Abstract: Freshwater fish represent half of all fish species and are the most threatened vertebrate group. Given their considerable passion and knowledge, aquarium hobbyists can play a vital role in their conservation. CARES is made up of many organizations, whose purpose is to encourage aquarium hobbyists to devote tank space to the most endangered and overlooked freshwater fish to ensure their survival. We found the CARES priority list contains nearly six hundred species from twenty families and two dozen extinct-in-the-wild species. The major families were typically those with the largest hobbyist affiliations such as killifish, livebearers, and cichlids, the latter containing half of CARES species. CARES included every IUCN threatened species of Pseudomugilidae and Valenciidae, but only one percent of threatened Characidae, Cobitidae, and Gobiidae species. No Loricariidae in CARES were in the IUCN red list as they have not been scientifically described. Tanzania and Mexico contained the largest amount of species, with the latter containing the most endemics. Many species were classified differently than the IUCN, including a third of extinct-in-the-wild species classified as least concern by the IUCN.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Role of Zoos and Ex Situ Conservation in Global Amphibian Recovery
    Evaluating the role of zoos and ex situ conservation in global amphibian recovery by Alannah Biega BSc. Zoology, University of Guelph, 2015 Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in the Department of Biological Sciences Faculty of Science © Alannah Biega SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY Fall 2017 Copyright in this work rests with the author. Please ensure that any reproduction or re-use is done in accordance with the relevant national copyright legislation. Approval Name: Alannah Biega Degree: Master of Science Title: Evaluating the role of zoos and ex situ conservation in global amphibian recovery Examining Committee: Chair: Bernard Crespi Professor Arne Mooers Senior Supervisor Professor Nick Dulvy Supervisor Professor Purnima Govindarajulu Supervisor Small Mammal and Herptofauna Specialist BC Ministry of Environment John Reynolds Internal Examiner Professor Date Defended/Approved: October 12, 2017 ii Abstract Amphibians are declining worldwide, and ex situ approaches (e.g. captive breeding and reintroduction) are increasingly incorporated into recovery strategies. Nonetheless, it is unclear whether these approaches are helping mitigate losses. To investigate this, I examine the conservation value of captive collections. I find that collections do not reflect the species of likeliest greatest concern in the future but that non-traditional zoos and conservation-focused breeding programs are bolstering the representation of threatened amphibians held ex situ. Next, I examine the reproductive success of captive breeding programs in relation to species’ biological traits and extrinsic traits of the program. Based on 285 programs, I find that not all species are breeding in captivity, yet success is not correlated to the suite of tested predictors.
    [Show full text]