A Different Model for Sustainability in Small Antelope Populations

A Different Model for Population Sustainability in Small Antelope Matt James Senior Director of Animal Care Dallas Zoo Antelope and Giraffe TAG Vice-Chair Small Antelope Sub-Group Who has small antelope at their institution?

Preface

 Great previous leadership

 Clearly, Matt = small antelope authority

 Not a novel idea

 By no means is this THE solution…

 …or even A solution

 Honestly…you’re just listening to me think out loud…

 …now might be a good time to go get a coffee Small Antelope Program Overview

Black Duiker Blue Duiker Red-flanked Duiker Klipspringer Kirk's Dik Dik Steenbok Yellow-backed Duiker # of Individuals 20 39 31 45 32 20 96 Exclusions 1 1 0 9 3 1 3 Breeding Population 19 38 31 36 29 19 93 Avg Population MK 0.2874 0.1593 0.0978 0.2377 0.1938 0.2182 0.1009 # of Males 12 23 12 19 15 11 49 Males with Breeding Rec 9 13 12 14 12 7 24 # of Females 7 15 19 16 14 8 44 Females with Breeding Rec 7 11 12 14 13 8 25 Births/year needed to maintain 4 11 7 7 7 4 10 2014 RCP Population Target 25 75 75 100 75 50 125 Births/year needed to hit RCP 5 12 - 9 12 9 15 Avg births/year over past 5 years 3.8 8 - 5.6 4.6 4.8 9 Net difference - Maintain -0.2 -3 - -1.4 -2.4 0.8 -1 Net difference - RCP -1.2 -4 - -3.4 -7.4 -4.2 -6 Breeding Rate vs Recommendations -3.2 -3 - -8.4 -8.4 -3.2 -16 Recommendation Success Rate 54% 73% - 40% 35% 60% 36% Success Rate Needed to Maintain 57% 100% - 50% 54% 50% 40% Success Rate Needed to hit RCP 71% 109% - 64% 92% 113% 60%

Big Trouble in Little Antelope

 Blue Duiker

 23.16 at 16 institutions Blue Duiker  All 11 breeding females at 11 different institutions Births/year needed to maintain 11  Including 5 new transfer and BREED WITH 2014 RCP Population Target 75 recommendations Births/year needed to hit RCP 12 Avg births/year over past 5 years 8  4 breeding aged females with DO NOT BREED recommendations Net difference - Maintain -3 Net difference - RCP -4  Calving interval ~12 months minimum Breeding Rate vs Recommendations -3 Recommendation Success Rate 73% Success Rate Needed to Maintain 100% Success Rate Needed to hit RCP 109% Current Sustainability Model

 Typical timelines

 Updated B&T Plan – Every 2 years Blue Duiker  Comment period to Final Draft to Zoos communicating Births/year needed to maintain 11 to transaction approval – 3 to 6 months 2014 RCP Population Target 75  Finding a quarantine window, physically moving the Births/year needed to hit RCP 12 animals, and a 30-day quarantine – 3 to 6 months Avg births/year over past 5 years 8 Net difference - Maintain -3  Introducing new animal to exhibit and mate – 1 to 3 Net difference - RCP -4 months Breeding Rate vs Recommendations -3  Best case scenario Recommendation Success Rate 73% Success Rate Needed to Maintain 100%  Observe breeding behavior – 1 month Success Rate Needed to hit RCP 109%  Gestation and weaning - ~1 year Current Sustainability Model

 Common scenario

 No breeding behavior seen – 6 to 12 months  Troubleshoot – 3 months Blue Duiker  Try again – 3 to 6 months Births/year needed to maintain 11 2014 RCP Population Target 75  Communicate issue with SSP Coordinator Births/year needed to hit RCP 12  Get a response – 1 day to 3 months!!! Avg births/year over past 5 years 8  Troubleshoot some more – 3 months Net difference - Maintain -3  Ask for a new recommendation Net difference - RCP -4

 Wait for interim recommendation or wait for new B&T plan – 1 Breeding Rate vs Recommendations -3 to 12 months Recommendation Success Rate 73%  Female calf born at start of B&T Plan period Success Rate Needed to Maintain 100% Success Rate Needed to hit RCP 109%  Sexually mature – 1 year old

 Transfers to new institution for breeding – 1.5 to 2.5 years old

 Introduced to new male – 2 to 3 years old

 No breeding seen/new recommendation requested – 3.5 to 5.5 years old

 Transfer and new pairing – 4.5 to 6.5 years old

 Median life expectancy for Blue Duiker – 2.6-3.0 years

Contributing Factors to Small Antelope Population Woes

 Paired breeding vs herd management

 Reproductive issues

 Lack of interest

 Don’t exhibit well

 Skittish demeanor

 Space Surveys

 We may have too many species for the level of interest? A Different Model for Sustainability

 Breeding Hubs

A Different Model for Sustainability

 Breeding Hubs  1 to 3 institutions holding the majority of the breeding population  Proven success/set up for the species  Blue Duiker example  12 breeding females

 6 held at MOODY

 6 held at METROZOO

 2 to 4 males at each to rotate through females  The other 14 institutions hold surplus males and non-reproductive females  As offspring are produced, reassess population and move less valuable males/females to non-breeding hub institutions

SKEPTICAL DUIKER Is skeptical. Proposed Sustainability Model

 Typical timelines

 Original scenario  New scenario  No breeding behavior seen – 6 to 12 months  No breeding behavior seen – 2 ovulations  Troubleshoot – 3 months  Move new male from adjacent pen to female, attempt  Try again – 3 to 6 months to breed – 1 day  Communicate issue with SSP Coordinator

 Get a response – 1 day to 3 months!!!

 Troubleshoot some more – 3 months

 Ask for a new recommendation

 Wait for interim recommendation or wait for new B&T plan – 1 to 12 months

 Female calf born at start of B&T Plan period  Female calf born at start of B&T Plan period

 Sexually mature – 1 year old  Sexually mature – 1 year old

 Transfers to new institution for breeding – 1.5 to 2.5 years  Transfers to new pen for breeding – 1 year old old  Introduced to new male – 1 year old  Introduced to new male – 2 to 3 years old

 No breeding seen/new recommendation requested – 3.5 to  No breeding seen/new swap for different approved 5.5 years old mate – 1 year old

 Transfer and new pairing – 4.5 to 6.5 years old  Breeding with new male – 1.5 years old

 Median life expectancy for Blue Duiker – 2.6-3.0 years Proposed Sustainability Model

 Pros

 Nimble

 Responsive

 Cost Efficient

 Allows for some level of “mate selection”

 Creates “active engagement” in breeding program

 Not what we have been doing (which hasn’t worked)

 Cons

 All of your eggs in 1 (or 2 or 3) baskets

 Many zoos excluded from breeding

 Reduces diversity in individual collections Proposed Sustainability Model

 Barriers to Success

 Institutional willingness

 To hold non-breeders

 To hold several pairs

Proposed Sustainability Model

 Barriers to Success

 Institutional willingness

 To hold non-breeders

 To hold several pairs

 Genetics

 May be too little too late for some species

 Finding right combination of animals for breeding hubs to hold

 Limited institutional resources available for microantelope

 Space

 Savanna exhibits

 Finances Proposed Sustainability Model

 Considerations for TAG’s small antelope management

 RCP - 2019

 Yearly B&T plans

 Manage and plan as a true sub-group

 Focus support onto programs “on the verge” of sustainability What about other sub-groups and TAGs?

 Would this work for other struggling ungulate populations?

 Herd breeding vs Paired breeding

 Maybe it’s only a temporary solution to improve struggling populations

 Try something other than “traditional” population management?

 Communicate expectations more clearly to IRs

 Rework the Wants/Needs process Thank you!

 Questions?

 Comments?

 General abuse?