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 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% Current Sustainability Model 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 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 Proposed Sustainability Model 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?.