Animals that need a captive population

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

I can understand that people prefer some animals rather than others, but this can cause problems when it comes to conservation. Hedgehogs are becoming rarer in the UK, but hedgehogs introduced to Scottish islands have led to a decline in ground-nesting bird numbers.
Similarly, there don't seem to be many people complaining against the eradication of introduced cane toads in Australia, but the idea of killing cats (another non-native species) appals many people. Cats and cane toads have a negative impact on many native animals, but "nice, fluffy pussy cats" have a far better 'aah' factor than "horrible toads".

Yes , I agree. The "moral outrage" does seems to centre almost entirely around defending the "welfare" of the fluffy and cute. I haven't actually seen any emotional appeals or calls to arms to protect invasive amphibians , fish , insects or reptiles (and honestly I hope I dont see any either).

Once again the mysterious, hypocritical , fanatical and totally illogical ontologies of animal rights activists fail to stand up to any serious scrutiny.

 

[Jurek7]

I am arguing that “northern” zoos should be supplying all the things you correctly identify as lacking.

Probably many people think so, but it is not so. Many breeding facilities in the tropics did actually receive help from Western zoos: funding, training, consulting veterinary visits etc.

Nevertheless, they were dozens of local problems which marooned them. A mild case is a breeding facility for western tragopans. It received funding and staff was invited to Europe for a free training in husbandry of exotic pheasants. The staff left to another job, and the second person, too. An extreme case is okapi breeding facility in Epulu, which was invaded by armed guerilla, who killed okapis, local employees and stole all the equipment.

In some cases, for example aviary for silvery pigeons in Indonesia funded by a German zoo, it looks like it is actually much more expensive to build everything on a remote island, than transport the pigeons elsewhere. But the pigeons must stay.

 

[Jennings]

Yes , I agree. The "moral outrage" does seems to centre almost entirely around defending the "welfare" of the fluffy and cute. I haven't actually seen any emotional appeals or calls to arms to protect invasive amphibians , fish , insects or reptiles (and honestly I hope I dont see any either).

Once again the mysterious, hypocritical , fanatical and totally illogical ontologies of animal rights activists fail to stand up to any serious scrutiny.

I've also seen certain people - usually on the left, but also including certain celebrity far right figures such as Morrissey and Bridget Bardot - conflating concern about INNS with racism. Funny how, as you say, they only extend this concern to birds and mammals; Topmouth Gudgeon and Pharoah Ants can take their chances but if you have a problem with American Mink wiping out Water Voles then brother, you have crossed a line.

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

I've also seen certain people - usually on the left, but also including certain celebrity far right figures such as Morrissey and Bridget Bardot - conflating concern about INNS with racism. Funny how, as you say, they only extend this concern to birds and mammals; Topmouth Gudgeon and Pharoah Ants can take their chances but if you have a problem with American Mink wiping out Water Voles then brother, you have crossed a line.

I for one think it is absurd that for some people the issue of controlling invasive species and restoring native ecosystems and species is synonymous and entwined with either leftwing political correctness or rightwing Nationalism and xenophobia regarding ideas pertaining to our own species.

Of course conservation is always going to have a political undercurrent as it is not isolated in a vacumn from the wider world and the spheres of politics and economics (quite the opposite). However, this kind of nonsense with conservation interventions being linked with racism or rightwing political ideologies is quite absurd.

I consider myself to be politically left of centre but I truly don't like the insertion of abritary political ideologies into conservation (Especially from those who are outside of the field) or hampering it when these concepts have nothing to do with wildlife.

The conservation of ecosystems and species simply has to find a way of rising above the divisive politics of our time and to be strictly non-partisan.

 

[MRJ]

Probably many people think so, but it is not so. Many breeding facilities in the tropics did actually receive help from Western zoos: funding, training, consulting veterinary visits etc.

Nevertheless, they were dozens of local problems which marooned them. A mild case is a breeding facility for western tragopans. It received funding and staff was invited to Europe for a free training in husbandry of exotic pheasants. The staff left to another job, and the second person, too. An extreme case is okapi breeding facility in Epulu, which was invaded by armed guerilla, who killed okapis, local employees and stole all the equipment.

In some cases, for example aviary for silvery pigeons in Indonesia funded by a German zoo, it looks like it is actually much more expensive to build everything on a remote island, than transport the pigeons elsewhere. But the pigeons must stay.

Problems are common in recovery programs, don't I know it. That does not change the fact that the best place to breed animals is within their natural range if at all possible.

However getting to the point of the question the fact is largely zoos do not / will not engage in large scale conservation breeding programs within their grounds. EAZA admits as much on their website when discussing conservation programs when they only mention in-situ conservation programs, with no disussion on links between their Regional Collection Plans and on-ground conservation work. Instead they say the reason for Regional Collection Plans Is:

"To meet their aims zoos and aquariums rely on the animal populations that they keep. Since they wish to refrain from bringing in animals from the wild, it is important that they maintain healthy and self-sustaining populations of animals. This means that zoos and aquariums need to have populations of many species that are large enough to prevent inbreeding, for instance." (PROGRAMMES » EAZA)

There are a number of reasons for this.

One is space. Research shows for instance that spaces for large mammals are already at saturation point. (Alroy, J. 2015. Limits to captive breeding of mammals in zoos. Conservation Biology, 29(3), p 926-931.)

Another in cost. Garnett S. in an as yet unpublished paper found that the average annual cost over 6 species and 11 institutions of maintaining a bird in a breeding program in Australia was A$6,322. By comparison the cost of maintaining birds in Brazil ranged between A$182 and A$469 over three species.

Most zoos describe their role as educative these days, and avoid discussing conservation breeding.

So the answer to the question "what animals are in need of a captive breeding program" is probably many, but good luck finding them a place.

 

[toothlessjaws]

I am constantly amazed when this issue comes at the depth of support for feral culling in the Australian community. I am always a little afraid when these things flair up and I go on line I would see a stream of anti-culling but it is always the other way. Don't see what Bridgette Bardot thinks making much difference any time soon.

I totally agree. I don't hear any particularly a strong voice against culling introduced pest animals in Australia. As a nation we are well educated on the damage caused by introduced animals and plants as we have so many infamous examples. It's been drilled into us for multiple generations now.

 

[toothlessjaws]

So the answer to the question "what animals are in need of a captive breeding program" is probably many, but good luck finding them a place.

Sigh. It's sadly why I found my opinion shift towards zoos. I believe in the concept, but not the reality of it. I actually think when it comes to exotics species they are counter productive, giving people a false sense of security that isn't really there. The world's zoos collectively do not have the genetic diversity or priorities required to save a huge swathe of exotic species we think are safe in captivity.

 

[Dassie rat]

The world's zoos collectively do not have the genetic diversity or priorities required to save a huge swathe of exotic species we think are safe in captivity.

I agree. There are many zoos that have drastically cut the number of species they hold. The zoos may spend millions of pounds on enclosures for large mammals that are not part of a reintroduction programme, or in need of one, while less popular animals, including endangered species, 'leave' the collection.
Due to the internet, it is not difficult to obtain information about lesser-known animals that should interest the general public, but how many labels show little more than a common name, Latin name and rough map? It's almost as if some zoos don't want visitors to be interested in lesser known animals and perhaps use this as a pretext to reduce their stock.

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

I agree. There are many zoos that have drastically cut the number of species they hold. The zoos may spend millions of pounds on enclosures for large mammals that are not part of a reintroduction programme, or in need of one, while less popular animals, including endangered species, 'leave' the collection.
Due to the internet, it is not difficult to obtain information about lesser-known animals that should interest the general public, but how many labels show little more than a common name, Latin name and rough map? It's almost as if some zoos don't want visitors to be interested in lesser known animals and perhaps use this as a pretext to reduce their stock.

I don't know whether I agree with that point that zoos don't want visitors to be interested in lesser known species because it sort of implies a grand scheme and intentionality that I haven't observed personally.

From what I've seen (and mostly vibes of this in Europe) its more an institutional complacency and an attitude based on the erroneous assumption that it pays to "give the masses what they want" which is apparently African and Asian megafauna and smaller cutesy charismatics such as meerkats , wallabies, short claw otters etc. The logical extension of these kind of attitudes is that the management of many zoos ultimately end up projecting a low expectation/ lowest common denominator view of the zoo-going public.

I think that this ends up perpetuating a feedback loop of negative consequences that impede both genuine education about the natural world and achieving ex-situ conservation of the species which should be prioritized and that are in serious need. If the two main criteria for zoos in the 21st century are to be conservation and education (and I think we largely all agree that this is one of the justifications for zoos to exist) then surely these attitudes are detrimental to achieving these aims.

I would personally like to see more zoos break this mould, to stop talking down to visitors by showing a greater estimation of the intellectual capabilities of the public and a greater commitment towards actual education rather than empty platitudes and just going through the motions.

Similarly , I would like to see zoos ( I can't speak for Europe but definitely Latin America) begin to move away (by the gradual phasing out) from the keeping of African and Asian megafauna that are largely superfluous and cutesy species which are not of conservation concern and start to make good on their commitment to conservation.

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

Problems are common in recovery programs, don't I know it. That does not change the fact that the best place to breed animals is within their natural range if at all possible.

However getting to the point of the question the fact is largely zoos do not / will not engage in large scale conservation breeding programs within their grounds. EAZA admits as much on their website when discussing conservation programs when they only mention in-situ conservation programs, with no disussion on links between their Regional Collection Plans and on-ground conservation work. Instead they say the reason for Regional Collection Plans Is:

"To meet their aims zoos and aquariums rely on the animal populations that they keep. Since they wish to refrain from bringing in animals from the wild, it is important that they maintain healthy and self-sustaining populations of animals. This means that zoos and aquariums need to have populations of many species that are large enough to prevent inbreeding, for instance." (PROGRAMMES » EAZA)

There are a number of reasons for this.

One is space. Research shows for instance that spaces for large mammals are already at saturation point. (Alroy, J. 2015. Limits to captive breeding of mammals in zoos. Conservation Biology, 29(3), p 926-931.)

Another in cost. Garnett S. in an as yet unpublished paper found that the average annual cost over 6 species and 11 institutions of maintaining a bird in a breeding program in Australia was A$6,322. By comparison the cost of maintaining birds in Brazil ranged between A$182 and A$469 over three species.

Most zoos describe their role as educative these days, and avoid discussing conservation breeding.

So the answer to the question "what animals are in need of a captive breeding program" is probably many, but good luck finding them a place.

In regards to the paper you mentioned by Garnett , does it mention what species of birds these were in Brazil ? I'm quite curious to know

 

[MRJ]

In regards to the paper you mentioned by Garnett , does it mention what species of birds these were in Brazil ? I'm quite curious to know

He mentions:

Pekin robin (Leiothrix lutea) A$469
Livingstone’s turaco (Tauraco livingstonii) A$311
Valley quail (Callipepla californica) A$182

Hope that helps.

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

He mentions:

Pekin robin (Leiothrix lutea) A$469
Livingstone’s turaco (Tauraco livingstonii) A$311
Valley quail (Callipepla californica) A$182

Hope that helps.

Thank you for the information

Admittedly I'm a little disappointed as I was expecting that these were Brazilian bird species like maybe guans , currosaws or tanagers.

 

[MRJ]

Thank you for the information

Admittedly I'm a little disappointed as I was expecting that these were Brazilian bird species like maybe guans , currosaws or tanagers.

I think he was just looking for something to compare, and really didn't care about the species.

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

I think he was just looking for something to compare, and really didn't care about the species.

Yes , it seems so , but it would be nice to see more studies done on native species kept in Brazilian institutions.

 

[Jurek7]

A perfect candidate for a captive population: Santa Catarina's Guinea Pig (Cavia intermedia). Endemic to a small islet off the coast of Brazil, it needs an insurance population. Guinea pigs are easy to keep, and very cute, so a perfect education animal.

 

[Jurek7]

Another: blue anole (Anolis gorgonae). Beautifully blue lizard. Endemic to a small island off the coast of Colombia*, threatened by introduced species, related to easy to keep anoles. An insurance population was already suggested in 2007 but apparently no serious action was taken. Could even become a popular pet, if captive population increases.

*corrected

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

Another: blue anole (Anolis gorgonae). Beautifully blue lizard. Endemic to a small island off the coast of Columbia, threatened by introduced species, related to easy to keep anoles. An insurance population was already suggested in 2007 but apparently no serious action was taken. Could even become a popular pet, if captive population increases.

*Colombia

 

[Jurek7]

One more: painted tree-rat (Callistomys pictus), endangered endemic of Atlantic coast of Brazil. Colorful and probably a good ambassador animal of Atlantic forests of Brazil.

Also, there are several endangered capuchin monkeys in Brazil: Kaapori capuchin (Cebus kaapori), blond capuchin (Sapajus flavius) and crested capuchin (Sapajus robustus). Endangered yellow-breasted capuchins and capuchins in general thrive in zoos, and there is probably an inflow of confiscated pets and maybe groups living in isolated forests with no long-term prospects.

 

[Onychorhynchus coronatus]

One more: painted tree-rat (Callistomys pictus), endangered endemic of Atlantic coast of Brazil. Colorful and probably a good ambassador animal of Atlantic forests of Brazil.

Also, there are several endangered capuchin monkeys in Brazil: Kaapori capuchin (Cebus kaapori), blond capuchin (Sapajus flavius) and crested capuchin (Sapajus robustus). Endangered yellow-breasted capuchins and capuchins in general thrive in zoos, and there is probably an inflow of confiscated pets and maybe groups living in isolated forests with no long-term prospects.

Blond capuchins are already established in Sao Paulo zoo and a few other zoos in Brazil as are the other species. Also , yes , correct in regards to the impact of the illegal pet trade on capuchins and the existence of isolated meta populations with difficult long term prospects. Habitat loss / fragmentation and isolated populations are particularly notable realities in the North and North-East region of the country.

The painted tree rat I agree definitely needs more ex-situ conservation. However, it may be a little harder to establish as an ambassador or umbrella species of the Atlantic rainforest (Particularly as it is a rodent and sadly they dont fare well in publicity campaigns) as there are already some successful examples. These include the various lion tamarin species , maned sloth, muriqui monkeys and a number of bird species that highlight the need for ecosystem conservation.

 

[vogelcommando]

And another species : the Brazilian merganser ( Mergus octosetaceus ). With a wild population of about 250 birds this is among the rarest waterfowl-species.
Luckily there is already a breeding-programm started for the species at the Zooparque Itatiba and the director ( mr. Kooij ) is a famous Dutch waterfowl-breeder / dealer with loads of experience with all kinds of ducks, geese and swans.
During 2 collecting-expeditions in 2011 and 2014 eggs were collected from the wild and from these eggs now 5 adult pairs live at the breeding-center at Itatiba. 2017 another collecting-trip was made ( to enlarge the genetic diversity of the captive population ) and 6 more mergansers could be placed in the breeding-project.
2017 2 pairs started for the first time to lay eggs and from these 5 ducklings were hatched and raised - a world-first-breeding !
Hopefully the breeding-programm will develop succesfull in the future and next to the planned re-introduction to the wild of birds bred at the breeding center, also some pairs can be made aviable for other zoos / breeding centers so the risk of loosing the complete captive population can be reduced.