Depressing topic...BUT...

Leptonyx

Leptonyx

Well-Known Member
I hate to post this right after foz's post on cautious hope; but I'm writing an essay to be considered for a wildlife conservation internship; and was hoping for some help...

One of the essay questions is what I think about conserving endangered species in regard to their changing habitats. I'm interpreting the question to mean "Should we conserve endangered animals if their habitat is dissapearing?". Personally; I'm all up for reintroduction as long as there IS habitat available; but otherwise if there is no chance of an animal being reintroduced into the wild, I question whether we should really be keeping them alive (PLEASE DON'T HATE ME!!! I just believe zoos are a temporary fix until the animal's habitat is cleaned up for them to return "home"!)

That being said; I'm wondering if there are any animals that are being bred in zoos; but with no chance of ever being returned to the wild? Again this is strictly for an application and I won't be badgering any zoos...I love them! Although; I'd like to hear anyone else's opinion as well...I'm sure it's been discussed at great length somewhere (perhaps indirectly with relation to other topics); but I've been MIA for so long I really don't feel like scrolling past the 2nd page of posts trying to find something that resembles it :)

Thanks so much everyone!
 
Leptonyx said:
That being said; I'm wondering if there are any animals that are being bred in zoos; but with no chance of ever being returned to the wild?
Thanks so much everyone!
Click to expand...

Aren't there some Guam bird species being bred in US zoos that are unlikely ever to be returned because of the introduced snales that infest the island?
 
Changing habitats does not necessarily mean loss of habitat. The removal of dead trees from recreational areas doesn’t change the habitat overall, but eliminates an essential element of that habitat that could effect the success of some species. For example, woodpeckers use dead trees to find food and also to nest. You could look at the increasing urbanization of the countryside or the impact of the spread of alien plant species (e.g. do native plant species lose out to introduced exotics in the competition to attract bees for pollination?)
 
Interesting essay question Leptonyx,

I have missed your posts.

Is a zoo a modern day ARK? Do we continue to breed until we can reproduce their natural environment? Although then is that area then what Jon Coe would call a No Zoo?

Will their natural environment actually be a zoo and not their original habitat but a recreation of it?

Probably more questions than answers here!
 
Thanks jay :p- I'll investigate on the Guam birds (that's so sad..of all the possible reasons not to reintroduce species I'm surprised snails are on that list...:confused:)

Ned- I considered your interpretation too and it's inserted earlier on in the essay :) I'm taking the "best case scenario to worst case scenario" interpretation of the question (animals not being returned to their natural habitats the absolute worst case scenario); only I was thinking about how certain animals thrive in changing environments (in Canada just considering foxes and white tail deer that have excelled in urbanized environments) but I agree with you and I'll try to incorporate that view into the essay :)

@ zooman- HAHA its all good! Miss Zoochat like crazy but school's been picking up so I haven't been able to drop in as much as I'd like. The essay questions are so incredibly broad its hard to know which questions they're asking specifically- so maybe its better not to have all the answers (or else my essay would be never ending...haha) :)

Thanks everyone! :)
 
Hi Leptonyx

I think Jay meant snakes rather than snails. Guam is infested with intrduced Asian tree snakes, Boiga irregularis, which have wiped out (I think) 9 out of 11 endemic bird species, and indirectly caused a spider epidemic (no birds to eat them)

You could also investigate current efforts to conserve numerous amphibians which have declined due to chytrid fungus. Unless someone comes up with a way of eliminating chytrid in wild habitats, reintroduction of many species may be impossible, or at least some way in the future
 
Oh dear I did indeed mean snakes. I really must spellcheck before I post. Though the idea of introduced snails being the cause of bird extinctions makes the mind run crazy:D
 
HAHA I should've clarified on that (thought it might be the toxin of snails or something) - though snakes does make much more sense :) Thanks Theloderma/jay (...again :d)
 
I was talking about this earlier! Weird...
I think that zoos should promote habitat conservation (e.g. deforestation in Borneo) as it's a problem that we have created so we have a right or duty if you will to try and prevent it.
If a species was naturally just dying out through lack of breeding or something, then I think there's more of a question as to should we be conserving it or is that just the way it's meant to be, but seeing as we screwed up the orangutan's rainforest I think we should promote ways to try and bring it back, e.g. Zoos :p
 
I think species conservation must go hand in hand with habitat conservation, particularly where the habitat detruction has been caused by man. We are now too far down the road of of habitat loss and environmental change that we now cannot say for definite which is natural and man made so therefore assume man made.

From what I've learnt at talks at Edinburgh Zoo this is where zoos and botanic gardens have an increasing role in learning how to maintain, recreate and reintroduce full biodiversity on the planet. It could well be possible to reintroduce animals where there natural habitat has now possibly disappeared completely through close relationships between zoos globally and botanic gardens working together to understand the relationships beteween plants and animals.

It certainly sounds an interesting topic considering that 2010 is to be the international year of biodiversity!
 
Jurek7 said:
Yes, Leptonyx, it's depressing, that you want others to write an essay for you, but don't bother to use the search function. ;)

success captive breeding - Google Search
Click to expand...


@ Jurek7; I had already googled a ton on captive breeding successes (notably the black-footed ferret's reintroduction to Saskatchewan) and inserted it into my essay prior to making the original post. If you read my post closely you'd realize that I asked a specific question on whether certain animals are being bred but have no chance of being returned to their natural habitat, and thus far the only I've been able to find is the Micronesian Kingfisher suggested by jay earlier (due to the introduction of the brown tree snake). There's a lot of speculation on which animals probably will not have a home to return to; but I was hoping for a concrete example.

I also asked for an interpretation of the question, then presented my own; but besides asking for other opinions nowhere did I ask anyone else to "write the essay" for me. As a graduate student I've worked very hard to get where I am; and I take extreme personal offense when someone makes the claim against me that the work I do is not my own.

Cheers-
 
Should Pere David Deer disappear because at this moment the people who live in their habitat cannot be entrusted to care for them?
 
Isnt the inability to return to wild due the complete destruction of habitat even more of a reason to keep such species in captivity so as to educate about the plight of such species!
 
Zooplantman said:
Should Pere David Deer disappear because at this moment the people who live in their habitat cannot be entrusted to care for them?
Click to expand...

I don't know much about Pere David Deer but my gut reaction would be of course not! If there's any hope of a species being successfully reintroduced into the wild I would keep them around for as long as possible! Out of curiosity's sake what are the people doing that prevents these deer from being returned? Is it lack of education/unwillingness to change their ways to accomodate the species? If its those two I'd think there'd be a higher chance of remediating that situation, after which reintroduction should be relatively simple....???

mark77 said:
Isnt the inability to return to wild due the complete destruction of habitat even more of a reason to keep such species in captivity so as to educate about the plight of such species!
Click to expand...

Mark you have a valid opinion; and if zoos had unlimited resources I would heartily agree with you! My main concerns with keeping such species in captivity is the worry that they'll draw away from other species we can still save/return to the wild- the dissapearance of any species is heartbreaking; but I would feel 10x worse if another species dissapeared because we were so intent as to focus on a species that can no longer be helped (I adopt a "learn what you can from the past but don't dwell on it, and focus on the future" attitude...). A more personal concern stems from what would happen if those animals were continually bred-I see the eventual "surplus" problem... admittedly it would take awhile to get there; but then what? We end up euthanizing a bunch of animals, or they end up in crowded facilities in which their quality of life is severely degraded? I may be extrapolating too much (I'm still reading Alan Green's "Animal Underworld" which discusses that exact same problem); but if anyone else has any opinions please share...I don't like my view; for now I just see it as a necessary one to adopt based on what limited knowledge I have :o
 
The breeding of SSP animals in AZA zoos is scientifically managed. SSPs manage genetic diversity and demographic stability. Your question, tho, was about the conservation of animals for reintroduction where habitat is disappearing.

Reintroduction programs are slow, long-term and closely monitored. The Guam Rail reintroduction program has been going on for 10 years, Trumpeter swan, 20 years, black footed ferret, 13 years, the Mexican wolf, 11 years.

There are reintroduction programs that zoos are not involved with like the Peregrine Falcon, a cliff dweller, which has adapted to nesting in tall buildings and is closely monitored by citizen scientists. The California Condor and the red-tailed hawk are other examples.
 
Leptonyx said:
whether certain animals are being bred but have no chance of being returned to their natural habitat
Click to expand...

First, animals have intristic value themselves, independently from their ecosystem. Both practical and purely for pleasure of seeing them. So it makes a prefect sense to preserve them ex situ. One can compare them to the cultural heritage like old buildings and works of art which are no longer useful.

Second, it is wrong and short-sighted to predict that some animals will have "no-place in nature" in future. Who can predict social situation and technology in 20, 30, 40 years?

As examples, I can cite re-introduction of large predators and herbivores to the most densely populated and industrial regions of the globe, where they were unwelcome just 10-20 years before. So Western Europe has wolves, bears, lynxes and wisent, lower 48 states of USA have wolves, China has Pere David Deer and is trying to reintroduce South Chinese Tigers. Even Britain has now wild Beavers and Wild Boars and it is understood that it could reintroduce bears and wolves to Scotland, and what is stopping them it is not lack of habitat but human attitude.

Technological advances allow people to overcome difficulties which seemed impossible recently, like introduced predators and diseases. So New Zealand, Australia and Tahiti have fenced off reserves for flightless birds, marsupials and Partula snails, respectively.

Guam Island has now a small few hectare fenced area cleared of snakes, where Guam Rails returned and Kingfishers could also be released. Guam rails were also successfully introduced to the nearby island of Rota.

I see no reason to think that clearing the whole Guam of introduced snakes will be impossible forever, and guess it will be possible very, very much earlier than in 200 years time in future which was suggested time bracket of the current captive breeding plans.

I hope this is answer for your essay. :)
 
Animals extinct in the wild can typicaly be reintroduced back after just a few years.

For example, black-footed ferrets and california condors were released less than 20 years after becoming extinct in the wild.

This shows that dangers are short-term, and people almost immediately pity and want the extinct animals back.

Reality is quite different than sad predictions in books in the past.
 
Your comments are much appreciated Jurek7; and its given me a lot to think about. Unfortunately it only brings up more questions as opposed to answering this blasted essay: I can't argue with the valid points you bring up (nor can I say my original arguments didn't have flaws); but at the same time I can't wholly agree with them either- we may just have to agree to disagree on certain issues (though secretly I'm hoping you're right and the future will be every bit as promising as you portray it to be... :))

I apologize for the lackluster response, but I pretty much sat here and came up with arguments against your examples; realized they weren't valid, came up for explanations for when they could be validated, and eventually lost track of what I was trying to argue in the first place :) The main issue I take with the technology/"the future is bright" view is that it holds no guarantees; it could be an extremely risky venture to put so much into a conserving a species on the hope that 20-30 years into the future it could be successfully reintroduced (and get there and realize we can't); and when there are species we have a much higher chance of successfully reintroducing NOW. Of course after writing this I started aruging with myself it would be WORTH the risk; then going back and thinking about the other efforts it could compromise, etc. In either case I've never seen a zoo budget and how much they allocate towards conservation and research, so until someone can tell me zoos have the power to keep a viable population of all endangered species, I think I'll stick with my current view (although if the SSP was expanded maybe it would be possible...? haha shutting up now :p)

Cheers :)
 
In either case I've never seen a zoo budget and how much they allocate towards conservation and research, so until someone can tell me zoos have the power to keep a viable population of all endangered species, I think I'll stick with my current view (although if the SSP was expanded maybe it would be possible...? haha shutting up now :p)

Cheers :)[/QUOTE]


The indirect benefits of zoos to conservation/research are far greater than any zoos financial budget.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top