Zoos obtaining threatened species from wild

[Unenlagia90]

Zoos nowadays is dedicated for conservation, if it turns to damage wildlife resources it would be something like sword over shield.

thinking of getting threatened species from the wild, it often happens. For example of many aquariums getting threatened shark species that was not bred in captivity, China's surge of importing West African Manatees (Trichechus senegalensis), and Vogelpark Turnersee's obtaining of the Vulnerable Red-throated piping guan (Pipile cujubi) in 2019.

For Vulnerable species it may be fair to get the species from the wild in a sustainable, reciprocally good way. Also ex-situ conservation is also good because some animal habitats were severely fragmented. The White-crested guan (Penelope pileata) is endemic to the Amazonian Brazil and human culture developments levelling the Amazonian rainforest and natural bushfires were degrading its natural habitat, so I think this species may or may not need an ex-situ conservation.

 

[Haliaeetus]

Sometimes the capture of some individuals in the wild can be the last way to save them, like for the Californian Condors and (the less-known but interesting case of) the Mexican Wolves.
A risk remains for such programs because they could fail in some cases (the attempts of captive rearing of Vaquitas).
I can also mention the case of the Sumatran Rhino, that experienced a near-failed captive breeding program in the 1980s, that seems to be reactived now because of the extreme deterioration of its status in the wild.

 

[Unenlagia90]

Sometimes the capture of some individuals in the wild can be the last way to save them, like for the Californian Condors and (the less-known but interesting case of) the Mexican Wolves.
A risk remains for such programs because they could fail in some cases (the attempts of captive rearing of Vaquitas).
I can also mention the case of the Sumatran Rhino, that experienced a near-failed captive breeding program in the 1980s, that seems to be reactived now because of the extreme deterioration of its status in the wild.

Hmm - I've got your point, but many zoos got animals (especially non-threatened species) mainly for display. zoos getting animals should not just be for display, but increasing population for conservation and for more animals to get resources from captive-bred population rather than from the wild.

 

[amur leopard]

Hmm - I've got your point, but many zoos got animals (especially non-threatened species) mainly for display. zoos getting animals should not just be for display, but increasing population for conservation and for more animals to get resources from captive-bred population rather than from the wild.

Zoos contribute to far more than just conservation. They also play big roles in research and education.

 

[Zooplantman]

Hmm - I've got your point, but many zoos got animals (especially non-threatened species) mainly for display. zoos getting animals should not just be for display, but increasing population for conservation and for more animals to get resources from captive-bred population rather than from the wild.

For the most part AZA and EAZA member zoos do not display wild caught individuals. But during the recent decade of zoo growth in China and the Middle East those new facilities - often with dreams of displaying large herds of animals - have imported a great many from the wild. This is a problem indeed.

 

[Haliaeetus]

For the most part AZA and EAZA member zoos do not display wild caught individuals. But during the recent decade of zoo growth in China and the Middle East those new facilities - often with dreams of displaying large herds of animals - have imported a great many from the wild. This is a problem indeed.

Some of these collections are really interesting, and have a very good potential in breeding endangered species.
I think to some Middle Eastern collections with species of Gazelles, Antelopes, Arabian Leopards and other desert fauna that don't exist or have collapsed in Western zoos.
I hope that some herds of these animals (especially hoofstock) will be imported in Europe (I think to southern countries like Spain or S France) in the future.

 

[vogelcommando]

In some cases it's not that bad to bring in wild-caught animals into captivity.
If a surtain habitat is planned to be destroyed ( for agricultural use, building roads / houses / complete villages or cities, and so on ) part of the animals living there could be replaced to other suitable area's but because these are also becoming scarse, at least some of the animals can then be places in suitable zoos.
Also confisticated animals which can't be placed back into the wild can be rehomed in good zoos and if there can be created some kind of breeding programm for them, then they can play an important role in later re-introduction programms. A good example is the confiscation of thousands of turtles in Hong Kong years ago and now the replaced animals have started to breed at a good number of the zoos they were send to.
Also wild-caught animals from unwanted feral populations can become ambassadors for their species in zoos ( like raccoons and Pallas' squirrels in Europe ).
An then there are the numberous rescue-centers worldwide which in many cases are over-crowded with rescued animals. If some of these could be brought to decent zoos ( again with some kind of breeding-programm ) this will help to make room in the rescue-centers and provide zoos with some intresting species.

 

[Jurek7]

Perhaps the best approach is to make those zoos start breeding their animals obtained from the wild and start breeding programs. Zoos in China learned to breed native pandas and golden monkeys, they could learn to breed their imported African manatees and sharks.

Asia is known for quickly modernizing by copying the West, so China could copy laws and zoo collaboration from EAZA and AZA, for example.

 

[DaLilFishie]

One that comes to mind is Scalloped Hammerheads (Sphyrna lewini). They are critically endangered and I have never heard of successful captive breeding of the species, so captive specimens are most likely wild caught.

 

[Unenlagia90]

One that comes to mind is Scalloped Hammerheads (Sphyrna lewini). They are critically endangered and I have never heard of successful captive breeding of the species, so captive specimens are most likely wild caught.

I am not angry about zoos obtaining animal resources from the wild, but the way needs to be sustainable. One of WAZA's code of ethics is if obtaining wild-caught animal resources it must be sustainable and not cruel. Meaning this sort of way of obtaining wild animal resources do not hurt wild population.

 

[Unenlagia90]

One that comes to mind is Scalloped Hammerheads (Sphyrna lewini). They are critically endangered and I have never heard of successful captive breeding of the species, so captive specimens are most likely wild caught.

I did not see any records of breeding the Scalloped hammerheads, but conversely Bonnetheads (Sphyrna tiburo) were bred in captivity. so we may reference the experience of breeding Bonnetheads.

 

[Lamantin]

Perhaps the best approach is to make those zoos start breeding their animals obtained from the wild and start breeding programs. Zoos in China learned to breed native pandas and golden monkeys, they could learn to breed their imported African manatees and sharks.

Asia is known for quickly modernizing by copying the West, so China could copy laws and zoo collaboration from EAZA and AZA, for example.

There are at least 2 Chinese aquariums breeding African manatees (Chimelong Ocean Kingdom and Quancheng Oulebao Polar Ocean World) and I agree that this is better than catching them in the wild, as long as they don't inbreed.

 

[Enzo]

I am not against zoos obtaining threatened animals from the wild. It might become even more necessary in future times, when biomes like Atlantic Forest won't be able to sustain themselves.
The problem, however, is when a zoo imports "wild" animals from places such as South African farms, pretending about their actual intentions.
This has happened very recently with BioParque do Rio, responsible for the biggest scandal involving the illegal purchase of wild animals in Brazilian history. They claimed they bought "Southern" giraffes for a conservation program developed by the Brazilian Association of Zoos and Aquariums, but that was a lie.

 

[iloveyourzoos]

Zoos need a good reason for obtaining species from the wild. But at least for accredited zoos, they are also required to have an Institutional Collection Plan, meaning that they are also already supposed to have a good reason for having every animal in their collection, regardless of where it came from. So are those good reasons really so different?

For me, a zoo that is truly following the spirit of the Institutional Collection Plan policies, and giving rigorous reasons for why they keep each animal, should have little problem justifying obtaining an animal from the wild. Because they are already experienced in doing that regardless of where the animal was sourced from.

Actually acquiring said animal from the wild may undoubtedly bring additional costs, legalities, and practical difficulties. I don't dispute that. But in terms of rationale or standards, if a zoo is already accustomed to demonstrating and following through on its conservation, breeding, research, and rescue/rehabilitation goals for all of its existing animals and species, then writing and implementing a plan that does the same for a new animal or new species wouldn't feel like that much of an additional hurdle. It's just part of their standard operating procedures.

The only real difference I can see is for "Display Only" animals, as mentioned above. But as long as you can honestly claim to be adding to the founder base, or bringing in at least a male and a female to headstart a population, or including a component of research on husbandry science, then it seems like your bases are covered. And if you're incurring the costs of a wild import, isn't it likely that you'd have at least one of these goals in mind already?

Lest I be misinterpreted to sound like a monster: I'm not in favor of a mass import of wild-caught animals to just sit in cages or collect like stamps. But our good zoos aren't supposed to be doing that with captive-born animals either. I'm not in favor of anything that does damage to the local ecosystem. But our good zoos do a similar calculation to make sure they don't do damage to the regional SSP/EEP, so I'm not sure that the considerations are really so different (although the details may be).

So rather than thinking of wild acquisitions as though they must meet some higher or special standard (which could carry an implicit or inadvertent admission that those standards may not be being met or applied to the existing captive animals), I wonder if it would be possible and better to say that there is a common set of standards for how zoos should function, and apply those standards equally to captive and wild sourced populations.