The Future of Wild Animals in 50 to 100 Years
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
The Future of Wild Animals in 50 to 100 Years
Future of Zoos Symposium, 10-11 February 2012
Canisius College, Buffalo, New York
Monika Fiby, Landscape Architecture, Zoo Design, Consulting
monika@fiby.at, monika@zoolex.org
Introduction
In today's overpopulated world, the concept of wilderness is naive for most part. Wild animals gradually
adapt to men-made environments - more or less successfully. In many parts of the world, migration of
terrestrial wild animals is limited by fences along highways and properties as well as train tracks and urban
developments. Their populations range freely in fragmented habitats with hardly any migration. As a
consequence, many species are no longer self-sustaining and need to be managed. They become semi-wild.
Spreading human settlements will speed up the development of semi-wild animal populations. The existence
of purely wild populations is questionable in 50 to 100 years.
Wild animal populations can be of four kinds:
• indigenous, born in the wild
Example: native animals, including regular migrants and those that immigrated on their own.
Note: Indigenous is not absolute. In Europe, the word "indigenous" is used to differentiate native
species from those that were introduced after 1500, when long distance travel became common.
• bred (not indigenous), raised in the wild
Example: European deer released in New Zealand for hunting.
• indigenous, born and raised in captivity and released
Example: conservation project species such as the Californian condor and others.
• bred as pets or farm animals, released or escaped
Examples: minks, dogs, pythons, parrots and others.
Sometimes, we can find all these forms in one place, for example in European rivers. Trout and salmon
cannot travel in many rivers due to various man-made barriers. Wild fish populations therefore have been
augmented with captive bred fish. Even specialists now cannot always differentiate between wild and bred
species in the waters. The fish population is monitored and fishing permits are adapted to the status of the
population. The commercially useful fish populations therefore are semi-wild.
The transformation of wild populations into semi-wild
Wild animal populations are being influenced by human presence, and - the more successful ones - adapt to
human lifestyles and landscapes. An increasing number of animals will lose their wild habitats and find new
ones in human settlements. This makes them dependent on human activities and management.
In the case of human-animal conflicts, animals are killed, or captured and relocated. Relocations to zoos are
common today. However, when numbers increase, not all of them can be kept in zoos. They will be managed
in more extensive environments and become semi-wild.
Unintended domestication
Semi-wild is on the way to domestication. While domestication is normally genetic selection for a certain
purpose, such as more meat or milk, it is also the unintended result of managed breeding of small
populations - not just in captivity. The following are indications of domestication¹ that can be found in some
populations of semi-wild animals.
Monika Fiby 1
• smaller brain, shorter intestines, smaller or less horns and teeth, less fur, reduced sexual
dimorphism
• variations in colour
• less aggression, less defensive behaviours, shorter flight distance
• less seasonal behaviours, difficulties in maintaining a stable body temperature
• slower development, neoteny
• more young, less parential care
Domestication is favoured by tight holding systems, the provision of high quality resources, and by reducing
competition for those resources.
Several species are currently becoming domesticated as a side effect of commercial breeding: deer, edible
fish like trout and salmon, pet parrots, chimpanzees and tigers, hunting and show raptors like falcon, buzzard
and eagle.
Zoos' favouring of less aggressive and less defensive individuals and those that are less sensitive to
disturbance, unintentionally leads to domestication.
Translocation of animals
Adaptations to captivity can impede animals from surviving in the wild upon release. Managing the exchange
between animal populations therefore requires reduction of stressors by using various methods such as.
• anaesthesia, captivity in-situ, acclimatisation, medication for the translocation of wild animals into
captivity;
• pre-release training and acclimatisation, conditioning for transport, post-release provisioning for the
release of captive animals into the wild;
• conditioning for transport for the exchange between semi-wild populations.
Experiences with technical procedures for the translocation of wild animals into captivity are well known.
Legal hurdles however can be massive, particularly when export is required. Taking wild native Australian
species out of Australia is almost impossible. Unfortunately, zoos are involved in wild animal "laundering" by
taking in wild-caught animals, breeding them and exporting the captive bred young.¹
The translocation of captive animals into the wild is far more difficult than the translocation of wild animals
into captivity. IUCN guidelines exist, but are often ignored by release project managers. Experiences and
success rates are low, costs are high.¹
Managing meta-populations
Reintroductions are usually done by public agencies. Only a small number of re-introduced animals come
from zoos, most come from special facilities. A good share of re-introduced animals, however, are captive-
bred descendants of zoo animals. Zoo expertise is often used in re-introduction projects by involving zoo
veterinaries, curators and keepers. Methods for catching, marking, feeding and treating animals are
developed in zoos.¹
The current strength of zoos is not the breeding and reintroducing of animals, but serving as back-up for
meta-populations and providing expertise for translocations.¹
Animals bred in semi-wild conditions are better suited for translocation to semi-wild or wild conditions than
zoo animals. Such transfers are easier, cheaper and more successful.¹ Several zoos therefore establish and
support special facilities for breeding animals in semi-wild conditions. This is more cost effective and
produces more genetically sound animals than fragmented minimalistic breeding populations with two to five
animals per species that most zoos keep.
Goldau animal park in Switzerland contributes to the management of the bearded vulture meta-population.
The zoo displays bearded vultures, runs a breeding facility without visitor access and re-introduces off-spring
to the wild.
Monika Fiby 2
Opportunities for visitor attractions
Semi-wild animal populations may generate additional opportunities for visitor attractions. The observation
of red deer at scheduled times by paying visitors is a typical wildlife experience in Austria. In this case, the
differences between wild and domesticated blur, as well as the differences between captive and wild.
Zoos work on developing holding systems that visitors do not perceive as captivity, such as landscape
immersion exhibits. In German zoos, the keeping of wallabies, maras and muntjac free-range in zoos is
common.
Visitor encounters with animals are organized in various forms:
• captive = animals confined and intensively managed
• free range = animals mixed with people and intensively managed
• semi-wild = animals partly self-sustaining, managed, not tamed or domesticated
• wild = animals self-sustaining and not managed
Zoo Salzburg feeds a population of griffin vultures that is partly zoo-born. Some stay in winter instead of
migrating to the South. These birds are untamed, but conditioned, tagged and managed semi-wild.
Viewing semi-wild animals will become more common in the future, if only for economic reasons. Managing
animals is more sustainable when it pays off by earning money from visitors. The organizational framework
for these animal attractions will have all kinds of names and legal backgrounds, including protected areas in
agricultural and forestry land.
Future zoo collection considerations
How will meta-population management influence global zoo collection plans?
Many collection plans list only generic species without specifying the subspecies because the future animal
owners don't know and/or don't care about the difference. In fact, not many people know and care about
inbreeding of animals. Some of them run zoos and do not consider hybrids as being a problem. From a
global perspective, the criteria for selecting species will probably stay simple in the future, being driven by
• perceived public preferences
• personal preferences
• budget and availability
• education by representing of most taxons
• recommendations from breeding programmes and IUCN
• CITES and national legislation
The species of a common animal collection are not hard to obtain in most places because there are enough
dealers - including zoos and other operations - that sell captive-bred animals.
Zoos with more ambitious collection plans, however, have difficulties obtaining the animals they wish, even
when they are well-established institutions. Import and transfer legislation are real restrictions for such
collections. These difficulties will increase in the future.
A recent discussion in the EAZA journal Zooquaria² revealed the problem of breeding genetically sound
tigers in zoos. The demand for tigers is just too great to be answered with genetically pure tigers. However,
instead of changing the collection plan, some zoos would rather take inbred tigers and continue breeding
them.
Chances are that the typical charismatic zoo species will become even more inbred and domesticated within
the next 100 years, while their wild counterparts will go extinct. The common zoo in 50 to 100 years may be
a cocktail zoo, keeping
• hybrid orangutans, giraffes, tigers, lions
• inbred white rhinos, elephants, parrots
• groups of male-only elephant, gorilla, and antelope groups
Monika Fiby 3
• laboratory retired chimpanzees, baboons, macaques
• rescued problematic bears, raccoons, monkeys
• rehabilitated native raptors, storks
Suggestions for counteracting the trends
In order to counteract these undesirable trends we will need to promote concepts that differ from the cocktail
zoo. We need to:
• develop collection plans and designs for meta-population management
• promote exhibitions of animals from the zoo's own bio-region
• develop semi-wild animal management and display
First, the management of meta-populations needs to become more common.
One obstacle in meta-population management is that zoos may risk empty exhibits when they hold only a
few animals of the managed populations. Obviously, the keeping of more specimens per species, - on or off-
exhibit, - as back-up would help. From the visitor attraction point of view there is no evidence that people
would not happily spend their time with less species in higher numbers. In contrast, visitors spend one to two
hours around six brown bears which is the total animal collection at the bear sanctuary in Arbesbach.
Emmen Zoo is an example of a successful zoo with large groups of not very many species. Fifteen macaws
in a large aviary are definitely more attractive than two.
In special cases, the rotation exhibit concept may help. The mink exhibit at Wiesbaden Animal Park may
serve as an example. The European mink is bred for release by the EuroNerz organization. In order to
promote their work and to reduce their space needs, they encourage zoos to take pregnant females in the
beginning of summer and return the female with the young in winter. The Wiesbaden Animal Park wished to
participate in the breeding program for European mink, but did not want to build an exhibit that will be empty
for part of the year.
The solution is to alternate the mink with the park's ferrets in three rotation exhibits. While the minks are
away, the ferrets are on display. The story about the mink's domesticated relatives is as interesting as
showing pets in the habitat their wild ancestors are adapted for.
Second, the display of native animals needs to become more popular. There are great examples of native
animal parks, however they are not the big well-known ones. As long as "cocktail zoos" are promoted, people
will expect cocktails at the zoo and zoos will feel forced to serve cocktails. This becomes a self-fulfilling
prophecy, reinforced by visitor surveys along the lines "we have great lions - what would you like to see?"
Third, the display of semi-wild animals needs to be developed. There are good examples and ideas³, but
they are still rare in zoos. At Paignton Zoo visitors can observe semi-wild badgers at night from a hide. The
bald ibis in the wild animal park in Grünau - the place that Konrad Lorenz made famous - are kept in an
aviary in winter and fly free in summer. Ravens and geese fly free, but are conditioned to come for feeding
times.
Delivering good memorable experiences of wild and semi-wild animals is not common today. Because it is
not very reliable it needs back-up from other experiences, but it can be developed easily and at very low
cost.
Monika Fiby 4References
1. FA John, FUNK Stehan M., O'CONNELL Donnamarie (2011) Zoo Conservation Biology. Cambridge
University Press. New York, United States of America.
2. CHRISTIE Sarah, RUIVO Eric Bairrao (2010) The motion: There is no place for white tigers in a
modern zoo. Zooquaria, Issue 70, Summer 2010. European Association of Zoos and Aquaria,
Amsterdam, Netherlands.
3. COE, Jon C., MENDEZ, Ray (2005) The Unzoo Alternative. Paper presented at the 2nd Joint
Conference of SEAZA and ARAZPA, 1-5 May 2005, Melbourne, Australia.
4. NORTON, Bryan G. (ed.) (1995) Ethics on the Ark. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington and
London.
Semi-wild vultures at Doué Zoo. Semi-wild deer at the Northwest Trek.
Animal encounter in a walk-through situation. Animal encounter in a safari situation.
Semi-wild boar at the Bavarian National Park. Semi-wild squirrel in a park.
Animal encounter in a free-range situation. Animal encounter in a semi-natural situation.
Monika Fiby 5You can also read
