the value of zoological collections in conservation

J. small Anim. Pract. (1970) 11, 55-62.

The value of zoological collections in conservation*

GEOFFREY S C H O M B E R G The Federation of Zoological Gardens of Great Britain and Ireland,

Zoological Gardens, Regents Park, London, N.W. 1

THE RECOGNITION that zoological collections have an important part to play in the conservation of wild life is even more recent than the realization that conservation itself is necessary, and the idea that zoos are an integral part of the conservation movement is by no means universally admitted. ZOOS themselves are only now beginning to accept their responsibility in helping to preserve vanishing animals, and they have already reviewed their position at two international conferences- in London in 1964 and at San Diego in 1966. The veterinary profession was not substantially represented at either of these conferences, and I a m particularly glad to be asked to speak at a meeting on this subject sponsored by your profession, since zoos represent a body of people concerned with a very important aspect of animal welfare.

I t is generally agreed by all reputable zoos, in view of the great rate a t which many wild animals are disappearing, that they have a clear responsibility to breed rare species; and that they should do so by keeping animals in the viable social grouping of each species and by refraining from keeping those which they feel they have no chance of breeding. This implies some degree of specialization, and many of the newer, smaller zoos are in fact concentrating on certain groups of animals, while the bigger general collections are putting more effort into breeding the animals with which they have been successful in the past. Zoos are also giving financial support to conservation in various ways, though not all of them recognize the need to educate the public, both in the appreciation of wild life and in the threats to its existence.

The fact that the threat to wildlife is universal means that all those who are concerned with wild animals need to co-operate to meet that threat-and this applies particularly to zoos, since i t is the raw material on which they depend which is disappearing. If they do not become self-supporting for the rarer forms they will lose the justification for their existence. I think it is true to say that they cannot survive indefinitely without the co-operation of universities, research

* Presented at the Third W.S.A.V.A. and Twelfth B.S.A.V.A. International Congress, London, 1969.

55

56 G E O F F R E Y S C H O M B E R G

organizations and game departments. More and more, ecological studies are being undertaken in developing countries for economic reasons, and it is up to those who are primarily concerned about wildlife to co-operate in convincing governments that their indigenous fauna is worth preserving. There are still too many zoos which do not seem to realize that they are the custodians of a great fund of natural knowledge, and that it is in their own interest to make this available to every scientific institution which can help their cause. I n order to do this, they need public support, which makes it vital for them to teach people that zoos are living museums rather than mere entertainments; they must bring home to their visitors that wild animals are important to everyone, and they must show them why. It is specially important to do this in urban areas, where people have no contact with the world of nature; zoo attendances are increasing everywhere, and this is some evidence for believing that urban man is beginning to yearn for Nature as a relief from his circumscribed existence.

Within the foreseeable future, the only wild animals left will be those in national parks and designated conservation areas. These areas are obviously still the best repositories of wild life, but they are subject to political pressures, and scarcely any are large enough to maintain a proper ecological balance. This means that they must be carefully managed, and that as time goes on their fauna will become only semi-wild. Indeed, we do not have to look impossibly far into the future to envisage a situation in some of the smaller parks where wild populations will require a n infusion of new blood from captive stocks. Even now, zoos are an essential comple- ment to parks, in that they are more likely to ensure the survival of some species which are particularly vulnerable to the dangers created by artificial boundaries. Examples of these are mammals and birds whose migration routes are unprotected, and many reptiles and amphibians with a very localized range.

Attempts are being made, especially in Africa, to farm wild animals, and while it may be logical to husband indigenous animals in preference to domestic stock as a source of protein, the more successful this is, the more likely it is that the wild animal will be subjected to selective breeding and thus cease to be truly wild. This is a problem, of course, which affects zoos and they will be judged in the future by their success in maintaining pure strains under artificial conditions.

Having stated in general terms the conservation problems publicly recognized by progressive zoos, I would now like to suggest some reasons why zoos have not developed in the past in ways which we now regard as necessary, what they are doing to improve and what I believe they ought to be doing.

Historically, most zoos were started simply as public entertainments, and only a small fraction of them were begun with any idea of promoting serious scientific studies. Even those which were established in the Nineteenth Century-and this includes most of the zoological societies-made little or no concession to ecological considerations when designing their exhibits. Towards the end of the century, the larger mammals were given more room and their presentation was made more naturalistic-and certainly more pleasing aesthetically. More important, it was

Z O O L O G I C A L C O L L E C T I O N S I N C O N S E R V A T I O N 57

recognized that exotic species could be acclimatized and fresh air and improved diets were gradually introduced. The advent of the moated enclosure instead of bars was certainly an improvement, and the trend set by such zoos as St Louis, Hamburg, and later Edinburgh and Regent’s Park, was followed by all the newly- developing urban zoos. But space is necessarily restricted in a town zoo and animals were still shown in a basically formalized setting. I n the past 10 years the number of zoos has increased phenomenally all over the world-there are now at least 800-and as far as Britain is concerned, the popularity of zoos has been accelerated by wildlife programmes on television resulting in the establishment of many country as opposed to urban zoos, as well as some much larger so-called ‘wildlife parks’.

I should stress at this point that what I have to say now applies to Britain, since it is only the British zoos of which I can lay any claim to special knowledge. Whereas the vast majority of zoos in other countries are either largely or wholly subsidized out of public funds, Britain is atypical in having a preponderance of zoos run as commercial enterprises. This is significant here in that the public demand for wildlife parks is being met by commercial organizations, some of which have substantial financial backing, a new phenomenon in Britain which may have two foreseeable effects in terms of conservation: the first is that these zoos can afford to establish breeding herds of the larger and more expensive mammals and thus could make a valuable contribution to captive stocks, even though the proprietors are actuated primarily by commercial motives. But since these are the people who have the money and the space to do what more venerable establish- ments are unable to do for lack of these things, we should not complain. O n the other hand, if there is ever a conflict of interest between the welfare of the animals and commercial considerations, we must assume that the latter will be given precedence. The second effect of the presence of these new parks will be that the older zoos will be forced to modernize in order to meet the public demand for more naturalistic exhibitions.

Although one-third of the new zoos being planned a t present in Britain will be municipal-and this is also a new trend-there is no doubt that most of the money for zoos here is being raised and earned by commercial companies, which are the very ones least likely to allocate funds for research and education; whereas the society and municipal zoos, which may be expected to engage in serious long-term scientific activities, must borrow money for expansion, and almost without excep- tion have little or nothing left over for developments which are significant in terms of conservation. I t seems absurd to zoos which are scientific institutions that so little public money is available to support living collections of animals in a country where the taxpayer subsidizes natural history museums to the extent of ?c;1 million annually.

But if zoos are to be regarded as serious scientific institutions they must stop thinking purely in terms of entertainment; they have got to come to grips with the conflict between exhibiting animals to the public and keeping animals as far


as possible in a biologically correct environment. For the majority of species there need be little or no conflict, but where it does exist, and especially for rare animals, the welfare and future of the species must come first. There are in fact plenty of examples to be seen in British zoos of exhibits which have been designed to meet an animal’s needs and are also-and o€ten because of this-are visually attractive. Nevertheless, it is still true to say that zoos in general are not designed for breeding animals as one of their main functions, nor are they meeting the challenge of growing public interest by providing the educational material and services which should supplement the visual impact of a well-presented collection.

If zoos are not taken seriously either as repositories of scientific material or as scientific institutions in their own right, it is simply because they have not earned this right. At the two conferences which I mentioned earlier, the general requirements of conservation as applying to zoos were agreed in principle, but- with some outstanding exceptions-zoos are still for the most part only paying lip service to these ideals. Many species which we have come to regard as ‘traditional’ exhibits in zoos are still being kept in conditions in which, according to our present knowledge, it is impossible for them to breed. For example, many birds of prey require far more aerial space for courtship and the rearing of young than a zoo can possibly give them, yet such species are long-lived in captivity and apart from this one factor do well in confinement ; crocodilians are universally deprived of a large enough dry land area in which to lay eggs, and I have yet to see marine turtles provided with sandbanks for this purpose in addition to a water tank. I t may be that it is impossible in these cases to reproduce all the necessary conditions for breeding, but zoos must either attempt to provide them or refrain from exhibiting these species. One of the commanest examples of non-existent breeding facilities is the practice of keeping only female elephants in zoos. The number of zoos prepared to keep bull elephants is very small indeed, and the bigger zoos should consider seriously whether they are justified in not providing the necessary space and equipment. I have no doubt that zoos can pursue these traditional practices with impunity for years to come, since many of these animals are not particularly rare and the public is certainly unaware of the problem. But I do not believe that the fact that a species is not rare makes it defensible to keep single individuals or homosexual groups in captivity.

Having said this, I think it is only fair to stress that many of the more venerable institutions which are best placed to take advantage of their breeding successes by carrying out research projects are usually the very ones which are suffering the worst disadvantages of outmoded buildings and restricted urban sites. Indeed i t has been seriously suggested that certain zoos have been breeding some of their ungulate species so well that they now have more animals than their land can sustain: and that within the next 10 years, unless measures are taken now, we may see many of the so-called endangered mammals slaughtered for lack of room. Equally serious is the fact that there are numerous small zoos only able to accom- modate herd animals in twos and threes which are selling stock instead of building


up herds, and this is a problem which ZOOS can only solve on a co-operative basis. However, there are encouraging signs that zoos are really beginning to re-

appraise the whole philosophy of zoo-keeping, and to jettison a few of their tenaciously held traditions. The Federation of Zoological Gardens of Great Britain and Ireland, which was established in 1966, has led the way by laying down minimum standards of management, animal husbandry and transportation, and by encouraging the acceptance and maintenance of these standards which form the basis of an inspection system embracing every aspect of animal care and zoo management, including the space provided for the animals; housing, climate, ventilation and lighting; hygiene, both indoors and in paddocks; the quality of food and its preparation; the provision of reserve space for sick and newly arrived animals; veterinary facilities; staff; and security. As you may imagine, we have had considerable problems in devising a system which is both acceptable and effective, but results so far are encouraging, and we keep the inspection procedure under continuous review.

Zoos are now certainly readier than they used to be to exchange rare animals on a co-operative basis, and the IUCN has assisted in organizing the establishment of stud books for six species of ruminants with another eighteen planned. The national zoo associations in America and Europe are generally encouraging their members to co-operate in breeding programmes, and our own British Zoo Federation has set up a Conservation and Breeding Committee whose duties are to keep a register of all rare mammals and birds kept by member zoos, with especial regard to species considered to be in danger of extinction in the wild, and to keep a register of unmated animals whether rare or not, so as to encourage member zoos to find mates for unpaired specimens. Last year we conducted a survey among our members which showed that they have in their collections ninety-three species of mammals and thirty-two species of birds totalling some 1200 specimens which are either on the IUCNlICBP Red Book list of endangered species, or are considered likely to become rare in the wild in future. Of these, we found that over 90 per cent were already being kept in pairs, and 37 per cent (445 specimens) had been bred in member zoos. This was a very encouraging result, and we feel confident that these figures will be improved upon.

The ultimate aim of conservation in zoos must, of course, be to return captive stocks of animals to their former natural range, and this has already been done with the Hawaiian goose, which has bred successfully a t Slimbridge, and the European great eagle owl which has been reintroduced into the forests of Sweden. The reintroduction of the European lynx to one of the large alpine reserves in Switzerland is also being considered, and it may be practical to start a captive breeding programme for the Barasingha deer for subsequent release in the Kanha Reserve in India. I n this latter case, the wild population has been seriously reduced by disease brought in by native cattle.

But these are isolated examples-albeit promising ones-of what needs to be done on a world scale, and in most countries with large numbers of indigenous


fauna, there is inadequate enforcement of protection laws, mainly, I believe, because governments are not prepared to allocate funds for this purpose until they are convinced that wildlife is a potential tourist attraction. However, where this has happened, export licences are being granted more selectively, and we may be able to look forward to a time when minimum standards will be demanded of all zoos by exporting countries.

Of course, this cannot work properly unless import regulations are equally selective, but a few of the major zoo-owning nations are beginning to take this problem seriously. To mention two examples, in this country we have the Animals (Restriction of Importation) Act 1964, under which certain rare animals may only be imported under Board of Trade licence for breeding purposes, and kept in premises approved by Government inspectors, and the United States Government is being pressed to pass legislation restricting the importation of all species listed in the Red Data Books, and to prohibit the trade in skins by the Wild Animal Propagation Trust, which is the conservation aim of the Association of American Zoological Parks and Aquariums.

I think it must be clear from what I have said that zoological gardens must have a truly international organization if they are to pursue conservation policies effectively, and I believe that this is needed to accelerate the modernization of zoo design and management quite as much as for the co-ordination of breeding programmes-indeed, the two should go hand in hand. The best way of achieving this would be to establish a central body on which the existing national federations would be represented-that is to say, the United States, British, German, Dutch, Japanese and Ibero-American associations, as well as the central authorities controlling zoos in the communist countries; and important zoos in other countries would also be asked to join.

I suggest that the functions of this organization should be sufficiently widely defined to embrace the needs of all zoos, whatever their status, so that they can derive benefits which will promote the aims of wildlife conservation in all its aspects. The first task would be to establish large groups of selected species in different places, to ensure that new strains are always available and in order to spread the risk of loss from disease; this might well entail the keeping of fewer species by the larger zoos, but the visual impact of larger groups of herd animals, for instance, would compensate for the decreased variety of exhibits. I would also suggest the establishment of centres where surplus stock could be held which would help zoos when they were unable to allocate extra space for future breeding. Next, I believe a real effort should be made to resolve the ever-present conflict between the exhibition and ecological requirements of many species, by appointing ecologists to zoos-possibly on a group basis-to study the problems involved and help zoos to make correct assessments of specific needs when new developments are being planned. This could provide more educationally meaningful exhibits as well as improved breeding conditions. At present there appears to be extraordinarily little planned research going on into this aspect of zoo-keeping.


A very important function of an international organization would be to promote scientific research into the biology of captive animals, both in co-ordinating programmes and in bringing research findings to the attention of the smaller zoos, for which the literature is often not readily accessible. I also feel strongly that the most important research which zoos should promote in the context of conservation is in the field of comparative veterinary medicine; I believe it is quite indefensible to keep a collection of animals which are replaced when they die without any attempt being made to discover the causes and improve our existing mortality rates. More funds for this research are badly needed in this country and no doubt it would be welcomed elsewhere.

Another way in which the veterinary profession could help zoos would be to follow the example of the British Veterinary Zoological Society, which has been immensely helpful to our Zoo Federation in putting veterinary surgeons who attend zoos in touch with each other. One of the problems of the small zoo owner is that he may have great difficulty in finding a veterinary surgeon who is familiar with the special problems of zoo animals, which are obviously outside the special field of the ordinary practitioner. An international zoo organization could possibly fulfil a similar function by helping to establish contact between zoos and the veterinary profession in other countries. The veterinary organizations would also be performing a great service to conservation if they could support government departments and other interested agencies in pressing for more efficient quarantine regulations in certain countries whose lack of control makes the importation of their hoofed animals unacceptable at present. The difficulty of moving animals about the world is not helping the efforts of zoos to breed seriously threatened species, and one or two quarantine stations in each continent which are recognized and accepted by all countries would be invaluable for conservation-minded zoos.

Lastly, I believe that any international body of the kind I have proposed must concern itself to some extent with the type of related activity which lends itself to co-operative planning. I am thinking here of exchange schemes for menagerie staff, improved methods of training in animal care, co-operative studies in new construction techniques, the dissemination of conservation propaganda in zoos and the encouragement of the right kind of publicity which will make the public more aware of the role which zoos can play in preserving animals rather than emphasiz- ing their more self-evident attractions as a form of entertainment.

I think it goes without saying that all these activities should be undertaken in consultation with the IUCN, which as the established international organ of conservation, has been trying for the past 5 years to promote co-operation between zoos. The IUCN’s influence and authority could also be invaluable in helping to impose sanctions on the fringe population of disreputable zoo owners and dealers which can so easily destroy the public image of zoos in general. Finally, I believe that i t is only with the support of the IUCN that funds could be raised for what is possibly the most important single piece of research, which can only be undertaken with the co-operation of zoos and the conservation movement’s fund-raising


bodies-I refer to the technique of artificial insemination, which is only successful at present with cattle and man. If money were allocated for a special project and used to finance the expensive and protracted procedures necessary to make this possible for the rarest animals, zoos and conservationists could contemplate a secure future for the wildlife of the world.

the value of zoological collections in conservation

Documents