Elsevier

Biological Conservation

Volume 141, Issue 2, February 2008, Pages 355-363
Biological Conservation

Review
The effects of captive experience on reintroduction survival in carnivores: A review and analysis

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2007.11.007Get rights and content

Abstract

This review focuses on the success and survivorship of captive-born versus wild-caught carnivores used in reintroductions. Previous reviews have suggested that reintroduction projects using captive-born animals are less likely to be successful than projects translocating wild-caught animals. The purpose of this paper is to examine this statistically and investigate how captivity may affect the survival of reintroduced carnivores. We examined results published in previous reviews, and found evidence to support that reintroduction projects using wild-caught animals are significantly more likely to succeed than projects using captive-born animals. We further compiled our own review of 45 case studies in carnivore reintroduction projects (in 17 species across 5 families) to investigate survival rates rather than overall project ‘success’. We found that (1) wild-caught carnivores are significantly more likely to survive than captive-born carnivores in reintroductions; (2) that humans were the direct cause of death in over 50% of all fatalities and (3) that reintroduced captive-born carnivores are particularly susceptible to starvation, unsuccessful predator/competitor avoidance and disease.

Section snippets

Brief introduction and background

Humans have a long history of translocating animals, whether by intention or not. In the past, intentional translocations of animals have predominantly been for the purpose of supplementing game species. However, more recently, translocation for the purpose of re-establishing endangered animals into their native habitat has become an increasingly popular conservation technique (MacKinnon and MacKinnon, 1991, Stuart, 1991). The IUCN (International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural

Previous reintroductions for conservation

There have been a number of well publicized reintroductions carried out for conservation purposes, e.g. golden lion tamarin (Kleiman and Mallinson, 1998), red wolf (Oakleaf et al., 2004), California condor (Toone and Wallace, 1994), black-footed ferret (Russell et al., 1994), and Arabian oryx (Stanley Price, 1989). Most of the animals used in these projects were either captive-born or brought into captivity due to their near extinct status. To evaluate the outcome of these projects, many have

Previous reviews and their findings on the effect of source population

Out of the several previously published reviews, three in particular, Griffith et al., 1989, Wolf et al., 1996, Fischer and Lindenmayer, 2000, have reported differences between the success rates of reintroduction projects and the source of animals used, and in all cases projects using captive-born animals averaged a lower success rate than those using wild-caught. Further to their 1989 paper, Griffith et al. (1990) statistically reported that this difference was significant; however, they did

Why focus on carnivores?

Carnivores are well represented in reintroduction projects; this can be explained by the taxonomic bias observed in species selected for conservation. Conservation societies often use flagship species, for example the giant panda (Ailuropoda malanoleuca), to promote conservation efforts and these are often chosen for their visual appeal, e.g. flagship species are typically large mammals. This preference for animals with ‘visual appeal’ can also be seen in species selected for reintroduction

Main objectives

There are two main objectives for this paper. One was to statistically verify differences between the success rates of reintroduction projects (obtained from previously published reviews) based on their source of founder stock. The prediction is that projects using wild-caught animals will be more successful than those using captive-born animals (Mathews et al., 2005). The second objective was to provide an updated review and analysis on the survival rates of reintroduced and translocated

Literature search

The literature search was carried out on carnivore reintroduction and translocation projects that have been published post 1990. Literature was collected over a 5 month period in early 2005, and included over 25 journals, two of which were particularly applicable –Biological Conservation and Conservation Biology, and over 30 relevant books and symposium proceedings. Journals were searched via online databases and electronic journals, such as Web of Science, EBSCO, JSTOR, IngentaConnect, and

An analysis of success of reintroduction projects using wild-caught versus captive-born

The calculated G statistic on the results from Fischer and Lindenmayer’s (2000) review, shows that reintroduction projects appear to be significantly more likely to succeed when a wild source population is used (31% of 45 projects) than when animals from a captive source are used (13% of 52 projects); G = 4.466, df = 1, p = 0.035.

Survival of wild-caught versus captive-born animals and family differences

The results of the ANOVA show that wild-caught carnivores survived significantly more (53%) than captive-born carnivores (32%), F(1,4.66) = 17.697, p = 0.01; Fig. 1.

When

Success of projects based on results of previous publications

Our results support that the use of different source populations has an effect on the success of the project and corroborates Fischer and Lindenmayer, 2000, Griffith et al., 1989, Wolf et al., 1996 reviews. This evidence suggests that captivity negatively influences animals’ capabilities to survive, and can result in a lack of appropriate ‘wild’ type behaviours (Rabin, 2003). Other potential factors influencing captive animals’ lack of success can range from lack of immunities to diseases

Conclusion

Our findings support previous reports that reintroduction projects using wild-caught animals are more successful than those using captive-born animals. We also found that wild-caught carnivores are more likely to survive than captive-born carnivores in reintroductions and that this trend appears to remain consistent across species and families. Further reviews should be conducted on carnivores, as well as other species, in order to improve our understanding on how captivity affects survival in

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the two reviewers for their constructive criticism and support, this manuscript has been much improved by incorporating their suggestions. We would also like to thank those members of our department who gave statistical advice and those who gave comments on final drafts.

References (84)

  • S.S. Vickery et al.

    Stereotypy and perseverative responding in caged bears: further data and analyses

    Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci.

    (2005)
  • Anders, O. (personal communiction, October 29,...
  • B.B. Beck

    Reintroduction, Zoos, Conservation, and Animal Welfare

  • B.B. Beck et al.

    Reintroduction of captive-born animals

  • R.C. Belden et al.

    Feasibility of translocating panthers into northern Florida

    J. Wildlife Manage.

    (1993)
  • L. Blomqvist et al.

    Lynx Reintroduction in Kampinoski Natural Park

    (2000)
  • M. Boer et al.

    Reintroduction of the European lynx (Lynx lynx) to the Kampinoski National park, Poland – a field experiment with zooborn individuals. Part II: release phase: procedures and activities of lynxes during the first year after

    Der Zoologische Garten

    (1995)
  • U. Breitenmoser et al.

    Assessment of carnivore reintroductions

  • S. Bremner-Harrison et al.

    Behavioural trait assessment as a release criterion: boldness predicts early death in a reintroduction programme of captive-bred swift fox (Vulpes velox)

    Anim. Conserv.

    (2004)
  • Bush, M., 1994. Reintroduction Medicine. Zoos’ Print, Jan/Feb,...
  • L.N. Carbyn et al.

    The swift fox reintroduction project in Canada from 1983 to 1992

  • T.W. Clark et al.

    General lessons and positive trends in large carnivore conservation

    Conserv. Biol.

    (1996)
  • T.W. Clark et al.

    Crafting effective solutions to the large carnivore conservation problem

    Conserv. Biol.

    (1996)
  • J.D. Clark et al.

    Bear reintroductions: lessons and challenges

    Ursus

    (2002)
  • R. Clubb et al.

    Captivity effects on wide-ranging carnivores

    Nature

    (2003)
  • A.A. Cunningham

    Disease risks of wildlife translocations

    Conserv. Biol.

    (1996)
  • R. Eastridge et al.

    Black bear reintroduction- evalutation of 2 soft-release techniques to reintroduce black bears

    Wildlife Soc. Bull.

    (2001)
  • B. Griffith et al.

    Translocation as a species conservation tool: status and strategy

    Science

    (1989)
  • B. Griffith et al.

    Translocations of captive-reared terrestrial verterbrates, 1973–1986

    Endangered Species Update

    (1990)
  • IUCN, 1998. Guidelines for Re-introductions: Prepared by the IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group. IUCN, Gland,...
  • D. Jansen et al.

    Improving prospects for the Florida panther

    Endangered Species Bulletin

    (2002)
  • K.G. Johnson et al.

    Human/Carnivore interactions: conservation and management implications from China

  • S.A. Johnson et al.

    Restoring river otters to Indiana

    Wildlife Soc. Bull.

    (1999)
  • D.G. Kleiman

    Reintroduction of captive mammals for conservation. Guidelines for reintroducing endangered species into the wild

    Bioscience

    (1989)
  • D.G. Kleiman et al.

    Recovery and management committees for lion tamarins: partnerships in conservation planning and implementation

    Conserv. Biol.

    (1998)
  • Kleiman, D.G., Beck, B.B., Dietz, J.M., Dietz, L.A., 1991. Costs of a re-introduction and criteria for success:...
  • D.G. Kleiman et al.

    Criteria for reintroductions

  • D.G. Kleiman et al.

    Improving the evaluation of conservation programs

    Conserv. Biol.

    (2000)
  • K. MacKinnon et al.

    Habitat protection and re-introduction programmes

  • B. Miller et al.

    Biological and technical considerations of carnivore translocation: a review

    Anim. Conserv.

    (1999)
  • D. Miquelle et al.

    Rehabilitation and translocation of two adult female amur Tigers

    (2001)

    • Cited by (278)

    • Wild feline pathogens in the Arabian Peninsula: A review

      2024, Journal for Nature Conservation

    • The ethics of intervening in animal behaviour for conservation

      2023, Trends in Ecology and Evolution

    • Evaluating the performance of conservation translocations in large carnivores across the world

      2023, Biological Conservation

    • An exploratory analysis of behavior-based and other management techniques to improve avian conservation translocations

      2023, Biological Conservation

    • Assessing ecological and socio-political factors in site selection for ocelot reintroduction in Texas

      2024, Conservation Science and Practice

    • Integrating microbiome science and evolutionary medicine into animal health and conservation

      2024, Biological Reviews
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text
    Copyright © 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.