1. Captive Breeding and Reintroduction
Once the limiting factors have been addressed it might be time for intensive management
last resort
expensive
difficult to make succeed
Beck et al % successful
Griffith et al % successful
requires large, long-term effort in captivity and the wild

2. Typical Questions About Captive Propagation
Is it necessary?
Is it successful and worth it?
How do you do it?
Technical questions about breeding, rearing, and release

3. Intensive Management Programs are Complex
Example from Mariana
Crow program on Guam
landowner coordination
monitoring
pull eggs
rear nestlings
translocate
hack to the wild
control predators

4. Why Captive Breed?
Produce stock for reintroduction (Wilson and Stanley Price 1994)
Preserve genetic variability
Produce stock for research
Produce animals for public education
Provide insurance against extinction
alala pva

5. Criteria to Meet Prior to Reintroduction (Kleiman et al. 1994)
Biological and Other Resources
Do we know how to rear and reintroduce the species?
Do we know enough about the biology of the species to determine if we have been successful?
Is funding for the long term available
includes monitoring success of reintroduction

6. Example of Meeting Criteria for Tamarins (Kleiman et al. 1994)

7. Assessment of Reintroduction Projects (Beck et al. 1994)
% of Projects
Reviewed projects from 1900 to 1993
N=145 projects, 13 million animals of 126 species
acclimate = hard vs. soft release

8. What Made Project Successful?
Successful if N=500 w/o human intervention or PVA looks good
16 (11%) successful
Training, local involvement, education, and duration are consistently important

9. Criteria for Success from Griffith et al. (1989)
Type of species (game more successful than threatened)
Habitat quality (better success into good habitat)
Location of release (better in core of historic range)
Source of stock (Wild caught better than hand-reared)
Food habits (herbivore better than carnivore or omnivore)
Duration of study (longer and more animals released increased success)

10. Size and Persistence of Release Matters (Ginsberg 1994)
PVA model results (Kit Foxes)
N=Starting pop size
SP=Start with N, then successive releases of 20 indiv/yr for 10 years
Huge increase in viability with little increase in per year release effort.
N=50
N=100
N=500
Successive Releases
N=50SP; N=100SP

11. Major Drawbacks to Success (Snyder et al. 1996)
Need to maintain a self sustaining captive population
Need to successfully reintroduce
May get domestication and disease in captivity
Need considerable funds and facilities
Diverts attention from long-term solution in the field (easy to do quick fix)
Need consistent administration (Clark et al. 1994)

12. The Biology of Captive Propagation and Reintroduction
Captive Breeding
zoo biology and husbandry
Manipulating Wild Pairs
pull clutch
Captive Rearing
considerations of diet, disease, training
Reintroduction
translocation, fostering, hacking (soft release), hard release

13. A General Captive Propagation Program
Aplomado falcons (Cade et al. 1991)
bring birds in from captivity
acclimate so they breed in captivity
increase productivity by food supplementation and clutch manipulation
hand rear young, experiment with parent rearing
manipulate wild pairs
clutch manipulation
hack out captive-reared birds
meet recovery goal for species
30-50 young released for years
require 15 pairs (35 individuals)

14. How to Incubate Eggs?
An example of figuring out one aspect of captive propagation
Use of surrogate species
Need controlled experiments

15. Effects of Manipulating Wild Pairs
Bald Eagles (Wood and Collopy 1993)
78% renested within 1 month
subsequent reproduction within the year may be reduced
this was modeled with RAMAS age model and was estimated not to affect viability of “donor” population
Corvids (Marzluff et al. 1994)
69% renested
reduced clutch size on renesting and slightly lower number of fledglings
occupancy and productivity at manipulated sites was same as controls next year

16. Hand-rearing May Produce Undersized Young for Release
Growth is usually faster in nature and may produce light-weight young (magpies)
Growth in captivity may be compensatory (crows)
If dominance is related to size, then survival or breeding may be reduced
Whitmore and Marzluff 1998

17. Practice Makes More Perfect
Mortality of pups is reduced with increasing number of litters produced for a species
3 outliers were removed from analysis??)
Ginsberg 1994

18. Ferret Predatory Behavior Is Influenced by Rearing
Vargas 1994
% of ferrets that killed PDs at 16.5 weeks
Group I
cage-raised, no exposure to live prey
Group II
Cage-raised, exposed to live hamsters--went for back of neck, not throat
Group III
Cage-raised, exposed to live Prairie Dogs
Group IV
Outdoor raised, exposed to PDs

19. Survival of Released Foxes is Affected by Method of Release
Kit Foxes (in Ginsberg 1994)
Wild caught translocated (hard release) did best in short term
Hard versus Soft Release were similar after 2 years
Wild Caught,
Hard-release
All Soft Releases
All Hard
Releases
Captive Reared, Hard-release

20. Sometimes Younger is Better! (Valutis 1997)
Post-release survival of American Crows was better if we released them young
less dispersal
gradual integration into wild flocks may be better
wild birds may be more receptive to new birds during breeding season
Assume missing
birds were alive
Assume missing
birds were dead

21. Recent Thoughts About Reintroduction
Red and Mexican Wolves
Politics and Biology
Guard Donkeys?
Lynx
Whooping Cranes
Western and Eastern Efforts

22. Red Wolves 1970’s few wolves left in Texas and Louisiana
All that could be found (N = 17) were captured by late 1970’s and brought in for captive breeding (Point Defiance Zoo initially then 20+ zoos)
Bred wolves in captivity successfully (300 + were produced at 30+ facilities)
Began reintroduction in 1987

23. Red Wolf Reintroduction Areas

24. Red Wolf Reintroduction Stats
First releases at Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge (1992: 30 animals roam free)
marooned species on 3 islands
10 on Bulls Island (2 survived through 1990)
Ended 2005
9 on Horn Island (5 survived through 1990)
None currently
4 on St. Vincent National Wildlife Refuge (all surviving)
Minimal efforts now, but captives at visitor facility
Goal was to produce wild-reared young wolves for reintroduction
2016: 74 in wild (20 packs, 1.7 mil. Acres in NC), 207 in captivity

25. Reintroduction Strategies
Pre-release training
minimum human contact
varied feeding regime (boom bust)
weaned from dog food to all meat
exposed to live prey
10(j) status
hunting and trapping of game allowed in release area to get sportsmen behind the program
can kill if threatening humans, but not livestock or pets

26. Reintroduction Success
ARNWR released 29 captive born wolves (19 adults, 10 pups) were released on 13 occasions
6 pups born in the wild
mid Oct >19 free-ranging
17 animals recaptured on 29 occasions
1 animal had to be returned to zoo
15 died
5 vehicle; 2 killed by other wolves; 2 infections; 1 choked on a coon kidney; 1 drowned in leghold; 4 drowned crossing river
The wild population has been declining lately from a high of 148

27. Why No Losses to Human Hatred?
Pre-release public education campaign
briefed enviros, congress, governor, local officials and local landowners
briefed navy and airforce which train next to refuge
focused on hunters and trappers at public meetings prior to release
10(j) status
Post-release press
22 mags, 24 newspapers, 5 national news broadcasts, 4 documentaries
New landowner agreements

28. Humans Benefited From Release
Post-release press increased tourism
Portrayed the region as unaffected by increase in human population where natural resources are still thriving
helped attract recreation

29. Other Spinoffs Additional land for conservation
Conservation Fund bought 47,000 ha next to ARNWR
33 private citizens donated 10,000 ha to the project
Civic groups got involved
Rotary Club gave conservation internships

30. Not So Good in Smokies
1990 reintroductions began in Great Smoky Mountains National Park
500,000 acre park (NC and Tenn)
1.5 mill acres of national forest adjoining with inholdings
37 wolves released
many strayed from park and were recaptured
like beef--$7,900 paid for 24 cows killed
liked people (taking handouts from tourists)
6 killed by cars, poison, shooting
33 pups born
4 survived through 1998

31. Lack of Food Important
Movements out of park were apparently in response to lack of big game
Parvovirus also got some pups
4 remaining animals (2 adults and 2 pups) were removed

32. Efforts Suspended and Revised
Review of program in 2015 suggests many hurdles remain
Land, hybridization with coyotes, restoration of multiple populations
PVA suggests extinction likely within a few decades if releases do not continue and captive population is not managed

33. Mexican Wolf Reintroduction Sites
5 release areas in Apache National Forest
Soft releases of family groups
Various degree of switch to natural prey
Vehicles are mortality source as is shooting
Ranch dogs and livestock have been injured or killed
Defenders paid full market value

34. Mexican Wolves Captive propagation for release
First releases March (New Mexico and Arizona) on NWR and USFS lands
Recent info from Arizona Game and Fish
Public not happy
New Mexico cattle growers have sued
Mortalities from autos and shooting
5 of first 11 released were shot
2005 Recovery Planning on hold, reintroductions continue

35. Perseverance is the Key
Babbitt was committed
“release … is to send a message that this is public land…..Americans support this effort…I’ve got my instructions from the American people”
As of 2017
97 wolves with 8 breeding pairs in AZ and NM
~300 in captivity (including wolf haven)

37. Expanded 10(j) area (non-essential, experimental)

38. From Latest FWS annual Report

39. Flexible Releases Lightweight pens take into backcountry
electrify soft mesh
soft releases will continue to be used
little room for error

40. Reducing Wolf Encounters with Lifestock (M. Jimenez (PhD work)
Trials with Montana’s Ninemile Pack
Cracker shells
very short term deterrence
Country Music
music played at night by a crippled cow--kept wolves away
Flags
flags on fences keep wolves out
Guard Donkeys
burros with cattle--increase aggressiveness of the prey
worked with coyotes
Smoke the donkey in Aspen keeps cougars at bay!

42. End of 2016: ~1704 wolves in 282 packs with 95 breeding pairs (200 wolves in 34 packs in Wa and Or)

43. Back to Wyoming
2014
Court concludes that it was arbitrary and capricious for the Service to rely on the state’s nonbinding promises to maintain a particular number of wolves when the availability of that specific numerical buffer was such a critical aspect of the delisting decision. Wolves again listed as nonessential experimental population in Wyoming.

44. Threatened Lynx? Listed as threatened in 2004
As of 2006, recovery outline completed
Interim, no authority, guidelines

45. Lynx Reintroduction Stats
Reintroduction occurring in Colorado
winter Lynx brought to San Juans from Canada
hard release
plan for 110 to be released over next 2 years
cost = $1.4 million (for first 3 years)
Initial Poor Success was questioned
2 of first 5 died of starvation
Later reintroductions went well
2010 deemed a success after >200 animals released

47. Whooping Cranes Early efforts in western US
1975--early 1990s whoopers cross fostered under Sandhill Cranes
Migrated and survived ok, but no breeding
1992--cross fostered whooper bred with a female sandhill
1993--cross fostered group down to 8 from high of 30 in 1980
Guide-bird program initiated
incubate and hatch in captivity
house chicks with cross fostered whoopers held in cages on breeding grounds
bond with whoopers to learn migration route
imprint on whoopers to learn sexual preference
2005 efforts in west essentially halted

48. Changing Focus to Eastern US
Use of ultralights and direct reintroduction to re-establish the eastern flyway population of Whooping Cranes
Population is growing
5 young in 2002
64 in 2006
99 in 2015
103 in 2017
2005 saw first breeding
2006 first migration on
own by cranes initially
led by ultralight

49. Now Simultaneously Using 3 Release Strategies
Adults migrating on own
Ultralight-guided migration for some young
Direct Autumn Release
Captive reared chicks released with older whoopers or wild sandhills to follow on migration

50. References
Phillips, M. K. 1990a. The red wolf: recovery of an endangered species. Endangered Species Update 8:79-81.
Phillips, M. K. 1990b. Measures of the value and success of a reintroduction project: red wolf reintroduction in Alligator River National Wildlife Refuge. Endangered Species Update 8:24-26.
Kaiser, J Study sounds alarm on Yellowstone Grizzlies. Science 284:568.
Davis, T Agencies dunk endangered songbird. High Country News Sept. 15, 1997
Drewien, R. C Guide bird program holds promise for whoopers. Habitat.

51. More References
Borenstein, S The bald eagle to be taken off endangered list. Seattle Times. June 17, 1999.
Weller, R Lynx reintroduced to Colorado. Seattle Times February 4, 1999.
London, J Red Wolf Country. Penguin Books, New York.
Miller, E Salmon says no bears, no way. High Country News. October 27, 1997

52. References
Vargas, A Ontogeny of the endangered black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes) and effects of rearing conditions on predatory behavior and post-release survival. PhD. Diss. U. Wyoming
Ginsberg, JR Captive breeding, reintroduction and the conservation of canids. PP In. Olney et al. (eds.). Creative Conservation. Chapman and Hall, London.
Valutis, LL Reintroduction of captive-reared birds. MSc. BSU. Boise, ID.
Wild, MA. Et al Comparing growth rates of dam- and hand-raised Bighorn sheep, pronghorn, and elk neonates. J W M 58:
Whitmore, KD and JM Marzluff Hand-rearing corvids for reintroduction: importance of feeding regime, nestling growth, and dominance. JWM 62:

53. More References
Wilson, AC and MR Stanley Price Reintroduction as a reason for captive breeding. PP In. Olney et al. (eds.). Creative Conservation. Chapman and Hall, London.
Kleiman, DG et al Criteria for reintroductions. PP In. Olney et al. (eds.). Creative Conservation. Chapman and Hall, London.
Beck, B.B., et al Reintroduction of captive-born animals. PP In. Olney et al. (eds.). Creative Conservation. Chapman and Hall, London.
Griffith, B. Et al Translocation as a species conservation tool: status and strategy. Science 245:
Cade, TJ et al Efforts to restore the northern aplomado falcon by captive breeding and reintroduction. Dodo 27:71-81.
Williams, GR Marooning--a technique for saving threatened species from extinction. International Zoo Yearbook 17:

54. Yet More References
Jones, CG. Et al A summary of the conservation management of the mauritius kestrel Falco punctatus Dodo 27:81-99.
Rachlow, JL. And J. Berger Conservation implications of patterns of horn regeneration in dehorned white rhinos. Conservation Biology 11:84-91.
Berger, J Animal behaviour and plundered mammals: Is the study of mating systems a scientific luxury or a conservation necessity? Oikos 77:
Wood, PB. And MW Collopy Effects of egg removal on bald eagle productivity in northern Florida. JWM 57:1-9.
Marzluff, JM et al Captive propagation and reintroduction of social birds. Annual Report. Sustainable Ecosystems Institute, Meridian, ID.

55. References
Haig, SM and JC Avise Avian conservation genetics. PP In. JC Avise and JL Hamrick (ed.) Conservation genetics. Chapman & Hall. New York.
Lynch, M A quantitative-genetic perspective on conservation issues. PP In. JC Avise and JL Hamrick (ed.) Conservation genetics. Chapman & Hall. New York.
Britten, HB. Meta-analyses of the association between multilocus heterozygosity and fitness. Evolution 50:
Fleischer, RC Genetics and avian conservation. PP In. JM Marzluff and R Sallabanks (eds.) Avian Conservation. Island Press. Covelo, CA.
Mitton, JB Molecular approaches to population biology. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 25:45-69
Lynch, M. R. Burger, D. Butcher, and W. Gabriel The mutational meltdown in asexual populations. J. Heredity 84:
Westemeier, R. L., Brawn, J. D., Simpson, S. A., Esker, T. L., Jansen, R. W., Walk, J. W., Kershner, E. L., Bouzat, J. L., and K. N. Paige Tracking the long-term decline and recovery of an isolated population. Science 282:

56. More References
Ardern, S. L. and D. M. Lambert Is the black robin in genetic peril? Molecular Ecology 6:21-28
Caro, T. M. and M. K. Laurenson Ecological and genetic factors in conservation: a cautionary tale. Science 263:
Jimenez, J. A., K. A. Hughes, G. Alaks, L. Graham, and R. C. Lacy An experimental study of inbreeding depression in a natural habitat. Science 266:
O’Brien, S.J., Roelke, M. E., Marker, L., Newman, A., Winkler, C. A., Meltzer, D., Colly, L., Evermann, J. F., Bush, M., and D. E. Wildt Genetic basis for species vulnerability in the Cheetah. Science 227:
Roy, M. S., E. Geffen, D. Smith, and R. K. Wayne Molecular genetics of pre-1940 red wolves. Conservation Biology 10:
Vrijenhoek, R. C., M. E. Douglas, and G. K. Meffe Conservation genetics of endangered fish populations in Arizona. Science 229:

57. Still More Refs
Hale, ML, Lurz, PWW, Shirley, MDF, Rushton, S., Fuller, RM, and K. Wolff Impact of landscape management on the genetic structure of red squirrel populations. Science 293:
Caro, T Controversy over behavior and genetics in Cheetah conservation. In. LM Gosling and WJ Sutherland, eds. Behavior and Conservation.
Keller, LF and DM Waller Inbreeding effects in wild populations. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 17:
Lande, R Extinction risks from anthropogenic, ecological, and genetic factors. Pp In Genetics and the Extinction of Species (Landweber, LF and AP Dobson, eds.). Princeton University Press
Nicholl, M.A.C. Jones, C.G., and K. Norris Declining survival rates in a reintroduced population of the Mauritius kestrel: evidence for non-linear density dependence and environmental stochasticity. J. Anim. Ecol. 72:
Nichols, R. A., Bruford, M. W., and J. J. Groombridge Sustaining genetic variation in a small population: evidence from the Mauritius kestrel. Molecular Ecology 10:
Mandel, J. T., Donlan,C. J., and J. Armstrong A derivative approach to endangered species conservation. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 8:44-49.