Sally Walker and Sanjay Molur

Introduction: A major objective of the modern zoo in modern society is to be directly relevant to conservation, with the ability of providing animals for dynamic conservation programs which include recovery, reintroduction, restocking, introduction into alternative habitats, strengthening of gene pools and simply providing a temporary safe harbor for species whose habitats have disappeared or degraded. Zoos have limited space and resources, however, and animals being bred and maintained for dynamic conservation have special needs. Therefore, zoos must have a means to prioritize species for conservation breeding. Not only zoos, but wildlife agencies also need to prioritize species so that they can focus their own resources on those which need help most or are salvageable only with intensive management.

Ironically, it is the international zoo representative, the Conservation Breeding Specialist Group (CBSG) in the Species Survival Commission which has developed a workshop methodology using the IUCN Red List criteria in a participatory manner for species prioritization and conservation breeding recommendations which is now being used by zoos, wildlife agencies, academic institutions and conservation NGO’s all over the world. This paper describes a case study in India in which all tetrapods and a good sampling of other groups were prioritized in this manner by a zoo Organisation and regional network of the Conservation Breeding Specialist Group. Other ways zoos can contribute to the Biodiversity Convention are covered briefly. It is suggested that South East Asian countries, perhaps led by the South East Asian Zoo Association, as many of their members already possess CBSG process skills, initiate this activity in the South East Asian countries which are signatories to the Biodiversity Convention.

Signatories of the Rio Convention agreed to carry out a number of tasks to conserve biodiversity in their country as part of their commitment to the Biodiversity Convention. Of the 42 Agenda Items of the Convention, a few stand out as particularly relevant to wildlife agencies and zoos at the grassroots level. The Convention itself is unique in that a "firm emphasis was placed on sovereign rights over biological resources." The concept of biological resources being the "common heritage" of everyone on earth was rejected in favor of the recognition that conservation of biodiversity is a "common concern" of mankind.

The Biodiversity Convention suggests that signatory nations prioritize species and sites and develop strategies for biodiversity conservation. Prioritization is a crucial and practical measure to insure that resources (time, money, and human energy) are being utilized in the most efficient manner. The most troubled sites with the most diverse and unique species, and the most highly endangered species should be tackled first (presuming they are imminently salvageable) before they are lost.

Which sites hold the greatest diversity and most unique species – of flora and fauna? Which species are the most likely to become extinct or irrevocably impoverished genetically if timely action is not taken to effect recovery? What are the strategies required for saving sites and species for conservation of biodiversity ? Strategies can be formulated only when size, scope and location of the task is known. Sites can be prioritised best when it is known what kind, how many and what status are the species they contain.

Therefore a first step in this series of country commitments to biodiversity conservation is to prioritize species according to their conservation status and then according to their conservation value. This step can be organized and carried out by zoos, taking help from their colleagues from wildlife agencies, scientific institutes and conservation NGOs. It is described in the Convention under Agenda Item 7, Identification and monitoring of Biodiversity. This and the other Agenda items which can be tackled by a cooperative effort between zoo scientists, field biologists, the academic community and the forest and wildlife agencies are listed below:

1. Identification and Monitoring of Biodiversity

2. Linking ex situ biodiversity back to in situ biodiversity

3. Public Awareness

4. Research and Training

Zoos, concerned about how best to use their limited space and resources, have been prioritizing species for collection planning and conservation breeding for some years and are well aware of the advantages of doing so. The Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, SSC IUCN that represents zoos and captive breeding centers developed a systematic methodology for prioritizing species using the IUCN criteria and principles of human group dynamics. This is called the Conservation Assessment and Management Plan Workshop or CAMP.

CBSG Chairman, U. S. Seal was asked by SSC’s founder the late Sir Peter Scott some years ago to develop a way for zoos to make rational decisions for captive breeding. Dr. Seal then developed the workshop process called the Conservation Assessment and Management Plan Workshop or CAMP. CAMP workshops gather field biologists, zoo managers and other assess the conservation status of a broad range of taxa in one particular group, such as primates, felids, cervids, etc. CAMP workshops can also be done on a regional or country basis, such as Endemic species of St. Helena’s Island, Soil Invertebrates of India, Endemic plants of Cuba, etc. The CAMP Workshops came about in the same general time frame when zoos in North America realized that they had to develop a more systematic method of utilizing their limited area and resources for keeping a self-sustaining captive population of all the endangered taxa which might require recovery programs involving captive stock.

A few years after the development of CAMP Workshops began at the instigation of CBSG IUCN decided to review the IUCN Red List Categories and began a process of revision which went through several iterations. This spanned a period of about 5 years and involved some 300 conservation biologists. CBSG used each new iteration of the developing new IUCN criteria in CAMP workshops, providing actual tests of their applicability and practicality. In 1995 IUCN approved the IUCN Red List Categories Final Version which had been revised specifically to provide consistency across taxon groups as well as a more objective and scientific methodology of describing species with a status. The IUCN Red List Categories are probably the best method of assigning conservation status to species.

CBSG encourages regional networking and there are two active CBSG networks in Asia, in India and Indonesia, with others coming up in Sri Lanka, Japan and possibly China. CBSG Regional Networks have come up elsewhere in the world as well, e.g. Meso-America and Mexico.

CBSG, India was the first network to begin and its inspiration came exactly six years ago at an Annual CBSG meeting held in Singapore. Dr. Seal mentioned that he wanted more regional activity to take place so that scarce financial resources could be utilized more efficiently and more people from far away areas could participate in the activities. Many Indians had attended that meeting and many others were quite interested, so it was not difficult to organize a regional CBSG in India. CBSG regional networks are an excellent means of bringing together all the specialists required for conservation programs, zoo personnel, field biologists, academics, forest and wildlife agencies and related conservation NGO's. It is also a means of insuring they are exposed to the most current scientific material and technology as well as conservation activities around the world. CBSG, India has used its association with an IUCN specialist group to contact other Indian members of IUCN specialist groups and bring them into the kind of dynamic conservation activity for which CBSG is so well known.

Now, CBSG, India has been active for about five and a half years and has organized many CBSG process workshops and other activities. Even before organizing, CBSG, India members had participated in a variety of CBSG workshops and other activities in different parts of the world. After setting up what was then called a CBSG satellite in India, CBSG, India personnel attended training courses and also had an opportunity to work with Dr. Seal and the CBSG specialists when they came to lead workshops and training organized by us in India.

We would like to suggest that regional and national zoo organisations in other countries consider taking up this task for their own region or country. CBSG, Indian Regional Networks such as has been formed in Indian and Indonesia in Asia make good catalysts for such exercises because they are composed of a combination of zoo personnel, wildlife officers and academics. While a Regional Association may initiate and guide the exercise to some extent, the Biodiversity Convention is specific that it is a country responsibility. The advantages for zoos are significant. Some of them are :

1. Zoos would be in the position of bringing to gether individuals from forest and wildlife agencies, the academic community, conservation NGO’s with field knowledge and from their own ranks. In the course of conducting such an exercise, the necessity of these different groups working together becomes clearly apparent.

2. Zoos would be seen as initiating a serious conservation exercise which would not only enable the wildlife agencies and academic institutions to prioritise species for conservation action and further research but the zoos themselves to make rational decisions on what and how many species to take up for captive programmes.

3. Zoos have access to the tools and techniques of the CAMP process and IUCN Red List criteria via their association with the Captive Breeding Specialist Group.

4. Zoos would strengthen and reinforce their association with IUCN, particularly the Species Survival Commission and the taxon based specialist group members in their own country.

5. Zoos could use the output from CAMP Workshops to formulate national captive action plans for their own country’s endangered species. The results would also facilitate decision making globally and allocate to the range country the primary input and impetus into the process.

6. Zoos could use the output of the CAMP Workshops in public relations, marketing programmes and educational programmes, The IUCN Red List categories "story" is an excellent educational message and species status can be innovatively displayed as part of the wayside graphics for each species. The educational and image-building potential of zoos involving themselves so actively and directly in the Biodiversity Convention is simply enormous.

Agenda Item 7 – Identification and Monitoring Biodiversity : CAMP Workshop results are not permanent – the environment and animals’ habitat and every possible aspect of modern life is rapidly changing. Species status needs to be reviewed every few years, ideally after additional field research is conducted. The initial CAMP workshop identifies all the species of a country, sorting out taxonomic, nomenclature and duplication problems; the follow up CAMP workshops provide "monitoring".

Agenda Item 8 – In situ conservation : CAMP workshops categorise species according to their conservation status from which Conservation Action or even Protected Area Mangement Plans can be made.

Agenda Item 9 – Ex situ conservation : Zoos are the main institution for ex situ conservation.

Agenda Item 12 – Research and Training – Some forms of biological and behavioural research on animals are only possible in zoos. Zoos have expertise in animal restraint, handling, identification, education, etc. which can be shared with with agencies.

Agenda Item 13 – Public Education and Awareness – Zoos are one of the primary centres where people go to look at animals. Zoo’s unique asset is that it can more or less guarantee visitors the experience of seeing the living animal. Zoos are in a unique position to influence public opinion and raise public awareness.

Zoos have an opportunity to make a genuine contribution to conservation of biodiversity by initiating prioritisation of their country’s species under the CAMP Process which was developed by their own IUCN specialist group. The Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, SSC, IUCN based in Minnesota offers consultancy services in helping to organise and conduct CAMP workshops and also facilitation training to empower range countries to conduct their own exercises. Funding may be available from a Biodiversity Support Programme, other international agency or from one’s own country’s Ministry. We have concluded that funding from neutral sources are preferable since this obviates the problem of vested interests trying to control the process. These exercises provide a great variety of benefits, including the enhancement of the "three C’s" of conservation, Communication, Collaboration, Cooperation between all relevant individuals, organisations, agencies and institutions.

References

1993, Ellis, S. and U. S. Seal, Eds., Conservation Assessment and Management Plan (CAMP) Workshop Process Reference Manual, Minneapolis.

1994, IUCN Red List Categories, Gland.

1994, Lyle Glowda, F. Burhenne-Guilmin, and H. Synge in collaboration with J. A. McNelly and L.Gundling, IUCN, Gland and Cambridge.

1997, Ellis, S. and U. S. Seal, Eds., Conservation Assessment and Management Plan (CAMP) Workshop Process Reference Manual, Revised for India by Sally Walker and Sanjay Molur, Combatore.

1997, Anonymous, Discussion document for Committee to Derrive Short Term Policy for Negative List of Exports of Medicinal Plants, Ministry of Environment, Government of India.

1997, Walker, S. and Sanjay Molur, Draft Summary Output of Conservation Assessment and Management Plan Workshop for Indian Mammals, Coimbatore.

1997, Walker, S. and Sanjay Molur, The Role of the IUCN Red List Criteria and CBSG CAMP Process

as a Method for Prioritising Indian Taxa for Conservation Breeding and Zoo Collection Plans, in press.