Chapter 37: Ex-situ conservation of wild pigs and peccaries421
component of its overall conservation strategy’. In a direct way,
ex-situ management can assist with achieving conservation by
helping to address primary threats and their causes, offsetting
the effects of primary and stochastic threats on the population,
buying time (through rescue or insurance activities) and restor-
ing wild populations (Traylor-Holzer et al. 2013, 2017; IUCN
SSC 2014). This can take many different shapes and forms, hap-
pen in many different types of environments and involve a whole
host of partners. Apart from direct conservation contributions,
ex-situ populations and institutions can also indirectly contrib-
ute to conservation, for example by making expertise, knowl-
edge, materials, staff and other types of in-kind support from the
zoo community available to help implement particular in-situ
conservation actions, by carrying out more general conservation
education and research activities, and by fundraising, etc.
Often, species conservation plans are developed by small
groups of wildlife biologists with little knowledge and considera-
tion of the very wide range of ex-situ conservation management
options available. Similarly, ex-situ managers often create goals
and plans for ex-situ populations without good interaction with
the in-situ community, resulting in programmes that are not
tailor-made to the real conservation needs of the species. The
‘One Plan Approach’ (OPA) to species conservation promotes
the joint development of management strategies and conser-
vation actions for all populations of a species by all responsi-
ble parties to produce a single, comprehensive conservation
plan for a species with the ultimate goal to support the species’
conservation in the wild (Byers et al. 2013). In contrast to what
has often been the case for other taxa, and as will become clear
from the species by species accounts of the ex-situ programmes
for wild pigs and peccaries provided below, the in-situ and ex-
situ communities working with these taxa already have a long
history of working and planning together. While there is cer-
tainly room for improvement, they have already come a long
way towards the OPA philosophy.
Zoo and Aquarium Associations –
Conservation and Population Management
As witnessed by sequential conservation strategies published
by the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA)
(IUDZG/CBSG 1993; WAZA 2005; Barongi et al. 2015), over
the last decades, the role of biodiversity conservation has rap-
idly gained importance within the professional zoo and aquar-
ium community. In the most recent strategy ‘Committing to
Conservation’, conservation is placed front and centre with
the vision that ‘Zoos and aquaria are redefined by society as
organisations that save populations of species in the wild,
while delivering the highest standards of care and welfare for
their resident animals, providing exceptional, behaviour-
changing, guest experiences’ (Barongi et al. 2015). Carrying out
conservation-relevant research; reaching excellence in animal
welfare; engaging and empowering visitors, communities and
staff; and deploying and developing small population manage-
ment are placed in the service of conservation. Several govern-
ments, such as the European Union, have incorporated the
requirement for conservation into their zoo-related legislation
(European Union 1999) and those regional zoo associations with
accreditation procedures (e.g. European Association of Zoos
and Aquaria (EAZA), the Association of Zoos and Aquariums
(AZA) (North America) and the Zoo and Aquarium Association
(ZAA) (Australasia)), have conservation-related requirements
that often go above and beyond the legal zoo licensing require-
ments. Increasingly, the zoo and aquarium world is recognized
by the wider conservation world as an important conservation
partner (Barongi et al. 2015).
In practical terms, zoos and aquaria are contributing to
conservation in many different ways: by operating their own
conservation programmes in the field, by contributing staff
time, expertise, equipment and other resources, by training
and capacity-building, by providing financial contributions, by
organizing joint conservation campaigns, through advocacy,
through various types of ex-situ management activities, through
conservation education, etc. Every year, zoos and aquaria world-
wide receive over 700 million visitors (Barongi et al. 2015) and
spend more than 350 million dollars on conservation (Gusset
& Dick 2011). EAZA zoos alone yearly teach about five million
children about biodiversity, animal welfare and conservation
(EAZA 2010). For the year 2014, 212 AZA facilities reported
154 million dollar spent on in-situ conservation, benefitting 776
species in 130 countries, having worked with 337 partners (AZA
2014). Contributions by EAZA zoos to in-situ conservation are
collected in the EAZA Conservation Database (www.eazacon-
servation.org/), which currently holds a total of 1348 projects.
In 2015 (after a recent relaunch), 53 institutions (or ~10 per cent
of the membership) supported 264 projects, working with > 295
species, for a total value of about 9.75 million euros. In July 2016,
the database contained 10 active projects addressing wild pigs or
peccaries, many of which are also supported by AZA member
institutions. While this is encouraging, and while due to their
widespread occurrence many habitat- or ecosystem-focused
conservation programmes in range states will indirectly also
benefit wild pigs and peccaries, work remains to be done to
increase the appeal of wild pigs and peccaries as taxa deserving
species-directed conservation support.
Healthy animal populations that are able to achieve the
goals that are set out for them are essential for zoos to fulfil their
conservation duties, either directly or indirectly (de Man et al.
2016). EAZA, AZA, and ZAA work within a structure of Taxon
Advisory Groups (TAGs), composed of specialists in a particu-
lar taxon (for example, Pigs and Peccaries) that have as one of
their main tasks to recommend which (sub)species within the
taxon should be held in their association, with which role(s) and
goals, and at what level of cooperative management. Important
elements in this decision are the conservation status of the
taxon, whether there is a direct or indirect conservation role for
ex-situ activities with that taxon in the region, whether there
are education, research or exhibit roles, how many individuals
and what type/level of genetic and demographic management
are required to fulfil the roles chosen for the taxon, how much
space is thought to be available, what level of husbandry expe-
rience and knowledge is present, etc. Many factors must thus
be weighed against each other, the result of which is described
in the Regional Collection Plan (RCP). Institutions that are a.03913:02:26