Part III: Conservation and Management422
member of the association are then expected to consult their
region’s RCP when composing their Institutional Collection
Plan so that, ideally, most space and resources are spent towards
species that are recommended for management.
For those species that allow identification and management
of individual animals, zoos use a pedigree-based management
(Bingaman Lackey 2010). Each individual of a managed species is
recorded in a studbook software programme (Bingaman Lackey
2010), such as Single Population Analysis and Records Keeping
System (SPARKS) (Species360 2013) or PopLink (Faust et al.
2009). From these studbook database systems, data are exported
to the analysis programme PMx (Ballou et al. 2010a), which
allows detailed genetic and demographic analysis of the popula-
tion, the results of which are used by the programme manager
to guide breeding, transfer and husbandry recommendations to
the institutions holding the species. Zoo populations are gen-
erally small and fragmented (distributed over several different
institutions), thus making them vulnerable to both demographic
(random and environmental variation in birth and death rates
and catastrophes) and genetic (genetic drift, loss of gene diver-
sity, inbreeding) stochasticity (Ballou et al. 2010b; Frankham
et al. 2010). Zoo populations thus need to be large enough and
require careful genetic and demographic management in order
for them to reach their genetic and demographic goals set within
the RCP (Ballou et al. 2010b; Frankham et al. 2010). Zoo asso-
ciations generally have different types of cooperative breeding
programmes, corresponding to different intensities of manage-
ment, both biologically and in terms of compliance with rec-
ommendations or involvement of non-member institutions.
The most intensive population management level concerns
programmes such as EAZA’s European Endangered species
Programmes (EEPs), AZA’s Species Survival Plans (SSPs), ZAA’s
Australian Species Management Plans (ASMPs), and the Global
Species Management Plans (GSMPs) administered by WAZA.
Less-intensive management levels are programmes such as
EAZA’s European Studbooks (ESBs) and WAZA’s International
(or global) Studbooks. While not having a formalized TAG sys-
tem, other regional and national zoo associations (Bingaman
Lackey 2010) also run studbooks and breeding programmes.
For example, the Indonesian Zoo Association (Perhimpunan
Kebun Binatang Se-Indonesia (PKBSI)) runs a national stud-
book for Sulawesi babirusa (Babyrousa celebensis). The TAGs
dealing with wild pigs and peccaries have good contacts with the
Wild Pig Specialist Group (WPSG) and the Peccary Specialist
Group (PSG) of the Species Survival Commission (SSC) of the
International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
and recommendations for ex-situ activities and support for in-
situ work are jointly developed.Data Sources for Ex-situ Populations of Wild
Pigs and Peccaries
There are three main data sources for ex-situ populations of wild
pigs and peccaries. For zoo-based populations, the most reli-
able information can be obtained from the national, regional or
international (global) studbooks maintained by the ex-situ pro-
gramme managers. These studbook databases typically containall the pedigree and demographic information for all the indi-
viduals of the taxon in institutions within the relevant asso-
ciation, plus individuals in other official partner institutions.
Studbook keepers take great care to carry out data clean up and
data validation and will undertake investigations to resolve gaps
in the pedigree.
For species without managed programmes, information
can be obtained from the Zoological Information Management
System (ZIMS) database. ZIMS contains husbandry, medi-
cal, and, from 2017 onwards, studbook data on animals held
by ~1000 zoos, aquaria and related conservation organiza-
tions from 88 countries in six continents that are a member of
Species360 (www.species360.org) (formerly International Species
Information System), a global non-profit, non-governmental,
membership-based organization. While membership in other
regions of the world is steadily increasing, the majority of current
Species360 members are located in Europe and North America.
Within Europe and North America, most but not all members
of EAZA and AZA are also members of Species360. Information
from ZIMS is therefore not entirely complete because data from
other regions are under-represented and not all zoo association
members are Species360 members. Nevertheless, especially for
species without managed programmes that do not have their
own studbook data set, Species360 provides an unrivalled, inte-
grated, real-time, web-based data source for animals in zoos
and aquaria. From 2017 onwards, studbook data will begin to
be integrated into ZIMS, connecting institutional and stud-
book records and eventually resulting in a global, integrated,
real-time studbook database that will replace the software pro-
grammes SPARKS and PopLink.
Last but certainly not least, a number of range country
ex-situ conservation initiatives for wild pigs and peccaries are
run by specific species conservation projects (see below) that
maintain their own data sets.Ex-situ Programmes for Wild Pigs
and Peccaries
Below follows a species-by-species account of formal ex-situ
programmes for wild pigs and peccaries. Each account will pro-
vide a very brief summary of the in-situ status and threats (for
more detailed information, please consult the species-specific
chapters in this volume), the role(s) and status of the ex-situ pro-
gramme, and successes and challenges.Chacoan Peccary (Catagonus wagneri)
The Chacoan peccary (Catagonus wagneri) is an endemic and
emblematic species of the thorn forests of the Gran Chaco
ecoregion in Paraguay, Bolivia, and Argentina. Previous studies
estimated a population of 5000 individuals in Paraguay in the
early 1990s (Taber et al. 1993) and 3200 individuals in Argentina
in 2002, before massive deforestation of the region for soybean
and cattle ranching from 2003 onwards (Altrichter et al. 2015).
Recent species distribution modelling showed that 46.24 per
cent of the Gran Chaco (497,577 km^2 ) is suitable for Chacoan
peccaries (about 24 per cent of which is highly suitable), and
that suitable areas are characterized by closed broadleaf.03913:02:26