Post on 22-Feb-2016
description
UNDERSTANDING THE INDIVIDUAL IN WILDLIFE CONSERVATION
WHO AN ANIMAL IS AFFECTS TRANSLOCATION SUCCESS
Case Study: An endangered species of desert rodent,
Dipodomys stephensi
Animal Welfare Program: Liv Baker
Animal Welfare Program
Developed through concerns of loss of wilderness
Focus on health of populations, species and overall ecosystem biodiversity ~ NOT on the welfare of the individual
Changes in the intensification of conservation programs warrant a reevaluation of this focus
Translocation demands the direct care and management of free-ranging animals as a means to species survival
CONSERVATION
Animal Welfare Program
Deliberate and mediated movement of free-ranging animals
Common conservation practice to combat species loss
Popular among stakeholders
50-95% mortality rate
TRANSLOCATION
FACE OF MORTALITY
Animal Welfare Program
CAPTURE
Animal Welfare Program
HANDLING / EXAMINATION
Animal Welfare Program
CAPTIVITY
Animal Welfare Program
NOVEL ENVIRONMENT
Animal Welfare Program
MONITORING
Animal Welfare Program
Animal Welfare Program
TRANSLOCATION SUCCESS?
Where When
How Why
?
Animal Welfare Program
TRANSLOCATION SUCCESS?
WHO?
Southern California
Nocturnal Ricochetal Semi-fossorial Quasi-solitary Granivorous Keystone species Endangered (1988)
Animal Welfare Program
STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT
SUBURBANIZATION
Animal Welfare Program
CULTIVATION
Animal Welfare Program
INVASIVE GRASSES
Animal Welfare Program
Animal Welfare Program
METHODOLOGY: Personality Profile Demographic information
Fecal cortisol levels
Captive activity budgets
Social context responses
STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT
Animal Welfare Program
FINDINGS
Home environment matters
Cortisol matters
Activity level matters
Behavioural response matters
STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT
Parking lot Fallow vineyard (El Sol)
Animal Welfare Program
Animal Welfare Program
STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT
Parking Lot El Sol0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Post-release survival
Series1
Population
Percentage of animals
trapped
75%
52%*
Animal Welfare Program
FINDINGS
Home environment matters
Cortisol matters
Activity level matters
Behavioural response matters
STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT
Animal Welfare Program
STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT
P lot El Sol0
5
10
15
20
25
Baseline cortisol profile
PopulationFecal
cortisol ng/g
*
Animal Welfare Program
STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Fecal cortisol change of translocated SKR
Shorter-term survivalLonger-term survival
Fecal cor-tisolng/g *
Animal Welfare Program
FINDINGS
Home environment matters
Cortisol matters
Activity level matters
Behavioural response matters
STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT
Animal Welfare Program
STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT
P Lot El Sol0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
Activity level in captivity
P LotEl SolAvg.
combined activity *
Animal Welfare Program
FINDINGS
Home environment matters
Cortisol matters
Activity level matters
Behavioural response matters
STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT
Parking lot SKR El Sol SKR
Animal Welfare Program
Predator simulation Less interaction with predator
stimuli Fewer attempts at escape More time spent at refuge (Except for experienced SKR)
Conspecific simulation More interaction with mirror Quicker to interact with mirror
Predator simulation More interaction with predator
stimuli Greater attempts at escape Less time spent at refuge (Experienced behaved the same)
Conspecific simulation Less interaction with mirror Slower to interact with mirror
Animal Welfare Program
WHO SURVIVES?
Cortisol activity reactivity
More Docile More Cautious More Social More Plastic
Animal Welfare Program
Compassionate Conservation
Animal Welfare Program: Liv Baker
THANKS TOFor Guidance:David Fraser, UBCDebra Shier, ICR; UCLAMatt R. Milnes, MHC; ICRJeff Zuba, ICR
For Assistance:Tom AshNancy ChenMichael LawrenceChris MoenMatthew PetelleChristina TseMary Toews Sean Kuling
For Funding:Riverside County Habitat Conservation AgencyKillam Foundation