Sever-conservation translocations-rev.2021

1
January 2021
Conservation translocations
Review:
Submitted to Uganda wildlife authority (UWA) as a background towards "The Okapi
restoration to Uganda project"
Zvi Sever, Ph. D., sever.zvi@gmail.com
Contents
Terminology.................................................................................................................3
2020-A global review of animal translocation programs....................................................3
-Genetic management of threatened species breeding programs & translocations-2020...4
-Wild Mammal Translocations: A Public Health Concern-2020........................................5
-Translocations of digging mammals and their potential for ecosystem restoration: a
review of goals and monitoring programmes-2020 .......................................................5
-Outcomes of wildlife translocations in protected areas: what is the type and extent of
existing evidence? A systematic map protocol-2020 .....................................................6
-Rev. Reintroduction modelling: A guide-models for species reintroductions-2020...........7
-Genetic Consequences of Multiple Translocations-Wallaby-Australia-2020.....................8
-Avian Reintroduction & Translocation-2020................................................................9
-Panda's Reintroduction Program 2003-2020 ...............................................................9
-9 Wildlife Success Stories-USA-2020...........................................................................9
-How to Reintroduce a Long-Lost Species-The tasmanian devils-Australia-2020..............9
2019-Conservation translocations: a rev. of common difficulties and promising directions .10
-California condor Reintroduction & Recovery- 2019..................................................10
-Review of WWF's role in the reintroduction of black rhinos to Tsavo East N. P. 2019.....10
-Translocation is an important component-150 Species-Australia-2019.........................12
-Translocation program-secure the future of 21 threatened species-Australia-2019 .......12
-Rhinos translocation from Europe to Africa-2001-2019 ..............................................13
-Limited contributions of released animals from zoos to North American conservation
translocations-2019 ................................................................................................13
2018-Ecosystem‐level effects of keystone species reintroduction: a literature review ..........14
-Reintroductions-birds and mammals involve evolutionarily distinct species-Rev. 2018 ..15
-Release site selection: reintroductions and the habitat concept- Rev. 2018 ..................16
-The Effectiveness of species reintroduction programmes-2018...................................16
-Mammal Society Position Statement on the Reintroduction of the lynx to Britain-2018 .17
- Largest ever bison reintroduction in Southern Carpathians-Europe 2018.....................18
2017-Essays and Perspectives - Rewilding South American Landscapes.............................19

2
-Wild Deserts: A project to reintroduce locally extinct mammals-Australia-2017............19
2016-Use of wild–caught individuals as a key factor for success in translocations ..............20
2015-Rev.-Translocation tactics: a framework to support the IUCN Guidelines for wildlife
translocations and improve the quality of applied methods.............................................21
-Predator supplementary feeding do not improve reintroduction–Australia-2015 ..........22
-Okapi's Genetic structure with implications for translocation-2015 .............................22
-The UK translocation of spiders-2015.......................................................................23
2014-Rev. Management Problems Arising From Reintroductions of Large Carnivores.........24
-Financial Costs of Large Carnivore-Namibia-2014.......................................................25
-Finding Correlations among Successful Reintroduction Programs-2014........................26
-The Dormouse Reintroduction Programme: A review-2014 ........................................26
-Evaluating the Potential for Species Reintroductions in Canada-2014 ..........................26
-Physiology in conservation translocations-2014.........................................................27
-Success of the Lynx reintroduction program-Colorado-2014 .......................................28
-Physiology in conservation translocations-(translocation physiology)- 2014..................29
-Adaptive Management: From More Talk to Real Action-2014 .....................................30
-Reintroduction objectives, decisions and outcomes: herpetofauna -2014.....................31
2013-IUCN-Guidelines for Reintroductions & Other Conservation Translocations ..............32
2012-Mega-Translocations: The Kenya Wildlife Service at its Best....................................32
-What is wrong with current translocations? A review-2012 ........................................33
2011-Populations Translocation Events and Impact on Natural Habitats ...........................33
2010-Evaluating the Canada lynx reintroduction programme in Colorado .........................34
-Factors associated with survival of reintroduced rabbits in California-2010 ..................35
2009-Review of Irish Golden Eagle Reintroduction Project ..............................................36
-Achieving success with small, translocated mammal populations-South Africa-2009 .....37
-The characteristics and success of vertebrate translocations within Australia 2009 .......37
-Translocate (capture & release) wild primates-1994-2009 ..........................................38
2008-The effects of captive experience on reintroduction survival in carnivores................38
-Captive Breeding, Reintroduction, and the Conservation of Amphibians-2008 ..............39
2007-Developing the science of reintroduction biology...................................................40
-California Condor Reintroduction- 2007....................................................................40
2006-Review- Revisiting translocation and reintroduction programmes: the stress ............41
-Optimising reintroduction success by delayed dispersal: protocol-wallabies-2006.........41
-Gharial conservation in Nepal: Results of a population reinforcement program-2006 ....42

3
-Health surveillance in wildlife reintroductions-UK-2006.............................................43
-Estimating the Viability of a Reintroduced New Zealand Robin-Predator Control-2006...44
-Programme of the mugger crocodile in India -2006....................................................45
2003-Reintroduction Schemes for Captive-Bred Animals.................................................45
2000-Review- An assessment of the published results of animal relocations .....................46
-Training captive-bred or translocated animals to avoid predators-Review-2000............47
1999-Translocation of Listed Threatened Species-Assessment-EPBC Act, Australia.............48
1995-Reintroduction of captive animals into their native habitat: A bibliography...............48
1994-Criteria for reintroductions..................................................................................48
-Reintroduction of captive-born animals-1994............................................................49
1989-Translocation as a Species Conservation Tool: Status and Strategy...........................49
-Reintroduction of Captive Mammals for Conservation- Guidelines-1989 .....................49
-------------------------------------
Terminology
Translocation-Relocation-Reinforcement-Reintroduction-Restoration-Restocking-
Rewilding-Introduction.
Type of release: Soft release or hard release.
2020-A global review of animal translocation programs
http://abc.museucienciesjournals.cat/volum-43-2-2020-en/a-global-review-of-animal-
translocation-programs/?lang=en
December 2020 Vol. 43.2 =Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 43.2 (2020) 221-232.
DOI: 10.32800/abc.2020.43.0221
Authors: P. S. Resende, A. B. Viana–Junior, Robert John Young, Cristiano
Schetini de Azevedo
We performed a bibliometric analysis to investigate the efficiency of release
techniques (soft and hard–release), to analyse the characteristics and outcomes of the
translocation programs, to identify knowledge gaps, and to provide recommendations.
Animal conservation studies involving animal release to the wild increased
significantly over the 31 years studied and were more frequently performed with
terrestrial mammals than with other taxonomic groups. Most of the studies were
performed by researchers from developed countries. Translocations occurred mostly
in temperate regions, with almost no translocations occurring in the tropics.
Almost 60 % of the studies did not provide information regarding the success or
failure of the translocation programs.
The most commonly used technique was hard release. Wild–caught specimens were
preferred for translocations.

4
Translocation programs were less common for groups like amphibians, fishes, and
invertebrates.
If criteria for suitable translocation are met, this management tool should also be
conducted for tropical threatened species, led by native researchers. Furthermore,
criteria for successful translocation should be clearly identified in order to improve
future conservation actions.
p. 229
Most animals from the wild were subjected to hard release, while the origin of
animals for soft release was equally from captivity or nature. Hard release may be
more advantageous for animals from nature that were in captivity for only a short
time, since there would be less time for their natural behaviours to change (Fritts et
al., 2001; Rummel et al., 2016). Animals that were born in captivity or had spent most
of their life in captivity may be released via soft release because it allows different
types of training to be applied (e.g., anti–predation, feeding, flight, etc.) during the
pre–release period to facilitate adaptation to the new wild environment (Sutherland et
al., 2010). Captive–born individuals are more likely to be predated since they have
had little if any contact with their predators (Mathews et al., 2006).Therefore, soft
release with a period of acclimatization may increase their chance of establishing
themselves (Reading et al., 2013). Through meta–analysis, Tetzlaff et al. (2019)
showed the advantages of pre–release management.
-Genetic management of threatened species breeding programs & translocations-2020
https://www.ari.vic.gov.au/research/threatened-plants-and-animals/genetic-management-
of-threatened-species-breeding-programs-and-translocations
Genetic management of threatened species breeding programs and translocations
Using genetics to inform and improve wildlife management programs that aim to
establish stable populations of threatened species to aid their conservation
Species translocations are an important conservation tool but are a highly complex
undertaking. Traditionally, the success of wildlife management programs that involve
breeding programs and translocations has been based on population stability or an increase
in numbers of individuals.
However, the IUCN recommends also considering genetic diversity as this has an impact
on how well populations can adapt to changes in their environment.
Despite the availability of mathematical models that describe how genetic diversity can be
influenced by management, translating their predicted outcomes directly into effective
actions is difficult.
ARI has led several projects in collaboration with Murdoch University and the Western
Australian Department of Biodiversity Conservation and Attractions, aimed to improve
how models can inform the design of translocations, including establishing meaningful
quantitative targets to measure success.
See:

5
 Pacioni, C., Wayne, A.F. and Page, M. (2019) Guidelines for genetic management in
mammal translocation programs. Biological Conservation 237: 105-113
-Wild Mammal Translocations: A Public Health Concern-2020
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338327635_Wild_Mammal_Translocations_A_P
ublic_Health_Concern
January 2020 Open Journal of Animal Sciences 10(01):64-133
DOI: 10.4236/ojas.2020.101006
João Carreira, Cecília Bueno, Alba Silva
Abstract
With regard to wildlife translocations and the assessment of potential risk of disease
transmission, several advances have been made in conservative projects.
However, other factors like the large number of species received at screening
centers from different locations, rescued after being hit by vehicles, taken by the
public or confiscated from illegal trade by the authorities, have increased the risk
of spreading, emergence or reemergence of zoonosis. Be-sides the notorious
importance of the procedure improvement for managing wildlife, the access to as
much as possible information about the occurrence of potential infections on each
particular species can be a tool of great value for mitigating the disease risk. In the
present paper, it was showed the evolu-tion of processes for wildlife translocations
mostly related to mammals, we also discussed some aspects related to sylvatic
animals as reservoir host of zoonosis and finally were presented several tables
recording numerous mammals hosts and their respective parasitic protozoa.
(7) (PDF) Wild Mammal Translocations: A Public Health Concern. Available from:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338327635_Wild_Mammal_Translocations_A_P
ublic_Health_Concern [accessed Mar 17 2021].
-Translocations of digging mammals and their potential for ecosystem
restoration: a review of goals and monitoring programmes-2020
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/mam.12208
Bryony J. Palmer , Leonie E. Valentine , Manda Page , Richard J. Hobbs
First published: 23 July 2020
https://doi.org/10.1111/mam.12208
Editor: DR
Abstract
Globally, translocations are commonly used to improve the conservation status of
threatened species. There is increasing recognition that translocations of ecosystem
engineers also have the potential to restore ecological processes. Digging mammals
are often considered to be ecosystem engineers, as their diggings provide shelter for
other species and can significantly alter soil properties, with subsequent changes to
vegetation.

6
Using Australian species as a case study, we reviewed published and grey literature
on digging mammal translocations to determine how often these translocations are
conducted to restore ecosystem processes. We documented ecosystem‐level
monitoring and research efforts, and assessed whether restoration was perceived to be
occurring post‐release.
At least 208 translocations of 24 digging mammal species have been conducted in
Australia, with a further 38 planned for the near future. Prior to 2019, only 3% of
translocations included a goal relating to the restoration of ecosystem processes
associated with digging activities. Nearly a quarter of pre‐2019 translocations have
been the subject of some form of ecosystem‐level monitoring or research, but long‐
term ecosystem‐level monitoring was very rare. In contrast, 74% of the translocations
planned for post‐2018 include a goal relating to the restoration of ecological processes
and most also include plans to conduct ecosystem‐level monitoring.
Ecosystem restoration was perceived to be occurring for 26% of the pre‐2019
translocations. None of the documents we reviewed indicated that ecological
degradation had occurred post‐translocation, even when declines in other taxa were
recorded.
The restoration of ecosystem processes is increasingly being identified as a goal for
translocation programmes. Where this is the case, we suggest that translocation
practitioners include success criteria for the restoration of ecosystem processes, and
commit to long‐term monitoring designed to detect ecosystem‐level effects of
translocations.
-Outcomes of wildlife translocations in protected areas: what is the type and
extent of existing evidence? A systematic map protocol-2020
https://environmentalevidencejournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13750-020-
00199-4
Joseph Langridge, Romain Sordello & Yorick Reyjol
Environmental Evidence volume 9, Article number: 16 (2020)
Conversion, fragmentation, and loss of natural habitats are among the main causes of
declining species‘ populations worldwide. Protected areas are therefore crucial for
biodiversity as they provide refuge and ensure key ecological processes.
Wildlife translocations, defined as ―the deliberate movement of organisms from one
site for release in another‖, have been used in conjunction as a conservation tool for a
number of decades as wild populations become increasingly fragmented and
endangered.
Not only are translocations used to bolster the viability of imperiled species but are
also recommended for improving population resilience and adapting species‘ ranges
in response to climate change.

7
Despite translocation being a recognized conservation tool, it remains complex with
variable results due to the different factors that can determine its success.
Accordingly, the Map will investigate the existing evidence on the links between
different types of wildlife translocation interventions and factors that may be
important to consider for planning. This will provide an overview of relevant studies
for possible future syntheses, and may help to inform management decisions.
Despite the number of translocations rapidly growing and it increasingly being
recognized as a key conservation measure, implementation is often complex and
different programs have had varying results. From a biological perspective, this is
notably due to the numerous different factors that influence its success [33, 34] such
as the number of translocated individuals [35], the distances involved [36], whether
acclimatization strategies (e.g. protective enclosures or supplemental feeding) are
used [37], and what levels of habitat quality individuals are faced with at release sites
[25, 26]. From a social perspective, interventions are still considered controversial:
cost, feasibility, and political acceptability remain the principal influencing
factors [38].
Outcome characteristics
The following biological outcomes will be recorded:
space use, demography, survival, reproduction, feeding, behavior, genetics, and
physiology (cf. Table 3 for full descriptions).
-Rev. Reintroduction modelling: A guide-models for species reintroductions-
2020
https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2664.13629
-REVIEW-Reintroduction modelling: A guide to choosing and combining models
for species reintroductions-2020
James Hunter‐Ayad , Ralf Ohlemüller , Mariano R. Recio , Philip J. Seddon
First published: 07 April 2020
https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13629
ABSTRACT
1. Species reintroductions are high‐investment ecological interventions that require
careful planning. Predictive models are useful tools for managing reintroductions.
2. We provide an overview of habitat suitability, dispersal, population dynamics and
interspecies models, considering potential uses and limitations of established methods
for reintroductions. Furthermore, we include a guide for integrating one or more
model types to predict reintroduction outcomes and answer specific management
questions.
3. Model utility will be maximized by considering the goals of the reintroduction,
attributes of the reintroduced species, threats to persistence and the quality of
available data.
4. Synthesis and applications. Our synthesis of state‐of‐the‐art ecological models
outlines how key ecological models can be applied to reintroductions. Our review can

8
aid practitioners undertaking reintroductions to assess and quantify their data and
modelling needs in line with their management goals.
There are four key components to be considered when modelling reintroductions
(Figure 1; Guisan & Thuiller, 2005):
1. Habitat suitability: to predict the ability of an area to support reintroduced
populations (Gutt et al., 2017).
2. Dispersal processes: to predict the spread of founders from release sites (Aben et
al., 2016).
3. Population dynamics: to predict population growth in reintroduction areas (Sewell,
Baker, & Griffiths, 2015).
4. Interspecies interactions: to predict impacts of other species, for example,
predators, prey, competitors, on reintroduced populations (Laperriere, Brugger, &
Rubel, 2016).
We cover these four main components, but acknowledge other factors to consider
when modelling reintroductions
-Genetic Consequences of Multiple Translocations-Wallaby-Australia-2020
https://www.mdpi.com/1424-2818/12/12/448
Daniel J. White,*, Kym Ottewell, Peter B. S. Spencer, Michael Smith, Jeff Short, Colleen Sims
and Nicola J. Mitchell
Diversity 2020, 12(12), 448; https://doi.org/10.3390/d12120448
Abstract:
Many Australian mammal species now only occur on islands and fenced mainland
havens free from invasive predators. The range of one species, the banded hare-
wallaby (Lagostrophus fasciatus), had contracted to two offshore islands in Western
Australia.
To improve survival, four conservation translocations have been attempted with
mixed success, and all occurred in the absence of genetic information.
Here, we genotyped seven polymorphic microsatellite markers in two source (Bernier
Island and Dorre Island), two historic captive, and two translocated L. fasciatus
populations to determine the impact of multiple translocations on genetic diversity.
Subsequently, we used population viability analysis (PVA) and gene retention
modelling to determine scenarios that will maximise demographic resilience and
genetic richness of two new populations that are currently being established.
One translocated population (Wadderin) has undergone a genetic bottleneck and lost
8.1% of its source population‘s allelic diversity, while the other (Faure Island) may be
inbred.
We show that founder number is a key parameter when establishing new L. fasciatus
populations and 100 founders should lead to high survival probabilities.
Our modelling predicts that during periodic droughts, the recovery of source
populations will be slower post-harvest, while 75% more animals—about 60
individuals—are required to retain adequate allelic diversity in the translocated
population.

9
Our approach demonstrates how genetic data coupled with simulations of stochastic
environmental events can address central questions in translocation programmes.
-Avian Reintroduction & Translocation-2020
http://www.lpzoosites.org/artd/
Avian Reintroduction & Translocation
Number of species: 202
Number of release sites: 764
Number of release events: 2,351
Most recent species edit: Brown Teal (Pateke)
Date of most recent edit: 02/29/20
-Panda's Reintroduction Program 2003-2020
https://www.pandasinternational.org/program-areas-2/reintroduction-program/
Panda's Reintroduction Program 2003-2020
The program to reintroduce captive born Giant Pandas back into the wild began in
July of 2003. The China Conservation and Research Center for the Giant Panda
(CCRCGP) formed a team to begin research on wild training of captive pandas from
the fields of ecology, behavior, veterinary needs, feeding management and researched
the captive individuals‘ adaptability in the wild. Since that time the program has
undergone many phases and changes as knowledge among scientists working with the
program has increased.
-9 Wildlife Success Stories-USA-2020
https://www.npca.org/articles/880-9-wildlife-success-stories
-How to Reintroduce a Long-Lost Species-The tasmanian devils-Australia-2020
68061
-
species
-
lost
-
long
-
a
-
reintroduce
-
to
-
opinion/how
-
scientist.com/news
-
https://www.the

11
Conservation biologist John Ewen discusses the recent reintroduction of Tasmanian
devils to mainland Australia after a 3,000-year absence and issues that need to be
considered when bringing long-departed animals back into an area.
2019-Conservation translocations: a rev. of common difficulties and promising
directions
https://zslpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/acv.12534
O. Berger‐Tal , D. T. Blumstein , R. R. Swaisgood
First published: 31 August 2019
https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12534
Abstract
Translocations are a common conservation and management strategy, but despite their
popularity, translocations are a high‐cost endeavor with a history of failures. It is
therefore imperative to maximize their success by learning from our collective
experience. The Global Re‐introduction Perspectives Series is a collection of
conservation translocation case studies, generated by the IUCN‘s Conservation
Translocation Specialist Group, and presented in a structured format with an emphasis
on practical information. All 293 animal translocation case studies to date include a
section in which the authors list the difficulties they have faced during the
translocation project, with over 1200 difficulties described so far. We reviewed all
difficulties reported in the series to get insights into the common perceived difficulties
faced by wildlife managers during animal translocations.
The most reported‐upon problems -had to do with animal behavior, followed by
monitoring difficulties, lack of funding, quality of release habitat, lack of baseline
knowledge and lack of public support. We scrutinized each of these difficulties to
highlight future research directions that are most likely to improve translocation
success, and put a special emphasis on difficulties stemming from animal behavior,
and on solutions that may alleviate these problems and improve conservation
translocation success world‐wide.
-California condor Reintroduction & Recovery- 2019
1979-2019 https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/Birds/California-Condor
1983-2017 https://www.nps.gov/articles/california-condor-recovery.htm
-Review of WWF's role in the reintroduction of black rhinos to Tsavo East N. P.
2019

11
https://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?353380/Review-of-WWFs-role-in-the-reintroduction-of-
black-rhinos-to-Tsavo-East-National-Park
a) Project Governance:
For all projects that involve partnerships with government agencies and come with
high risks, a Project Governance Framework that provides clarity on roles and
responsibilities and accountability mechanisms within and between funding offices
and implementing offices, should be part of the Programme Management Standards.
Specific Project Agreements should build on existing protocols, by clearly stipulating
the roles, responsibilities and accountability of each of the parties on the design,
implementation and delivery of results.
b) Project Planning, Design and Implementation:
Conservation Projects must be embedded in species action plans (e.g. IUCN SSC
Groups), national planning processes (e.g. state biodiversity management plans) and
be prioritised in relevant fora and committees. Project planning phases must include
critical evaluation of previous projects undertaken to ensure all necessary lessons
have been learned and should involve external review.
Planning a major conservation project that has risks should involve WWF technical
staff or external expertise as required during key stages of project development, even
when WWF‘s role is as the funder and not in direct project delivery. Clear risk
assessments should be produced along with measures to address any threats, with
reviews in place to determine that these threats have been adequately tackled. In
instances where individual WWF offices may not have sufficient technical ability to
carry out these complex exercises independently, project teams with necessary
external expertise should be established.
c) Partnership Agreements:
WWF offices must collaborate based on standard principles of partnership (shared
values, mutual trust, mutual accountability, power sharing and empowerment). The
broader WWF network must be kept informed and given the opportunity to provide
expert knowledge and to influence project design and implementation.
d) Programme Management Standards Review:
WWF International will be using the lessons from the review to reassess programme
management standards and develop systems in which adherence to standards is
ensured for ‗high risk‘ projects.
e) Translocation Taskforce and Guidelines:
In future, improved internal translocation guidelines and a proposed Translocation
Taskforce must be used to ensure that projects are assessed against relevant
procedures. The process must include approval of all activity-specific relevant
documents such as habitat and water suitability, security assessments, and other
evaluations as required. Decisions around site selection, forms of capture,
transportation and release should be undertaken with the involvement of suitably
qualified WWF staff and external experts using the translocation guidelines to ensure
best practice.
f) Project Oversight:
Certain WWF teams are highly skilled and experienced in rhino translocations in key

12
locations in Africa and Asia, and best practice must include future consultations with
these professionals and, where appropriate, their extended networks.
In addition, project leads for translocations and reintroductions must have oversight of
all technical aspects of the project based on outputs from the proposed Translocation
Taskforce with full support of Senior Management and external expertise, as well as a
mandate to veto projects if conditions do not meet the necessary criteria . The
workload of the project lead must be managed in order to enable them to fully
undertake their responsibilities.
-The Translocation Taskforce and Guidelines- are available.
-Translocation is an important component-150 Species-Australia-2019
https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/topics/animals-and-plants/threatened-
species/programs-legislation-and-framework/translocation
Translocation
Translocation is an important component of over 150 Saving our Species
projects.
Translocation is increasingly being used in conservation to improve the outlook of
threatened plants and animals. It is often supported by captive breeding or plant
propagation programs to increase the number of individuals available for
translocation.
The best approach for conserving threatened species is to protect them where they are
naturally found. If this is not likely to be effective, it may be possible to integrate
translocation with other conservation measures.
We generally use translocation in three circumstances:
 we move species to areas they have not previously occurred
 we move species to areas where they previously occurred, but are no longer found
 we move extra plants or animals to increase existing populations.
-Translocation program-secure the future of 21 threatened species-Australia-
2019
https://www.australianwildlife.org/translocation-program-set-to-secure-the-future-of-
21-threatened-species/
By Dr John Kanowski, Chief Science Officer
Australian Wildlife Conservancy is a leader in the reintroduction of threatened
mammals to secure, feral predator-free areas. To date, AWC‘s reintroduction program
has resulted in the establishment of secure populations of 11 species of threatened
mammals across a total of five feral predator-free areas (Faure Island, WA, and four
fenced areas – Karakamia, Mt Gibson, Yookamurra and Scotia). A further three
fenced areas – at Newhaven, Pilliga and Mallee Cliffs – are on target to become fully
operational in 2019. Together with the existing program, reintroductions of locally-

13
extinct mammals to the new sites are expected to secure populations of 21 species of
threatened mammals by 2023.
See also:
Wildlife Translocations-AWC-Australia
https://www.australianwildlife.org/our-work/wildlife-translocations/
-Rhinos translocation from Europe to Africa-2001-2019
https://www.cntraveler.com/story/rwanda-just-pulled-off-the-largest-transport-of-rhinos-
from-europe-to-africa
It is not yet noon in Rwanda’s Akagera National Park, but already the morning fog
has lifted to reveal the country‘s ravishing broad-plain savannah. The flat expanse,
dotted with acacia trees, is very different from the rest of the country's forests, where
the mountain gorillas live. A wooden enclosure lies ahead, its inhabitant pacing back
and forth, a mouthful of hay hanging from its shifting jaw. ―You‘re all right. You‘re
okay. What a good boy,‖ whispers Jes Gruner, the park manager, as he comforts the
one-ton eastern black rhinoceros in its safe house, or ―boma.‖
Manny is an eight-year-old male rhino recovering from a 30-hour translocation from
Europe‘s Czech Republic. His 3,700-mile-long journey, made with four other rhinos,
was completed on the afternoon of June 24. It has been a herculean operation,
beginning with an initial transfer from zoos all over Europe to Safari Park Dvůr
Králové in the Czech Republic in November 2018. Here, the three female and two
male rhinos slowly acclimatized to the prospect of life in the wild, with subtle diet
changes, increased contact with each other, and crate containment practice for the
long flight ahead. Now, having arrived with a crew of vets, zoo keepers, and a
zoologist, the rhinos are beginning their rewilding process, moving from their small
bomas to increasingly larger enclosures, until they are released into the park.
Ultimately, the animals will be joining a founder group of 18 black rhinos in Akagera,
bought from South Africa in 2017 with the support of the Howard G. Buffet
Foundation.
One of the five eastern black rhinoceros transported from the Czech Republic to
Rwanda.
Sophy Roberts
―It‘s an extremely costly commitment,‖ says Gruner. ―In fact, if we hadn‘t bought
those 18 rhinos, the park would have been financially self-sustaining by now. But
that‘s the cost of conservation. You have to do it. Even with this new group of five,
donated by zoos, the accumulated expense will exceed $1 million.
-Limited contributions of released animals from zoos to North American
conservation translocations-2019
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29923231/
Conserv Biol. 2019 Feb;33(1):33-39.
doi: 10.1111/cobi.13160.

14
Typhenn A Brichieri-Colombi 1
, Natasha A Lloyd 1
, Jana M McPherson 1
, Axel
Moehrenschlager
Abstract
With the loss of biodiversity accelerating, conservation translocations such as
reintroductions are becoming an increasingly common conservation tool.
Conservation translocations must source individuals for release from either wild or
captive-bred populations.
We asked -what proportion of North American conservation translocations rely on
captive breeding and to what extent zoos and aquaria (hereafter zoos) fulfill captive
breeding needs.
We searched -for mention of captive breeding and zoo involvement in all 1863
articles included in the North American Conservation Translocations database, which
comprises journal articles and grey literature published before 2014 on conservation
translocations in Canada, the United States, Mexico, the Caribbean, and Central
America before 2014 as identified by a comprehensive literature review.
Conservation translocations involved captive breeding for 162 (58%) of the 279
animal species translocated. Fifty-four zoos contributed animals for release.
The 40 species of animals bred for release by zoos represented only 14% of all animal
species for which conservation translocations were published and only 25% of all
animal species that were bred for releases occurring in North America.
Zoo contributions -varied by taxon, ranging from zoo-bred animals released in 42% of
amphibian conservation translocations to zero contributions for marine invertebrates.
Proportional involvement of zoos in captive-breeding programs for release has
increased from 1974 to 2014 (r = 0.325, p = 0.0313) as has the proportion of
translocation-focused scientific papers coauthored by zoo professionals (from 0% in
1974 to 42% in 2013).
Although zoos also contribute to conservation translocations through- education,
funding, and professional expertise, increasing the contribution of animals for release
in responsible conservation translocation programs presents a future conservation
need and opportunity.
We especially encourage increased dialogue and planning between the zoo
community, academic institutions, and governments to optimize the direct
contribution zoos can make to wildlife conservation through conservation
translocations.
Keywords: América Central y el Caribe; Caribbean; Central America; acuarios;
aquaria; ex situ populations; poblaciones ex situ; refuerzos; reinforcements;
reintroducciones; reintroductions; zoos.
2018-Ecosystem‐level effects of keystone species reintroduction: a literature
review
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/rec.12684
Sarah L. Hale
John L. Koprowski
Abstract
The keystone species concept was introduced in 1969 in reference to top‐down
regulation of communities by predators, but has expanded to include myriad species
at different trophic levels.

15
Keystone species play disproportionately large, important roles in their ecosystems,
but human‐wildlife conflicts often drive population declines. Population declines have
resulted in the necessity of keystone species reintroduction; however, studies of such
reintroductions are rare.
We conducted a literature review and found only 30 peer‐reviewed journal articles
that assessed reintroduced populations of keystone species, and only 11 of these
assessed ecosystem‐level effects following reintroduction.
Nine of 11 publications- assessing ecosystem‐level effects found evidence of
resumption of keystone roles; however, these publications focus on a narrow range of
species.
We highlight the deficit of peer‐reviewed literature on keystone species
reintroductions, and draw attention to the need for assessment of ecosystem‐level
effects so that the presence, extent, and rate of ecosystem restoration driven by
keystone species, can be better understood.
-Reintroductions-birds and mammals involve evolutionarily distinct species-Rev.
2018
https://www.pnas.org/content/115/13/3404
Reintroductions of birds and mammals involve evolutionarily distinct species at the
regional scale
Charles Thévenin, Maud Mouchet, Alexandre Robert, Christian Kerbiriou,
and François Sarrazin
PNAS March 27, 2018 115 (13) 3404-3409; first published March 12,
2018; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1714599115
1. Edited by Rodolfo Dirzo, Department of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA,
and approved February 14, 2018 (received for review August 17, 2017)
Significance
There are general acknowledgements that Earth‘s sixth mass extinction event is more
severe than perceived when looking at population extirpations (rather than focusing
only on species extinctions) and that species extinctions are associated with the rapid
loss of evolutionary history. In this study, we investigate how population
reintroductions, a major conservation tool used to reverse population extirpations, can
contribute to the preservation of evolutionary diversity within birds and mammals.
Using data on reintroductions of terrestrial birds and mammals in Europe and North
America, we show that, despite strong taxonomic biases leading to a poor
representativeness of the regional phylogenetic diversity, reintroduction practitioners
seem to have focused on highly evolutionarily distinct species.
Abstract
Reintroductions offer a powerful tool for reversing the effects of species extirpation
and have been increasingly used over recent decades. However, this species-centered
conservation approach has been criticized for its strong biases toward charismatic
birds and mammals. Here, we investigated whether reintroduced species can be
representative of the phylogenetic diversity within these two groups at a continental

16
scale (i.e., Europe, North and Central America). Using null models, we found that
reintroduced birds and mammals of the two subcontinents tend to be more
evolutionarily distinct than expected by chance, despite strong taxonomic biases
leading to low values of phylogenetic diversity. While evolutionary considerations are
unlikely to have explicitly driven the allocation of reintroduction efforts, our results
illustrate an interest of reintroduction practitioners toward species with fewer close
relatives. We discuss how this phylogenetic framework allows us to investigate the
contribution of reintroductions to the conservation of biodiversity at multiple
geographic scales. We argue that because reintroductions rely on a parochial approach
of conservation, it is important to first understand how the motivations and constraints
at stake at a local context can induce phylogenetic biases before trying to assess the
relevance of the allocation of reintroduction efforts at larger scales.
-Release site selection: reintroductions and the habitat concept- Rev. 2018
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/oryx/article/abs/release-site-selection-
reintroductions-and-the-habitat-concept/66615B0EFE567A75F79557063FEBEA26
Identifying release sites with good habitat quality is one of the most important steps in
any reintroduction project. However, despite their wide application in legislation and
research, the habitat concept and habitat-related terms remain poorly defined and
subject to confusion. Reviewing a variety of definitions, we advocate for
understanding habitat as an area with a species-specific set of resources and
environmental conditions that enable a population to persist and reproduce. Using this
understanding we investigated release site selection as well as the usage of the term
habitat and other habitat-related terms in 324 reintroduction case studies and
reintroduction policy documents published during January 1990–May 2016. Although
the use of the habitat concept in these publications remained mostly unclear because
of the lack of definitions provided, we found an overall improvement in the quality of
reintroduction site assessment, and a shift towards more systematic approaches, such
as habitat modelling and experimental translocation.
To further improve reporting on release site selection, we recommend updating
IUCN reintroduction publications and encouraging practitioners to consider the
spatial and temporal heterogeneity of habitat, as well as the multiple scales at
which a species selects its habitat, in the design of a release site assessment.
-The Effectiveness of species reintroduction programmes-2018

17
https://www.ukessays.com/essays/sciences/the-effectiveness-of-species-reintroduction-
programmes-science-essay.php?vref=1
UKEssays. (November 2018).
Introduction
Reintroduction programmes were created to reintroduce captive bred species back
into a habitat. These are species that are originally endangered and at the risk of
extinction. However there are many factors that affect the success of a reintroduction
programme. These can include the expense of a reintroduction programme (Vickery et
al. 2003). As many non-profit charities carry out the reintroduction programmes, there
is a need to find support or outside funding to cover the costs of captive breeding for
reintroduction and in some cases the programmes just aren‘t feasible (Kleiman, 1989),
(to the process of captive breeding). This important process builds up species numbers
for reintroduction, where individuals from a species are removed from their habitat
and taken into captivity for breeding to take place. Captive breeding also acts as a way
to help to conserve species that are unable to survive in their natural habitat such as
the Arabian Oryx (Spalten et al, 1999). This leads into another issue which vitally
needs to be addressed. The habitat in which a species will be reintroduced into needs
to be carefully chosen, as there are many factors in the environment which could have
possible adverse effects. To ensure the successful reintroduction of a species; first
intrinsic factors need to be addressed, which would include the issue of carrying
capacity. Carrying capacity is the number of organisms a habitat can sustain without a
species being lost. For example, if the number of organisms released is below the
carrying capacity, theoretically a positive growth should be observed (Newth, 1985).
If the number of organisms is above the carrying capacity, the opposite will occur and
a negative decline would be evident. Then the extrinsic factors need to be examined,
these include abiotic and biotic factors of the habitat need to be closely explored. For
example abiotic factors like storms, forest fires and floods can all have impacts on
populations, although they are density independent. The biotic factors would include
predation and the competition for resources. If a species is being reintroduced into its
original habitat, then the causation of the decline needs to be addressed in order for
the situation not to reoccur. For example, any genetic issues. These can arise as a
consequence of captive breeding and subsequent species reintroduction. These include
an inbreeding depression, loss of genetic variation, hybridisation (more commonly
known as out breeding depression), potential adaptation to the captive environment,
and even a potential for the accumulation of new deleterious alleles. Each of these in
one way or another will impede the organism‘s successful reintroduction to the wild.
-Mammal Society Position Statement on the Reintroduction of the lynx to
Britain-2018
https://www.mammal.org.uk/2018/02/position-statement-on-the-reintroduction-of-
the-lynx-to-britain/

18
The Eurasian or northern lynx, Lynx lynx, is native to Britain. Previously thought to
have become extinct in the Mesolithic as a result of climate change, radiocarbon
dating of fossil remains shows it survived until at least the early Medieval period.
Gaelic and Cumbric accounts suggest even longer persistence, though the exact dates
are unknown. Its extinction was almost certainly a consequence of human activities
including direct persecution, hunting, habitat loss and local extinction of prey species
such as roe deer (Capreolus capreolus).
There is currently a legal imperative under the Habitats Directive to consider
reintroductions of extinct species to EU states. In addition, proponents of ‗rewilding‘,
argue that the reintroduction of large animals that have become extinct since the last
Ice Age is a key element in restoring ecosystems that are functional in the absence of
human intervention.
… Read more
- Largest ever bison reintroduction in Southern Carpathians-Europe 2018
https://rewildingeurope.com/news/largest-ever-bison-reintroduction-in-southern-
carpathians-boosts-population-by-23-animals/
Largest ever bison reintroduction in Southern Carpathians boosts population by 23 animals
Rewilding Europe and WWF Romania are delighted to announce the successful
reintroduction of 23 European bison at two sites in the Southern Carpathian
mountains of Romania. The animals, which were sourced from 9 European nature
reserves and zoos, have been released over the course of several weeks. Ongoing
rewilding efforts involving bison began in the Southern Carpathians in 2014. This
reintroduction – the largest ever in the Carpathians – significantly advances the
comeback of this magnificent species and takes the local population up to
53. Around 30 of these animals are now freely roaming in the wild, with the recently
released bison' kept in enclosures until their full release later this year.
-Wildlife Translocation-2018
https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1018&context=nwrcwdm
ts
Wildlife Translocation
Michael T. Mengak University of Georgia, mmengak@uga.edu
Human-Wildlife Conflicts Many people enjoy wildlife. It enriches their lives in many
ways. Nationwide, Americans spend over $144 billion annually on fishing, hunting,
and wildlifewatching activities. However, wildlife is not always welcome in or near
homes, buildings, or other property and can cause significant damage or health and
safety issues (Figure 1). In one study, 42% of urban residents reported experiencing a
wildlife problem during the previous year and more than half of them said their
attempts to resolve the problem were unsuccessful.
… Read more

19
2017-Essays and Perspectives - Rewilding South American Landscapes
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2530064417301062
Essays and Perspectives - Rewilding South American Landscapes
A review of a multispecies reintroduction to restore a large ecosystem: The Iberá
Rewilding Program (Argentina)
Highlights
•Populations of five species and a jaguar breeding program have been established.
•High quality communication and learning from animals responses are lessons
learned.
•Importance of suitable habitat, long-term commitment and solid and flexible teams.
•Iberá Rewilding Program represents a model for proactive conservation in the
Americas.
Abstract
Iberá Nature Reserve in the province of Corrientes, Argentina has suffered one of the
worst defaunation processes in the country. After acquiring lands within the Reserve,
The Conservation Land Trust started the Iberá Rewilding Program in 2007, with the
aim of reintroducing all animal species that had been extirpated locally in historic
times. Along with its ecological value, this program intended to improve local
economies by positioning Iberá as an ecotourism destination. So far, two self-
sustaining populations of two species (giant anteater and pampas deer) and five initial
population nuclei of four species (giant anteater, pampas deer, tapir, peccary and
green-winged macaw) have been established, as well as an ongoing jaguar breeding
program. Major obstacles faced during the rewilding process included communication
challenges (communicating the program results openly and clearly); bureaucratic
challenges (overcoming initial resistance from authorities, academia, and other
stakeholders by producing high quality recovery plans and communicating
consistently) and species-specific challenges (recognizing each species‘ requirements
and learning from individual animals‘ responses). This experience demonstrates that
rewilding projects require abundant suitable habitat, long-term financial and
organizational commitment, a solid interdisciplinary team and a high level of
flexibility in order to adapt in a changing context. One of the first programs of this
kind in the Americas, the Iberá Rewilding Program is being adopted by government
authorities, private conservationists and the general public in Argentina, as a model
for proactive conservation.
-Wild Deserts: A project to reintroduce locally extinct mammals-Australia-2017
https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/-/media/OEH/Corporate-Site/Documents/Parks-
reserves-and-protected-areas/Parks-management-other/sturt-national-park-review-
environmental-factors-reintroduce-locally-extinct-mammals-170451.pdf
Wild Deserts: A project to reintroduce locally extinct mammals to Sturt National Park in
NSW
Review of Environmental Factors, August 2017
Report prepared for the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage by Rebecca West
and Reece Pedler, Wild Deserts, Centre for Ecosystem Science, School of Biological,

21
Earth and Environmental Science, UNSW Australia, NSW 2052. © 2017 State of
NSW and Office of Environment and Heritage With the exception of photographs, the
State of NSW and Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) are pleased to allow
this material to be reproduced in whole or in part for educational and noncommercial
use, provided the meaning is unchanged and its source, publisher and authorship are
acknowledged. Specific permission is required for the reproduction of photographs.
The Wild Deserts Team, on behalf of OEH, has compiled this review of
environmental factors in good faith, exercising all due care and attention. No
representation is made about the accuracy, completeness or suitability of the
information in this publication for any particular purpose. OEH shall not be liable for
any damage which may occur to any person or organisation taking action or not on
the basis of this publication. Readers should seek appropriate advice when applying
the information to their specific needs. All content in this publication is owned by
OEH and is protected by Crown Copyright, unless credited otherwise. It is licensed
under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0), subject to the
exemptions
2016-Use of wild–caught individuals as a key factor for success in translocations
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/83003852.pdf
Use of wild–caught individuals as a key factor for success in vertebrate
translocations Rummel, A. Martínez–Abraín, J. Mayol, J. Ruiz–Olmo, F. Mañas, J.
Jiménez, J. A. Gómez & D. Oro. (2016).
Abstract
Success of vertebrate translocations is crucial to improve efficacy and efficiency of
conservation actions but it is often difficult to assess because negative results (failed
translocations) are seldom published.
We developed surveys and sent them to heads of conservation services in three major
Spanish Mediterranean regions. The purpose of our surveys was to determine which
methodological factor that could easily be implemented in practice was more
influential for translocation success. These factors included the origin of translocated
individuals (captive or wild) and translocation effort (propagule size and program
duration).
After analyzing 83 programs, corresponding to 34 vertebrate species, by means of
generalized linear mixed modelling, we found that 'origin' was more relevant for
translocation success than 'effort', although we could not rule out some role of
translocation effort.
Variance in success of translocation programs involving individuals from wild
sources was smaller and consequently results more predictable. Origin interacted with
taxa so that success was higher when using wild birds and especially wild fish and
mammals, but not when releasing reptiles.
Hence, we suggest that, for any given effort, translocation results will be better for

21
most vertebrate taxa if individuals from wild sources are used. When this is not
feasible, managers should release captive–reared individuals for a long number of
years rather than a short number of years.
Key words: Translocation success, Vertebrates, Origin of individuals, Reintroduction
effort, Captive–breeding, Cost of release
2015-Rev.-Translocation tactics: a framework to support the IUCN Guidelines
for wildlife translocations and improve the quality of applied methods
https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/1365-2664.12498
Batson, W. G., Gordon, I. J., Fletcher, D. B., & Manning, A. D. (2015). REVIEW:
Translocation tactics: A framework to support the IUCN Guidelines for wildlife
translocations and improve the quality of applied methods. Journal of Applied
Ecology, 52, 1598–1607.
Summary
1. Translocation is a popular conservation tool, but the outcomes are variable. Many
tactics can be used to improve the probability of success, but a comprehensive
summary of these does not exist. This increases the risk that valuable tactics will be
overlooked, and inhibits effective communication.
2. We assess the diversity of ‗translocation tactics‘ used in mammal and bird
translocations, by reviewing the IUCN/SSC Guidelines for Reintroduction and other
Conservation Translocations, 195 peer-reviewed articles and 73 case studies from the
IUCN/SSC Global Reintroduction Perspectives Series.
3. We recorded descriptions of every technique used to influence the post-release
performance of translocated wildlife. We developed the Translocation Tactics
Classification System (TTCS) which defines a collection of 30 tactics and organize
them into an ecologically relevant framework. We also assess the occurrence of
tactics within the Guidelines, the primary literature and the case studies to evaluate
how tactics are communicated within these mediums.
4. Our results indicate that the Guidelines are a valuable resource, but do not
exhaustively cover tactics, and that detailed methodological accounts are rarely made
publicly accessible. This highlights the need to develop context-specific resources to
support the Guidelines, and to develop and exploit mediums that facilitate recording
of methodological detail, the tactical rationale behind the design and evaluations of
effectiveness. Although some forms of grey literature address this issue, the general
lack of information limits the ability to investigate the relationship between tactics
and translocation success.
5. Synthesis and applications- The Translocation Tactics Classification System
(TTCS) provides a checklist which ensures that the full diversity of tactics is
considered when developing translocation processes. Standardizing the
communication of tactics, and encouraging detailed accounts of applied
methodologies to be recorded, along with the tactical reasoning behind the design,

22
will provide operational models and the data required to conduct broad-scale meta-
analyses.
Key-words: assisted colonization, conservation, processes, protocols, reintroduction,
restocking, strategy, supplementation
-Predator supplementary feeding do not improve reintroduction–Australia-2015
https://www.publish.csiro.au/am/am15020
Predator swamping and supplementary feeding do not improve reintroduction
success for a threatened Australian mammal, Bettongia lesueur
Hannah L. Bannister A D
, Catherine E. Lynch B
and Katherine E. Moseby B C
+ Author Affiliations
Australian Mammalogy 38(2) 177-187 https://doi.org/10.1071/AM15020
Submitted: 19 June 2015 Accepted: 7 December 2015 Published: 2 February 2016
Abstract
Broad-scale Australian mammal declines following European settlement have resulted
in many species becoming regionally or globally extinct. Attempts to reintroduce
native mammals are often unsuccessful due to a suboptimal number of founders being
used, high rates of predation and a lack of knowledge of the reintroduction biology for
the species concerned.
We trialled predator swamping and supplementary feeding in an attempt to offset
predation and improve reintroduction success for the burrowing bettong (Bettongia
lesueur) in arid South Australia.
We compared population longevity of a large release group (1266 animals) with five
releases of smaller groups (~50 animals at each).
We compared release sites with (n = 5) and without (n = 1) supplementary food to
determine whether site fidelity, body condition and reproduction were affected, and
whether these traits aided population establishment. Predator swamping did not
facilitate reintroduction success, with no bettongs detected more than 122 days after
release. While supplementary food increased site fidelity and persistence at release
sites, bettongs failed to establish successfully at any site.
Neither predator swamping nor supplementary feeding enhanced reintroduction
success at our sites but results suggested that supplementary feeding should be
explored as an aid to reintroduction success for Australian mammals.
Additional keywords: burrowing bettong, predator swamping, supplementary feeding,
translocation.
-Okapi's Genetic structure with implications for translocation-2015
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10592-015-0726-0
or
http://orca.cf.ac.uk/73677/

23
Genetic structure of captive and free-ranging okapi (Okapia johnstoni) with
implications for management.
Stanton, D.W.G., Helsen, P., Shephard, J., Leus, K., Penfold, L., Hart, J., Kümpel, N.F., Ewen,
J.G., Wang, J., Galbusera, P. & Bruford, M.W. 2015. Genetic structure of captive and free-
ranging okapi (Okapia johnstoni) with implications for management. Conservation Genetics.
DOI: 10.1007/s10592-015-0726-0
Abstract
Breeding programs for endangered species increasingly use molecular genetics to
inform their management strategies.
Molecular approaches can be useful for investigating relatedness, resolving pedigree
uncertainties, and for estimating genetic diversity in captive and wild populations.
Genetic data can also be used to evaluate the representation of wild population
genomes within captive population gene-pools.
Maintaining a captive population that is genetically representative of its wild
counterpart offers a means of conserving the original evolutionary potential of a
species. Okapi, an even-toed ungulate, endemic to the Democratic Republic of Congo,
have recently been reclassified as Endangered by the IUCN.
We carried out a genetic assessment of the ex-situ okapi (Okapia johnstoni)
population, alongside an investigation into the genetic structure of wild populations
across their geographic range.
We found that while levels of nuclear (12 microsatellite loci) genetic variation in the
wild, founder and captive okapi populations were similar, mitochondrial (833 bp of
Cyt b, CR, tRNA-Thr and tRNA-Pro) variation within captive okapi was considerably
reduced compared to the wild, with 16 % lower haplotype diversity. Further, both
nuclear and mitochondrial alleles present in captivity provided only partial
representation of those present in the wild.
Thirty mitochondrial haplotypes found in the wild were not found in captivity, and
two haplotypes found in captivity were not found in the wild, and the patterns of
genetic variation at microsatellite loci in our captive samples were considerably
different to those of the wild samples.
Our study highlights the importance of genetic characterisation of captive
populations, even for well-managed ex-situ breeding programs with detailed
studbooks.
We recommend that the captive US population should be further genetically
characterised to guide management of translocations between European and US
captive populations.
Keywords: Captive; Wild; Ex-situ; In-situ; Founder
-The UK translocation of spiders-2015
https://www.dolomedes.org.uk/conservation/translocation.html
The UK translocation programme
Summary
Between 2010 and 2015, around 6,000 hand-reared, three-month old fen raft
spiderlings and 56 adult females with their nurseries containing hundreds of week-old
spiderlings, were released at new sites in the Norfolk and Suffolk Broads. These

24
nurseries contributed in the regional of 30,000 spider lings, although their survival
chances were much lower than those of the older, hand reared spiders.
The timetable of the releases, and a summary of the numbers of nurseries recorded in
the new populations by 2015 is given in the following table - the rationale for the
work and details of the translocation programme are given below.
2014-Rev. Management Problems Arising From Reintroductions of Large
Carnivores.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5443d7c7e4b06e8b47de9a55/t/5924b44abebafb
37bd63dfa5/1495577692924/JYI_Sep2014_11to16+reintroduction.pdf
A Review of Management Problems Arising From Reintroductions of Large
Carnivores. By Mark Edwards
Large carnivores are often apex predators and are important in ecosystems as their
behaviour promotes biodiversity. They frequently fall victim to anthropogenic
causes of local extinction and subsequently, have often been the subjects of
conservation efforts involving reintroduction programs. As land-use changes
restrict ranges and reduce prey for large carnivores, the trend towards local extinction
is set to increase; therefore ex-situ conservation is likely to be increasingly prevalent.
Reintroduction programmes are divided into two distinct parts.
The first part is pre-release, which includes selection, breeding, and preparation of
animals. The second part runs from the time the animals are ready for release through
the actual release process and may include post-release monitoring and the release of
further, supplementary, animals where this is necessary and feasible.
This study identifies and discusses a number of potential problems involved in the
use of captive animals to seed reintroductions including welfare as well as ethical
and political issues.
Other challenges include the genetic and behavioural integrity of founder animals
and disease control, both in captivity and post release. This study also identifies a
Site Owner/manager1 Introduced
in:
2015 range2 2015 minimum estimate
of nurseries
Castle Marshes SWT 2010-'11 >3km ditch 800
Carlton Marshes SWT 2011-'12 ca 1km ditch
(140 in 2014, no equiv. est. in
2015)
Mid-Yare
Marshes
RSPB 2012-'13
ca 1.1km
ditch
480
Ludham Marshes NE 2014-'15 0.35km introductions only

25
number of points for consideration during and after release, including the involvement
and motivation of stakeholders. The potential ecological ramifications of
reintroductions are discussed as is the role of zoos in future programmes.
Recommendations are made regarding the involvement of social scientists and
conservationists in future release programmes.
-Financial Costs of Large Carnivore-Namibia-2014
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0105042
Financial Costs of Large Carnivore Translocations – Accounting for
Conservation
Florian J. Weise , Ken J. Stratford, Rudolf J. van Vuuren
Published: August 15, 2014
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105042
Abstract
Human-carnivore conflict continues to present a major conservation challenge around
the world. Translocation of large carnivores is widely implemented but remains
strongly debated, in part because of a lack of cost transparency.
We report detailed translocation costs for three large carnivore species in Namibia and
across different translocation scenarios. We consider the effect of various parameters
and factors on costs and translocation success. Total translocation cost for 30
individuals in 22 events was $80,681 (US Dollars).
Median translocation cost per individual was $2,393, and $2,669 per event.
Median cost per cheetah was $2,760 (n = 23), and $2,108 per leopard (n = 6). One
hyaena was translocated at a cost of $1,672.
Tracking technology was the single biggest cost element (56%), followed by captive
holding and feeding. Soft releases, prolonged captivity and orphaned individuals also
increased case-specific costs.
A substantial proportion (65%) of the total translocation cost was successfully
recovered from public interest groups.
Less than half the translocations were confirmed successes (44.4%, 3 unknown) with
a strong species bias. Four leopards (66.7%) were successfully translocated but
only 8 of the 20 cheetahs (40.0%) with known outcome met these strict criteria. None
of the five habituated cheetahs was translocated successfully,
nor was the hyaena.
We introduce the concept of Individual Conservation Cost (ICC) and define it as the
cost of one successfully translocated individual adjusted by costs of unsuccessful
events of the same species. The median ICC for cheetah was $6,898 and $3,140 for
leopard. Translocations are costly, but we demonstrate that they are not inherently
more expensive than other strategies currently employed in non-lethal carnivore
conflict management. We conclude that translocation should be one available option
for conserving large carnivores, but needs to be critically evaluated on a case-by-case
basis.

26
-Finding Correlations among Successful Reintroduction Programs-2014
https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/106549/Estrada_Practicum_
2014.pdf?sequence=1
Finding Correlations among Successful Reintroduction Programs: An Analysis
and Review of Current and Past Mistakes. By Jillian Estrada
In the past half century the world has seen a dramatic decline in species. More and
more species are being pushed to brink of extinction. In the past, there have been
several methods utilized to mitigate these trends, however with the recent surge of
local extinctions, reintroductions have become a growing conservation tool. Despite
many disadvantages of developing a reintroduction plan, hundreds have been
attempted over the past 40 years, with mixed outcomes. Some conservationists have
studied the factors associated with success; however the criteria on which their
assessments were based were flawed.
I attempted to complete my own assessment of successful programs using detailed
program information along with life history traits of focal species. My results
illustrate the many obstacles faced by reintroduction biologists. Based on the
limitations faced throughout this study, I conclude that conservationists must take a
step back and address the many issues with current reintroduction protocols prior to
attempting any further assessments. My recommended solutions to some of these
issues include
defining universal criteria for a reintroduction program to be considered successful;
monitoring, logging, and disseminating standardized data; and collaborating with
captive facilities that have the ability to offer additional support.
-The Dormouse Reintroduction Programme: A review-2014
http://publications.naturalengland.org.uk/publication/5914082255306752
The Dormouse Reintroduction Programme: A review (NECR144)
This record was published by Natural England on 20 March 2014.
This review of the dormouse reintroduction programme was commissioned by Natural
England to help identify the best approach to long term conservation of dormice, to
inform decisions about future action taken under the Dormouse Species Recovery
Programme and to achieve the aims of Biodiversity 2020.
-Evaluating the Potential for Species Reintroductions in Canada-2014
https://www.arlis.org/docs/vol1/69415913/gedir_revised_edited_final_may_16.pdf
Evaluating the Potential for Species Reintroductions in Canada
JAY V. GEDIR, TIAN EVEREST, AND AXEL MOEHRENSCHLAGER,
Centre for Conservation Research, Calgary Zoo, 1300 Zoo Road NE, Calgary, AB,
T2E 7V6, Canada, email jayg@calgaryzoo.ab.ca
Abstract:

27
Species reintroductions and translocations are increasingly useful conservation tools
for restoring endangered populations around the world. We examine ecological and
sociopolitical variables to assess Canada‘s potential for future reintroductions.
Biologically ideal species would be prolific, terrestrial, herbivorous, behaviorally
simple, charismatic, easily tractable, or large enough to carry transmitters for post-
release evaluations, and would have small home range requirements. Sociologically,
Canada‘s large geographic area, low human density, high urban population,
widespread protectionist views towards wildlife, and sound economic status should
favor reintroduction success. Canada has implemented legislation to safeguard species
at risk and, compared to developing countries, possesses substantial funds to support
reintroduction efforts. We support the reintroduction guidelines put forth by the
World Conservation Union (IUCN) but realize that several challenges regarding these
parameters will unfold in Canada‘s future. Pressures from the rates of species loss and
climate change may precipitate situations where species would need to be
reintroduced into areas outside their historic range, subspecific substitutions would be
necessary if taxonomically similar individuals are unavailable, and in crisis situations,
reintroductions may need to be attempted before historic population decline factors
are fully understood. Given a sound understanding of population threats, sufficient
habitat, and adequate resources, some Canadian species that show promise for
successful reintroduction are the Queen Charlotte Island ermine (Mustela erminea
haidarum), American badger (Taxidea taxus jeffersonii), pallid bat (Antrozous
pallidus), barn owl (Tyto alba), white-headed woodpecker (Picoides albolarvatus),
and stinkpot (Sternotherus odoratus). Key Words: reintroduction, translocation,
endangered species, conservation, Canada.
-Physiology in conservation translocations-2014
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4732500/
Physiology in conservation translocations
Esther Tarszisz,1,*
Christopher R. Dickman,2
and Adam J. Munn1
Conservation translocations aim to restore species to their indigenous ranges, protect
populations from threats and/or reinstate ecosystem functions. They are particularly
important for the conservation and management of rare and threatened species.
Despite tremendous efforts and advancement in recent years, animal conservation
translocations generally have variable success, and the reasons for this are often
uncertain. We suggest that when little is known about the physiology and wellbeing of
individuals either before or after release, it will be difficult to determine their
likelihood of survival, and this could limit advancements in the science of
translocations for conservation. In this regard, we argue that physiology offers novel
approaches that could substantially improve translocations and associated practices.
As a discipline, it is apparent that physiology may be undervalued, perhaps because of
the invasive nature of some physiological measurement techniques (e.g. sampling

28
body fluids, surgical implantation). We examined 232 publications that dealt with
translocations of terrestrial vertebrates and aquatic mammals and, defining ‗success‘
as high or low, determined how many of these studies explicitly incorporated
physiological aspects into their protocols and monitoring. From this review, it is
apparent that physiological evaluation before and after animal releases could progress
and improve translocation/reintroduction successes.
We propose a suite of physiological measures, in addition to animal health indices, for
assisting conservation translocations over the short term and also for longer term post-
release monitoring. Perhaps most importantly, we argue that the incorporation of
physiological assessments of animals at all stages of translocation can have important
welfare implications by helping to reduce the total number of animals used.
Physiological indicators can also help to refine conservation translocation methods.
These approaches fall under a new paradigm that we term ‗translocation physiology‘
and represent an important sub-discipline within conservation physiology generally.
Keywords: Conservation physiology, conservation translocation, monitoring,
vertebrate
-Success of the Lynx reintroduction program-Colorado-2014
https://cpw.state.co.us/lynxresearch
Success of the Lynx reintroduction program
Background
In 1997, the Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) undertook what was to become one
of North America‘s most high-profile carnivore reintroductions to date.
The goal of CPW‘s lynx reintroduction program was to establish a self-sustaining
lynx population within Colorado, where biologists felt quality lynx habitat still
existed.
The observations and lessons from this program – the latest in a long line of
successful CPW reintroductions – may be helpful in planning future carnivore
reintroductions such as wolverines in Colorado and elsewhere.
Benchmarks for success
To evaluate the short-term success of lynx reintroduction efforts, the CPW established
a set of benchmarks for tracking progress toward a self-sustaining lynx population
in Colorado:
 Reintroduced lynx demonstrate a high rate of survival in the critical first months after
release
 Released adult lynx demonstrate low mortality rates over the longer term, particularly
in good habitat
 Lynx remain in good habitat at densities sufficient for breeding
 Reintroduced lynx successfully reproduce
 Lynx born in Colorado survive and also successfully reproduce (called ―recruitment‖)
 Lynx recruitment equals or exceeds mortality over an extended period of time

29
Reintroduced lynx have been monitored by the CPW for over a decade to track the
population‘s progress toward reaching these benchmarks.
As of summer 2010, all benchmarks for successful lynx reintroduction have been
met.
For more details and a map showing lynx locations, see Lynx Reintroduction
Assessment.
Listen to the Colorado Public Radio interview with Colorado Parks and Wildlife
Species Conservation Coordinator, Eric Odell.
Reports
 2010-11 Lynx Annual Report
 Predictive Map of Lynx Habitat Use in Colorado
 Areas of High Habitat Use for Lynx Reintroduction to Colorado
 Lynx Movements Near Berthoud Pass, Colorado
 Lynx Movements Across 1-70 in Colorado
 Lynx Movements Near Monarch Ski Area
 Lynx Movements Near North Pass, Colorado
 May 2009 Lynx Update
 2007-08 Lynx Research Report
 2002 Lynx Reintroduction and Augmentation Program
 2001 Progress Report to USFWS
 2000 Progress Report to USFWS
 Colorado Lynx Locations through Feb 2005
 White River National Forest Lynx Locations
 Wolf Creek Pass Report
 Summary of Lynx Number South of Hwy 160, Nov 2005
-Physiology in conservation translocations-(translocation physiology)- 2014
https://www.journalmap.org/oxford-university-press/conservation-
physiology?direction=asc&order=title&page=9&view=list
Physiology in conservation translocations
Authors- Tarszisz, Esther, Dickman, Christopher R. and Munn, Adam J.
Keywords
Conservation physiology, conservation translocation, monitoring, vertebrate
Abstract
Translocations (reintroductions) are prominent in conservation, but successful
outcomes remain few, despite advances in the field. Physiology is a hitherto
underutilized, but could markedly improve successes. More importantly, increased

31
application of physiological tools actively promotes at least two of the three Rs of
animal welfare – Refinement of methods and Reduction of animals used.
Conservation translocations aim to restore species to their indigenous ranges, protect
populations from threats and/or reinstate ecosystem functions. They are particularly
important for the conservation and management of rare and threatened species.
Despite tremendous efforts and advancement in recent years, animal conservation
translocations generally have variable success, and the reasons for this are often
uncertain.
We suggest that when little is known about the physiology and wellbeing of
individuals either before or after release, it will be difficult to determine their
likelihood of survival, and this could limit advancements in the science of
translocations for conservation.
In this regard, we argue that physiology offers novel approaches that could
substantially improve translocations and associated practices. As a discipline, it is
apparent that physiology may be undervalued, perhaps because of the invasive nature
of some physiological measurement techniques (e.g. sampling body fluids, surgical
implantation).
We examined 232 publications that dealt with translocations of terrestrial vertebrates
and aquatic mammals and, defining ‗success‘ as high or low, determined how many
of these studies explicitly incorporated physiological aspects into their protocols and
monitoring.
From this review, it is apparent that physiological evaluation before and after animal
releases could progress and improve translocation/reintroduction successes. We
propose a suite of physiological measures, in addition to animal health indices, for
assisting conservation translocations over the short term and also for longer term post-
release monitoring.
Perhaps most importantly, we argue that the incorporation of physiological
assessments of animals at all stages of translocation can have important welfare
implications by helping to reduce the total number of animals used. Physiological
indicators can also help to refine conservation translocation methods. These
approaches fall under a new paradigm that we term ‗translocation physiology‘ and
represent an important sub-discipline within conservation physiology generally.
-Adaptive Management: From More Talk to Real Action-2014
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00267-013-0205-7
Adaptive Management: From More Talk to Real Action | SpringerLink
Byron K. Williams & Eleanor D. Brown
Environmental Management volume 53, pages465–479 (2014)
Abstract
The challenges currently facing resource managers are large-scale and complex, and
demand new approaches to balance development and conservation goals. One
approach that shows considerable promise for addressing these challenges is adaptive

31
management, which by now is broadly seen as a natural, intuitive, and potentially
effective way to address decision-making in the face of uncertainties.
Yet the concept of adaptive management continues to evolve, and its record of
success remains limited.
In this article, we present an operational framework for adaptive decision-making, and
describe the challenges and opportunities in applying it to real-world problems.
We discuss the key elements required for adaptive decision-making, and their
integration into an iterative process that highlights and distinguishes technical and
social learning. We illustrate the elements and processes of the framework with some
successful on-the-ground examples of natural resource management. Finally, we
address some of the difficulties in applying learning-based management, and finish
with a discussion of future directions and strategic challenges.
-Reintroduction objectives, decisions and outcomes: herpetofauna -2014
https://zslpublications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/acv.12146
Reintroduction objectives, decisions and outcomes: global perspectives from the
herpetofauna
J. G. Ewen, P. S. Soorae, & S. Canessa.
Abstract - Reintroductions and other conservation translocations are an important but
often controversial form of wildlife management. Some authors have suggested the
low success rates may reflect poor planning and decision-making.
In this study, we used examples of herpetofaunal reintroductions, published in four
volumes of the IUCN‘s Reintroduction Specialist Group Global Perspectives in
Reintroduction Biology, to identify the objectives set by reintroduction practitioners,
the indicators of success they choose and the types of difficulties they encounter.
We found -objectives focused on target species, but also on broader ecological
objectives, such as ecosystem restoration, and social and economic aims. Practitioners
reported high success rates: however, these referred to a mixture of general objectives,
reflecting the fundamental aims of programs, and technical aspects, such as
developing husbandry protocols, that are important only as stepping stones for
broader objectives.
In some cases, important objectives were not assigned relevant indicators, thus
making assessment impossible. Non-biological aspects such as funding dynamics
were the most important source of difficulties; however, they were not always openly
recognized by assigning relevant objectives and indicators.
We argue that the adoption of a more structured approach to decision-making -could
help in addressing all these issues.
In particular, we recommend that where possible, managers should clearly state all
relevant objectives and constraints, and distinguish their respective relevance and
importance.
If such elements are not clearly defined a priori, planning and assessing

32
reintroductions can become difficult or even impossible, increasing the risk of
inefficient use of resources.
Figure 1 Relative weighting of attention given to four broad themes within the
IUCN‘s global reintroduction perspective case studies on herpetofauna. The four
themes are criteria related to: (1) the target species, at the individual, population or
species level; (2) the broader ecological context without specific reference to the
species; (3) the social context and other non-biological aspects; (4) technical aspects
of the reintroduction, such as learning about specific problems and developing
management techniques. We have evaluated this weighting across three components
of reintroduction programmes from setting objectives, setting indicators of success
and, finally, summarizing what practitioners found difficult with implementing their
reintroduction programmes. Circle size represents the number of statements made
across case studies, such that larger circles indicate more attention. Numbers within
the circles are the sum total of statements.
2013-IUCN-Guidelines for Reintroductions & Other Conservation
Translocations
http://www.issg.org/pdf/publications/rsg_issg-reintroduction-guidelines-2013.pdf
Guidelines for Reintroductions and Other Conservation Translocations
2012-Mega-Translocations: The Kenya Wildlife Service at its Best
http://www.georgewright.org/291lekolool.pd
Mega-Translocations: The Kenya Wildlife Service at its Best
Isaac Lekolool , Kenya Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 40241-00100, Nairobi,
lekolool@ kws.go.ke
Introduction
The capture and translocation of 220 elephants in just two weeks, the rare
translocation of 18 hippos in three weeks, the mass capture and translocation of
over 1,000 impalas and 800 zebra in a single month—these are some of the most
exciting and unparalleled feats of the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS). These few
examples do not only show the magnitude, but also the efficiency in carrying out such
exercises.
The capture of a wild animal is an intricate process, requiring great caution to ensure
safety of both personnel and the animal. Translocation, which refers to the physical
transfer of an animal from one habitat to another,

33
-What is wrong with current translocations? A review-2012
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228091894_What_is_wrong_with_current_t
ranslocations_A_review_and_a_decision-
making_proposal/link/0fcfd5080f922cf2e0000000/download
What is wrong with current translocations? A review and a decision-making
proposal Irene
Pérez1,2*, José D Anadón2,3,4, Mario Díaz5 , Graciela G Nicola6 , José L Tella3 ,
and Andrés Giménez2
Should a species be translocated?
Uncertainty regarding the necessity and feasibility of many translocations complicates
answering this question.
Here, we review translocation projects, both published and unpublished.
Our results indicate that most projects (1) addressed fewer than half of the basic
criteria established for translocations and (2) were either unjustifiable from a
conservation perspective or inadequately designed to guarantee success or preclude
negative consequences.
We propose a hierarchical decision-making system – an explicit method that
integrates existing guidelines, thereby covering a key gap in conservation science – to
reduce ambiguity when deciding whether to implement a given translocation project.
This method will improve the likelihood of success in translocation projects and
contribute to the efficient use of the limited resources available for these conservation
efforts.
2011-Populations Translocation Events and Impact on Natural Habitats
http://www.eolss.net/sample-chapters/c12/E1-67-06-04.pdf
BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION AND HABITAT MANAGEMENT- Vol. II
– Populations Translocation Events and Impact on Natural Habitats-Catherine
Souty-Grosset and Fr d ric Grandjean ©Encyclopedia of Life Support
Systems(EOLSS) POPULATIONS TRANSLOCATION EVENTS AND IMPACT
ON NATURAL HABITATS

34
C. Souty-Grosset, F. Grandjean
2011
Translocations of wild-caught or captive-reared animals are playing an increasing role
in conservation of rare and endangered species and are used to establish new
populations, to reintroduce a species to unoccupied portions of its historic range, or to
augment populations that are critically small and in danger of imminent extinction.
Translocations include establishing of new populations or re-establishing by both
the artificial movement of individuals between natural populations and the release
of (often captive-reared) animals to reintroduce or augment small populations of
native individuals. But thorough precautions must be taken because introduction of
native species to areas outside their natural distribution can have detrimental impacts:
these include introduction of disease organisms and disturbance of ecosystems. In
addition, introduction may result in loss of genetic diversity when separate stocks of
the same species are mixed.
A translocated population may be considered viable and conserved only after showing
promise of sustaining itself over ecological time measured in tens to thousands of
years! Population genetics and demography determine the success of the introduction:
specifically, the number of founders, the quality of habitats, and the historical
distribution are variables that have been associated with translocation success.
Because small populations are more subject to extinction due to inbreeding and
demographic accidents than larger ones, information on the influence of translocation
practices on genetic diversity and postrelease reproductive success would be of great
value in designing reintroduction programs.
It is recognized that translocation is a valuable conservation tool, both in terms of
restoration communities and assessing the extent of ecosystem dysfunction.
Nevertheless, there are potential risks with translocation conservation strategies. For
example, disease transmission and impact of other endemic populations may result.
Up to the early 1990s, the success and effect of translocation programs were not well
evaluated because there was rarely appreciable monitoring after release.
Since 1995, the monitoring programs following translocations are carefully
developed and documented in order to gain knowledge from strategies that
succeeded or failed. Information on the effects of translocations on translocations of
animal and plant species and their environment are more and more available.
2010-Evaluating the Canada lynx reintroduction programme in Colorado
https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1365-
2664.2010.01805.x
Evaluating the Canada lynx reintroduction programme in Colorado: patterns in
mortality
Olivier Devineau1 * † , Tanya M. Shenk2 , Gary C. White1 , Paul F.Doherty Jr1 ,
Paul M. Lukacs2 and Richard H. Kahn2
Summary

35
1. Reintroducing carnivores has become a widely used technique to restore the
natural integrity of ecosystems. Accurate estimates of demographic parameters for
reintroduced populations are essential to evaluate the success of the reintroduction
programme, assess the need to release additional animals and to develop
management recommendations.
2. In an effort to establish a viable population of Canada lynx Lynx canadensis in
Colorado, USA, the Colorado Division of Wildlife released 218 wild-caught lynx
from 1999 to 2006. All lynx were released with very high frequency (VHF) and⁄or
satellite transmitters from which locations, mortality, reproduction, habitat use and
movement patterns were documented. We present estimates of mortality.
3. Known-fate models could not be applied here to estimate mortality due to
excessive missing location data because of either extensive movement outside of the
study area or transmitter failure. Instead we employed a multistate model to address
these issues.
4. We describe how the more general multistate mark–recapture model can
accommodate missing data to estimate monthly mortality rates of released lynx both
inside and outside the study area. We also explored factors possibly affecting lynx
survival such as sex, time spent in pre-release captivity, movement patterns and
origin.
5. Monthly mortality rate -was lower inside the study area than outside, and slightly
higher for males than for females, although 95% confidence intervals overlapped for
sexes. Mortality was higher immediately after release [first month = 0Æ0368 (SE =
0Æ0140), and 0Æ1012 (SE = 0Æ0359) respectively, inside and outside the study
area], and then decreased according to a quadratic trend. Annual survival was
0Æ9315 (SE = 0Æ0325) within the study area and 0Æ8219 (SE = 0Æ0744) outside
the study area.
6. Synthesis and applications- For those contemplating lynx, or other carnivore
reintroductions, we suggest identifying a high-quality release site to minimize
mortality. We recommend that managers consider the demography of animals
separately within and outside the reintroduction area for valid assessment of the
reintroduction. Movements of reintroduced animals and their subsequent loss through
death or permanent emigration may require the need for additional individuals to be
released for a successful reintroduction effort.
Key-words: Canada lynx, carnivore, Colorado, known-fate model, Lynx canadensis,
mortality, multistate model, program MARK, reintroduction, telemetry
-Factors associated with survival of reintroduced rabbits in California-2010
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320710000169
Factors associated with survival of reintroduced riparian brush rabbits in
California
Laurissa P. Hamilton a,b,*, Patrick A. Kelly a , Daniel F. Williams a , Douglas A.
Kelt b , Heiko U. Wittmer b

36
The riparian brush rabbit (Sylvilagus bachmani riparius) is an endangered species
found in dense, brushy habitat in the California‘s Central Valley.
We- implemented a reintroduction program to bolster populations at a Federal
Wildlife Refuge and to assess factors influencing mortality and subsequent survival of
released individuals.
Between July 2002 and July 2005, we reintroduced 325 captive-bred individuals to
unoccupied habitat within their historic range using a soft-release strategy and
monitored their subsequent survival with radiotelemetry.
Longer time in soft-release pens resulted in increased monthly survival.
Rabbits were most susceptible to post-release mortality during the first 4 weeks
following reintroduction and both, body mass and length of time in the soft-release
enclosure influenced this relationship.
When we controlled for release mortality during this acclimation period, subsequent
monthly survival probabilities were most strongly influenced by release year (year 1
vs. years 2 and 3) and by a catastrophic flooding event;
length of time in the soft-release enclosure -remained an important variable in longer-
term survival.
Cause of mortality -was unknown for the majority of deaths (61.9%), but predation
(including presumptive predation) was the greatest known cause of death in
translocated rabbits (26.4%).
Reintroduction programs should employ an adaptive management approach with
ongoing monitoring of target animals and concurrent analysis to allow managers to
adjust methods as conditions dictate.
2009-Review of Irish Golden Eagle Reintroduction Project
https://raptorpersecutionscotland.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/irishgoldeneagleprojec
t_review-2009.pdf
Review of Irish Golden Eagle Reintroduction Project: donation of Scottish birds
under licence issued by SNH
Background
The recent reintroduction of golden eagles to Ireland has been one of the highest
profile environmental projects in Ireland and is an important part of Ireland‘s new
millennium celebrations. It has relied on the donation of chicks from Scotland, and
has involved a high degree of cooperation between government agencies, NGOs,
scientists and volunteers in the two countries. Reports of the poisoning of one of the
birds released in Ireland has triggered concerns about the environmental ‗security‘ of
the release area, and given rise to broader concerns about the prospects for the project
and its potential impact on the Scottish golden eagle population. SNH issues the
licence, which authorises the taking of golden eagle chicks from Scottish eyries. The
current review has been prompted by the above issues but has also been undertaken as
part of a regular review of progress, and as such looks at issues of golden eagle
conservation management and survival in Scotland.

37
-Achieving success with small, translocated mammal populations-South Africa-
2009
https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2009.00081.x
Achieving success with small, translocated mammal populations
Kyle S. Van Houtan , John M. Halley , Rudi Van Aarde , Stuart L. Pimm
First published: 09 December 2009
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2009.00081.x
Abstract
Translocations are increasingly important tools for endangered species conservation,
but their success is often uncertain.
We analyzed 125 time series of grazing mammal translocations in South African
protected areas. Some 94% of translocations succeeded (66% unambiguously) even
though most populations began with <15 individuals and most of the species involved
are of conservation concern.
Adding new individuals to existing small populations increases per capita growth
rates and seems to prevent translocations from failing. Growth of the translocated
populations is both greater and less variable than wild mammal populations and
appears less affected by the typically important ecological factors (e.g., initial
propagule size, precipitation, reserve size, or presence within historical range).
One‐third of the populations showed robust signs of density dependence but we detect
few examples of Allee effects.
Our results, from empirical time series of small populations, offer new insights into
achieving success for translocation programs limited to releasing few individuals.
-The characteristics and success of vertebrate translocations within Australia
2009
http://www.wildliferesearchmanagement.com.au/Final%20Report_0609.pdf
The characteristics and success of vertebrate translocations within Australia-
Final report
This report compiles 380 translocations of 102 species. Of these, 195 translocations
(51% of total translocations) are of 50 threatened species (roughly half of all species
translocated). This somewhat underestimates the proportion of translocations
conducted on threatened species as the two species (Brush-tailed Bettong and
Tammar Wallaby) that have the most translocations were delisted as threatened
species in the late 1990s, in part, because of the success of translocations. For the
purposes of these calculations, they are regarded as non-listed species.
Reintroductions were the most common form of translocation (65% of 380
translocations), followed by introductions (22%) and restocking (13%). Some
species have been highly favoured for translocation, with Brush-tailed Bettong being
the species most moved, mostly since the mid-1970s. Other species with 10 or more
translocations were Koala, Tammar Wallaby, Bilby, Brushtail Possum, Numbat,

38
Southern Brown Bandicoot (WA form), Burrowing Bettong, Malleefowl, and Noisy
Scrub Bird. Relatively f
Typically introductions and restocking of mammals were far more successful than
were reintroductions. Often, introductions were to islands (43 of 52 translocations).
-Translocate (capture & release) wild primates-1994-2009
https://www.conservationevidence.com/actions/1558
Translocate (capture & release) wild primates from development sites to natural
habitat elsewhere
Key messages
 One study in Malaysia found that the majority of orangutans survived following
translocation from a development site to natural habitat, alongside other interventions.
 Three before-and-after studies in Tanzania, French Guiana, and Madagascar found
that a majority of primates survived for 5-30 months following translocation from a
development site to natural habitat, alongside other interventions. One study in French
Guiana found that a minority of primates survived for at least 18 months.
 One before-and-after study in India found that rhesus monkeys remained at the sites
where they were released following translocation from a development site to natural
habitat, alongside other interventions.
2008-The effects of captive experience on reintroduction survival in carnivores
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222557519_The_effects_of_captive_experie
nce_on_reintroduction_survival_in_carnivores_A_review_and_analysis
The effects of captive experience on reintroduction survival in carnivores:
A review and analysis
Kristen R. Jule*, Lisa A. Leaver, Stephen E.G. Lea University of Exeter, Animal
Behaviour Research Group, School of Psychology, Wash
Abstract
This review focuses on the success and survivorship of captive-born versus wild-
caught carnivores used in reintroductions. Previous reviews have suggested that
reintroduction projects using captive-born animals are less likely to be successful than
projects translocating wild-caught animals. The purpose of this paper is to examine
this statistically and investigate how captivity may affect the survival of reintroduced
carnivores.
We examined results published in previous reviews, and found evidence to support
that reintroduction projects-using wild-caught animals are significantly more likely to
succeed than projects using captive-born animals.
We further compiled our own review of 45 case studies in carnivore reintroduction
projects (in 17 species across 5 families) to investigate survival rates rather than
overall project ‗success‘.

Sever-conservation translocations-rev.2021

Sever-conservation translocations-rev.2021

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Similaire à Sever-conservation translocations-rev.2021

Similaire à Sever-conservation translocations-rev.2021 (20)

Plus de Zvi Sever

Plus de Zvi Sever (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Sever-conservation translocations-rev.2021