Elsevier

Biological Conservation

Volume 242, February 2020, 108404
Biological Conservation

Unmonitored releases of small animals? The importance of considering natural dispersal, health, and human habituation when releasing a territorial mammal threatened by wildlife trade

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108404Get rights and content

Abstract

Unmonitored release is a common practice, especially in small animals, that present a series of adverse conditions if not well-planned. Small research centers and non-governmental organizations in developing countries often receive animals that are then subject to unmonitored releases. We explored the patterns of post-release and natal dispersal in the Javan slow loris, a Critically Endangered venomous and territorial mammal that is highly threatened by wildlife trade. We then determined the importance of health status and human habituation for the survival of translocated and natally dispersing animals. We collected data from 2012 to 2018 on pre-release and pre-dispersal health conditions and human habituation, post-release and post-dispersal presence of wounds, behavior, and ranging patterns of 11 translocated and 11 natally dispersing individuals and compared them with 12 stable resident individuals. Translocated animals had a larger home range size (15.9 ± 4.1 ha) and higher wound presence during recaptures (0.47 ± 0.13) than stable resident individuals (3.2 ± 3.0 ha; 0.10 ± 0.06) but they did not differ from natally dispersing individuals (13.8 ± 3.7 ha; 0.28 ± 0.11). Both translocated and natally dispersing individuals can move to a different habitat type compared to their release area or natal range. The fate of both translocated and natally dispersing individuals was influenced by their health state (p < 0.001), and human habituation significantly affected the possibility of being captured for wildlife trade of translocated individuals (p = 0.048). We highlight the importance of considering natal dispersal, health state, and human habituation before the release of small animals to avoid death and capture for wildlife trade.

Introduction

Despite evidence on best practices in planning and monitoring translocation projects being available (IUCN/SSC, 2013, see Batson et al., 2015b for a review), unmonitored releases of animals are still frequent and can result in a series of adverse conditions if not well-planned (e.g. genetic changes, diseases, competition with resident individuals; Laikre et al., 2010, Champagnon et al., 2012). The reason for translocation failures is often unknown due to a lack of post-release monitoring (Griffith et al., 1989; Wolf et al., 1996; Fischer and Lindenmayer, 2000; Seddon et al., 2007; Beck, 2016). For example, a survey from 30 rescue centers revealed that only a third of respondents followed criteria to assess translocation success (Guy et al., 2013). Small research centers and non-governmental organizations in developing countries often receive animals brought in by villagers or law authorities and do not have the infrastructure to keep them (Cuarón, 1997, Cuarón, 2005, Agoramoorthy and Hsu, 2007, Nijman et al., 2009, Kenyon et al., 2014). These animals are often former pets or wild animals adapted to live in human-modified habitats that people perceive as forest animals (Kumar et al., 2014). As a result, they are subject to unmonitored releases (Dodd Jr and Seigel, 1991; Agoramoorthy and Hsu, 2007; Moore et al., 2014; Kumar et al., 2014; van der Sandt, 2017; Beck, 2019).

Animals translocated to an area where conspecifics are present may be forced to disperse (Le Gouar et al., 2012), thus translocated animals may share common characteristics with animals dispersing from their natal habitat (Macdonald and Johnson, 2001). Understanding patterns of natal dispersal in wild animals is, thus, fundamental when planning translocations (Armstrong and Seddon, 2008). Dispersal from the release site to another area is usually considered a criterion for failure in translocation projects, but often the information on wild dispersing animals is lacking (Stamps and Swaisgood, 2007; Le Gouar et al., 2012; Villaseñor et al., 2013; Berger-Tal et al., 2019), so such secondary dispersals may be natural for some species (Sutherland et al., 2000 for a review).

The health condition of animals immediately after the release is considered a main factor determining translocation success and should be taken into consideration and monitored (Mathews et al., 2006; Dickens et al., 2010). Health condition (considering both visible signs and pathogens), however, needs to be considered carefully even before the release since it may determine the translocation success (Mathews et al., 2006; Parker et al., 2012; Portas et al., 2016). Furthermore, health monitoring after release is often limited to direct observations of diseases and mortality, while comprehensive health evaluations are often missing (Deem et al., 2012; Portas et al., 2016). Another fundamental factor to be considered before the release is the habitat suitability in the release area, although the definition of suitable habitats is not always clear since it is species-specific (Osborne and Seddon, 2012). An unsuitable release area can determine a post-release dispersal as a consequence of the Natal Habitat Preference Induction (i.e. animals look for stimuli from their natal habitat instead of evaluating the habitat quality of the release site; Stamps and Swaisgood, 2007). An additional factor to be taken into consideration when planning population restoration projects, often neglected, is the involvement and attitudes of the local community, especially for species subjected to hunting and other forms of wildlife trade (Hunter et al., 2007; Nilsen et al., 2007; Jule et al., 2008). Areas with long-term conservation projects that also include conservation education or community outreach programs may thus be more suitable for restoration of threatened populations.

We explored the patterns of post-release and natal dispersal and investigated the role of health state and human habituation on the fate of translocated and natally dispersing Javan slow lorises Nycticebus javanicus, a nocturnal mammal, as part of a long-term conservation and research project. Slow lorises are the only venomous primates and it is suggested that the main use of their venom is against conspecifics (Rode-Margono and Nekaris, 2015). Javan slow lorises are highly territorial and animals can have severe wounds that are usually more frequent during dispersal (Fuller et al., 2018). Slow lorises are widely threatened by illegal trade for pets, medicines and tourist photography props (Nekaris and Starr, 2015; Ni et al., 2018), meaning that a low alert response towards humans may be detrimental for their survival. Furthermore, traders may cut their teeth to prevent venomous bites, which have implications for feeding on their main food resources – exudates, which they must gouge from trees (Nekaris and Starr, 2015). Slow lorises, despite being highly territorial and threatened by wildlife trade, are frequently subjected to unmonitored releases (Kumar et al., 2014). We collected data on translocated and natally dispersing animals and predicted that health state and human habituation would have been significant factors in determining animal survival and success in settling in a stable area. We then compared the presence of wounds and animals' ranging patterns after release or dispersal with those of stable resident animals present in the area to determine whether translocated and natally dispersing animals are similar. This information is important to determine whether post-release dispersal is abnormal or whether it is similar to the process of animals dispersing from their natal range. If unmonitored releases are to continue by welfare charities and governments, these data may provide some information on how to select appropriate release candidates.

Section snippets

Study site and subjects

We examined pre-release and pre-dispersal health conditions, human habituation, post-release and post-dispersal presence of wounds, behavior, and ranging patterns of 11 translocated (4 females, 7 males) and 11 natally dispersing (3 females, 8 males) Javan slow loris Nycticebus javanicus in Cipaganti, Garut District, Java, Indonesia (7° S, 107° E, 1200 m a.s.l.). The habitat consists of a mosaic of agricultural fields, bamboo patches, shrubs, and small agroforest patches in the vicinity of a

Results

The probability of wounds was significantly different between translocated (estimated mean: 0.47 ± SE 0.13), natally dispersing (estimated mean: 0.28 ± SE 0.11), and stable resident individuals (estimated mean: 0.10 ± SE 0.06) (generalized linear model: Wald χ2 = 6.42, p = 0.040), with a significant difference between translocated and stable resident individuals (Sequential Bonferroni: p = 0.029) (Fig. 1). The home range size in the first two months after release or dispersal was also different

Translocated animals may be forced to disperse

Here we showed that translocated animals in re-enforcement programs may act as natally dispersing animals, showing similar home ranges and probability of wounds. It is often assumed that post-release survival and settlement in a release area are the main criteria for a successful translocation (Le Gouar et al., 2012; Parker et al., 2012). As a consequence, many management tools are often used to mitigate post-release dispersal (Richardson et al., 2015b). The biology and ecology of a

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Marco Campera:Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing - original draft, Visualization.Ella Brown:Investigation, Writing - review & editing.Muhammad Ali Imron:Writing - review & editing, Project administration.K.A.I. Nekaris:Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Resources, Writing - original draft, Supervision, Project administration, Funding acquisition.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgments

We thank Indonesia RISTEK and the regional Perhutani and BKSDA for authorising the study. Amersfoort Zoo, Augsburg Zoo, Brevard Zoo, Cleveland Zoo and Zoo Society, Columbus Zoo and Aquarium, Cotswolds Wildlife Park, Disney Worldwide Conservation Fund, Henry Doorly Zoo, International Primate Protection League, Little Fireface Project, Mohamed bin al Zayed Species Conservation Fund (152511813), Margot Marsh Biodiversity Fund, Memphis Zoo, Moody Gardens Zoo, National Geographic (GEFNE101-13),

References (70)

  • L. Laikre et al.

    Compromising genetic diversity in the wild: unmonitored large-scale release of plants and animals

    Trends Ecol. Evol.

    (2010)
  • T.G. Lovegrove

    Island releases of saddlebacks Philesturnus carunculatus in New Zealand

    Biol. Conserv.

    (1996)
  • F. Mathews et al.

    Health surveillance in wildlife reintroductions

    Biol. Conserv.

    (2006)
  • J.A. Stamps et al.

    Someplace like home: experience, habitat selection and conservation biology

    Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci.

    (2007)
  • C.P. Teixeira et al.

    Revisiting translocation and reintroduction programmes: the importance of considering stress

    Anim. Behav.

    (2007)
  • G. Agoramoorthy et al.

    Ritual releasing of wild animals threatens island ecology

    Hum. Ecol.

    (2007)
  • J. Altmann

    Observational study of behavior: sampling methods

    Behaviour

    (1974)
  • W. Batson et al.

    Release strategies for fauna reintroductions: Theory and tests

  • W.G. Batson et al.

    Translocation tactics: a framework to support the IUCN guidelines for wildlife translocations and improve the quality of applied methods

    J. Appl. Ecol.

    (2015)
  • B.B. Beck

    The role of translocation in primate conservation

  • B.B. Beck

    Unwitting Travelers: A History of Primate Reintroduction

    (2019)
  • O. Berger-Tal et al.

    A systematic survey of the integration of animal behavior into conservation

    Conserv. Biol.

    (2016)
  • O. Berger-Tal et al.

    Conservation translocations: a review of common difficulties and promising directions

    Anim. Conserv.

    (2019)
  • H. Birot et al.

    Artificial canopy bridges improve connectivity in fragmented landscapes: the case of Javan slow lorises in an agroforest environment

    Am. J. Primatol

    (2019)
  • P.W. Bright et al.

    Animal translocation for conservation: performance of doormice in relation to release methods, origin and season

    J. Appl. Ecol.

    (1994)
  • F.L. Bunnell et al.

    Dispersal and dispersion of black-tailed deer: models and observations

    J. Mammal.

    (1983)
  • F. Cabana et al.

    The seasonal feeding ecology of the Javan slow loris (Nycticebus javanicus)

    Am. J. Phys. Anthropol

    (2017)
  • A.D. Cuarón

    Conspecific aggression and predation: costs for a solitary mantled howler monkey

    Folia Primatol.

    (1997)
  • A.D. Cuarón

    Further role of zoos in conservation: monitoring wildlife use and the dilemma of receiving donated and confiscated animals

    Zoo Biol.

    (2005)
  • N. Das et al.

    Medicinal plant exudativory by the Bengal slow loris Nycticebus bengalensis

    Endanger. Species Res.

    (2014)
  • S.L. Deem et al.

    Diseases of poultry and endemic birds in Galapagos: implications for the reintroduction of native species

    Anim. Conserv.

    (2012)
  • C.K. Dodd et al.

    Relocation, repatriation, and translocation of amphibians and reptiles: are they conservation strategies that work?

    Herpetologica

    (1991)
  • A. Dolev et al.

    Impact of repeated releases on space-use patterns of Persian fallow deer

    J. Wildl. Manag.

    (2002)
  • J.G. Ewen et al.

    Empirical consideration of parasites and health in reintroduction

  • J.L. Frair et al.

    Know thy enemy: experience affects elk translocation success in risky landscapes

    J. Wildl. Manag.

    (2007)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text