UNDERSTANDING THE INDIVIDUAL IN WILDLIFE CONSERVATION

WHO AN ANIMAL IS AFFECTS TRANSLOCATION SUCCESS

Case Study: An endangered species of desert rodent,

Dipodomys stephensi

Animal Welfare Program: Liv Baker

Animal Welfare Program

Developed through concerns of loss of wilderness

Focus on health of populations, species and overall ecosystem biodiversity ~ NOT on the welfare of the individual

Changes in the intensification of conservation programs warrant a reevaluation of this focus

Translocation demands the direct care and management of free-ranging animals as a means to species survival

CONSERVATION

Animal Welfare Program

Deliberate and mediated movement of free-ranging animals

Common conservation practice to combat species loss

Popular among stakeholders

50-95% mortality rate

TRANSLOCATION

FACE OF MORTALITY

Animal Welfare Program

CAPTURE

Animal Welfare Program

HANDLING / EXAMINATION

Animal Welfare Program

CAPTIVITY

Animal Welfare Program

NOVEL ENVIRONMENT

Animal Welfare Program

MONITORING

Animal Welfare Program

Animal Welfare Program

TRANSLOCATION SUCCESS?

Where When

How Why

?

Animal Welfare Program

TRANSLOCATION SUCCESS?

WHO?

Southern California

Nocturnal Ricochetal Semi-fossorial Quasi-solitary Granivorous Keystone species Endangered (1988)

Animal Welfare Program

STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT

SUBURBANIZATION

Animal Welfare Program

CULTIVATION

Animal Welfare Program

INVASIVE GRASSES

Animal Welfare Program

Animal Welfare Program

METHODOLOGY: Personality Profile Demographic information

Fecal cortisol levels

Captive activity budgets

Social context responses

STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT

Animal Welfare Program

FINDINGS

Home environment matters

Cortisol matters

Activity level matters

Behavioural response matters

STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT

Parking lot Fallow vineyard (El Sol)

Animal Welfare Program

Animal Welfare Program

STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT

Parking Lot El Sol0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Post-release survival

Series1

Population

Percentage of animals

trapped

75%

52%*

Animal Welfare Program

FINDINGS

Home environment matters

Cortisol matters

Activity level matters

Behavioural response matters

STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT

Animal Welfare Program

STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT

P lot El Sol0

5

10

15

20

25

Baseline cortisol profile

PopulationFecal

cortisol ng/g

*

Animal Welfare Program

STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Fecal cortisol change of translocated SKR

Shorter-term survivalLonger-term survival

Fecal cor-tisolng/g *

Animal Welfare Program

FINDINGS

Home environment matters

Cortisol matters

Activity level matters

Behavioural response matters

STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT

Animal Welfare Program

STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT

P Lot El Sol0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

Activity level in captivity

P LotEl SolAvg.

combined activity *

Animal Welfare Program

FINDINGS

Home environment matters

Cortisol matters

Activity level matters

Behavioural response matters

STEPHENS’ KANGAROO RAT

Parking lot SKR El Sol SKR

Animal Welfare Program

Predator simulation Less interaction with predator

stimuli Fewer attempts at escape More time spent at refuge (Except for experienced SKR)

Conspecific simulation More interaction with mirror Quicker to interact with mirror

Predator simulation More interaction with predator

stimuli Greater attempts at escape Less time spent at refuge (Experienced behaved the same)

Conspecific simulation Less interaction with mirror Slower to interact with mirror

Animal Welfare Program

WHO SURVIVES?

Cortisol activity reactivity

More Docile More Cautious More Social More Plastic

Animal Welfare Program

Compassionate Conservation

Animal Welfare Program: Liv Baker

THANKS TOFor Guidance:David Fraser, UBCDebra Shier, ICR; UCLAMatt R. Milnes, MHC; ICRJeff Zuba, ICR

For Assistance:Tom AshNancy ChenMichael LawrenceChris MoenMatthew PetelleChristina TseMary Toews Sean Kuling

For Funding:Riverside County Habitat Conservation AgencyKillam Foundation