Evolving Approaches to Zoo-Based Conservation

Abstract

In the latter portion of the twentieth century, a number of zoos and aquariums began to re-evaluate what the mission of living institutions should be (Rabb, 1994). Zoos and aquariums have long held wildlife conservation as a goal (Jarvis, 1965), and a number of larger institutions (e.g., Bronx Zoo/Wildlife Conservation Society, San Diego Zoo) have had a considerable commitment to in situ conservation for many decades. However, the increasing degree of threat faced by the natural world, along with growing global awareness of the plight of threatened species and their habitats, encouraged many within the zoo and aquarium community to lobby for a larger role for the profession in in situ conservation and for the need to emphasize the conservation mission of living institutions (Hutchins & Conway, 1995; Norton, Hutchins, Stevens, & Maple, 1995). In response to this change in mission, the last quarter century has seen a proliferation of different zoo-based approaches to wildlife conservation at institutions large and small. Many early initiatives tried to capitalize on the role that might be played by zoo animal populations, particularly in terms of research and reintroduction, and much of this early work developed organically, based on the specific interests, passions, or relationships of individual zoo employees. Initially, most of the push to expand the conservation work of zoos occurred at the level of individual institutions, with zoos like Columbus, Saint Louis and Denver building significant programs. More recently, the major zoo and aquarium associations have codified the need for their members to be involved in in situ conservation in documents ranging from the World Zoo and Aquarium Strategy