ZPM_April_2011 by ZOO-WILD

Magazine of Zoo Outreach Organisation Vol. XXVI No. 4, April 2011

ISSN 0971-6378 (Print); 0973-2543 (Online)

How does drama help understand the link between wildlife conservation and animal welfare? Read the article on Pp. 5-15.

Date of Publication: 19 April 2011

Magazine of Zoo Outreach Organisation Vol. XXVI No. 4, April 2011

ISSN 0971-6378 (Print); 0973-2543 (Online)

Contents Western Ghats Reptile Conservation Assessment and Management Plan (CAMP) Workshop, Sanjay Molur, Pp. 1-4 Linking Wildlife Conservation and Wildlife Welfare: Educator Training Report, B.A. Daniel, R. Marimuthu and S. Walker, Pp. 5-15 Dysfunctional Zoos & What to Do, Sally Walker, Pp. 16-20 Decade on Biodiversity and Opportunities for Zoos in South Asia, P. 21 Dhaka Zoo hosts Interns from all over Bangladesh Dr. Md. Shakif-Ul-Azam, Pp. 22-23

Western Ghats Reptile CAMP Workshop held at Coimbatore, March 2011

Symbiotic Plant-Ant Mutualism: Biomimetics ideas for Outsourcing in Biz Management, S. Paulraj, Pp. 24-26 Zygomycosis in captive Asian Elephant (Elephas maximus), Manuel Thomas, Abin Varghese, K. Abraham Samuel and Punnen Kurian, P. 27 A note on parasitic infections in Indian peacock G. Ponnudurai, K. Rajendran, N. Rani and T.J. Harikrishnan, P. 28

Linking Wildlife Conservation and Wildlife Welfare : an activity at the educators training workshop held at Coimbatore, February 2011

Western Ghats Reptile Conservation Assessment and Management Plan (CAMP) Workshop Sanjay Molur* There is an increased interest in understanding and defining threatened taxa using methods available at hand within local and global contexts. A cursory glance at any checklist or conservation oriented publication includes a paragraph or Table of threatened species within the site of study. This reference to threatened species invariably is to the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species web site, which has until date more than 55,000 species in its record from around the world. Not all of the species on the site are threatened as a fair number of them are either species of Least Concern or Data Deficient. The process that leads to determining whether a species is threatened or not also provides an opportunity to understand how many are not threatened, therefore providing ample information to list both threatened and non-threatened species on that list. India has been one of the pioneers in assessing the status of species compiling information and applying the IUCN categories and criteria since 1995. In 1997 the first national assessments were conducted in a series of Conservation Assessment and Management Plan (CAMP) workshops as part of the Biodiversity Conservation Prioritization Project (BCPP) by Zoo Outreach Organisation (ZOO) in collaboration with the Salim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History (SACON), and funded by the WWF and USAID. The seven workshops conducted in 1997 laid the foundation for data compilation, assessments, and research and education follow-up for several groups of fauna and flora including all of the 400+ mammals, 450+ reptiles, 200+ amphibians, ~330 freshwater fishes, ~100 selected invertebrates, ~250 plants (including selected medicinal plants and all mangrove species), and other smaller groups of algae, pteridophytes and gymnosperms. Several different outcomes of these exercises resulted in field biologists either supporting or refuting the data and the assessments, leading to a continuously improved and better data sources. The basic assessments and the information thereof led to follow-up workshops at the South Asian regional level in the 2000s. Taxonomic networks have assisted these follow-up exercises immensely, with more youngsters taking part in field work, taxonomic quests and more recently phylogenetic studies to establish more current

A plenary session during the CAMP workshop

The snake working group hard at work

* Executive Director, Zoo Outreach Organisation/ Founder/Secretary, Wildlife Information Liaison Development Society Email: herpinvert@gmail.com

ZOOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s PRINT, Volume XXVI, Number 4, April 2011

the earlier workshop showed several species either threatened or lacking data, the March 2011 exercise indicated a broad shift of our understanding of the threatened species into less threatened categories, namely Least Concern. The assessments are not yet complete, so it is unwise to reveal the statistics yet, but the results should be out sometime in the next 3 months.

A break after 14-hour working days - at the NBNP

The Reptile assessment team in dappled light

knowledge on our understanding of taxonomy, biogeography, distribution and threats. The recently concluded assessment of the Western Ghats reptile fauna in Coimbatore (28 February to 4 March 2011) at Karl Kubel Institute shifted some of the established paradigms of our understanding of threatened reptiles as compared to the 1997 CAMP output. A total of 245 species of reptiles were assessed, several endemic to the Western Ghats, and others occurring in the Western Ghats or in southern India. Species endemic to the Eastern Ghats and peninsular India were also considered in the assessments. 40 participants with

expertise in the field represented 28 organizations in the assessments. While the 1997 Indian reptile CAMP had several well-established herpetologists of that era, the 2011 Western Ghats reptile CAMP workshop had a fairly young representation with a majority of the participants attending the CAMP workshop for the very first time; many of them having developed their expertise in this field since the first reptile CAMP workshop nearly 14 years ago! And, as expected, information, knowledge base and trends in taxonomic details resulted in our understanding of reptiles in the 1997 CAMP vis-à-vis the 2011 CAMP. While

So as a follow up of the workshop, consistency checks of the data are underway. Once that is completed, all working PDFs will be reviewed by all the participants to input data that were not compiled during the workshop. Since all the information were compiled on the online Species information Service (SIS) database developed by the IUCN, the consistency checking and finalization is expected to be more systematic and rapid. Maps using ArcView were generated before the workshop based on the extensive information supplied by several participants and others who did not attend the CAMP workshop. Point locality data were digitized and polygons were defined after discussions in the working groups, which also gave a better idea of the species’ distribution, extent of occurrence and area of occupancy, likely threats and therefore a more accurate assessment. These maps are being worked on and finalized currently, which will also be sent to the participants for finalization. So, you can expect a final output in three to four months. Final outputs will include a complete account of information in the Threatened Taxa Monitoring System (TTMS) website at www.southasiantaxa.org where all point locality data, text, maps, etc. will be provided open access, hopefully by July 2011. Later in the year, around October, the IUCN Red List will publish the assessments for all endemic reptiles of the region on the www.iucnredlist.org website. The Western Ghats reptile CAMP workshop is part of the global reptile assessments (GRA) of the IUCN SSC, similar to the global mammal and amphibian assessments. However, workshops to assess reptiles are more ad hoc depending on availability of funds. The Critical Ecosystem Partnership Fund (CEPF) under the large grant awards to the Wildlife information Liaison Development (WILD) Society funded this workshop. Collaborators include Zoo Outreach Organisation, the South Asian Reptile Network and the Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, South Asia network, working along with the IUCN GRA.

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVII, Number 4, April 2011

List of reptiles assessed during the CAMP workshop in Coimbatore in March 2011 Coronella brachyura Cyrtodactylus nebulosus Daboia russelii Dasia haliana Dasia subcaerulea Dendrelaphis caudolineolatus Dendrelaphis grandoculis Dendrelaphis pictus Dendrelaphis tristis Draco dussumieri Dryocalamus gracilis Dryocalamus nympha Echis carinatus Elachistodon westermanni Eryx johnii Eryx whitakeri Eublepharis fuscus Eublepharis hardwickii Eurylepis poonaensis Eutropis allapallensis Eutropis beddomii Eutropis bibronii Eutropis carinata Eutropis clivicola Eutropis gansi Eutropis innotata Eutropis macularia Eutropis nagarjuni Eutropis trivittata Eutropis tytleri Geckoella albofasciatus Geckoella collegalensis Geckoella deccanensis Geckoella jeyporensis Gehyra mutilata Gongylophis conicus Grypotyphlops acutus Hemidactylus aaronbaueri Hemidactylus albofasciatus Hemidactylus anamallensis Hemidactylus bowringii Hemidactylus brookii Hemidactylus flaviviridis Hemidactylus frenatus Hemidactylus giganteus Hemidactylus gracilis Hemidactylus graniticolus Hemidactylus gujaratensis Hemidactylus leschenaultii Hemidactylus maculatus Hemidactylus persicus Hemidactylus porbandarensis Hemidactylus prashadi Hemidactylus reticulatus Hemidactylus sataraensis Hemidactylus scabriceps Hemidactylus subtriedrus Hemidactylus treutleri Hemidactylus triedrus Hemiphyllodactylus aurantiacus Hemiphyllodactylus typus Hypnale hypnale

Kaestlea beddomei Kaestlea bilineata Kaestlea palnica Kaestlea travancorica Lepidodactylus lugubris Liopeltis calamaria Lycodon aulicus Lycodon flavomaculatus Lycodon striatus Lycodon travancoricus Lygosoma ashwamedhi Lygosoma goaensis Lygosoma guentheri Lygosoma lineata Lygosoma pruthi Lygosoma punctata Lygosoma vosmaeri Macropisthodon plumbicolor Melanophidium bilineatum Melanophidium punctatum Melanophidium wynaudense Naja naja Oligodon affinis Oligodon arnensis Oligodon brevicauda Oligodon nikhili Oligodon taeniolatus Oligodon travancorica Ophiophagus hannah Ophisops beddomei Ophisops jerdonii Ophisops leschenaultii Ophisops microlepis Ophisops minor Otocryptis beddomii Peltopelor macrolepis Platyceps ventromaculatus Platyplectrurus madurensis Platyplectrurus trilineatus Plectrurus aureus Plectrurus canaricus Plectrurus guentheri Plectrurus perroteti Psammodynastes pulverulentus Psammophilus blanfordanus Psammophilus dorsalis Psammophis condanarus Psammophis leithii Psammophis longifrons Ptyas mucosa Python molurus Ramphotyphlops braminus Rhabdops olivaceus Rhinophis fergusonianus Rhinophis sanguineus Rhinophis travancoricus Riopa albopunctata Ristella beddomii Ristella guentheri Ristella rurkii Ristella travancorica Salea anamallayana

ZOOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s PRINT, Volume XXVI, Number 4, April 2011

Salea horsfieldii Sepsophis punctatus Sibynophis subpunctatus Sitana ponticeriana Sphenomorphus dussumieri Sphenomorphus indicus Teretrurus sanguineus Trimeresurus gramineus Trimeresurus malabaricus Trimeresurus strigatus Typhlops beddomii Typhlops exiguus Typhlops pammeces Typhlops porrectus Typhlops thurstoni Typhlops tindalli Uropeltis arcticeps Uropeltis beddomii Uropeltis broughami Uropeltis ceylanicus Uropeltis dindigalensis Uropeltis ellioti Uropeltis liura Uropeltis macrolepis Uropeltis macrorhynchus Uropeltis maculatus Uropeltis myhendrae Uropeltis nitidus Uropeltis ocellatus Uropeltis petersi Uropeltis phipsonii Uropeltis pulneyensis Uropeltis rubrolineatus Uropeltis rubromaculatus Uropeltis smithi Uropeltis woodmasoni Varanus bengalensis Xenochrophis piscator Xylophis captaini Xylophis perroteti Xylophis stenorhynchus

Photo credit Sanjay Sondhi

Ahaetulla dispar Ahaetulla nasuta Ahaetulla perroteti Ahaetulla pulverulenta Amphiesma beddomei Amphiesma monticola Amphiesma stolatum Argyrogena fasciolata Atretium schistosum Barkudia insularis Barkudia melanosticta Boiga beddomei Boiga ceylonensis Boiga dightoni Boiga forsteni Boiga trigonata Boiga wallachi Brachyophidium rhodogaster Bungarus caeruleus Bungarus ceylonicus Bungarus fasciatus Bungarus sindanus Calliophis beddomei Calliophis bibroni Calliophis melanurus Calliophis nigrescens Calotes andamanensis Calotes aurantolabium Calotes calotes Calotes ellioti Calotes grandisquamis Calotes nemoricola Calotes rouxii Calotes versicolor Chalcides pentadactylus Chamaeleo zeylanicus Chrysopelea ornata Cnemaspis australis Cnemaspis beddomei Cnemaspis boiei Cnemaspis goaensis Cnemaspis gracilis Cnemaspis heteropholis Cnemaspis indica Cnemaspis indraneildasii Cnemaspis jerdonii Cnemaspis kandiana Cnemaspis kolhapurensis Cnemaspis littoralis Cnemaspis monticola Cnemaspis mysoriensis Cnemaspis nairi Cnemaspis nilagirica Cnemaspis ornata Cnemaspis otai Cnemaspis sisparensis Cnemaspis tropidogaster Cnemaspis wynadensis Cnemaspis yercaudensis Coelognathus helena Coelognathus radiatus Coluber bholanathi Coluber gracilis

PARTICIPANTS IN REPTILE CAMP AARON M. Bauer Gerald M. Lemole, Director, Graduate Program in Biology, Villanova University 800 Lancaster Avenue Villanova, Pennsylvania 19085 Ph: +16105194857 aaron.bauer@villanova.edu ABHIJIT Das Division of Herpetology Aaranyak, 50 Samanwoy Path Survey, Beltola Guwahati - 781 028, Assam protobothrops@gmail.com ACHYUTHAN NS N-304, Haware Glomaph Sector 20, Kharghae New Mumbai, Maharashtra Mobile: +91 9930817255, 9944476966 latvika@yahoo.com AENGALS R Scientist Zoological Survey of India 130, Santhome High Road Chennai - 600 028, Tamil Nadu Phone- +91 44 24642680 / 24643191 Fax: +91 44 24642680 aengalszsiramasamy@yahoo.com ANIRUDDHA Datta Roy Karanth Lab Centre for Ecological Sciences Indian Institute of Science Bangalore – 560 012, Karnataka Phone- +91 9483507715 roysnake@gmail.com BHARGAVI Srinivasulu Research Scientist Biodiversity Research and Conservation Soc. Secunderabad 11 AP Res: +91 40 64561981 Mobile: +91 9346746472 bharisrini@gmail.com braconsindia@gmail.com BHUPATHY S PS, SACON Anaikatti (PO), Coimbatore 4 TN Phone: +91 422 2657103-105 Res: +91 422 2402297 bhupathy.s@gmail.com Channakeshava Murthy, BH Scientist ZSI Zoological Survey of India Kolkata, West Bengal drbhckmurthy31@rediffmail.com puttakeshava@gmail.com DANIEL BA Scientist, Zoo Outreach Organisation, Peelamedu, Coimbatore 4 TN Phone: +91-422-2561087 Mobile: +91-9344830425 Fax: +91-422-2563269 badaniel@zooreach.org DEEPAK V Wildlife Institute of India Post Box-18, Chandrabani Dehradun - 248001 Uttarakhand deepaksalea@gmail.com DIPAK Sawant Curator Wild Animal Rescue and Rehabilitation Center, Katraj, Pune, Maharashtra Phone: +91 020 24370747 Mobile: +91 9595366245 dipaktheraptor@gmail.com,

GANESH SR Research Scholar Chennai Snake Park Tamil Nadu Phone: +91 44 22353623 Res: +91 44 26511570 Mobile: +91 9444753065 snakeranglerr@gmail.com snakeranglerr@yahoo.com GOWRI Shankar Agumbe Rainforest Research Station, Suralihalla, Agumbe Thirthahalli Taluk Shimoga District – 577 411 Karnataka Phone: +91 08181 223081, 233186 Mobile: +91 9448156804 gowrishankar.arrs@gmail.com ISHAN Agarwal Karanth Lab Centre for Ecological Science Indian Institute of Science Bangalore - 560 012 Karnataka Ishan.agarwal@gmail.com JOYCE Jose Assistant Professor in Zoology, Mar Thoma College, Kuttapuzha (P.O), Tiruvalla – 689 103, Kerala Mobile: +91 9446812852 joyceofthejungle@gmail.com MADHURI Ramesh No. 10, Auroville Main Road Periya Mudaliar Chavadi Kottakuppam Panchayat Auroville - 605 101, Puducherry Mobile: +91 9940413597 madhurir@hotmail.com MALIK Fasil Madala Assistant Professor and Head Department of Forestry Sir Syed College Kannur University Karimbam P. O. Kannur – 670 142, Kerala Res: +91 4662 2382206 Mobile: +91 9995289366 malikcof@gmail.com MANJU Siliwal Research Associates Wildlife Information Liaison Development Society Peelamedu, Coimbatore 4 TN Mobile: +91 9344837182 manju@zooreach.org, manjusiliwal@gmail.com MARCELO F. Tognelli Programme Officer IUCN | CI Biodiversity Assessment Unit c/o Science + Knowledge | Conservation International 2011 Crystal Drive, Suite 500 Arlington, VA 22202, USA m.tognelli@conservation.org marcelo.tognelli@iucn.org MOLUR, Payal “GO WILD Workshops” D2 Mitralaya EB Colony, Phase II Ganapathy 6, Coimbatore, TN Ph: 9442251743 Payal.molur@gmail.com MRUGANK Prabhu Centre for Ecological Sciences Indian Institute of Science Bangalore – 560 012 Karnataka mrugankvp@gmail.com

NEELESH Naresh Dahanukar Indian Institute of Science Education and Research Central Tower Sai Trinity Building Sutarwadi Road, Pashan Pune – 411 021, Maharashtra Mobile: +91 9226339091 n.dahanukar@iiserpune.ac.in neeleshdahanukar@rediffmail.com NEIL Cox MGR., IUCN Biodiversity Assessment Unit 2011 Crystal Drive, Suite 500, Arlington, VA 22202 USA Office phone: 1/703/341-2649. n.cox@conservation.org; neil.cox@iucn.org NIRMAL U Kulkarni 6 Hiru Naik Bldg, Dhuler Mapusa, Goa – 403 507 Mobile: +91 9326107079 ophidian_nirmal@yahoo.co.in NITIN S. Sawant Research Scholar Department of Zoology Goa University Goa – 403 206 Mobile: +91 9822483535 nitinnature@yahoo.co.in PRATYUSH Mohapatra Centre for Biodiversity Conserv M-71, Housing Board Colony Baramunda Bhubaneswar – 751 003, Orissa Phone: +91 9437171712 pratyush.kingcobra@gmail.com RAJENDRA Vyas 505, Krishnadeep Apartments Mission Road Fatehgunj Vadodara – 390 002 Gujarat Phone: +91 0265 2791198 Mobile: +91 9825308498 razoovyas@hotmail.com SANJAY Molur Founder/Secretary Wildlife Information Liaison Development Society Peelamedu, Coimbatore 4 TN Phone: +91-422-2561087 Mobile: +91-9367619991 herpinvert@gmail.com SANJAY Sondhi TITLI TRUST 49, Rajpur Road Enclave Dhoran Khas, near IT Park P.O Gujrada, Dehradun Uttarakhand Phone: +91 135 2607452 Mobile: +91 9412052189, 9423004369 Sanjay.sondhi1@gmail.com titlitrust@gmail.com SANJAY Thakur Sr. Project Officer WWF-India Seoni, Madhya Pradesh Mobile: +91 9993465716 +919423004369 sanjaythakur12@rediffmail.com, sanjaythakur005@gmail.com SAUNAK Pal Centre for Ecological Sciences Indian Institute of Science Bangalore – 560 012, Karnataka herps.saunak@gmail.com

SHRUTI Sengupta 4G, Madhumita Apartment 33 B.T. Road Khardah Kolkata – 700 117, West Bengal Mobile: +91 9007024528 senguptashruti@gmail.com shruti_sengupta@yahoo.com SREEHARI R Student Kerala Agricultural University KAU (PO), Thrissur - 680 656 Kerala sree.forestry@gmail.com SREEHARI VS Student Kerala Agricultural University KAU (PO), Thrissur - 680 656 Kerala Mobile: +91 9496352944 svs.orion@gmail.com SREEKAR Rachakonda C/o Biodiversity Research and Conservation Society G4, MRK Towers Swarnadhama Nagar, Near Military Diary Farm Old Bowenpally Secunderabad - 500 011 Andhra Pradesh Phone: +91 9000149069 Skype: sreekar1988 sreekar1988@gmail.com SRINIVASULU C Ass Prof, Wildlife Biology Section Department of Zoology Osmania University Hyderabad 7 AP Phone: +91 40 27682218 Mobile: +91 9346571981 hyd2masawa@gmail.com Yashmita Nitin Ulman Student Kerala Agricultural University KAU (PO), Thrissur - 680 656 Kerala Mobile: +91 9496360435 yashmita.forester@gmail.com VARAD B Giri Curator, Collections Department Bombay Natural History Society Hornbill House, S. B. Singh Road Mumbai - 400 001, Maharashtra Phone: +91 22 22821811 Mobile: +91 9029024488 varadgiri@gmail.com VIJAYAKUMAR SP Ph.D Student Centre for Ecological Sciences Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore - 560 012, Karnataka Mobile: +91 9481481755 vijay_rhaco@yahoo.com vj@ces.iisc.ernet.in Aditya Srinivasulu Student Researcher, Biodiversity Research and Conservation Society, Andhrapradesh. Phone: 040-42402460 Mobile: +91 9346571981, 9440571981. Cadisri98@gmail.com C. Vadivalagan Doctoral Student Bharathiar University Conservation Biology Lab Coimbatore- 641 040, TN Mobile: +91 9965079109 Vadivu.barcoding@gmail.com

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVII, Number 4, April 2011

Linking Wildlife Conservation and Wildlife Welfare: Educator Training Workshop Report B.A. Daniel1, R. Marimuthu2 and S. Walker3 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare (UFAW) based in Gt. Britain, works to promote and develop improvements in animal welfare with scientific research and creating awareness globally. UFAW takes a practical approach knowing that certain types of research are necessary and will be carried out despite any amount of protest. So UFAW devises research protocols for urgently required medical and other scientific research which cause the least possible discomfort for laboratory animals. UFAW has many programmes; see <www.ufaw.org>.

educational packet called Conservation Consciousness linking wildlife

Left : The “Old School” based in Great Britain is the Headquarters of the Universities Federation for Animal Welfare UFAW

Below: UFAW Council and S.Walker at their HQ having a discussion over high tea

Founded in 1929 with a tagline of Science in the service of animal welfare UFAW describes itself as an “internationally recognised, independent, scientific and education animal welfare charity concerned with improving knowledge and understanding of animals' needs in order to promote high standards of welfare for farm, companion, laboratory, captive wild animal and those with which we interact in the wild.” Zoo Outreach Organisation has a very long relationship with UFAW and has been much influenced by their combined philosophy of science and practical approach. With support from UFAW, ZOO organized a two-day educator training programme for selected educators involved in wildlife education and conservation in South India. The training programme was organized at Karunya University Campus during 18-19 February 2011 with the them of making conservation and welfare work together for the benefit of wildlife. Background From the time of its found in 1985, ZOO defined itself as both a conservation and animal welfare organisation, among other things, e.g., “Zoo Outreach Organisation (ZOO) is a Positive, Constructive, Practical, Scientific, Sensible and Sensitive Conservation, Education, Research and Animal Welfare Society.” Over the years since inception ZOO has conducted education programmes in which animal welfare was included with conservation and some in which animal welfare specifically in zoos and in field biology was highlighted. ZOO has developed power point presentations, and educational packets to supplement the programmes. More recently an

Bhutan small mammal students and academics with Dr. Paul Racey, Chair, Bat Specialist group and Mike Jordan, Director, National Zoo Pretoria South Africa. Paul and Mike are shining examples of combining conservation and animal welfare in many training workshops in South Asia in collaboration with ZOO 1 Scientist, 2Education Officer, 3Founder/Director, Zoo Outreach Organisation badaniel@zooreach.org, marimuthu@zooreach.org, sallyrwalker@zooreach.org

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVI, Number 4, April 2011

conservation and wildlife welfare and another two packets themed Good Zoo practice Zoo Animal Welfare. In its field techniques training for taxon networks, ZOO’s choice of Resource Persons (such as Dr. Paul Racey, and Dr. Mike Jordan pictured on the previous page) have been invited to our workshop as Resource Person over and over again for their superb handling methods in field techniques training, emphasizing that field research doesn’t have to be torture for animals. Last year, UFAW devoted an entire issue of their Animal Welfare Journal (Animal Welfare 19: 2010) to the Proceedings of a Symposium conducted the same year and which addressed “conservation and welfare of animals” as a single topic. The conference highlighted communication and cooperation between the fields of conservation biology and animal welfare sciences as leading to better science and better treatment of animals in research. Also in September 2010 there was a workshop entitled “Compassionate Conservation” by ZooCheck with Wildcru at Oxford. Previous to this in a CBSG Strategic Planning brainstorm in 2009, the third author suggested the topic of wildlife welfare as a theme that the IUCN SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group should consider as one of their mandated activities. It was accepted in the 2010 meeting of CBSG after a 2-day working group discussed the topic in detail. (See Appendix 1 for Working group Report end of this article).

ZOO Educator Workshop Linking Conservation and Welfare With this background ZOO planned a two-day educator programme in Conservation and Animal Welfare for conservationists interested in education as well as educators interested in conservation. The theme of the training was ‘Linking Wildlife Conservation with Wildlife Welfare ... tools for making both work for the benefit of wildlife” with the following objectives:

of paper. The assessments or “front end evaluation” is done both before and after the workshop, which help the organizers to measure acquisition of facts about conservation and welfare, comprehension, feelings and effect on behavior. As part of the programme, an activity to help the group to break social barriers and interact among each other without inhibition was carried out.

• to empower educators of all kinds to teach about wildlife conservation and wildlife welfare; • to understand the link between wildlife conservation and wildlife welfare and issues related to it • to demonstrate innovative teaching and learning techniques designed to understand the above concept. The first and second author also were trainers for the programme.

Unlike species or habitat related topics, Wildlife conservation vis a vis wildlife welfare are virtually untouched for discussion among educators. So an introduction on the history and definition of conservation biology and animal welfare was done. Animal welfare and wildlife conservation evolved as two distinct lines of thoughts that were developed due to concern over the impact of human beings on animals. According to D. Fraser in his presentation at the UFAW symposium: “Animal welfare ... focuses on how human actions affect individual animals and their quality of life.” Some examples from animal welfare perspective are: cruelty and neglect of domestic or captive animals, misuse of animals in research, cruelty to captive wild animals used for entertainment, discomfort and pain caused by institutionalized forms of animal slaughter from industrialized food production, etc. The animal welfare movement began in response to the awareness of human cruelty to animals, in whatever form. Wildlife conservation is in response to the decline of wild taxa irregardless of cause. Some examples of negative impact of human beings from a perspective of wildlife conservation are: extermination of wild animals by hunting, etc., reduction of animal populations due to shrinkage of habitat as a result of development by human beings, etc. These changes were welcomed as part of economic necessity as per history, but as the population declines and near

Participants were zoo volunteers, animal rescue team members, research/graduate students, education interpretation assistants, members from NGOs involved in wildlife education, police involved in wildlife rescue, school teachers and wildlife photographers (Appendix 2: Participants list). The programme module involved a pre- workshop assessment to understand the attitude of the participants and their knowledge about the subject “conservation and animal welfare. Two assessments were conducted, i.e., attitude assessment and content survey. People’s attitudes vary from individual to individual when they hear some news. A set of questions related to conservation and welfare was read out to the group to assess the attitude of group or individual based on their expression. In the second assessment they were asked to give their reply on a piece

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVII, Number 4, April 2011

extinctions became more noticeable, perceptions began to shift among people who view this destruction of nature with distress. In response, a conservation movement began to form to protect natural populations and ecological systems. Animal welfare and wildlife conservation movements emerged as independent disciplines of science and social concern at different times of human culture, however, both recruited scientific research to help understand problems of both domestic and wild animals and to identify solutions. In spite of this, communication between animal welfare scientists and conservation biologists has been sparse throughout the history, until more recently. This led to the development of two separate bodies of science, both rooted in social concern about animals but viewing animals and addressing concerns with different perspectives. If analyzed, the negative impact on animals caused by all forms of human activity are implicated both in both wildlife conservation and animal welfare; animals suffer and die lingering deaths, ecological systems are disturbed, and in extreme cases taxa are threatened with extinction. As human population increases, impacts on animals will increase manifold. The results are of enormous significance for both wildlife conservation and animal welfare. To a degree the problems of animal conservation and animal welfare may well tend to merge. Definitions of conservation biology, wildlife, wildlife conservation, animal welfare, wildlife welfare were explained with some examples which helped the group to understand the difference between the terminologies used during the programme. Definitions, some of which are ad hoc, and examples follows. Conservation biology is a multi-disciplinary science to study the nature and status of Earth's biodiversity with the aim of protecting species, habitats, and ecosystems from decline and extinction. It also includes basic research for the conservation of specific taxa and habitat and interdependence of species and threshold effects in ecological process. Some types of field research for conservation has been criticised by animal welfare advocates, often the reason being that some field conservationists may not consider the welfare of the animal when handling or even observing. Wildlife includes primarily animals that are not domesticated or captive, but there is a terminology which refers to “wildlife in the wild” and “wild animals in captivity” as well. Wildlife usually is considered to be those animals that live in the wild or away from human habitation, which is not always the case. We come across many wild animals in our day-to-day life. For example: frogs, house geckos, lizards, spiders, bats, vultures, etc. Zoo Outreach

Daniel opens the programme Linking Wildlife Conservation with Wildlife Welfare.

Organisation created an education programme some years ago called “Daily Life Wildlife” which covered these examples. This programme was created by the third author who had been mightily impressed during her first few days in India by the daughter of her host catching up a very large centipede on the end of an Indian broom and calmly depositing it outside the house. Even pest animals that are not wanted can be treated with respect and permitted to live … outside. Wildlife conservation is a practice in which people attempt to protect wild animals and their habitats and prevent species decline and extinction. Animal welfare: welfare is well-being, which means free from neglect, abuse, stress, distress and deprivation. Until the last couple of decades, when the animal welfare community has taken very dramatic interest in zoo and circus animals, Animal welfare science had been focused on captive animals most of which are normally domesticated. All told, animal welfare as a subject addresses concerns at the level of individuals and small groups of animals ; it is concerned about their health, quality of life and affective states, especially negative states such as pain and stress. Wildlife welfare, a relatively new term, so far refers to the well-being of wild animals in both wild and captive states. Wildlife welfare is easily accepted regarding captive animals i.e., animals in the laboratory, circus, forest camps, zoos, etc. Wildlife welfare is intended to apply to all wildlife, free-living or free ranging non-domestic animals whether in the home, fields or forest . Some examples of human activities which can impact the well-being of free-living wild animals are: destruction of the habitat, introduction of diseases, reduction of food availability, hunting,trapping, poisoning, removing food source, use of hunting techniques that may result lingering death, disturbance from recreational activities, introduction of non-native animals, release of chemical pollutants leading to pathology, poisoning, release of hybrid captive born animals in the wild, building structures or using machines which can injure animals within the forest; human transportation systems that create major problems for animals such as fragmentation of habitat.

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVI, Number 4, April 2011

! the past distribution range maps of Asian elephant. Subsequently a current distribution map of Asian elephant was given. After assembling both the maps, based on map information, they were asked to list country-wise distribution of Asian elephants. About 200 years ago the Asian elephants had a continuous distribution in 17 countries ranging from Iraq in the west up to Eastern China and from the foot hills of Himalayas in the North up to Indonesia in the south. However the present distribution is restricted to 13 countries with a patchy distribution with high number of elephants left only in India. Now the elephant populations have limited movements due to fragmentation of the habitat. The present distribution Asian elephant is facing both conservation and welfare issues.

The Five Freedoms of Animal Welfare The Five Freedoms of Animal Welfare developed by the Farm Animal Welfare Council, UK some years ago was introduced to participants. Although the Five Freedoms .. were developed for the welfare of farm animals, they have been adopted over the years for use in other animal caretaking venues such as rescue centres, laboratory animals, pets, etc. As per CBSG Working Group on Conservation and Welfare, the “5 Freedoms” were developed for domestic animals and are not appropriate for welfare in modern zoos, particularly for animals that are intended to be released in the wild in future. There is a view however that the Five Freedoms of Animal Welfare are better than bad welfare in zoos. Many zoos which are not in the mainstream of the modern zoos have improved their welfare considerably after being introduced to the Five Freedoms. Five freedoms of animal welfare are: (i) Freedom from thirst, hunger and malnutrition - by ready access to fresh water and a diet to maintain full health and vigor. (ii) Freedom from discomfort - by providing a suitable environment including shelter and a comfortable resting area. (iii) Freedom from pain, injury and disease - by prevention or rapid diagnosis and treatment. (iv) Freedom to express most normal behavior - by providing sufficient space, proper facilities and company of the animal’s own kind. (v) Freedom from fear and distress - by ensuring conditions, which avoid mental suffering.

Keeping this as an example the participants were asked to list examples of human impact on Asian elephants from conservation and welfare point of view. The group listed 16 issues (Table 1) of which 13 were common for both conservation and welfare issues. Table 1: Adverse human impact on Asian elephants with implications for both conservation and welfare issues (as per the view of the participants) Effect of people Conservation issue Habitat loss √ Habitat alteration √ Fragmentation √ Electric lines/windmills Poaching √ Revenge killing √ Inbreeding √ Migration √ Capturing √ Road and train kills Tourism √ Diseases √ Forest fire √ Tree felling √ Pollution (all kinds) √ Global warming √

Welfare issue √ √ √ (stress) √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

After introducing the background, wildlife conservation and wildlife welfare issues were discussed by way of activities inspired by active learning techniques. To ensure understanding of conservation and welfare and to understand human impact on animals, a mapping activity was conducted. The history of former distribution of Asian elephant (100 years ago) was compared with the present distribution to understand human impact over time. Participants were asked to form three groups of equal size and given a set of ‘past’ maps in pieces. The task was to assemble all parts of the set to complete

Mapping activity demonstrates how human presence has harmed elephants.

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVII, Number 4, April 2011

Understanding conservation and welfare issues through drama: Welfare issues in animal conservation and research Drama is a useful tool in education as it is enjoyable to do and also memorable. Drama illustrates concepts lucidly. The dramas we use for education are designed so that no special props or costumes are necessary, easily available props such as masks and natural sounds can be used. The participants designed two drama themes and performed mime dramas. The participants rehearsed during evening hours and performed the next day. Both the groups of participants designed dramas that highlighted human impact on animals with dramas on “dancing bear” and “human-elephant conflict”. Drama 1: Two trappers shoot a Participants can experience the cruelty of a “Kalandar” tribesman capturing a bear cub mother bear with two cubs and and teaching it to dance using a painful ring and rope through its nose. take the cubs in a gunny bag to a village where a buyer waits. The cubs are frightened; they cry and moan. The buyer sells cubs to traveling performers who use dancing bears in their act and collect money. The itinerant performers feed them bread and milk and cubs become attached to them. The owners pierce their tender noses and put a ring and chain through the nostril. They also break the teeth so the young bears can’t bite. They train the cubs to dance and perform other entertaining antics. A wildlife organization running a rescue centre searches for such bears and they find these cubs. They speak for a long time to the performers about their lives and offer them money and training to start a new career. The performers The conclusion of a highly successful human/elephant conflict drama agree to hand over their bears for this chance and even sign a to allow elephants to use their original path. Villagers plant contract that they will not buy any more bears. The bears native plants with the help of forest department. After are taken to the bear rescue centre, given medical some time both man and elephant live without any trouble. treatment, fed good food and given a forested area stocked with climbing trees, toys, water pools and other bears. The Each group took about 7 minutes to perform their drama. performers do well at their new business earning a better At the end of each drama conservation and welfare issues living than they did with the bears. involved in both the situation were discussed. Drama 2: Villagers convert a forest area that is a migratory Towards the end of day one, two other games were played path of elephants into cultivable land. They fence the entire to explain wildlife welfare by reduction of food availability area that blocked migration of elephants. Elephants during and destruction of habitat of the animals. Before breaking the next season, visit that area as usual and found no way up for the day, interested participants shared their to cross the fenced area. While trying to get away some conservation/research activities or institutional activities elephants are hit by a speeding train and die. The villagers with others. also lose their crop and sustained injuries while driving the elephants away. Later, biologists conduct a study and teach the villagers about coexistence. They convince the people

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVI, Number 4, April 2011

Very simple props can be extremely effect in an education drama

Day 2: The second day’s programme started with a recap of day 1 activities and then performance of a mini drama. Drama helped participants to discuss detailed aspects of conservation and welfare without any barrier. After drama a debate was organized. The theme of the debate was ‘Wildlife welfare and wildlife conservation: two sides of the same coin’. The participants formed two groups representing conservation researchers and welfare people. They selected two case studies: 1. Conservation and welfare aspects while translocation of big cats (leopard) for conservation purpose, 2. Rescue and handling of snakes. They listed out welfare and conservation issues in both the case studies and pointed out how they converge. Understanding the link between human population growth and species endangerment – wildlife conservation and welfare A game called “Big-squeeze” game dramatizes the critical link between human population and species endangerment. In the last 100 years, human population has increased tremendously resulting in competition for natural resources between human beings and wildlife. Tiger population status was taken as an example for playing the game. The object of the game is for individuals representing tigers and other wildlife species to avoid becoming threatened or extinct. Wild animals, in order to survive in the wild require three major resources: food, water and space. These major resources should be protected in order to protect wildlife. The game explains how an increase in human population since 1900 resulted in competition for natural resources that push the animal to the brink of extinction.

Participant presents a working group report

This game explains how human beings impact wildlife welfare by destruction of habitat, reduction of food availability for animals, hunting, and other impacts discussed earlier. The same impact lead to species decline which is a conservation as well as welfare issue.

A very funny game called “bear dancing” also has a deep inner meaning. Kids of all ages love “bear dancing” but bears don’t like it much !

ZOO is now developing a learning packet to assist educators in conveying the relationship between conservation and welfare to students. If you are interested to receive such material please send us your name and email and request.

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVII, Number 4, April 2011

Planning an education programme: Apart from learning about conservation and welfare during the training, participants also learned about active learning tools. All the participants were inducted into ZOO’s Educator Network ZEN, and can avail some help from ZOO to carry out education programmes in their respective localities. They must learn how to plan an education programme, since this methodology is new to many educators. As a member of ZOO’s Educator Network, they are entitled to receive publications of ZOO’s education materials. During this session they were taught how to use ZOOs education packets effectively and make best use of it. A full demonstration was given explaining the ways to use the education packets at different types of occasions by rakhi-tying, marching with placards and convincing people to promote wildlife conservation and welfare.

Personal commitments ZOO request participants in all of our programmes to commit themselves to do any two simple actions within the next six month of the training. A special commitment card was developed for participants to write down their commitments and keep with them as reminders. Post training assessment were conducted to determine the effectiveness of our teaching. Workshop evaluation was also done to get feedback about the programme which will help us to improve the content of the training (Appendix 3: Comments about the workshop). Certificates were distributed for all participants.

A very big thanks to UFAW for their innovative and stimulating symposium and generous financial support. Participants receiving certificates

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVI, Number 4, April 2011

Appendix 1: CBSG Working Group Report on CBSG getting involved in Welfare issues Participants Session One: Kristin Leus, Kathy TraylorHolzer, Phil McGowan, Dave Morgan, Dan Wharton, Gordon McGregor-Reid, Gloria Svampa, Chris West, Bob Cook, Sally Walker Session Two: Dave Morgan, Andrea Fidgett, Jackie Ogden , Bryan Carroll, Georgina Groves, Lydia Kolter, Clifford Nxomani, Theo Pagel, Saman Semanayake, Sally Walker This Working Group met in two sessions. The first was during the CBSG Steering Committee Meeting, and the second during the Annual Meeting. The reports from these groups are presented sequentially below.

Session Two: Dave Morgan, Andrea Fidgett, Jackie Ogden , Bryan Carroll, Georgina Groves, Lydia Kolter, Clifford Nxomani, Theo Pagel, Saman Semanayake, Sally Walkr

We began by clarifying whether we were talking about assisting all zoos or just those involved in conservation activities. It could be ‘dangerous’ to be perceived as supporting the entire spectrum – maybe CBSG should be involved with only some zoos and not others. Many thought that it is difficult to delineate between those types of zoos – it is a continuum – and difficult to disentangle these issues. There is an implication that if you improve welfare, you then also improve the ability for conservation activities, and therefore it is appropriate to involve all zoos. The welfare of animals in regions holding native threatened species can impact the conservation potential of other regional programs holding those species, and so can have conservation impacts even if that individual zoo is not engaged in conservation activities. It also may be that the approach will not be to zoos on an individual basis, but handled at the zoo association level. It was brought up that this issue goes beyond animals in zoos (e.g., dolphin drives, animal handling by field biologists). We agree that this is an issue that needs to be addressed – and is being addressed to some extent within WAZA, regional zoo associations, and by animal welfare organizations. The question here is – should CBSG be involved in assisting zoos with improving the welfare of its animals? Points Favoring CBSG Involvement/Potential Roles for CBSG: • If welfare compromises conservation activities, then CBSG involvement is appropriate. • CBSG has strengths (facilitation skills, conflict resolution skills, cultural sensitivity, more neutral position) in its approach that make it valuable to facilitate discussions between zoo associations and other stakeholders to facilitate progress, standards development, etc. • It was acknowledged that WAZA tends to be reactive vs proactive, although this is changing, and that it is difficult for WAZA to deal with this (tried before) in its current structure (regional zoo associations are probably better placed to deal with this issue).

• Potential role for CBSG might be to jumpstart effort that WAZA (and regional zoo associations) then take up; both CBSG and WAZA can take an interest and contribute. • Zoos need information, motiva-tion, inspiration, and to tie welfare together with other aspects of ex situ management; CBSG is well suited to help with this. • Potential role for CBSG is to help stakeholders define what we really mean by welfare (e.g., “5 Freedoms” were developed for domestic animals and are not quite appropriate for welfare in zoos); CBSG better equipped to help with philosophy, etc. than others. • CBSG can bring scientific approach to welfare definition • CBSG has members who are knowledgeable about zoo and wildlife legislation as well as standards for welfare and conservation, some of them with legal qualification. CBSG members can also provide advice and even manpower for qualified enforcement of legislation, which is a necessity for implementation of legislation appropriately. • CBSG can help zoos in identifying how they can appropriately contribute to conservation. Points Against CBSG Involvement • Welfare is a big focus and priority for some zoo associations – best done by regional zoo associations (BUT this is not the case in all world regions). • If CBSG takes this on, it could possibly come with the cost of reducing our efforts in other areas; we need to figure out how CBSG can best use its strengths to help others take this on without developing a big task for CBSG (need specific roles for CBSG). • Some big welfare organizations could help, but not all are open-minded. There was a brief discussion regarding if the IUCN currently has a statement on welfare of wild animals. Such a position statement could be quite valuable. Session One Conclusions 1. Yes, there is a need to address animal welfare concerns (for animals in zoos and field biologists handling animals in field projects). 2. CBSG does have a role to play—to provide high level strategic guidance; specifically:

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVII, Number 4, April 2011

• Feeding into WAZA, regional zoo associations, IUCN (e.g., position statement on welfare of wild animals) • Help define welfare in a conservation context (science based) – CBSG can be the medium to lead to welfare standards (help bring WAZA, regional zoo associations, welfare organizations together, and then hand off to them) e.g., how CBSG provided the platform for development of work on climate change, AArk, ‘disfunctional zoos’ project • Help to define links between welfare and conservation (animal welfare in the continuum of intensively managed populations, breaking down ex situ – in situ barriers); ‘wildlife welfare’ is a new (to CBSG) and handy term Action Items for Session I CBSG office should contact the IUCN re: the need for/value of a position statement on welfare – if there is agreement, then possibly convene a working group. There is a working group scheduled during this CBSG annual meeting to take this discussion further Chris West (as chair) will take the discussions from the CBSG working group to WAZA’s Ethics and Welfare Committee to work in collaboration with regional zoo associations During the plenary discussion, it was noted that there are two ongoing IUCN statements/projects that may be relevant; we need to investigate to see if they relate to/ include welfare: statement on wildlife research and the statement on ethics of conservation (ethical obligations to wildlife). Session Two Reviewed results from Day One, and acknowledged that this issue is receiving recent attention, including two journals that have had recent issues devoted to conservation animal welfare, including Zoo Biology and Animal Welfare Journal, UFAW, UK, and a recent workshop on “Compassionate Conservation” by ZooCheck at Oxford with Wildcru. It is not our focus to develop welfare standards. We focused on animal welfare rather than ethics/rights Background Thoughts Conservation is often considered antithetical to animal welfare; some field conservationists may not consider animal welfare when handling animals. Animal welfare community historically has used “Five Freedoms” to describe welfare; these are fairly old, and also less relevant to zoo animals - more for domestic or companion or livestock animals. Five Freedoms of Animal Welfare • Freedom from thirst and hunger • Pain injury and Disease • Fear and distress • Discomfort • To express normal behavior It is imperative to have a scientific measurement of welfare. Agreed there are many challenges of defining welfare, and of measuring it. There is a good bit of work on defining and measuring animal welfare going on by some of the different regional associations, but not all. (For example, there is a different version of five freedoms that better applies to zoo animals). In some cases and some areas, zoo designers may be designing for visitors rather than animals, and not considering the biology of the animals, thus removing options for the animals and leading to stress/poor welfare.Although we didn’t define it, there was general agreement on some key elements: • What are the biological aspects? • Focus on natural behavior - including some level of stress • Opportunity to express most normal behaviors • Animals must continually make decisions, must be optimizing their situations

• From a conservation perspective, minimizing our impact on animals Acknowledged that there are also significant cultural differences regarding welfare (e.g., euthanizing feral cats is highly controversial in some areas, not in others) Acknowledged the differences in the sanctuary approach vs. zoo approach. What are the implications of not breeding animals for the long-term, in terms of welfare? Is this related to public engagement/education? Often people don’t understand what natural state of animal is. How do we in zoo/animal settings educate people about welfare issues? Conservation welfare continuum Is the purpose to contextualize welfare as it relates to conservation? As it relates to zoos and aquariums? CBSG doesn’t specifically deal with zoos, but how it applies to conservation? The group recognized that the application of welfare constructs in zoo environments and in field are very different. Conservation Welfare Continuum Extensively Managed

Intensively Managed

(Less/no responsibility for welfare)

(More responsibility for welfare)

Focus on population

Focus on individual

Focus on welfare diminishes as animals are less managed. Focus: Where conservation and welfare intersect This led us to discuss whether there should be a statement of animal welfare as it applies to conservation. Possible scope: zoo animals, handling of animals in field, reintroduction, culling, where conservation and welfare intersect. Action Points in Priority Order • Define why CBSG should be involved - what our niche is (e.g., our role as a science-based organization) • Engage with conservation NGOs and animal welfare community to understand what work is going on and where the gaps are. • Define contexts where welfare and conservation really intersect - where the impact of welfare in conservation lies (reintroduction, culling, moderate management-mountain gorillas receiving vet care) •IUCN statement on conservation welfare • Address cultural differences in welfare - science, regulatory/legal and society/public opinion CITES Issues • educate the public (should the public education working group work with this group?) • address conflicts between welfare and conservation (black footed ferret and live prey items) • define continuum between “extensively managed/wild/less responsibility” and “intensively managed/zoos/ complete responsibility for welfare” • consider human/wildlife conflict and how that relates to conservation welfare • clarify our targets - are we assisting all zoos, those actively working on conservation?

From : CBSG News Vol 22 January 2011. Welfare Working Group. www.cbsg.org

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVI, Number 4, April 2011

Appendix 2: Participants list Mr. Aravind M. Balakrishnan Volunteer, ZOO WATCH, Mrunalan, P.S.C. Nagar, Ulloor, Thiruvananthapuram-695 011 Kerala Mobile: 09946130797; Email: arvndbalan@gmail.com; arvndbalan@yahoo.co.in

Mr. A. Salahudeen Ph.D, Scholar, , Conservation Biology Laboratory , Dept. of Zoology, Bharathiyar Univeristy, Coimbatore-641 046 Mobile: 9843606024; Email: salaonmail@gmail.com; sala.natyu@gmail.com

Dr. M. Deivendra Kumar Nethaji Snake Trust, Post Box No.5, Usilampatti-625 532, Madurai Mobile: 9940928027; Email: dev_homoeo@yahoo.co.in

Ms. Smitha Madanan Volunteer, ZOO WATCH, Sree Smitham, Chemmakadu Post, Perinad, Kollam-691 603 Kerala Mobile: 09447865483; Email:smitha.madanan@gmail.com

Ms. M. Heavenlin PG Student, Department of Zoology, Bharathiyar Univeristy, Coimbatore-641 046 Mobile: 9600640962, Email: sharonheaven89@gmail.com

Mr. H. J. Srikanth Member, The Nature Trust, D-1, Saibaba Flats, No.1 Kannagi Street, East Tambaram, Chennai-600 059 Mobile: 9551049662 ; Email: hjsrikanth@gmail.com

Mr. K. Kaushik UG Student, 43 Samarao Street, Fort, Coimbatore Mobile: 9597234800, Email: chatwithchockie@gmail.com

Mr. P. Surendher Nethaji Snake Trust, Post Box No.5, Usilampatti-625 532, Madurai Mobile: 9790442978; Email: ramesh_nsrc@yahoo.com

Mr. N. Murugesan Trustee, The Discover Wild Foundation, 378, II Floor, Fancy Complex, Crosscut Road, Coimbatore-641 012 Phone: 0422-4393324; Mobile: 9487875757; Email: murugeskovai@gmail.com; murugesh2003@rocketmail.com Ms. K. Pavithra Shri PG Student, Department of Zoology, Bharathiyar Univeristy, Coimbatore-641 046 Mobile: 9842941747; Email: pavithra.shri12@gmail.com Mr. P. Rama Sundar Interpretation Assistant, Nilgiri Biosphere Nature Park, Thoovaipathy Village, Anaikatti Post, Coimbatore-641 108 Mobile: 9159565824; Email: nbrpark@gmail.com Mr. P. Ramesh Founder Trustee, Nethaji Snake Trust, Post Box No.5, Usilampatti-625 532, Madurai Mobile: 9952569420; Email: ramesh_nsrc@yahoo.com

Mr. S. Suraj Kumar Managing Trustee, The DiscoverWild Foundation, 36 Sengupta Street, Ram Nagar, Coimbatore-641 009 Tel: 0422-4377465; Mobile: 8015545189; Email: discoverwild@gmail.com Mrs. T. Vijayalakshmi B.T. Assistant, Sri R.K.M. Sarada Vidyalaya Model H.S.School, 45 Bukit Road, T. Nagar, Chennai-600 017 Tel: 044-24343064; 25503093; Mobile: 9600120532; Email: design@chempuretech.co.in ZOO team: Dr. B.A. Daniel (Trainer)(badaniel@zooreach.org) Mr. R Marimuthu (Trainer) (marimuthu@zooreach.org) Mr. Raveendran (Assistance) Zoo Outreach Organisation, Peelamedu, Coimbatore 641004 TN India Phone: 0422 2561087; Daniel: 9344830425; Marimuthu: 9842222774

ZOOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s PRINT, Volume XXVII, Number 4, April 2011

Appendix 3: Comments about the workshop Suraj Kumar: We have been conducting nature awareness programmes in schools and colleges and have these camps as our major campaigns for 2011. Attending this workshop has given us a new insight into how to be more creative and make such awareness camps more fun, enjoyable and at the same time kindle a spark in the minds of young children by introducing games, theatre (drama) and debate. We can clearly understand that our future programmes will be more entertaining and involving for children and students. It is in their hands that the future of wildlife is. I would personally like to thank Dr. Daniel and Mr. Marimuthu for providing us with a wonderful time and also to Mr. Ravindran who was a great team’s man. My wishes to all the participants too for their enthusiasm and zeal. Pavithra Shri: I enjoyed two days and it will be a memorable movement in my life. I was able to improve my knowledge and creativity.

Ramesh: The workshop was held on 18-19 was very useful. If you conduct the course exclusively in Tamil it would be better for people like me and also if you extend this workshop for another 2 days more, we would learn lot of information. Further, on behalf me and members of my organization, thanks for bringing students, other NGO’s who are related to wildlife and as new friends we can help each other in wildlife welfare and conservation of wildlife programmes. Rama Sundar: Through educator training-Linking wildlife conservation & wildlife welfare, I learned about wildlife welfare and its conservation a lot. The way Mr. Marimuthu & Dr. Daniel handled the sessions was very interesting. Whenever such workshops will be held in other places, I will participate and work hard to save threatened wild animals. Further food, accommodation was good.

Heavenlin: Got many ideas to conduct programmes in schools. The topic “Biodiversity” can be included that how much species are present all over the world and in India like the elephant mapping techniques in the past and present data. Srikanth: It was a very informative workshop. The link between wildlife conservation and wildlife welfare were made clear. The food and accommodation arrangements were good. Overall the workshop was very useful to all participants. Vijayalakshmi: I have one suggestion regarding map activity, if each group gets different animal, we’ll get more information. Salahudeen: Nice location and good arrangements. Nice, because most of our sessions are not in the forest or natural areas. So I like so much. Very good, because the workshop had a small group. Superb, because of the participants are from various different disciplines. I enjoyed a lot and enriched my knowledge in nice way in the subject. Kaushik: I am very sure that I got a very good knowledge about wildlife welfare and wildlife conservation. And also your way of teaching is very good and interesting. Conduct many programmes like this to the youngsters and interested peoples.

RESULTS of ZOO/UFAW Linking Conservation Workshop Evaluation (n=13)

Presentations & concepts Objectives 12 Excellent Theme 5 Excellent, 8 Good Five Freedoms 5 Excellent 8 Good Games and activities Know each other 8 Excellent 5 Good Assessment tools 5 Excellent 8 Good Drama Map 9 Excellent 4 Good Oh deer 6 Excellent, 5 Good, 1 not satisfied, 1 no reply Dancing bear: 8 Excellent 4 Good 1 no reply Debate 2 Excellent, 5 Good, 3 Fair, 1 Not satisfied, 2 no reply Res.round up 6 Excellent, 5 Good, 2 Fair, 1 no reply Hospitality Food 6 Excellent, 7 Good Accommodation 5 Excellent, 8 Good

Surender: Sharing many ideas was useful to me. Each and every idea created new thoughts in my mind. I believe it will further create new thoughts in my mind. Deivendra Kumar: Linking wildlife conservation with wildlife welfare programme really taught me many things. Hats off for your tremendous effort to save wildlife through this training.

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVI, Number 4, April 2011

Dysfunctional Zoos & What to Do Sally Walker* Introduction This paper proposes the term “dysfunctional zoos” to describe a type of captive wild animal facility that does not function adequately (or at all) for even the most essential canons of zoos, e.g., education, conservation or research. While no one knows precisely the exact number of zoos, or if you will, captive wild animal facilities permitting public viewing, globally, an educated guesstimate might suggest that easily more than 50-75% of such facilities that are known could be defined or described as dysfunctional. WAZA has adopted a very practical and positive approach to the diversity of zoos in the world by welcoming Regional and National Zoo Associations as WAZA Association Members under certain conditions. WAZA and its member zoos work with the associations in a way that serves longrange goals for the improvement of captive animal facilities that do not function as what is currently called zoos. WAZA accepted the need for action on behalf of institutions then described as sub-standard zoos but renamed by WAZA as Zoos needing Improvement for the sake of cultural sensitivity. The author suggests that even the best zoo in the world could use some improvement or other; just as no perfect human being exists on Earth, there is no perfect zoo, thus the term “zoos needing improvement” is embarrassingly inappropriate In 2003, at the Annual WAZA Conference held in San Jose, Costa Rica, there were multiple concerns raised about substandard zoos. Two presentations were given on this topic, one, entitled The Other Zoo World1 by this writer and colleagues calling attention to the proliferation of substandard zoos which probably far outnumbered the professional zoos. The paper also called for a subcommittee to be set up by WAZA that would formulate a plan for addressing the issue. A second paper on substandard zoo was presented and in addition, much discussion occurred on the state of the host zoo of the conference and what could be done generally. Subsequently, in early 2006 a Drafting Committee was convened by WAZA the members of which produced a Resolution on needy institutions that was adopted by the WAZA membership in the annual conference held in Leipzig, Germany. The resolution declared: we as a community of organized zoos and aquariums have a moral, ethical and professional

responsibility to engage with needy institutions in order to help them improve their standards, achieve conservation goals, and benefit the animals they hold.2 The following year, 2007, the Drafting Committee generated a WAZA tool kit for addressing the issue of needy zoos, or zoos needing improvement. The tool kit consisted of a set of minimum standards by which these zoos could be inspected and assessed for appropriate assistance, which could be undertaken by proficient zoos according to their interest and resources. The tool kit also included a complaint procedure for use by the regional and national associations or by member zoos. These tools were made available within the year and met with enthusiasm by the membership which officially approved them at the 62nd (2007) WAZA conference3. Since then some individual zoos as well as zoo associations have undertaken projects assisting zoos that needed help, sometimes in localities where the assisting zoo was also running a field project. Other zoos have provided various kinds of help to needy zoos via the regional or national associations such as AZA, EAZA, PAAZAB, SAZARC, EARAZA, etc. In fact, several years before, AZA and EAZA addressed the issue of substandard zoos in their country or region, assessed them and made attempts to assist, often in serious, protracted and expensive exercises. In the long term, however, the totality of the enterprise has not been very effective in addressing and correcting the issue, primarily due to the sheer enormity of the problem, the speed at which zoos are increasing and the rate and scope of recidivism. There are hundreds, even thousands of dysfunctional zoos in the world, many yet to be documented. These zoos need very drastic improvements in the most elementary and fundamental aspects, such as animal welfare, which covers the entire range of care of captive animal. Many of these establishments are spurious, without long-range plans, sustainability, trained and interested staff, an/or other characteristics that define a healthy, functional zoo. Terminology of bad zoos Dysfunctional zoos is a more accurate descriptor for what have been referred to as substandard, needing improvement or needy zoos. Although the latter terms are not

wrong as such, neither do they convey a realistic picture. Dysfunctional zoos might be defined succinctly as: animal collections open to the public which don’t function as conservation facilities, rather just the opposite. One might even be so bold as to say that dysfunctional zoos not only do not function as conservation facilities, but as purveyors of decline and extinction. This term is more appropriate also because it does not imply that such zoos are troubled with just a few poor enclosures or merely ignorant and untrained owners and staff. Dysfunctional implies ill health (physical and/or mental) or a variety of deep-seated and elemental problems that prevent the institution(s) from improving without fundamental changes, or all encompassing transformation, at the governance and ground level, including, but not limited to closure and re-distribution of the animals. The major difference might be said to be that good zoos are busy with conservation actions . . . research, breeding, field projects, education, marketing, etc. and dysfunctional zoos are busy generating species decline! How do zoos generate species decline, and even extinction! They do it through such bad habits as were summarized in the previously cited presentation, The Other Zoo World by Walker et al in 2003. • •

• •

•

Waste of wild animal resources both animal and financial. Over breeding and release of surplus animals without monitoring which promotes disease, fighting and injury, overpopulation, over-grazing, etc. Creating wrong attitudes in visiting public Projecting a bad image of zoos worldwide with poor animal welfare practices Acquiring animals from certain unscrupulous animal dealers, other dysfunctional zoos, and local trappers and traders (wild).

This list was expanded and published in 2007 in the WAZA Guidelines for Improving Standards in Zoos, 2007 and again several times since by the author in other published documents. Managing Trustee/Director, ZOO/ SAZARC sallyrwalker@zooreach.org

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVII, Number 4, April 2011

Extinctions Stating categorically that dysfunctional zoos cause extinctions may seem an extreme claim, however, the sheer number of non-organised zoos in the world reflects a gigantic number of wild animals in captivity without purpose or responsible management. It is not beyond reason to assume that certain species’ numbers have been severely reduced by captures for zoos, deaths through mismanagement, etc. One zoo known by the author admitted to having caught six wild Pallas’ Cats (Felis manul) in the last few years, not all together as a breeding effort but one at a time. When an individual died zoo authorities ordered another captured. Pallas’ Cat is a relatively rare and highly delicate species: zoos that obtain them without a systematic plan and expertise in their care are most probably driving them to extinction in their country or region. Another example in a very different scenario involves herd animals or large herbivores that are surplus stock as they are easily bred and populations are not controlled except by wrong releases! This happens in a great many zoos in South Asia. When released in a forested area without sufficient study of the carrying capacity and appropriateness of the habitat, they can lay waste the entire vegetation of the area, thus leading to extinctions of endemic and indigenous niche-oriented organisms. Disease from the once captive animals may also infect resident animals as testing usually includes only TB.4 There are countless scenarios of this type. This example is difficult to prove, as no department or organisation wants to admit to this having happened, or perhaps has not even noticed! How many Zoos The number of facilities that are called zoos has been estimated at as many as 10,000 worldwide. The source of that estimate is vague, but if you consider that there are about 1000 roughly documented zoos that are in some way related to WAZA either members as such or members of member regional and national associations and/or wannabe members then it is not difficult to imagine a few more thousand off the grid. This many dysfunctional zoos is too many for our small world and its biodiversity due to impacts mentioned above. The number of zoos in the world is moot, because no single agency or authority knows for certain how many captive wild animal facilities exist in their country, unless they have a rigorous registration system. For example, in 1982, years before the establishment of the Central Zoo Authority in India, the Department of Environment, Government of India brought out a booklet which listed zoos and botanic gardens of the country as a total of 44.5 Suspecting the accuracy of this number, the writer conducted a very simple survey consisting of a stamped postal card sent to all state forest, wildlife and animal husbandry departments, offices and ministries; all environmental, conservation and animal welfare oriented non-governmental organizations; and a variety of individuals and state officials of the states. Returned postcards yielded a list of 122 zoos, safari parks, deer parks, mini-zoos, etc. in various states in India.6 Two years later, in 1989 S. K. Patnaik, Director and L. N. Acharyo, Veterinary Surgeon of Nandankanan Biological Park published a Directory of 49 Indian Zoos, having conducted a survey through the forest departments and colleagues and including a great deal of information on each facility.7 Combined, these lists got the attention of the Ministry of Environment who began to discuss a zoo policy that, some months or years later, morphed into legislation, and a good thing that was! The Zoo Act was passed in

19918, and in 19929, when the Ministry of Environment announced that all operating zoos of any size had to register with CZA, there many more facilities! In 1994, ZOOS’ PRINT magazine published a list of 312 existing zoos and another 13 registered to be established, a total of 342 then10. In fact a primary objective of the Act was to limit or regulate the mushroom growth of zoos by introducing a legal process which included obtaining permission from the government, having a sustainable economic base and authorities. By the time seemingly all zoos had registered the list had mushroomed indeed to 450! 11. In formulating their legislation, the Government of India did a very clever thing. The drafting committee contrived to define “zoo” in such a way that it would include almost any wild animal facility, even travelling menageries. As much of the impetus to have zoo legislation in the first place was animal welfare and the miserable conditions of many spurious animal facilities as well as the habit of wild captures, it was important to be able to control all of them with legislation. The term “stationary institution” is bedrock to the definition of zoos in other countries but that did not fit India’s situations. South Asian Zoos - India South Asia till date includes 8 countries, (Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka) of which all but Maldives has at least one zoo and one with more than 200. India, for example, now has 200-plus zoos which is many times the number of zoos of any other country and even of all the other countries’ zoos put together. In area India is far larger, so that number of zoos fits the country. Of these, 25% are standard but different sized zoos called Large, Medium and Small according to several different values, and 75% are mini-zoos and deer parks. CZA inspected the zoos, gave them each a list of undesirable constructions or practices, and provided funds and time to improve before conferring recognition or refusal. CZA closed over 200 additional zoos that were deemed hopeless for want of finance and a sufficiently interested patron over the years. In comparison there are about 30-50 known zoos throughout the rest of South Asia. This number includes other captive wild animal centers which are open to the public for viewing, such as the Takin Centre (Budorcas taxicolor) of Bhutan, a rescue and conservation breeding facility, as well as spurious facilities known to be operating. The vague number and the fact that no numbers have been assigned to countries reflects a certain variation in facts which changes every year or two! India was the first country in whole Asia to pass effective zoo legislation. As mentioned earlier Sri Lanka had passed a National Zoological Gardens Act 1982,12 but it was primarily an administrative tool. In 1991 the Government of India via the Ministry of Environment and Forest passed the Indian Zoo Act as an amendment to the Wildlife (Protection) Act. (op. cit.) The Zoo Act first featured broad regulatory legislation that also provided for setting up an autonomous Central Zoo Authority (CZA) to implement the Act. A year later (1992) after formation of CZA, detailed Norms and Standards were added as an additional amendment to the Zoo Act, which, itself was an amendment to the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1975. Every year or two, additional amendments and corrections have been included in the Act, which reflects the evolution in thinking and experience of CZA and its member zoos, and to an extent, some global zoo trends. This flexibility to change ineffective or un-implementable laws and replace them with improved legislation is very good as generally the time- frame for amendments is far shorter than the initial cumbersome and

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVI, Number 4, April 2011

painful act of passing legislation. It provides a fix for standards proven to be inadequate, for whatever reason, and a methodology for integrating ongoing changes taking place both in and outside the country addressing zoo animal welfare, wildlife biology, conservation education, etc. The Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India does not have absolute power or oversight over all those zoos. CZA staff is not large, and these 200 zoos are operated by a range of state, municipal, private, and non-governmental organizations and institutions. They can all get out of tune quite easily for a variety of reasons. Nevertheless, it can be said quite accurately that India has, by adopting very strong zoo legislation backed up with a well-funded CZA as well as much hope and good will, has significantly improved more zoos than any other effort in the history of zoos, and also closed more zoos! Even the backslider zoos which become complacent after having been inspected and recognized, do not slide back nearly so far as they were originally. Backsliding may occur temporarily when a new director or veterinarian is transferred to the zoo as per India’s draconian administrative system, and in any case, all zoos are re-inspected every three years by CZA. Other South Asian Zoos Another promising example is Nepal, which claimed only one zoo, the Central Zoo, located in Lalithpur, Kathmandu. Casual information indicated to this author that there may be more zoos, so R. Marimuthu, Education Officer of Zoo Outreach Organisation, visiting Nepal for purpose of conducting a training workshop, was deputed do a survey. The result of this effort was a list and short description of 14 facilities published in ZOOS’ PRINT Magazine.13 The Government of Nepal responded immediately, sending a team from Central Zoo to survey the facilities, of which 10 were categorized as zoos.14 Some months later the Government of Nepal set up a team to formulate legislation using, among other references, the CZA Norms and Standards, and it is currently moving through the various, tedious steps at a reasonable pace.15 Prospects for passage of zoo legislation in Nepal are very good. There is a proposal for the Central Zoo to function as a sort of coordinating institutions for all the rest of the zoos in Nepal which is very sensible. In South Asia, Bangladesh and Pakistan are now more or less actively working on zoo legislation to cover the wild animal facilities open to public in

their country. Pakistan is working provincially as some provinces do not have zoos or are not interested, and has a good number of wildlife regulations which could be tapped for certain zoo issues. Sri Lanka is aware of the need for norms and standards to strengthen their existing National Zoological Gardens Act, the primary purpose of which was perhaps to confirm the National Zoo as a Department to set up more zoos; it also includes a few simple rules for visitors. The new and powerful Ministry of Economic Development, that was recently made responsible for the Department of Zoos, has taken a decision to seriously upgrade all existing facilities and establish several new zoos in different areas of the country. It is hoped that strict legislation including high standards will precede this plan. Bhutan and Afghanistan have only one known or acknowledged wild animal facility at present. Afghanistan has a single zoo in Kabul which was opened August 17th, 1967,16 but for all practical purposes was destroyed during the bombings a few years ago. Now, as the nation’s capital gets back on its feet the zoo is being rebuilt and improved by the Municipal Corporation. Even suggestions are afoot for expansion into adjoining area as well as another zoo just outside the city. Afghanistan National Assembly approved an Environmental Law published in Official Gazette No. 912, 25 January 2007.17 The document has been unofficially translated from Dari and Pashto to English and carries many provisions, which, for the present, might be interpreted in such a way as to protect species and provide amenities such as education and training. In the past, Bhutan has listed a both Mini Zoo and a Gharial Breeding Centre that are now not listed, but there is a Takin Centre (Budorcas taxicolor) in need of improvement, as public visitation is permitted. This centre is located just on the outskirts of Bhutan’s capital, Thimpu, and is one of the few nature-oriented attractions near the city. Since Bhutan has a short history of creating mini-zoos and permitting public in breeding centres, some form of legislation to direct or regulate these practices is required. There are big holes (some for photography) in the rusty fencing around the Centre. If not for the essential goodness of virtually all Bhutanese people, surely some unfortunate event might have taken place.

South Asian Zoo Association for Regional Cooperation SAZARC The South Asian Zoo Association for Regional Cooperation SAZARC was founded in 2000 for the purpose of creating a link between zoos in the different South Asia countries as well as a kind of affiliation with global zoos and, most of all, to encourage them to get zoo legislation along the lines of the Indian Zoo Act. SAZARC meets every year in a different South Asian country 100% funded by Western Zoos. Every so often SAZARC substitutes a small group with each from a different South Asian country to attend a conference in one of the South East Asian countries. In all the South Asian countries the model of the Central Zoo Authority Zoo Act, Recognition of Zoos Rules, Norms and Standards (1991, 1992 and amendments thereafter) is an influence. In three SAZARC conferences, in 2002 (Dhaka, Bangladesh), 2008 (Ahmedabad, India) and 2009 (Dehiwala, Sri Lanka) zoo legislation was the major training theme with CZA legislation as an example. In the first instant, Bangladesh, host of the conference, convened a working group and drafted standards for their country using the CZA model. Subsequently, the transfer system worked its black magic in Bangladesh resulting in this important topic being dropped because new officials did not know about it. After a few years, Bangladesh zoo legislation was taken up and followed and is now in the Law Ministry being assessed. It still has a long road to travel and many obstacles but there is some hope that it will go through in the correct format. At the Ahmedabad SAZARC conference, Resource Person Brij Kishor Gupta, an official from CZA gave several excellent presentations about Indian zoo legislation, including how it had evolved and was being implemented, as well as its pitfalls. Very good work in groups was done there. In Sri Lanka, in 2009, Dr. Miranda Stevenson, Director, BIAZA (formerly an experienced zoo keeper, curator and director), Dr. Kris Vehrs, (Director, AZA and an attorney holding the post of legislative council to AZA for over two decades), and Mike Jordan, formerly Curator, Chester Zoo, now Conservation Advisor, National Zoological Gardens, South Africa presented information on zoo animal welfare and legislation and sat with countries in working groups to assist them in working on these topics. In these conferences, working groups for all the countries were set up to take legislation and animal welfare forward with Indian participants advising.

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVII, Number 4, April 2011

It is worth a mention that at the 10th Annual SAZARC Conference recently held in Nepal, the theme of Emergency Protocols was linked to 21st Century Crises of Climate Change, Emerging Diseases and Terrorism. In the past year, CZA had taken up the topic of emergency response and required their zoos to create one appropriate for their zoo contained within their Management Plan, without which their recognition might suffer. CZA also commissioned a Disaster Management Plan, a manual18 compiled from a variety of sources by former Director, Kanpur Zoo. CZA Member Secretary permitted SAZARC to use their document and donated 20 copies to the conference. Again CZA got there first with disaster response as, until this past year, no zoo in South Asia and probably even in all Asia had a systematic response plan in print. In the conference all countries formed their own working groups but combining Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bhutan as the latter two countries had only one attendee. Non-Indian countries used the CZA model plan, which covered everything aside from the 21st century crises, which Indian participants were requested to cover. Participants were requested to submit the idea to their governing body, which, hopefully, would be influenced to set up an official committee to formulate a detailed plan that fits each country respectively. Getting down to business So, what business is it of WAZA and WAZA member zoos, which work hard to effectively promote and protect wildlife conservation using their institutions in different ways, to worry about the other zoos. Increasingly more WAZA zoos are busy contributing to conservation by supporting field projects, training, education, etc. However, here is a view that while many WAZA zoos are hard at work on conservation, dysfunctional or even some semi-functional zoos may be cancelling this good work animal for animal. Many WAZA zoo personnel have indicated it is “a good thing but not a priority” to help dysfunctional zoos improve. If you look at this situation honestly, however, it may be more of a priority than anyone currently thinks. Because these zoos are off the grid, no one really has a clear idea of their impact. Its like climate change … hard to convince people because they do not want to believe all those bad things are or might be true. No one in the established zoo world wants to compare the good done by well-meaning zoos and the damage done by indifferent or otherwise non-productive facilities, each group for their own reasons. Dysfunctional zoos occur in almost all countries. Surprisingly the United States, for example, which has perhaps the most outstanding zoos, has a shocking number of dysfunctional animal holding facilities (anti-AZA institutions, mini-zoos, rescue centres, orphanages, etc.) that are considered zoos by their visiting public, if they allow. Some years ago, AZA conducted a study and came up with a figure in the low thousands. Down to the why The why requires a book, not an article, as reasons vary between and even among countries and regions. The focus of this particular discussion however is overwhelmingly on zoos in formerly colonized continental areas, such as the former Indian subcontinent, now officially South Asia. The whys for zoos in South Asian countries as well as several other continental areas have a large number of things in common, many of which seem to be colonial leftovers! In addition to lack of exposure to avant-garde zoos and decades experienced and knowledgeable zoo personnel, a few, only three, of the most destructive of these are summarized here:

• Out-dated administrative systems with cumbersome

•

bureaucratic features which actually hinder progress, but particularly with respect to complex institutions, such as zoos. Dramatically hierarchical departments, services, ministries, in which senior-most officials are so much revered or feared that often they cannot be approached with the facts of a situation. A draconian system of transfer of mid and senior level officials from seemingly related departments to zoos where they spend six months (or less) to a very few years getting some orientation, and then being transferring back to their parent department instead of to another zoo, where they could use their experience and enhance their skills.

There is almost total blindness to the dramatic negative impacts on institutional quality this system produces. It is institutional blindness because there seems to be no solution possible, particularly in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. This system seems to be more prevalent in forest, wildlife and animal husbandry services than in Municipal or city bureaucracies that have their own problems. To be fair to CZA, a couple of years after establishment, CZA investigated how this system might be changed in India and learned that in order to toss the transfer system, even in one department or discipline, 50% of the states of India have to agree! Almost impossible to get even two Indian individuals to agree so 50% of states is pretty much out of the question. The parent ministry or department would not like to approve because they would almost certainly lose some senior posts if the zoos were declared a separate service. Naturally individual officers and their families would not be happy with this state of affaires. The outdated administrative structure is tragic, because the countries which laid this on its colonies have moved on with more streamlined and sensible administrative systems, while their offspring, their former colonies, remain the same as centuries ago. The hierarchical nature of these systems is close to military, particularly in certain departments connected with forests and wildlife. It prevents honest and healthy exchange of information and ideas and produces a sort of psychological disease, akin to Dr. Wilhelm Reich’s emotional plague, which, instead of being passed from generation to generation in families, it is passed from superior to subordinate with similar dynamics. The transfer system is the most destructive of these examples. In the transfer system, there seems virtually no forethought of which individuals might make the best zoo directors or curators. All personnel are considered equally qualified for the job since they are either foresters or veterinarians. Transfers are not based on merit, although an officer held in some esteem can be transferred to a particular city or town on his request because the schools are good and he has school-going kids, or some other personal reason. Also in some places transfers are considered a punishment post. In India some of the negative impacts have lessened since legislation and CZA were established, as they have brought much needed prestige as well as money and more flexibility to zoos. The transfers transpire are not from zoo to zoo but from zoo to an only mildly related disciplines (such as eucalypus or coffee plantations, administration, etc. in the parent department). Parent departments may be forest or animal husbandry, environment, municipality, sometimes wildlife conservation or economic development. One thing in common – the decision makers for the zoos are rarely from zoos.

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVI, Number 4, April 2011

In South Asian zoos as a whole, this system translates into a shifting, drifting zoo non-community where genuine expertise rarely develops before another transfer takes place, even in India, despite the amazing input of the Central Zoo Authority. The strength of the destructiveness often lies with the hierarchical system Ministers, Secretaries and other very prestigious officials who often relate naïve or counter-productive suggestions for zoos. Knowledgeable zoo personnel are afraid to correct their seniors. The press loves it when a very senior official makes a suggestion for the zoo – it is as if he or she conferred eternal life for everyone. In fact, many of the problems of zoos of this region starts with senior officials and politicians who do not understand the subtle problems, requirements or current ideology of the world’s zoos and of the established and organized contemporary zoo community. Trying the education is difficult because it is not a priority and as soon as or even before one gets a Minister or Secretary sufficiently trained up, its time for them to go. Is there a fix ? Using the resources of WAZA, members with sufficient experience in zoos and exposure to low-income countries could make a difference by taking interest and engage the governments of these countries at different levels. Such help and the encouragement of strong principles in managing zoos could help South Asian and other countries zoos to come out of their problems. The prestige value of WAZA is immense in the global zoo community, with virtually all the mainstream zoos aware of the global association and arguably influenced by it. The mainstream zoos possibly could play a significant role also in ferreting out the dysfunctional zoos and determining their future either with training and help or making a case for closure. Much of the difficulty in improving zoos globally is the cultural dissonance existing between so-called developed and developing countries. For example, the WAZA Drafting Committee created a Zoo Assessment Tool, a form that ostensibly listed the minimum acceptable standards, for the purpose of evaluating substandard, or as they euphemistically came to be called zoos needing improvement. This tool and a set of guidelines for improving zoos were approved by WAZA membership in the 67th Annual conference in 2007. At a certain regional conference, which shall remain anonymous for reasons that will

become obvious, the topic of zoo legislation was the theme and the Assessment Tool handed out as an aid to discussion. Participants of the conference snapped it up and innocently adopted it as their accepted, instead of minimum, standard. This was allowed to stand for the time being by the association director in view of the fact that the larger percentage of even the region’s best zoos would have to work for some time to meet these minimum criteria. Also this fact itself makes a strong statement in confirmation of the diversity of norms of the zoos of the world. Why everyone in WAZA should care about this Dysfunctional zoos bring a bad name to the greater zoo community. It is perhaps the responsibility of all of us to do what we can to either improve or help remove these destructive facilities. Lobbying for zoo/wild animal facility legislation that includes standards, a procedure for registration, inspection, recognition and derecognition and protocol for closure of hopeless and non-compliant institutions is one way to help, although it can be soul-destroying as per the writer’s personal experience of last quarter century. Verily, the process proceeds at a snail’s pace. Investing funds in one-off individual zoo improvements can be risky unless the investing zoo or organisation is committed for its. One CAN if committed, make things happen, but much patience is required. Serious backsliding is almost certainly inevitable unless there is strong legislation, an implementing authority and effective penalties in place. Thirty five years in the other zoo world has convinced the writer that without strong legislation and its components, there may be no way to improve or close dysfunctional zoos on a permanent basis. There are thousands of facilities …it is a job for all of us. WAZA has developed a series of documents to help with this task. Tackling governments and lobbying for legislation is a slow and painful process but worth the investment long term.

References 1

Walker, S., Morgan, D. and Matamoros, Y. (2003). The “Other” zoo world – bad zoos and their impact: What is to be done. Presented at the 58th conference of the World Association of Zoos and Aquaria WAZA, Costa Rica, November 2003. 2 WAZA (2006). WAZA resolution on Improving Standards in Zoos. Adopted at

the 61st Annual Conference, Leipzig, Germany, August 2006. 3 WAZA (2009). WAZA resolutions 1946-2009. A complete listing of the WAZA resolutions adopted by the annual conferences. (Resolution 62.2). WAZA Executive Office, Berne, Switzerland. October 2009. 4

Walker, S. (Pers. obs.) unpublished.

5 Anon (1982). List of National Parks, Sanctuaries, Botanical Gardens and Zoological Gardens in India, Department of Environment, Ministry of Agriculture, New Delhi, 1982. 6 Walker, S. (1987). How many zoos? Zoos’ Print 2(4-5): 7-10. 7 Patnaik, S.K. and Acharjyo, L.N. (1989). Directory of Indian Zoos. Nandankanan Biological Park, Bhubaneswar, Orissa. 8 Anon (1991). Indian Wildlife Amendments: the zoo act, Gazette of India, October 1991. 9 CZA (2009). Recognition of Zoo Rules, 1992 (with up to date Amendments), pp. 230-283. In: Zoos in India. Legislation, Policy, Guidelines, and Strategies. 10 Walker, S. (1994). Historical Listing of Indian Zoos according to CZA Registration Forms. ZOOS’ PRINT 9(11): 29-34. 11

Walker, S. (Pers. comm.) unpublished

12 Anon (1982). National Zoological Gardens Act, No. 41 of 1982. Government of Sri Lanka. 13

Marimuthu, R. & Walker, S. (2007). Report on Animal Facilities. Zoos’ Print 22 (4): 1-7.

14 Walker, S. and Marimuthu, R. (2009). Changing zoos in a whole country – Nepal a case study. Zoos’ Print 24(2): 5-7. 15

Walker, S. (Pers. obs.) unpublished.

16 Nogge, G. (1972). Kabul Zoo: the show window of Afghan Fauna, Outdoorsman Monthly, 3. 17 Anon (2007). Environment Law, Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, Official Gazette No. 912, dated 25 January 2007, as approved by National Assembly. 18 Hemanth Kumar, R. (2009). Model Disaster Management Plan for Zoological Parks in India, Kanpur Zoological Park, Kanpur, UP, 112pp.

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVII, Number 4, April 2011

Ref.: SCBD/OES/OES/AD/74686

11 January 2011 N OTI FIC A TION

Unite d N ations Decade on B iodive rsity 2011-2020 Dear Sir/Madam, The United Nations General Assembly proclaimed the period from 2011 to 2020 as the United Nations Decade on Biodiversity in its Resolution 65/161 :

Decides, following the invitation of the tenth m eeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biologica l Diversity, to declare 2011-2020 the United Nations Decade on Biodiversity, with a view to contributing to the implem entation of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity for the period 2011-2020, requests the Secretary-General, in this regard, in consultation with Member States, to lead the coordination of the activities of the Decade on behalf of the United Nations system , with the support of the secretariat of the Convention on Biologica l D iversity and the secretariats of other biodiversity-related conventions and relevant United Nations funds, progra mm es and agencies, and invites Member States in a position to do so to contribute, on a voluntary basis, to the funding of the activities of the Decade; The Decade coincides with and supports the implementation of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 adopted by the Conference of the Parties at its tenth meeting held in Nagoya, Japan. A strategy to celebrate the Decade will be made available to all Parties soon. The Secretariat encourages all Parties that have established a national committee for the International Year of Biodiversity to extend its mandate for the celebration of the United Nations Decade on Biodiversity. Please accept, Madam/Sir, the assurances of my highest consideration.

Ahmed Djoghlaf Executive Secretary

To: CBD National Focal Points and International Organizations Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity United Nations Environment Programme 413 Saint-Jacques Street, Suite 800, Montreal, QC, H2 Y 1N9, Canada Tel : +1 514 288 2220, Fa x : +1 514 288 6588 secretariat@cbd.int www.cbd.int

Opportunities for Zoos in South Asia Award winning documentary producers, CICADA Bellwether are currently producing a high end factual series for the Discovery Channel. The programme is to be a very positive and educational look at animal behaviour and CICADA Bellwether hope to identify some individuals, animals and zoos they can work with and include in the programme. For the record, we are not interested in negative stories or sad stories. We are interested in upbeat and surprising stories. The series is primarily based around film clips and will centre around unique experiences animal carers have had. One main theme we are finding are examples where animals have done the unexpected and may have got out of their enclosure or found themselves where they are not meant to be e.g. they go on a walkabout, have fun and act independently. Again, the emphasis is on the fun, the surprising, informative. One good example is an orangutan at a zoo in Australia that taught itself how to short circuit its lock and got out and walked into the next door enclosure. Another interesting aspect is the animal escape simulation training that zoos do to be always prepared for such incidences. We would be very happy to speak with anyone who may have any relevant experiences or be interested in finding out more information. Of key interest is identifying any existing footage of interesting incidents people that they might be able to include in the programme. For further information, please email Julie Jackson at julie@cicadabellwether.com or call +44 7891 459 344.

ZOOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s PRINT, Volume XXVI, Number 4, April 2011

Dhaka Zoo hosts Interns from all over Bangladesh Dr. Md. Shakif-Ul-Azam* In 2005 Dhaka Zoo started a formal zoo education programme which presently enrolled a total of 3167 students.

Students learn about taking care of wild animals at Dhaka Zoo and become more interested in wildlife conservation and environmental sustainability. The zoo benefits by getting extra pairs of hands to do a wide range of jobs, thereby increasing their efficiency while helping young students satisfy the requirements of their academic programme. The Programme covers a different topic every day of a 12 day programme, including every from A to Z -Administration to Zoo Animal Management. Working officers take the classes in the work environment. Students are required to take part in all jobs, not just the exciting ones, but cleaning cages and paperwork.

Current interns chat with Sally Walker during her last visit.

The zoo provides a coordinated research programme for Internee students as part of their course from different Universities such as • Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh (BAU) • Sylhet Agricultural University • Chittagong Veterinary and Animal Science University (CVAHU), and • Rajshahi University, Dinajpur Veterinary College etc. The Dhaka Zoo also coordinates MS/M- students from different institution like Dhaka University and Jahangir Nagar University along with the above.

Internee students clean hospital zoo garden

Course Coordinator giving brief to intern students

Also students from different International schools in Bangladesh such as the Private University and Officer’s of Bangladesh Army (Veterinary Core) visit Dhaka Zoo as part of their service or to fulfill the requirement of their assignment or course of study. The zoo also helps any other school, college or university regarding Zoo education and research if they require. These programmes are coordinated by the Dhaka Zoo Education and Research section.

Internee students help give medical treatment to a barking deer.

Researcher and Education Officer, Dhaka Zoo, Bangladesh shakif78@gmail.com

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVII, Number 4, April 2011

Training Schedule for Internship Programme Faculty of Veterinary Science & Animal Husbandry The class time is fixed by concerned class teacher. For the zoo section classes no overlapping Day-1 | Scientific Officer | Veterinary Hospital: Orientation class, registration, history of Dhaka Zoo and present status of zoo's in Bangladesh. Day-2 | Nutrition Officer | Animal Nutrition Section: Wild animal nutrition and rationing, collection procedures of different animal feeds, feeding system, ration formulation, difference between local and foreign ingredients of foods Day-3 | Publicity Officer | Publicity Section : Role of print and electronic media, zoo publicity Day-4 | Zoo Officer Avian | Avian Section: Cleaning, feeding, rearing and hygienic management, Significant Characteristics of Important Avain species, staff management Day-5 | Zoo Officer Small Mammals and Reptiles | Small Mammals and Reptiles Section : Cleaning, feeding, rearing and hygienic management, characteristics of important animals, staff management Day-6 | Zoo Officer Large Mammals and Herbivores : Cleaning, feeding, rearing and hygienic management, characteristics of important animals, staff management Day-7 | Zoo Officer Carnivores| Carnivores Section : Cleaning feeding, rearing and Hygienic Management, Characteristics of Important Animals, Staff Management Day-8 | Officer in Charge Museum : Aquatic animal and fish stuffing, museum management, criterion followed for Extinct, Critically Endangered, Endangered and Vulnerable Day-9 | Deputy Curator (Administration) | Deputy Curatorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Office : Wild animal medicine, about zoo act and zoo management Day-10 | Deputy Curator (Animal Survey) Deputy Curator Office : Survey of wild animals, government rules and regulation and implementation Day-11 | Veterinary Surgeon | Veterinary Hospital : Health management, treatment, some common diseases of zoo animals Day-12 | Scientific Officer | Veterinary Hospital : Disease investigation, biodiversity, zoo ethics, zoo education and postmortem of wild animals

Interns also learn to measure and deliver foodstuffs to the animals properly

Sanitation and hygiene are crucial to animal health. Interns learn to clean cages so they can supervise maintenance personnel in future

ZOOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s PRINT, Volume XXVI, Number 4, April 2011

Symbiotic Plant-Ant Mutualism: Biomimetics ideas for Outsourcing in Biz Management S. Paulraj*

Problems faced by the present day business organizations in outsourcing are analyzed and attempts have been made to find solutions through Biomimetics. The symbiotic mutualism existing between Bull-horn acacia (Acacia cornigera) and the tree ant (Pseudomyrmex ferruginea) provide biomimetic solutions for the problems faced in outsourcing business. Biomimetics, Biomimicry or Biomics is the developing science of taking inspiration from Nature to find practical solutions to problems encountered in the human world. The name comes from the Greek words, bios (life) and mimeses (imitations). Scientists have sensibly realized that nature has a lot to teach us. By opening their eyes to the wonders around them they have found some innovative solutions where life imitates nature (Dop, 2010). Applying the biomimetics in various fields has been documented with example by Kennedy, (2009). But, no example for its application in business field has been cited by him. Only recently Elliott, (2009), Paulraj (2010) and Richerdson (2010) attempted applying the concept of biomimetics in business. Richerson, (2010) explained how the principle of symbiosis are applied in business by formulating a symbiotic matrix. He concludes that by applying biomimetics to business partnership, it is possible to identify the type of partnership, the life-strength of the partnership and to finally define the naked strategy for the business. For his analysis of symbiotic, he has taken into account all six types of symbiosis relationships ranging from mutualism to antibiosis. In the present paper attempts have been made to show how the symbiotic mutualism type of association existing among plants and animals could be developed as a biomimetic model for providing principles for business outsourcing and for suggesting solutions for the problems faced in the outsourcing business. Method The plant – animal relationship developed between the Bullhorn acacia (Acacia cornigera) and the arboreal ant (Pseudomyrmex ferruginea) is taken up for the biomimetics studies. The bull-horn acacia is best known for its symbiotic relationship with the ant that lives in its hollowed-out thorns. The natural principles behind this mutualism type of symbiotic association have been found out using the studies available on this plant and animal (Armstrong, 2010). Observations Unlike other acacias, the Bull-horn acacias are deficient in the bitter alkaloids usually located in the leaves that defend against ravaging insects and browsing animal. Instead, this tree makes use of the services of the acacia-ants for their defense. The acacia-ant acts as a defense mechanism for the tree, protecting it against the harmful insects, animals or humans that may come into contact with it. In return, the tree provides home in the hollowed-out thorns for which the tree is named and also supplies the ant with nutrient rich protein-lipids nodules called Betain bodies from its leaflet tips and carbohydrate rich nectar from glands on its leafstalk base. These Beltain bodies have no known function or use to the plant other than to provide food for the symbiotic ants.

The aggressive ants release an alarm pheromone and rush out of their thorn “barracks” in great numbers. The browsing livestock can apparently smell the pheromone and avoid these acacias day and night. In addition, getting stung in the mouth and tongue is an effective deterrent to browsing on the tender foliage. The worker ant also clear away other competing plants from the acacia’s vicinity – plants which could otherwise over shade the acacia, which need direct sunlight. Janzen, (1983) who gathered most of early evidences regarding this symbiosis, believed that the Bull-horn acacia shoots must be occupied by the Pseudomyrmex ants for a substantial portion of its life in order to survive and reproduce, just as the acacia-ants depend on its shelter and Beltain bodies to compete with other insect species. Rehr et al., (1973) produced evidences in favour of the hypothesis that, originally, the chemical defense had been existing in these acacias and has been subsequently lost in the ant-acacias, possibly because maintenance of both and chemical defense places an unnecessary metabolic burden on the plant. The activity of the acacia-ants increases shortly after a disturbance of the host and can be viewed as an inducible response that could reduce defensive cost (Cronin, 1998). Results The various biological facts about the Acacia’s and ant’s activities reveal the involvement of several natural principles. The principles concerning outsourcing arrived at from the biological facts are as follows: 1. In spite of possessing strong thorns, the Bull-horn acacia failed in its defense strategy of its own. Therefore, outsourcing the defense work became mandatory for its survival. Principle: The real reason for outsourcing lies in the quest for finding people who can do the work better than you. 2. The partner chosen by the acacia is a tiny ant but it is very effective only in protection works. This will ensure that the partner will not interfere in any other activities of the host. Principle: Choose the partner who should be an expertise only for the chosen work and not any other works that are carried out by the host. 3. The bullhorn acacia lost its costly alkaloids production activity as it find it no more useful after establishing the association with ant that suffice the protection needs. Principle: Avoid the activities once the partner is found thoroughly fit enough to perform the same in a cost effective way. 4. Bullhorn acacia offer its less useful thorns for providing shelter and provide food through its unused Beltain bodies to the partner ants. Principle: Find out materials that are less used or not used by you and make use of them effectively for meeting the cost of engaging the outsourced partner.

*Chennai Snake Park, Rajbhavan Post, Chennai – 600 022, India. Email: paulrajifs@gmail.com

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVII, Number 4, April 2011

5. The Bull-horn acacia grows well and concentrate on its core-function of reproduction as, it gets more energy out of the savings from the stoppage of costly alkaloids production. Principle: Outsource non-core works and concentrate on core-activities for better growth. 6. The acacia established its association with the ant strong enough so as to make it a part of its life. Principle: Treat your outsourcing partner as a trust worthy person so as to make him a part of your team. 7. The acacia provide good shelter in its succulent thorns and offer sufficient and enriched food from protein-fat rich Beltain bodies and carbohydrate rich glandular secretions. Reciprocally, the ants not only protect the plant against the browsing animals but also clear the dominant ground growths that are considered competitors for the growth of the acacia. Principle: Higher the benefit you offer the higher the expertise you get from your partner. 8. The acacia does not expect the service of the ant continuously. It requests the protection from the ants only at the time of getting affected by sending chemical signal to the ant. Principle: Don’t expect too much from your partner for the minimum cost you have paid to him. Conserve energy by avoiding activities when not useful or not needed. 9. The mutualism type of association developed between acacia and the ants is a win-win relationship that is considered as the most essential criteria for a successful partnership. Principle: A win-win relationship between the service provider and the client is imperative for the success of an outsourcing initiative. 10. The ants while performing their duties, never do anything that are harmful to acacia particularly, they do not scare away the beneficial honeybees visiting the acacia flowers for pollination. Principle: Ensure that the activities of the client do not hamper the service provider’s activities any way. Discussion The Nature’s principles behind the mutualism type of association developed between the acacia and the ant could be taken as a time tested and highly viable principles for this outsourcing business. Here, the Bullhorn acacia may be taken as the model organization that seeks outsourcing and the acacia-ants be taken as the client outsource service

Fig. 1 (Source: 7th Annual Outsourcing Index, 2004. The Outsourcing Institute, NY., U.S.A.)

provider. The most successful organizations in the outsourcing business should be the one that fallows the various principles of Nature. Avagliano (2004) in his latest survey report study on outsourcing, highlighted top 10 reasons behind choosing outsourcing. According to the present study, the ten principles behind the association between acacia and the ant, are almost coincide with the top ten reasons for outsourcing. In spite of that, the present outsourcing business faces several problems. According to the recent survey report made by the Outsourcing Institute (Avagliano, 2004) five common areas of problems are identified that are responsible the failures in outsourcing. They are Time, Expertise, Budget, Bandwidth and Access to service providers. If we find out how these problems are tackled by the Nature, then, the same could be tried for solving our outsource management problems. Of the five areas of problem mentioned in the report (Avagliano, 2004) only the following three are consistent in all three years of survey (Fig. 1). They are the Time, the Expertise and the Bandwidth ( resource needed to complete a task or project). Therefore, only these three common and persistent problems are taken up for finding solutions. Time related problem: Bell (2006), while analyzing solutions for this time related problem indicated that this is mainly due to the client’s

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVI, Number 4, April 2011

unpreparedness at the time of offering the outsourcing service. In other words, the client start working on designing the project work only after getting the job work. If critically analyze the issue of time factor in the acacia and ant association, it is revealed that the ants that are given the work of defense, are always at the disposal of the service provider acacia with their already developed expertise and, there is no preparation time for starting the assignment. Here, three factors are involved in the timely execution of the work. 1. Preparedness to execute the work any time required by the host, 2. Effective communication and 3. Closer Vicinity for immediate delivery. Therefore, the outsourcing parties may get the solution to the time related problem by adopting the system followed by the acacia and the ants. Problems related to Expertise: The selection of expertise by the acacia is considered very creditable. The protection expert ant is a simple animal but, it is has got an effective attacking system. The acacia needs only that and does not concerned about other abilities. This expert (ant) finds no better host than the acacia as the host provide all essential needs of the ant. This sort of liberal service by the acacia made the expert to be very loyal to the host and be always at the disposal of the service provider. This sort of relationship between the service provider and the expert may be helpful to solve the problem of expertise in outsourcing.

The third problem is connected with the bandwidth that is, the resources needed to complete a task or project. As far as the acacia is concerned, it effectively utilizes its idle resources such as, succulent thorns and the Beltain bodies for the use of its client's (ant) service. It also saved considerable energy by stopping the costly production of alkaloids for defense purpose once it got an effective alternative from the ants. As far as the ant is concerned, its defense activity increases shortly after a disturbance of the host and it is viewed as an inducible response that could reduce defensive cost (Cronin, 1998). Thus, one could find economy in resource utilization in both partners that makes the association viable and strong. The outsourcing business organization should think of such effective utilization of their available resources for solving the problems connected with bandwidth. Conclusion Studied the possibility of applying biomimetics in solving the problem faced in the business outsourcing taking the example of symbiotic relationship found between the bullhorn acacia and the acacia ants. Most of the manmade principles of outsourcing are in agreement with the Nature’s principle of symbiotic relationship. But, the problems faced by the partners in business outsourcing are not seen in Nature’s partners in symbiosis. Therefore, the following biomimetics solutions for the problems in outsourcing, derived from Acacia and ant relationship, are suggested. 1. Choose the expert service provider who are already equipped with the expertise in the area of your requirement and make available at your disposal all the time. This will solve time related problems. 2. Choose your client for your outsource work who should possess the expertise only in the areas of your need. This will ensure that your client will concentrate only on your assigned work and also, your client will get opportunity to specialize more and more in the areas of your need. This will solve your problem concerning the selection of correct expert. 3. Sort out untapped and under utilized resources with you and put them in use effectively. Find out better alternatives for costly activities and stop doing them once you get the right alternatives. This will solve the problems related to resource crunch.

References Armstrong, W.P. (2010). Acacias & Their Remarkable Symbiotic Ants. Available at: http:// waynesword.palomar.edu/acacia.htm Accessed on 22 December, 2010. Avagliano, T. (2004). 7th Annual Outsourcing Index. Small Companies Outsource Different Things for Different Reasons. Outsourcing Essentials 2(3): 1-2. Available at: http://www.outsourcing.com/content.asp?page=01b/other/ oe/q304/7index.html Bell, S. L. (2006). Your Top 10 Outsourcing Problems – Solved. MPO Magazine, CA, U.S.A. pp5. Available at: http://:www.mpo-mag.com/articles/2006/10/your-top-10outsourcing-problemssolved Cronin, G. (1998). Between-Species and Temporal Variation in Acacia-Ant-Herbivore Interactions. Biotropica 30 (1): 135-139. Dop, L. (2010). Examples of Biomimetics where life imitates Nature. Suit101.com. Available at: http:// www.suite101.com/content/examples-of-biometrics-wherelife-imitates-nature-a305108?template=article_print.cfm Elliott, D. (2009). Designing packs as nature intended. packingnews.co.uk. Available at: http:// www.packagingnews.co.uk/news/designing-packs-asnature-intended/ Accessed on 21 December, 2010. Janzen, D. H. (1983). Pseudomyrmex ferruginea (Hormigadel Cornizuelo, Acacia-Ant), pp. 762-764. In: Janzen, D.H. (ed.). Costa Rican Natural History. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Kennady, S. (2009). Biomimicry/Biomimetics: General Principles and Practical Examples. The Science Creative Quarterly, 4 pp.6. Available at: http://www.scq.ubc.ca/ biomimicrybiomimetics-general-principles-and-practicalexamples/ Paulraj, S. (2010). Ants’way of teamwork: Some management concepts behind it. Scientific Transactions in Environment and Technovation. 2010. In press. Rehr, S. S., P. P. Feeny and D. H. Janzen. (1973). Chemical defence in Central American Non-ant-Acacias. Journal of Animal Ecology 42(2: 405-416. Richardson, P. (2010). Symbiosis: natural partnering. Thoughtcrew. pp4. Available at: http:// www.thoughtcrew.net/index.php/2010/11/24/symbiosisnatural-partnering/

Biodiversity Conservation Knowledge Centre at Wildlife Trust of Bangladesh Wildlife Trust of Bangladesh (WTB) and the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) have collaboratively developed a biodiversity conservation knowledge centre in Dhaka. Secondary school and university students have explained to us that they would really like a central hub in which they can learn and talk about conservation, and also work together to develop innovative projects. The centre has been set up with this in mind; we want to help equip students with the skills they need to face the environmental struggles of their country. The centre will offer services including: access to international journals for the latest innovative approaches to conservation, core text books to provide foundational knowledge, regular events (debates, filmshows, seminars) to help develop informed opinion about conservation, classroom aids, and support for the development of conservation projects in their own communities. The idea for this knowledge centre came from the late Dr. Noazesh Ahmed, an eminent photographer and geneticist, also the founding vice chairman of WTB. Remembering his dream, his close colleagues - Mr. Enayetullah Khan Chairman, WTB and Anwar Islam are now making it a reality. The centre has been duly named after Dr Ahmed as Noazesh Knowledge Centre. This first centre is only the beginning and if it is a success, then we would like to replicate it to help develop other young conservationists across the country.

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVII, Number 4, April 2011

Zygomycosis in captive Asian Elephant (Elephas maximus) Manuel Thomas1*, Abin Varghese1, K. Abraham Samuel2 and Punnen Kurian3 Case Report Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) largest and most viable wild population is in India and Kerala supports a very good number of elephants under captivity. Asian elephants in captivity are susceptible to poor health, behavioral abnormalities and breeding problems (Ramanathan et al., 2008). The present paper reports the occurrence of Apophysomyces elegans infection in a 40 year old male captive Asian elephant in Kerala.

Thomas, A.J., S. Shah, M.S. Mathews and N. Chacko (2008). Apophysomyces elegans – renal mucormycosis in a healthy host: A case report from South India. Indian Journal of Medical Microbiology 26(3): 269–271.

Loss of epidermal cells and pus formation was observed for last seven months, especially in trunk and ear region of the elephant. Skin scrapings and pus swabs from infected area were collected and inoculated into 2% Mycological Peptone with chloramphenicol (0.2 mg/ml) and incubated at room temparature. The developed colonies were sub-cultured on to Czapek Dox Agar (CDA) and Sabouraud Dextrose Agar (SDA). Apophysomyces elegans was confirmed by macroscopic and microscopic observations and isolated from all collected samples. Apophysomyces elegans is a common environmental contaminant which is commonly found in tropical and subtropical regions. The colonies are rapidly growing with abundant aerial hypahe and no reverse pigmentation. Sporulation was induced and sporangiosphores with funnel-shaped apophyses and pyriform sporangia was observed by microscopy. Most of the infections are reported from regions with warm climates, such as the southern portions of the United States, Mexico, North Australia, and South India (Ribes et al., 2000). Infection is usually acquired through traumatic implantations associated with soil or decaying vegetable matter (such as from accidental injuries or insect bites). Invasive soft tissue infections can develop on burns or wounds which are contaminated by soil. The fungus has the ability to invade blood vessels. Apophysomyces elegans infections present most commonly as necrotizing fasciitis, osteomyelitis and angioinvasion (Reddy et al., 2008). Human infections from South India are observed by many workers (Thomas et al., 2008; Kindo et al., 2007). Reports on infections due to Apophysomyces elegans in animals like bottle nose dolphin, killer whale and white sided dolphins (Robeck et al., 2002) are available. References Kindo, A.J., N.R. Shams, K. Kumar, S. Kannan, S. Vidya, A.R. Kumar and J. Kalyani (2007). Fatal cellulitis caused by Apophysomyces elegans. Indian Journal of Medical Microbiology 25(3): 285–287. Ramanathan, A. and M. Avanti (2008). A visual health assessment of captive Asian Elephants(Elephas maximus) housed in India. Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine 39(2): 148–154. Reddy, I.S., N.R. Rao, V.M.S. Reddy and R. Rao (2008). Primary cutaneous mucormycosis (zygomycosis) caused by Apophysomyces elegans. Indian Journal Dermatology Venereology & Leprology 74(4): 367–370. Ribes, J.A., C.L. Vanover-sams and D.J. Baker (2000). Zygomycetes in human disease. Clinical Microbiology Reviews 13(2): 236–301. Robeck, T.R and L.M. Dalton (2002). Saksenaea vasiformis and Apophysomyces elegans zygomycotic infections in Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus), a Killer Whale (Orcinus orca), and pacific white- sided dolphins (Lagenorhynchus obliquidens). Journal of Zoo & Wildlife Medicine 33(4): 356-66.

1 Tropical Institute of Ecological Sciences, Vadavathoor P.O, Kottayam – 686 010, Kerala *doctorfungus@rediffmail.com 2 Sr. Gr. Lecturer, Department of Zoology, C.M.S College, Kottayam, 686 001 3 Sl Gr. Lecturer, Department of Zoology, St. Marys College, Manarcadu, Kottayam, Kerala 686 035

ZOO’s PRINT, Volume XXVI, Number 4, April 2011

A note on parasitic infections in Indian peacock G. Ponnudurai*, K. Rajendran, N. Rani and T.J. Harikrishnan Introduction Among avian blood parasites, Haemoproteus species is cosmopolitan and has been reported to be infected in many avian species (Poharkar et al., 2009). This parasite is transmitted from infected to healthy birds by arthropod vectors, including bird lice found in peacock. In this paper occurrence of Haemoproteus species and ectoparasites such as ticks and lice in a peacock is reported. Materials and Methods An ailing peacock was brought to the veterinary hospital complex of Veterinary College and Research Institute, Namakkal, Tamil Nadu by the forest personnel. The bird was unable to fly, showed visible signs of respiratory distress, anaemia and torticolis. In the head region, areas around the eyes and wattles were found studded with various stages of ticks. Upon combing through the feathers, movements of lice could be observed.

Fig. 1 Halter shaped - gamont of Haemoproteus spp. found in the RBC

Blood smears were prepared and stained with Giemsa stain. The stained smears were examined under 100x (oil immersion lens). The specific identity of the ticks that were collected from the peacock was determined as per the keys described by Soulsby (1982). The specific identity of the lice could not be determined.

Acknowledgement The authors are grateful to the Dean, Veterinary College and Research Institute, Namakkal, for the facilities provided.

Results and Discussion In the present case, the clinical signs like increased body temperature, lateral recumbency, respiratory distress and inability to fly were observed. These findings corroborate with findings of Poharkar et al., 2009 who observed all the above clinical signs in vultures that affected with malarial parasites Haemoproteus and Plasmodium spp. The ticks that were collected from the peacock were identified as Haemaphysalis spp. Examination of blood smears collected from the peacock revealed the presence of gametocytes of Haemoproteus parasites (Fig.1). As the bird was brought in a critical state, it died before antimalarial drug treatment could be started. This finding confirms the observation of Malkani, 1936 as he reported that Haemoproteus infection is highly fatal to Indian peacocks. References Malkani, P.G., (1936). Haemoproteus rileyi (sp.nov) causing a fatal disease in Indian peacock. Indian J. Vet.Sci.Anim.Husb., 6: 155-157. Poharkar, A., P.A. Reddy, V.A. Gadge, S. Kolte, N. Kurkure and S. Shivaji (2009). Is malaria the cause for decline in the wild population of the Indian white backed vulture. Current Science 96:553-558 Soulsby, E.J.L., (1982). Helminths, Arthropods and protozoa of Domesticated Animals. 7th Edn, EIBS and Bailiere Tindall, London, 809pp.

* Address for correspondence: Associate Professor, Department of Veterinary Parasitology, Veterinary College and Research Institute, Namakkal, Tamil Nadu â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 637 002. Email: gponnu@rediffmail.com

ZOOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s PRINT, Volume XXVII, Number 4, April 2011

75th Anniversary of the Society for the History of Natural History From Royal Gifts to Biodiversity Conservation: The History and Development of Menageries, Zoos and Aquariums Thursday 19th and Friday 20th May 2011, Chester Zoo, UK This international Symposium is being held in celebration of the 75th Anniversary of the Society for the History of Natural History. It is a joint collaboration between the Society for the History of Natural History, the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums - WAZA and Chester Zoo, supported by the Linnean Society of London and the Bartlett Society. The focus of the symposium is to provide a comprehensive overview of the history and development of living wild animal collections across the world. Symposium proceedings will be made available. Invited speakers will be talking on: • The Foundations of Zoo Biology • The World Association of Zoos and Aquariums • Living Collections in the Ancient World • Royal and Private Animal Menageries • Aquariums and Marine and Freshwater Biological Associations • The Development of Regional and National Zoo Associations and Outreach For further information on registering for the symposium, submitting an abstract or presenting a poster, please contact Claudine Gibson <c.gibson@chesterzoo.org>

International Training Course: New Trends and Methodology in Animal Ecology and Conservation Biology 18 to 26 August, 2011 - Beijing The Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) and the International Society of Zoological Sciences (ISZS), with support from the International Cooperation Bureau, CAS, are proud to offer an International Training Course: New Trends and Methodology in Animal Ecology and Conservation Biology, in Beijing, 18 to 26 August, 2011. The registration deadline is 15 June, 2011. Course Description and Registration Details The training session aims to: • Promote new theories, changes, and developments in methodology of animal ecology, along with promoting new technologies in the field, and conservation biology; • Enhance the overall academic understanding and innovation of animal ecology and conservation biology; and • Facilitate communication among animal ecologists and conservationists from developing countries, and offer a platform for face-to-face communication with leading scientists. Leading scientists of biology and conservation biology from China and abroad will give lectures to researchers from developing countries, especially targeting young scientists and senior researchers. The courses will introduce new concepts in cutting edge science, highlighting the latest progress and trends, with an emphasis on application and practice. Through these courses, participants will master new theories, techniques and methodology of animal ecology and conservation biology, as well as understand cutting edge trends in research on animal ecology and conservation biology. The training courses will culminate in an examination. Qualified participants will be awarded a certificate issued by the Institute of Zoology, CAS and ISZS, and become a member of ISZS. To register for the course, please complete the application form and send to iszs@ioz.ac.cn or fax to +86-10-6480-7295 by 15 June, 2011. Download the registration form at http://www.globalzoology.org/uploads/File/Application%20Form2.pdf For more information, contact Ms. Xiong Wenhua (Tel: +86-10-6480-7295) or Ms. Wang Li (Tel:+86-10-6480-7093). Note: Financial Aid is available under certain circumstances. Please see application/registration form for further detail.

Magazine of Zoo Outreach Organisation ZOO’s PRINT Publication Guidelines

Publication Information

We welcome articles from the conservation community of all SAARC countries, including Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and other tropical countries if relevant to SAARC countries’ problems and potential.

ZOO’s PRINT, ISSN 0973-2543 Published at: Coimbatore Owner: Zoo Outreach Organisation, 9A Lal Bahadur Colony, Peelamedu, CBE 4

Type — Articles of semi-scientific or technical nature. News, notes, announcements of interest to conservation community and personal opinion pieces.

Editor: Sally R. Walker Associate Editor: R.V. Sanjay Molur and Daniel B. Ayyachamy Managing Editor: Latha G. Ravikumar Editorial Assistant: R. Marimuthu

Feature articles — articles of a conjectural nature — opinions, theoretical, subjective. Case reports: case studies or notes, short factual reports and descriptions. News and announcements — short items of news or announcements of interest to zoo and wildlife community Cartoons, puzzles, crossword and stories Subject matter : captive breeding, (wild) animal husbandry and management, wildlife management, field notes, conservation biology, population dynamics, population genetics, conservation education and interpretation, wild animal welfare, conservation of flora, natural history and history of zoos. Articles on rare breeds of domestic animals are also considered. Source : zoos, breeding facilities, holding facilities, rescue centres, research institutes, wildlife departments, wildlife protected areas, bioparks, conservation centres, botanic gardens, museums, universities, etc. Individuals interested in conservation with information and opinions to share can submit articles ZOOS’ PRINT magazine. Manuscript requirements: Articles should by typed into a Word format and emailed to zooreach@zooreach.org. Avoid indents, all caps or any other fancy typesetting. You may send photos, illustrations, tables. Articles which should contain citations should follow this guideline: a bibliography organized alphabetically and contain ing all details referred in the following style : surname, initial(s), year, title of the article, name of journal, volume, number, pages. Editorial details : Articles will be edited without consultation unless previously requested by the authors in writing. Authors should inform editors if the article has been published or submitted elsewhere for publication.

Zoo Outreach Organisation Trust Committee and Sr. Staff Managing Trustee: Sally R. Walker Chairman Trustee: R. Nandini Executive Director: R.V. Sanjay Molur Finance Director Trustee: Latha G. Ravikumar Scientist: B.A. Daniel Researcher: R. Marimuthu Other staff: B. Ravichandran, Pravin Kumar, K. Geetha, S. Radhika, Arul Jagadish, Ravindran, S. Sarojamma ZOOs’ PRINT magazine is informal and newsy as opposed to a scientific publication. ZOOS’ PRINT magazine sometimes includes semi-scientific and technical articles which are reviewed only for factual errors, not peer-reviewed. Address: Zoo Outreach Organisation Post Box 1683, Peelamedu Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu 641 004, India Phone: +91 422 2561087 Fax: +91 422 2563269 E-mail: zooreach@zooreach.org Website: www.zooreach.org, www.zoosprint.org