Can translocation help wild primates?

Caldecott, Julian; Kavanagh, Michael J.

doi:10.1017/s0030605300029495

Cited by 29 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Rehabilitated vervet monkeys should theoretically be released near wild troops, as home ranges are usually adjacent to each other [Cheney et al, 1988]. However, as this may have a negative impact on food resources and behaviour of wild troops in the area [Caldecott and Kavanagh, 1983;Yeager, 1997], and may result in released individuals being injured or killed by wild conspecifics, as seen in our study and in other releases of rehabilitated primates (e.g. chimpanzees [Goossens et al, 2005]), we suggest that troops are released at least 1 km away from the core range of a wild troop.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Postrelease Success of Two Rehabilitated Vervet Monkey (Chlorocebus aethiops) Troops in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

Wimberger

Downs²,

Perrin³

2010

IJFP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In South Africa, the most common primate in rehabilitation centres is the vervet monkey (Chlorocebus aethiops). Here we evaluated the efficacy of releasing two vervet monkey troops into the wild, using the standard methods employed by an established rehabilitation centre. Two troops were assembled over 2–3 years. Coloured ear tags identified adults, subadults and juveniles. Radiocollars were placed on all the adults and subadults of both troops (41% of all individuals). Each troop was released at a suitable site after 2 nights in a holding cage, and supplementary food was provided for 2 months after release. For 10 months, locations of both troops were recorded, as well as the presence/absence of individuals and their general behaviour. The smaller troop survived better than the larger troop, with only 6 of 35 individuals (17%) confirmed alive in the large troop compared with 12 of 24 (50%) in the small troop. Large numbers of missing monkeys make it difficult to determine whether the release was a success. However, results suggest that rehabilitated vervet monkeys could be successfully released in the future. Recommendations are provided for consideration in future releases.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3.9 ! 2.0 m), to enable individuals to adjust to the new environment [Caldecott and Kavanagh, 1983;Bright and Morris, 1994;Baker, 2002]. The cage was placed in the shade, with additional shade cloth covering the top.…”

Section: Soft Releasementioning

confidence: 99%

Postrelease Success of Two Rehabilitated Vervet Monkey (Chlorocebus aethiops) Troops in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

Wimberger

Downs²,

Perrin³

2010

IJFP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such operations are conducted for conservational, scientific, educational, or commercial purposes [Caldecott & Kavanagh, 1983]; they are widespread [Wolf et al, 1996] and can be valuable in primate conservation [Rodriguez-Luna et al, 1993;Andau et al, 1994]. However, they may be dangerous in terms of disease risks [Cunnigham, 1996].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The presence of pathogens in translocated animals represents a potential risk for naive resident populations and should thus be investigated. Moreover, chronic and acute stress due to loss of habitat and capture can reveal subclinical diseases [Caldecott & Kavanagh, 1983], which may have negative effects on the ability of the founder animals to establish a viable population [Woodford & Rossiter, 1994]. Finally, handling of nonhuman primates provides an opportunity for studying infectious processes that are of integral importance in shaping wildlife ecology [Spalding & Forester, 1993].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health evaluation of translocated free‐ranging primates in French Guiana

Thoisy

Vogel²,

Reynes

et al. 2001

American J Primatol

149

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Among over 40 mammal species threatened by the filling of a hydroelectric dam reservoir in French Guiana, three species of primates have been translocated, comprising 124 red howler monkeys, six white-faced sakis, and 95 golden-handed tamarins. Health status of the animals was evaluated by direct physical examination and by hematological, biochemical, virological, and parasitological surveys of collected blood. The physical condition of the howlers was slightly worse toward the end of the capture period, but that of sakis and tamarins remained satisfactory. Several ectoparasites (ticks, larvae of dipterous insects, fleas, and lice) were collected, and various wounds, apparently nondebilitating, were recorded in howlers. Hematological and biochemical profiles determined for the three species revealed a slight anemia in howlers. Entamoeba, Strongyloides, and Trypanoxyurus were common in fecal samples of howlers. A survey of blood smears from the three species revealed infection by several types of microfilaria, Trypanosoma rangeli-like and Plasmodium brasilianum in all three, and Trypanosoma cruzi-like in howlers. These infections had no significant impact on the health status or the hematological profiles. Serologic investigations revealed occasional reactions against Toxoplasma gondii, a strong anti-Plasmodium response in the two Cebidae species, and a weaker one in tamarins. Attempts to isolate arbovirus failed, but antibody responses to Mayaro and yellow fever viruses were strong, especially in the howlers. A strong correlation between age and serological status led to a better understanding of the epidemic cycles. Our survey indicates French Guianan primates are reservoirs for several anthropozoonoses, including malaria, Chagas disease, and arboviruses.

show abstract

“…In the arsenal of conservation tech. niques, reintroduction is one of the most dramatic (Caldecott and Kavanaugh 1985), but the effectiveness of many past reintroductions is quesdonable (Booth 1988, Griffkh andothers 1989). The goal of reintroduction is to establish a free-ranging, viable, reproductive population of a species that can interact freely with its environment (Jungius 1985).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

High-performance teams in wildlife conservation: A species reintroduction and recovery example

Clark

Westrum

1989

Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

/ Reintroduction of animals to the wild to establish free-ranging viable populations is a valuable conservation tool, but ecological skills alone are not enough to ensure a successful reintroduction; also needed to do the work are effectively designed and managed programs. This article suggests general guidelines for organizing and managing reintroduction programs, reviews some basic organizational issues, and considers ways to develop high-performance teams The need to integrate reintroduction programs into their larger interorganizational context is discussed. The reintroduction program's structure must be appropriate for its function and should be properly staffed, led, and buffered from its political environment It should process information well, learn rapidly from its own mistakes, and be creative A high-performance team devotes most of its energies to solving external rather than internal problems

show abstract

Can translocation help wild primates?

Cited by 29 publications

References 5 publications

Postrelease Success of Two Rehabilitated Vervet Monkey (Chlorocebus aethiops) Troops in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

Postrelease Success of Two Rehabilitated Vervet Monkey (Chlorocebus aethiops) Troops in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa

Health evaluation of translocated free‐ranging primates in French Guiana

High-performance teams in wildlife conservation: A species reintroduction and recovery example

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About