Penguin Conservationaviansag.org/Newsletters/Penguin_TAG/Vol-6_No-2... · penguin drawings (page 1 and back cover). Articles submittedfor publicationshouldbe typed. For articles which

Penguin ConservationJune, 1993 vol. 6, no. 2

In this issue

New Name, Wider Horizons

Bringing New Penguins into the Collection, 90's Style

Behavioral Observations of Captive MagellanicPenguins with Chicks

The Penguin Conservation and Management Plan

AAZPA Penguin Advisory Group Recommendationon Magellanics in Captivity

More about the AAZPA Penguin Advisory Group

Haemoparasites in the African (Jackasss) Penguin

1

2

7

13

18

19

20

Publication information:

Penguin Conservation

ISSN # 1045-0076Indexed in: Wildlife Review and

Zoological RecordSerials librarians, please note:

Previous title was SPN: Spheniscus Penguin Newsletter.Volume numbering continued from previous title.

Printed on recycled paper.

Penguin Conservation is published three times per year, with financial supportfrom the American Associa tion ofZoological Parks and Aquariums, from the MetroWashington Park Zoo, and from its readers. Subscription is free, to those with aserious interest in penguin conservation and study. Contributions toward printingand postage costs are welcome; please make checks payable to "ConservationPublications," and send to the Editor at the address below.

The drawing which serves as our cover logo is reproduced by kind permissionof the artist, Arm Munson. Thanks to Joan Skidmore, for permission to use herpenguin drawings (page 1 and back cover).

Articles submitted for publication should be typed. For articles which includegraphs (such as line or bar graphs) please include a separate sheet giving the dataused to generate the graph. Authors who work on a Macintosh computer can helpour editorial process by sending their work on disk as well as paper.

All articles for the next issue must be received by September I, 1993.

Please address all correspondence to:

Cynthia Cheney, EditorPenguin ConservationMetro Washington Park Zoo4001 SW Canyon Rd.Portland, Oregon 97221 USA

Telephone: (503) 226-1561FAX: (503) 226-6836

New Name, Wider Horizons

global climate change. Captive populations must be self-sustaining, with norecruitment foreseeabie from wildpopulations; with sound management,these can be self-contained populationsfor the next century or two, as captivemanagers now plan for such time spans.These colonies can provide learning opportunities that may aid in wildmanagement, as well as helping zoological institutions to educate the publicabout wildlife and promote better stewardship of the world's oceans andcoastlines. With your help, Penguin Conservation will address all of these areas,and others which can promote our goalof conserving this group of animals.

With this issue, the Spheniscus Penguin Newsletter becomes PenguinConservation. The new title reflects expansion to cover matters relating to theconservation of all penguin species, notjust the genus Spheniscus. The publication schedule is also changing, to threeissues per year. This will allow us topresent more information, morepromptly.

Expansion is made possible by a generous grant from the AmericanAssocia tion of Zoological Parks andAquariums, drawn from funds designated for penguin conservation projects.These funds were contributed in part bythe Stride-Rite Corporation and theDaily Juice Company. The grant willsupport most of the printing costs forthis issue and the four following issues.Postage costs will continue to be contributed by the Metro Washington Park Zoo.

Thanks to these supporters, the newPenguin Conservation will be able to provide a means of communication for allthose, worldwide, involved in the management and study of wild and captivepenguins of all species. Conservationplanning has begun to consider all penguin species at the same time, inevaluating threats in the wild, allocatingfacilities for captive colonies, <LT1d identifying areas needing further research (seearticle, page 13).

Since its fustissue in September 1988,SPN has received financial support frommany individuals, and organizations.The Portland Chapter of the AmericanAssociation of Zoo Keepers paid formost of the printing costs, and MetroWashington Park Zoo has borne th costof air mail postage going all ver theworld. Penguin Conference Japan madea very generous contribution from theirmembers. Many individual readers alsosent contributions, which not onlyhelped pay the printer, but also cheeredthe editor as tangible proofs that thepublication was of value to its readers.Our thanks to you all.

Voluntary contributions from readers will continue to be requestedannually, and other sources of supportwill also be sought for the future. Theideal remains that everyone with a serious interest in the subject may receivethe publication, upon request.

The general purpose of the publication also remains the same: to provide asingle location where all those workingwith or for penguins may exchange information. Those who read thepublication, and send in articles for others to read, include field researchers,veterinarians, zoologists working in thelab, zookeepers, behavioralists, nutritionists, zoo curators, and all thoseconcerned with managingand preserving populationsof penguins. The inter-relatedness of wild and captive'research and management isbecoming increasingly clear.Each field has the opportunityto collect information of valueto the other, and successfulmanagement of limited populations in the wild or in zoos, aydraw upon the same body ofknowledge and techniques.

Also, we will continue to serveas a medium for inquiries, putting individuals in touch with others whoseexperience may help.

Penguin Conservation's readers arealso its authors. Please consider whataspect of your work might be of interest or use to other readers, and writean article or short note. Article published elsewhere may also bere-published here, and find newreader in other parts of the world .'. ,~~--e:or in other disciplines. ~ ;<j

Th f b ',,",,~ ...,.;.!! .~'.'

criticatf:;:n;:;~~~~~ns~<~~22·~~~.'~E;:'~~"'~~i:!~!!II'~IIin the wild and in captivity. Wildp pulations are threatened bypollution, competition for foodsources, human interfer ce ofvarious sorts, and potential

-Editor

Penguin Conservation June 1993 page 1

Bringing new penguins into the collection 90's style

INTRODUCTION

THE EXPERIENCE OF VARIOUS COLLECTIONS

IN HAND-REARING PENGUINS HAS SHOWN 1HAT

HUSBANDRY METHODS AND DIET REQUIRED FOR

one species are not necessarily optimalfor another. The work described in thispaper has advanced our knowledge ofmethods resulting in the successful handrearing of King and Macaroni penguins.

Edinburgh Zoo received 50 Macaroni (Eudyptes chrysolophus) and 49 King(Aptenodytes patagonica ) eggs on the 27thDecember 1991. These were delivered toEdinburgh by Richard Hill fromBirdland, Bourton on the Water, carriedin portable incubators. They were collected by him in South Georgia and weretherefore part-way through incubationon arrival. The zoo's animal hospital hadbeen converted into a quarantine for thepurpose of housing these eggs.

IncubationOn arrival the eggs were numbered,

and placed in egg incubators which hadbeen preset to a temperature of 36.5 °Cand 60% relative humidity. These eggswere now in Ministry of Agricultureapproved quarantine. The eggs were notwashed owing to the fact that they werepart-way through incubation. Crackedeggs were put in a separate incubator toreduce the risk of cross-infection.

Problems were encountered controlling the humidity levels, especially sincethe ambient R.H. in the incubator roomvaried from 20%-60%. As only one of theincubators used (A.B. Newlife 75) had afully automatic humidity control system, the other four had to be monitoredtwice daily and adjusted accordingly. Tofacilitate this the eggs were weighed

Miranda F. Stevenson, CuratorMartin P. Gibbons, Assistant CuratorEdinburgh ZooCorstorphine Rd.Edinburgh EH 12 6TSUK

Edinburgh, Scotland

regularly to track moisture loss. Notknowing exactly when incubationstarted meant that calculating for optimal weight loss was not possible. Usingdata previously collected during incubation of King and Gentoo eggs laid bybirds at Edinburgh Zoo, it was possibleto extrapolate values that were reasonably accurate. Owing to the variabilityand irregularity of shape of penguineggs it is not possible to use describedmethods (Hoyt, 1979) to estimate freshegg weight from volume.

The first Macaroni egg hatched onthe 29th December 1991 and the firstKing on the 25th January 1992. Of the 49King eggs, 20 proved infertile, and of the50 Macaroni, 5 were infertile. Twentynine Macaroni hatched, a success rate of64% and 17Kings hatched, a success rateof 59%.

Eggs were candled with a halogencandling lamp and on internal pippingthey were moved to a hatcher at a temperature of 35.5°C and a relativehumidi ty of approximately 75%. Chickstook approximately 48 hours from external pipping to hatching.

Staff only aided hatching in twoseparate circumstances: failure to pipexternally, and sticking. The first occurred when the chick had pippedinternally but, either due to malposihoning or general weakness, had beenunable to pip through the external shell.Chicks were assisted if they failed to pipexternally within 24 hours of internalpip, or if they were observed to be getting obviously weaker following theeffort of pipping internally. A chick wasjudged to be weakening when its pip-

MIRANDA F. STEVENSON

MARTIN P. GIBBONS

ping attempts became shorter andshorter in duration. (The stimulation ofhandling the egg is usually enough tostimulate this behavior, so that it can bemonitored periodically.) When the decision was made to assist the external pip,a small hole approximately 2 mm in diameter would be drilled into the airspace and this was usually enough torevitalise the chick. Secondly, if the chickhad become stuck to the internal membrane due to insufficient humidity or aburst blood vessel, immediate actionwas taken to release it. This occurredwith eight Macaronis and five Kings.The procedure followed was the standard one of moistening the membranewith sterile distillled water, using anartist's brush. Especial care must betaken ifblood vessels are involved; at theslightest sign of fresh blood appearingthe egg was immediately replaced in thehatcher. If bleeding continued, Aureomycin wound powder was applied.

Experience has suggested that it isbetter to assist a hatching chick, if thereis any doubt. In the present case, therewas additional concern for the eggs' viability due to storage and transportation.In our experience, no chicks are knownto have been lost due to active intervention of this kind.

RearingReject hospital human-baby in incu

bators were used for the early stage ofrearing.

After hatching the chicks weremoved to a 'hatching' baby incubator for24 hours, at a temperature of 34°C. Thenavel wound where the yolk sac wasabsorbed was dusted with Aureomycindusting powder. Chicks received theirfirst feed approximately 24 hours afterhatching when they were moved to'rearing' incubators. During their stay inbaby incubators the chicks were placedin small plastic containers, or plasticbowls, in pairs where possible. The sub-


4.000 ,-----------------------------,

--------- ............ ,

WILD BIRDS

EDINBURGH BIRDSen 3,000w~~«0::

" 2.000Z

I-3:

1,000

//

/

//

//,

//

/,/

I

//

//

//,

//

//

//

//

/

AGE IN DAYS

Figure 1. Macaroni Penguins: Growth rates of wild-caught and Edinburgh hatched chicks.

8,000

7,000

en 6,000w~~ 5,000«0::

" 4,000Z

I-3,000

3:2,000

1,000

0

,---------------------------------, EDINBURGH

BELFAST

AGE IN DAYS

Figure 2. King Penguins: Growth rates of Edinburgh hatched and Belfast hatched chicks.


Bringing new penguins into the collection 90's stylecontinued from page 3

strate used was paper towelling.Containers and towelling were changedafter each feed and containers sterilised.In some instances, the chicks' toenailsshowed a tendency "to tum under thefoot causing misshapen feet; plasticmesh was put on top of the towelling inthe containers to provide better tractionfor the chicks' nails, and in more extreme cases feet were bandaged into thecorrect position. This technique workedwell.

Each chick was individually bandedwith coloured embroidery thread andweighed each morning before the 0800

feed. Weight curves were checked foreach bird each day. Figs. 1 and 2 showthe growth of the Edinburgh chickscompared with growth rate data fromMacaroni chicks in the wild and fromKing chicks at Belfast Zoo.

There is danger of overheating penguin chicks and care was taken to reducethe incubator temperature by ICC perday in the case of the Macaronis andO.soC per day in the case of the Kings.(See Table 1.) Great care was taken afterthe last feed to check the exact temperature of each incuba tor. When theMacaroni chicks were approximately 7

days old and the Kings 14 days old theywere moved to a second room, wherethey were placed in plastic containers,610x790x300 mm deep with insertedplastic mesh bases on a SOx25 mmwooden framing. Heat lamps wereplaced over one end of each of these andwere raised in height as the chicks grew.

When the chicks reached the coolestcontainer they were then moved to athird cooler room and placed in similarcontainers. Containers and mesh substrates were changed after each feed. Thechicks ended up in unheated cages; in

DAYMACARONI KING

TEMPERATURE IN °C TEMPERATURE IN °C

0 34.0 34.0

1 33.5 33.5

2 32.5 33.0

3 31.5 32.5

moved to room 1 in boxes with7 heat lamp; hot end of box 28°C,

cool end 25°C

moved down to cooler boxes in moved to room 1 in boxes with

12room 1; by day 12 (approx) heat lamp; hot end of box 28°C,moved to room 2 with fan, at cool end 25°C14-18°C

18-22moved to unheated cage, temp. moved to room 2,lO-12°C at 14-18°C

22-23moved to unheated cage, temp.10-12°C

Incubator temperatures were reduced by 1°C per day for Macaroni chicks andO.soC per day for King chicks.

Table 1. Rearing temperatures for Macaroni and King Penguin chicks.


the case of the Macaronis this was whenthey reached approximately 1 kg inweight. In the tmheated room, a fan wasused to increase air circulation. This system of gradual progression to coolerareas as the chicks grew and their downthickened worked well.

FeedingDetails of the gruel diet are given in

Table 2. Food was freshly prepared andliquidised into a gruel every 24 hoursand stored in plastic containers in a refrigerator. Quantities for each feed wereplaced in separate containers, and whenrequired for feeding the gruel washeated by standing the container in hotwater until the contents became warm.After feeding, any remaining heatedfeed was discarded. Food containerswere washed and sterilised in a chlorinebased sterilizer. Chicks were fed fromsyringes, finishing up with panacur syringes (wide-nozzled 60 ml drenchingsyringes used with wormers for mammals). It was necessary to sieve gruelthat was being used in 20 ml and smallersyringes.

For the first few feeds chicks weretube fed, until they learned the technique of feeding from a syringe. Thiswas to ensure they received the correctamount of gruel per feed for the first fewdays after hatching. Macaroni chickswere supplemented with small (approximately 30 mm long) whitebaitfrom the time they reached 150 kg, andKing chicks from Day 2, working up tostrips of sprat and then to entire smallsprats.

Initially chicks were fed four times aday, at 0800, 1200, 1600, and 2000 hours.Each chick was fed 10% of its morningbody weight in gruel each feed, up to amaximum of 45 ml gruel for Macaronisand 50 ml per feed for Kings. The frequency was reduced to three feeds (0800,1400,2000), ending up with two feeds at0800 and 1700. When on solely fish feedsMazuri fish-eater tablets were added tothe morning fish feed, dose as per manufacturer's recommendations.

For Macaronis the regime adoptedwas three feeds, two gruel and fish, andone fish only, once they reached over 700g in weight. This was reduced to twofeeds when their weights were over 2000g, with gruel feeds gradually beingphased out.

When the King chicks reached aweight of 2-3 kg they were put on threefeeds, two gruel and fish, and one fishonly. When they weighed more than 3kg gruel was given at only one feed, andwhen they reached more than 4 kg theywere put onto two feeds with no gruel.

Chick SurvivalMacaroni

Of the 29 Macaronis that hatched allsurvived until 25 days of age. One chickdied at 26 days and one at 27 days, bothdue to secondary effects from residualyolk sac infections. All the remaining 27chicks fledged and were moved out ofquarantine to the new penguin exhibit.

please turn to page 6

MACARONIS KINGS

300ml Hartmann's Solution 300 ml normal saline (10%)

100 g squid (shell & ink-sac 100g squidremoved)

100 g sprats (whole) 250 g sprats

100 g prawns (whole)

2 Mazuri fish-eater 2 Mazuri fish-eatertablets tablets

1 Pet Cal tablet 1 Pet Cal tablet

1 tblspn. SA 37 1 tblspn. SA 37

Table 2. Penguin hand-rearing diets


Bringing new penguins into the collection 90's stylecontinued from page 5

Subsequently, two chicks died in Apriland a fifth, which was blind due to earlyulceration of the eyes and a pseudomonas eye infection, contracted aspergillosisand had to be euthanized. This left 24chicks at the end of 1992, a total rearingsuccess of 83%.

KingOf the seventeen hatched, all sur

vived until the end of 1992, making a100% rearing success.

Health problemsAny chick that was causing concern

after hatching was given oral prophylactic treatment with amoxycillin (forMacaronis 0.1 ml per 100 g wt, twicedaily) After it was discovered that yolksac infections might be a larger problemthan initially thought, all the King chickswere given six days prophylactic treatment with amoxicillin (0.6 mI per 300 g,twice daily). This might have contributed to their higher rearing success rate.

Occasionally problems are causedwith penguin chicks regurgitating feed;

Recent Literature

Brooke, M. de L. and Prince, P.A.1991. Nocturnality in seabirds. Proceedings of the Twentieth InternationalOrnithological Congress. 1113-1121.

Croxall, J.P. 1992. Southern oceanenvironmental change: effects on seabird, seal and whale populations.Philosophical Transactions of the RoyalSociety ofLondon, Series B. 338: 319-328.

Croxall, J.P. and Briggs, D.R. 1991.Foraging economics and performanceof polar and subpolar Atlantic seabirds. Polar Research 10:561-578.

Croxall, J.P. and Williams, T.D.1991. The gentoo penguin as a candidate species for the CCAMLREcosystem Monitoring Programme.CCAMLR Selected Papers 1990. 483-488.

this can be difficult to stop and causesrapid weight loss. If a chick regurgitatedmore than two consecutive feeds it wastubed Dioralyte instead of gruel for thefollowing two feeds and given oral antibiotic for four days. Dioralyte feeds werethen repeated as necessary until thechick completely recovered.

Three King chicks developed wheezing, possibly due to inhalation of feed.They were injected with LA oxytetracycline (100 mg per 1 kg body weightonce daily for six days and then onceevery second day for the next sevendays).

AcknowledgementsWe would like to thank John Stronge

of Belfast Zoo for providing us with thediets and methodology he devised whenhand-rearing Gentoo and King penguins in 1989 and 1990. Keepers GillianBrooks and Daniella Dixoncarried out much of the rearing andcleaning work in the quarantine area.We would like to thank Hoechst U.K.Ltd. for providing us with large Panacursyringes.

Davis, R.W., Croxall, J.P. andO'Connell, M.J. 1989. The reproductiveenergetics of gentoo and macaronipenguins at South Georgia. Journal ofAnimal Ecology 58:59-74.

Hines, Ronald S.; Patrick Sharkeyand Robin B. Friday. 1990. Itraconazoletreatment of pulmonary, ocular anduropygeal aspergillosis andcandidiasis in birds-data from fiveclinical cases and controls. Proceedingsof the American Association ofZoo Veterinarians, pp. 322-327.

Ghebremeskel, K., Williams, T.D.,Williams, G., Gardner D.A. andCrawford, M.s. 1991. Plasma metabolites in macaroni penguins (Eudypteschrysolophus) arriving on land for

Products mentioned in the textAureomycin dusting powder: Chlor

tetracycline hydrochloride 2% powder.Cyanamid Animal Health Division,Gosport, Hampshire.

Clamoxyl: palatable drops of Amoxicillin Trihydrate, 50 mg per mI. BeechamAnimal Health, Brentford, Middlesex.

Dioralyte: rehydration solution.Rorer Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Eastbourne.

Hartmann's Solution: Saline solutionmade by Animalcare Ltd., CommonRoad, Dunnington, York, Y015RU.

Mazuri fish-eater tablets: supplementary food by SDS, Withirn, Essex.

Pet Cal: Calcium and Phosphorusplus Vitamin 0

3by Beecham Animal

Health, Brentford, Middlesex.SA-37: Multivitamin preparation by

Intervet UK Ltd., Science Park, MiltonRoad, Cambridge.

ReferencesHoyt, D.F. (1979) Practical methods

of estimating volume and fresh weightof birds' eggs. Auk 96: 73-77.

breeding and moulting. ComparativeBiochemistry and Physiology 99A:245250.

Heinemann, D., Hunt, G.L., andEverson, I. 1989. Relationships between the distributions of marineavian predators and their prey,Euphausia superba, in Bransfield Straitand southern Drake Passage, Antarctica. Marine Ecology Progress Series,58:3-16.

Hunt, G.L., Heinemann, D., Veit,R.R., Heywood, R.B. and Everson, I.1990. The distribution, abundance andcommunity structure of marine birdsin southern Drake Passage, andBransfield Strait, Antarctica. Continental Shelf Research 10:243-257.


Behavioral Observations of Captive Magellanic Penguins(Spheniscus magellanicus) with Chicks

KATHY A. BENNETT

LARGE POPULATIONS OF MAGELLANIC

PENGUINS (SPHENISCUS MAGELLANICUS) ARE

FOUND IN THE WILD; HOWEVER, FEW ARE

exhibited in captivity. Much of the research on this penguin species hasfocused on wild populations (Boersmaet al., 1990; Boswall and Maclver, 1975;Capurro et al., 1988; Ghebremeskel et al.,1989; Gochfield, 1980;Jehl, 1975; Scolaro,1987; Scolaro et al., 1983; Stonehouse,1967; and Wilson and Wilson, 1990).

A group of 67 wild-caught Magellanic penguins were brought from Chileto the San Francisco Zoological Gardensin 1984. These birds have bred and produced young every spring since 1985.Details of the exhibit design and husbandry procedures are described byAvery-Beausoleil and Ryan (1985). Theproductive colony of Magellanic penguins at the San Francisco ZoologicalGardens provided opportunities for research on this species in captivity.Preliminary studies on this colony werereported by Avery-Beausoleil and Ryan(1985) and Venizelos et a!,. (1985).

In 1990, the colony consisted of 60individuals including 16 mated pairs.The purpose of this study was to investigate the nutrition provided toparent-reared Magellanic penguinchicks. This paper reports an analysis ofspecific parental behaviors and focuseson chick-feeding activities.

MethodsBehavioral observations of the pen

guin colony were conducted by zoo staffand trained volunteers. Three experienced researchers served as teamleaders. All observers completed a three

Kathy A. BennettPueblo Zoo3455 Nuckolls Ave.Pueblo, Colorado 81005[When this paper was written, KathyBennett was an Avian Intern atthe San Francisco Zoo .J

San Francisco, California

hour training session at the zoo. Theylearned the various behaviors (see Appendix 1) by viewing slides and a videotape. In addition, each observer workedwith one of the team leaders on their firstday of data collection.

To ascertain accuracy in data collection, each observer was subjected toreliability testing. One of the team leaders collected data on a pair of penguinssimultaneously with the observer undergoing reliability testing. Each testwas run to ten minutes. Comparison ofthese results demonstrated eachobserver's accuracy. All observers demonstrated accuracy within 1%.

Observations were conducted threedays a week from 1100-1300 and 16001800 hours. The project began 15 March1990 and continued until 18 June 1990when the last three chicks were takenfrom their parents for weaning.

This report focuses on the time period during which the chicks were beingparent-reared (10 May through 18 June1990). Four pairs of penguins were observed initially. These pairs were chosenfor their tractability, visibility in theirburrows, and past breeding and chickrearing successes. During the course ofthe breeding season, two additionalpairs were added to the study when twoof the original pairs became unsuitablefor the project (see Discussion). Each individual in the study was identified bycolored tags that were attached to itsnumbered wing bands.

Data were collected by use of a scansampling technique which is a form ofinstantaneous sampling (Altmann, 1974;Lehner, 1979). Individuals were viewed

at predetermined time intervals andtheir behaviors were scored. For thisstudy, one individual (the male bird ofthe pair) was observed on the minutemark, and. the second individual (thefemale) was observed on the 30 secondmark. At those instances, the observerrecorded the subject's behavior and location. The researchers were stationedon benches in the public viewing areaaround the penguin exhibit 3.6-4.5 m(12-15 ft) across from the burrow theywere watching. Binoculars aided in theirability to identify the individuals and thebehaviors. The data were later talliedinto time blocks of one hour for computer input.

The collection of data during thesame set time periods each day is defined by Lehner (1979) as haphazardsampling. This method was chosen because the cleaning and feedingschedules required to maintain the animals and their exhibit were disruptive todata collection.

Scan sampling provided data suitable for estimating percentage of timeindividuals spent in various activities.Focal animal observa tions (where oneindividual is the focus and behaviors arerecorded during a set time period) wereused for studying the feeding behavior.Whenever the observers saw a parentfeeding one of the hatchlings, they recorded the time duration of this activity.This was done in addition to the scansampling data collection.

ResultsA total of 152.2 hours of data was col

lected. During the a.m. time block(1100-1300), the penguins were observedfor 77.7 hours. During the p.m. timeblock (1600-1800), the birds were observed for 74.5 hours. Total observationsfor each pair were: Pair A-59.S hours,




continued from page 7

Pair 8----46.5 hours, Pair C-25.3 hours,Pair D-13.2 hours, and Pair E-7.4hours.

The behaviors (see Appendix 1) weregrouped into generalized categories:

1) Maintenance behaviors: mute,preen, rouse, wing flap;

2) Sexual/ social behaviors: call,copulation, duet, ecstatic display,head shake, mutual display, mutual preen, pre-copulation, preenother bird, slender walk;

3) Aggressive behaviors: bill clack,chase conspecific, cobra, contactconspecific, flee conspecific;

Behaviors

4) Nest building behaviors: arrangenest rnaterial, carry nest rnaterial,deposit nest material, dig, pick upnest material;

5) Care of young behaviors: broodyoung, feed young, nest relief,young solicit food;

6) Egg-related behaviors: tum egg,incubation;

7) Locomotive behavior: walk;8) Stationary behaviors: rest lying

down, rest standing up9) visual behaviors: disturbed, look

around;10) miscellaneous behaviors: other

behaviors (including yawn, pant,

head bob, pivot over nest, andcontact with keepers); out ofsight.

The percentages of time that thesebehaviors were exhibited are shown inFigures 1 and 2. Figure 1 shows the averages of the behaviors for all the birdsobserved, while Figure 2 shows a comparison of the averages of the behaviorsbetween the male and female animals.Feeding young averaged 1.19% of allbehaviors, which is only a small portionof the care of young category (mean39.67%). Other behaviors in the care ofyoung category were brooding (38.1%),

Aggressive

Locomotive

Egg-related

Sexual/social

Nest-building

Visual

Maintenance

Miscellaneous

Stationary

Care of young 39.7

o 10 20 30 40

Percentage of Time Spent

Figure 1. Average activity budgets for Magellanic Penguins with chicks.


nest relief (0.17%), and young solicitingfood (0.24%). Comparison of male andfemale parents when feeding the chicksresulted in a mean of 0.99% for the malepenguins and 1.79% for the females.

Analysis of the data collected onfeeding durations resulted in a mean of4.44 minutes (n=107, range=1-19 minutes, 50=4.17) for all pairs of parents.Four pairs (Pairs B-E) with only onechick averaged 3.71 minutes in feedingduration (n=58, range=1-17 minutes,50=3.86). Pair A with two chicks averaged 5.33 minutes in feeding duration(n=49, range=1-19 minutes, 50=4.36).

Behaviors

The female penguins fed their chicksa total of 160 times, while the male birds

. fed 116 times. During the a.m. timeblock, the penguins fed their young atotal of 132 times, with the females feeding 85 times and the males feeding 47times. The frequency of the a.m. feedingsof the young by the female parents wassignificantly greater than by the maleparents (chi square, n=132, P<0.05). During the p.m. time block, the birds fedtheir chicks a total of 144 times, with thefemales feeding 75 times compared tothe males feeding 69 instances. Therewas no significant difference betweenthe frequency of the p.m. feedings by the

male and female parents (chi square,n=l44, P<0.05).

DiscussionUnlike other species of the genus

Spheniscus, Magellanic penguins breedat only one time during the year(Boswall and MacIver, 1975). This limitsthe amount of data that can be collectedin a year. This is a preliminary report onthe parental behaviors of the Magellanicpenguin colony at the 5an FranciscoZoological Gardens, and more data collection is necessary. The followingcomments relate to what was learnedafter one breeding season.

Aggressive

Locomotive

Egg-related

Sexual/social

Nest-building

Visual

Maintenance

Miscellaneous

Stationary

Care of young

o 10 20 30 40

Percentage of Time Spent

Figure 2. Comparison of parental activity budgets, by sex.




Visibility into the burrows restrictedthe number of pairs that could be observed. During the course of the study,two of the initial four pairs became unsuitable for the project when one pair'ssingle egg failed to hatch, and the otherpair's only chick died at three days ofage. Two additional pairs were thenadded to the study group. 1his resultedin a limited number of observationhours for three of the pairs. Thus the results should be viewed guardedly.

The use of a scan sampling observation method is recommended byAltmann (1974) for estimating time andactivity budgets. Review of the data indicates that the adults spend 73% of theirtime engaged in 2 types of activities: careof the young (39.67%) and stationarybehaviors (33.27%). These observationsare in accord with those by Merritt andKing (1987) on captive Humboldt penguins (Spheniscus humboldti) andWarham (1971) on wild royal penguins(Eudyptes chrysolophus schlegeli), wherenesting birds spent the majority of theirtime in their burrows or resting near theburrow entrances.

The scan sampling method did notgive us the information that was desiredon frequency and duration of feedingattempts, therefore the focal animalmethod was initiated to collect data onfeeding durations. Analysis of this datareveals a discrepancy between the results of the two different observationalmethods. The scan sampling methodindicated an average of 1.19%, whereasthe focal animal method disclosed anaverage of 5.68%. The focal animalmethod seems better suited for data collection of frequency and duration offeedings and may be a more accuraterepresentation of this behavior. An interesting comparison could be made byusing the focal animal method for all thedata collection in future breeding seasons.

Haphazard samples (Lehner, 1979)were taken because of the activities nec-

essary to maintain the penguins. Therewas concern over interference by humans and its effect on data collection.This method allows for only a limitedpicture of the activities of the birds forthe entire day. A more realistic picture ofthe birds' activities throughout the daycould be achieved by the use of randomsamples as described by Lehner (1979).1his involves collecting data during allhours of the day.

Four of the pairs observed had onechick, and one pair had two hatchlings.Comparison of the average feeding durations shows a mean of3.71 minutes forpairs with one chick and a mean of 5.33minutes for the pair with two offspring.The small sample size limits the validityof these comparisons.

These preliminary results indicatethat the females fed their chicks tWice asoften as the males in the a.m. time block.The males and females fed with equalfrequency in the p.m. time block. Theseresults should be viewed with cautionuntil this study is repeated with a largersample size. Future observations on thiscolony and on Magellanic penguins atother zoos and aquariums will be necessary to validate these findings.

SummaryBehavioral observations were con

ducted during the 1990 breeding seasOnon selected members of a captive colonyof Magellanic penguins at the San Francisco Zoological Gardens. The twoprimary activities of the adult birds werecare of young and stationary behaviors.The female penguins were observedfeeding the chicks twice as often as themales during the mornings and equallyin the afternoon. Feedings averaged 4.44minutes in duration. These findingsmust be viewed with caution due to thelimited sample size and future researchis necessary to validate these conclusions.

AcknowledgmentsFunding was made possible through

an Institute of Museum Services GrantNo. IC-80352-88. I would like to thankthe following people: penguin keepersJane Tollini and Carol Cone (teamleader), Kathleen Hick (team leader),Kathy Hobson (for help with the statistics and printing of the graphs), and allof the volunteers who participated in thecollection of the behavioral data.

ReferencesAltmann, J., 1974. Observational

study of behavior: sampling methods.Behav.49:227-265.

Avery-Beausoleil, 1.; Ryan, E.A.,1985. Practical aspects of the husbandryand maintenance of the Magellanic penguins (Spheniscus magellanicus) at the SanFrancisco Zoo. Animal Keeper's Forum12:451-464.

Boersma, P.D.; Stokes, D.L.; Yorio,PM., 1990. Reproductive variability andhistorical change of Magellanic penguins (Spheniscus magellanicus) atPunta,Tombo, Argentina. In: L.S. Davisand J.T. Darby (Eds.) Penguin Biology.New York, New York: Academic Press,Inc.

Boswall, J.T.; MacIver, D., 1975. TheMagellanic penguin (Spheniscusmagellanicus). In B. Stonehouse (Ed.) TheBiology ofPenguins. Baltimore, Maryland:Dniv. Park Press.

Capurro, A.; Frere, E.; Gandini, M.;Gandini, P.; Holik, T.; Lichtschein, V.;Boersma, PD., 1988. Nest density andpopulation size of Magellanic penguins(Spheniscus magellanicus) at Cabo DosBahias, Argentina. Auk 105(3): 585-588.

Ghebremeskel, K.; Williams, G.;Keymer, I.F.; Horsley, D.; Gardner,D,.A., 1989. Plasma chemistry ofrockhopper (Eudyptes crestatus), Magellanic (Spheniscus magellanicus) andgentoo (Pygoscelis papua) wild penguinsin relation to moult. Compo Biochem.Physiol. 92A(1):43-47.


Gochfi.eld, M.,1980. Timing of breeding and chick mortality in central andperipheral nests ofMagellanic penguins.Auk 97(1):191-193.

Jehl, Jr., J.R, 1975. Mortality of Magellanic penguins in Argentina. Auk92(3):596-598.

Lehner, PN., 1979. Handbook ofEtlwlogical Methods. New York, New York:Garland STPM Press.

Merritt, K.; King, N.E., 1987. Behavioral sex differences and activity patternsof captive Humboldt penguins(Spheniscus humboldti). Zoo BioI. 6:129138.

Scolaro, J.A., 1987. A model life tablefor Magellanic penguins (Spheniscusmagellanicus) at Punta Tombo, Argentina. J. Field Ornithol. 58(4):432-441.

Scolaro, J.A.; Hall, M.A.; Ximenez,I.M., 1983. The Magellanic penguins(Spheniscus magellanicus): sexing adultsby discriminant analysis of morphometric characters. Auk 100(1):221-224.

Stonehouse, B., 1967. The general biology and thermal balances of penguins.Advances in Ecol. Res. 4:131-196.

Venizelos, N.; Ryan, E.; Hedberg, G.,1985. Preliminary results of the San Francisco Zoological Gardens Magellanicpenguin (Spheniscus magellanicus) program. AAZPA Annual Conf. Proc.250-269.

Appendix 1: Behaviors

Warham, J., 1971. Aspects of breeding behavior in the royal penguin(Eudyptes chrysolophus schlegeli). Notornis18:91-115.

Wilson, RP.; Wilson, M.PT., 1990.Foraging ecology of breeding Spheniscuspenguins. In: L.S. Davis and J.T. Darby(Eds.) Penguin Biologtj New York, NewYark: Academic Press, Inc.

Reference list for Penguin BehaviorsAinley, D.G. 1974. The comfort be

havior of Adelie and other penguins.Behavior 50:16-51.

Bekoff, M.; Ainley, D.G.; Bekoff, A.1979. The ontogeny and organization ofcomfort behavior in Adelie penguins.Wilson Bulletin 91(2): 255-270.

Boersma, P.O. 1976. An ecologicaland behavioral study of the Galapagospenguin. Living Bird 15:43-93.

Boswall, J.; MacIver, D. 1975. TheMagellanic Penguin (Spheniscusmagellanicus). In: B. Stonehouse (Ed.),The Biology of Penguins. Baltimore, Md.:Univ. Park Press.

Eggleton, J.; Siegfried, W.R 1979.Displays of the jackass penguin. Ostrich50:139-167.

Haftorn, S. 1986. A quantitativeanalysis of the behavior of the chinstrappenguin (Pygoscelis antarctica) and macaroni penguin (Eudyptes chrysolophus) on

Bouvetoya during the late incubationand early nestling periods. Polar Research4(1): 33-46.

Merritt, K.; King, N.E. 1987. Behavioral sex differences and activity patternsof captive Humboldt penguins(Spheniscus humboldti). Zoo Biologtj 6:129138.

Myers, W.A. 1977. Scheduled displays of behavior in captive Humboldtpenguins. Curator 20(2): 102-107.

Spurr, E.B. 1975. Communication inthe Adelie penguin. In: B. Stonehouse(Ed.), The Biologtj ofPenguins. Baltimore,Md.: Univ. Park Press.

Warham, J. 1971. Aspects of breedingbehavior in the royal penguin (Eudypteschrysolophus schlegeli). Notornis 18:91-115.

1. Maintenance behaviors:MUTE: Pass feces and uratesPREEN: Groom feathers with bill or footROUSE/STRETCH: Fluff/shake feathers,shake tail, or stretchWING FLAP: Flap wings while standing still.

2. Sexual/Social behaviors:CALL: Penguin recognition call, low callCOPULAnON: Male mounts female with IUs feet on her back, he taps IUs wings rapidly against her body, presses IUs tailagainst her tailDUET: Two birds call or bray to each other, wings against body, no display





ECSTATIC DISPLAY: Single bird calls/brays,wings held out, head and neck stretched upwardHEAD SHAKE: Bird tucks head down toward chest and shakes/vibrates head rapidly, usually between mated pairs ornew pairsMUTUAL DISPLAY: Two birds call/bray, wings held out, head and neck stretched upwardMUTUAL PREEN: Two birds groom each other simultaneouslyPRE-COPULATION: Male approaches female and taps wings rapidly against her bodyPREEN OTHER BIRD: Bird preens another bird or chickSLENDER WALK: Walk with neck stretched up and head bowed slightly, wings at side.

3. Aggressive behaviors:BILL CLACK: Two or more birds slap bill against billCHASE CONSPECIFIC: Chase another penguinCOBRA: Aggressive posture, head and neck move in snake-like movementsCONTACT CONSPECIFIC: Aggressive contact between the penguinsFLEE CONSPECIFIC: Displaced by another penguin.

4. Nest Building behaviors:ARRANGE NEST MATERIAL: Arrange material in burrow, usually with billCARRY NEST MATERIAL: Walk with sticks, grasses, etc. in billDEPOSIT NEST MATERIAL: Leave nest material in or near burrow entranceDIG: Dig in burrowPICK UP NEST MATERIAL: Pick up nest material (sticks, grasses, etc.).

5. Care of Young behaviors:BROOD: Wann chick by lying, partially standing over, or putting wings around chickFEED YOUNG: Parent opens mouth wide and covers chick's head and regurgitates food into chick's mouthNEST RELIEF: One parent moves off the nest and the other parent takes over incubation or broodingYOUNG SOLICITING FOR FOOD: Chick touches parent's bill, neck, and/or body while vocalizing.

6. Egg-related behaviors:EGG TURN: Move egg on nest with bill (by incubating bird)INCUBAnON: Keep egg wann by contact with brood patch.

7. Locomotive behavior:WALK: Walk.

8. Stationary behaviors:REST LYING DOWN: Lie down, quiet, no movementREST STANDING UP: Stand up, quiet, no movement.

9. Visual behaviors:DISTIJRBED: Bird looks around intently, moves head rapidlyLOOK AROUND: Look around.

10. Miscellaneous behaviors:OlliER: Other miscellaneous behaviors (describe)OUT OF SIGHT: Bird is not visible.


The Penguin Conservation and Management Plan(CAMP): Introduction and Overview

SUSIE ELLIS, PH.D.

ing regarding resource allocation forspecies management and survival.These tools bring together an assessment and planning process thatconsiders both wild and captive populations, since in at least half of the caseswith which we work, both must bemanaged to ensure species survivaland recovery. One assessment tool iscalled Conservation Assessment andManagement Plan (CAMP).

Conservation Assessment andManagement Plan (CAMP)

A CAMP workshop brings together 10-40 experts to evaluate thethreat status of all taxa in a broadgroup (such as penguins) to set conservation action and information-gatheringpriorities. It is a process that has developed within the last one and a half

years, and is an attempt to develop aprocess that will:

1) assess threat, attempting to apply (and test) the Mace-Lande criteriafor threat;

2) make broad-based recommendalions concerningconservation-orientedmanagement and research that mightbe needed to directly contribute to theknowledge needed to develop comprehensive recovery programs; and

3) clearly define the scope of theproblem facing the taxonomic or regional group in question.



Apple Valley, Minnesota

able to serve as a neutral catalyst andmediator for intensive species conservation efforts throughout the world.

In collaboration with experts in theSSC and BirdLife International Specialist Groups, wildlife agencies,non-governmental organizations, global captive breeding community, andthe private sector, CBSG is evolving aseries of programs, activities, and partnerships to respond to the challenge ofrapidly diminishing biodiversity.

The traditional technique of Triage ...whereby agreat deal of money is spent to preserve a few

select charismatic megavertebrates,is not a viable or cost-effective technique for

long-term preservation of biodiversity

A key component in preserving biotic diversity is deciding how to uselimited resources where they can dothe most good-maximizing optionsand minimizing regrets concerningspecies preservation. The traditionaltechnique of Triage treatment of species preservation, whereby a great dealof money is spent to preserve a fewselect charismatic megavertebrates,often at the expense of other, not soglamorous species, is not a viable orcost-effective technique for long-termpreservation of biodiversity. CBSG haspioneered the use of scientificallybased management tools that allowinformed and efficient decision-mak-

Susie Ellis, Ph.D.IUCNjSSC Captive BreedingSpecialist Group12101 Johnny Cake Ridge RoadApple Valley, MN 55124

REDUCTION AND FRAGMENTATION OF

WILDLIFE POPULATIONS AND HABITATS ARE

OCCURRING AT A RAPID AND ACCELERATING

rate. For an increasing number of taxa,the results are small and isolatedpopulations that are at risk of extinction. As populations diminish in theirnatural habitat, wildlife managers realize that management strategies mustbe adopted that will reduce the risk ofspecies extinction. These managementstrategies must be global in nature, andwill include habitat preservation, intensified information gathering, and insome cases, the use of technologiesdeveloped in captivity or scientificallymanaged captive populations that canfacilitate genetic and demographic interaction with wild populations.

The Captive Breeding SpecialistGroup is one of the nearly 100 Specialist Groups of the Species SurvivalCommission of the IUCN-The WorldConservation Union. CBSG is the largest and most active specialist group,and is a network of nearly 600 volunteers with expertise in species recoveryplanning, small population biology,reproductive and behavioral biology,and captive animal management.Within the SSC, CBSG's primary goalis to contribute to the development ofholistic and viable conservation strategies. CBSG's main strength is inproviding a link between in situ and exsitu conservation efforts.

CBSG works closely with wildlifeand conservation agencies, zoos andother organizations committed to species conservation through habitatpreservation in the wild and alsosometimes through captive breeding.Because it does not represent any particular political constituency, CBSG is



CAMPs are not intended to take theplace of Action Plans developed byvarious SSC and BirdLife InternationalSpecialist Groups, but are a resourcefor the development of these plans.The SSC has endorsed CAMPs as thefirst logical step in the development oftaxon-based Specialist Group ActionPlans. A Penguin Action Plan, if itwere to develop, would be the responsibility of the BirdLife InternationalSeabird Specialist Group, chaired byDr. David Duffy.

There is wide diversity in how toassess threat. During the 1992 PenguinCAMP workshop, each penguin taxawas assessed in terms of the MaceLande criteria for category of threat.These criteria were developed by Drs.Georgina Mace and Russ Lande at therequest of IUCN to try to make definitions of threat more explicit and havewider applicability to multiple taxa,basically redefining the current IUCNRed List categories. The Mace-Landescheme attempts to assess threat interms of likelihood of extinction withina specified period of time (see Table 1).

The characteristics of this systemare that it:

1) is simple, with few categories2) is a probabilistic assessment ofrisk3) has flexible data requirements4) can use flexible population units5) uses clear terminology6) uses a time-scale of years and

generations. Mace-Lande uses a biologic time scale of 100-200 years to takeinto consideration long-lived species.

In assigning categories of threat,several variables come into play: totalpopulation size (N), effective population size (Ne), number ofsubpopulations, rate of populationdecline, catastrophe or habitat change,exploitation, and exotic introductions(Table 1). The system defines three categories for threatened taxa, based onpopulation viability theory:

Critical: 50% probability of extinction within 5 years or 2 generations,whichever is longer

Endangered: 20% probability ofextinction within 20 years or 10 generations, whichever is longer

Vulnerable: 10% probability of extinction within 100 years

The new category, Critical, impartsa strong sense of urgency, with a message that any taxa assessed as such isunder the immediate threat of extinction.

In assessing threat according toMace-Lande criteria, workshop participants break down into workinggroups of from 2-10 people, examininginformation on the status and interaction of other population and habitatcharacteristics in addition to totalnumbers or guesstimates of total number. Information about data quality,population fragmentation, demographic trends, range, and envirorunentalstochasticity are also considered.

For each taxa, recommendationsare generated for the kinds of intensivemanagement action necessary. Theserecommendations are: increased intensity of management programs in thewild currently underway, which generally includes habitat protection, insitu and ex situ collaborative research,and Population and Habitat ViabilityAnalyses (PHVA), which combinesanalytic and simulation techniques tolook at the effects of an array ofvariables on the survivability of popula tions with the ultima te goal ofpreventing extinction and providingfor recovery in the wild. Establishmentof captive populations or the use ofcaptive technologies, for the sole purpose of supporting the long-termconservation of species, are also considered.

For birds thus far, CAMPs havebeen conducted for waterfowl, parrots,cranes, Asian hornbills, pigeons and

doves, Galliformes, and penguins, inconjunction with BirdLife International Specialist Groups. They havealso been conducted for eight mammalian and four reptile groups. RegionalCAMPs have also been carried out forHawai'ian forest birds and for the floraand fauna of St. Helena Island.

There are a number of limitationsin developing a CAMP document withlimited input from biologists worldwide. Because of its design, the CAMPprocess is one that cannot be achievedwith a large delegation. After the initial discussion draft of the CAMPdocument is completed by workshopparticipants, it is generally circulatedto 100-200 field biologists and wildlifemanagers for comment and review,and it is reviewed at regional CBSGmeetings held in conjunction with regional zoo association meetings heldthroughout the world. This reviewprocess helps in pointing out uncertainties in the data presented andstimulates response from people whohave better data, or stimulates surveyor other specific action that will get theneeded data. Over time, each document evolves from the comments anddiscussions from other biologists asthey react to the draft generated at theinitial CAMP meeting. Comments andclarification of data and text in CAMPdocuments are encouraged from allinterested parties. After review andrevision, CAMPs are distributed to allreviewers, appropriate wildlife andconservation agencies, and also to zoological associations worldwide. It isthe intent that these documents will bereviewed and updated every year orso, or as world situations change.

The Penguin CAMP WorkshopIn August 1992, a Conservation

Assessment and Management Planworkshop was held in Christchurch,New Zealand, for penguins. Thisworkshop grew out of a Populationand Habitat Viability Assessment



~

~....;:l

(Jc;:lVl~

~;:,..;.....c;:l

?;:l

""f-\\.0\.0W

'\:l

~""f-\CJl

Mace-Lande Categories and Criteria for Threat

POPULATION TRAIT CRITICAL ENDANGERED VULNERABLE

Probability of extinction 50% within 5 years, 20% within 20 years 10% within 100 yearsor 2 generations, or 10 generations,whichever is longer whichever is longer

OR OR OR

Any 2 of the following Any 2 of following criteria or any Any 2 of following criteria or anycriteria 1 CRITICAL criterion 1 ENDANGERED criterion

Effective population Ne Ne<50 Ne < 500 Ne <2,000

Total population N N <250 N < 2,500 N <10,000

Subpopulations :::; 2 with Ne > 25, N > 125 :::; 5 with Ne >100, N > 500 or :::; 5 with Ne >500, N > 2,500 orwith immigration :::; 2 with Ne >250, N> 1,250 :::; 2 with Ne >1000, N> 5,000< 1/generation with immig. < 1/generation with immig. < 1/generation

Population Decline > 20%/yr. for last 2 yrs. or > 5% /yr. for last 5 yrs. or >1%/yr. for last 10 yrs.>50% in last generation >10%/gen. for last 2 yrs.

Catastrophe: rate and >50% decline per 5-10 yrs. >20% decline/ 5-10 yrs., 2-4 gen. >10% decline5/10 yrs.effect or 2-4 generations; >50% decline/10-20 yrs., 5-10 >20% decline/10-20 yrs. or

subpops. highly correlated gen. with >50% decline /50 yrs.subpops. highly correlated with subpops. correlated

OR

Habitat Change resulting in above pop. resulting in above pop. effects resulting in above pop. effectseffects

OR

Commercial exploitation resulting in above pop. resulting in above pop. effects resulting in above pop. effectsor effectsInteraction/ introducedfauna



Workshop that was requested by theNew Zealand Department of Conservation to assist in developing recoveryand management plans for penguinsthere. Attendance was heavilyweighted with representation from theAustralasian region; few Antarctic scientists were able to attend.

A rough draft document, developed at the workshop, was circulatedto participants of the Second International Penguin Conference held atPhillip Island, Australia, the week following the workshop. The reportgenerated intense discussion and catalyzed increased involvement fromadditional field biologists in the development of the second draft of theCAMP document. One shortcoming inthe first review draft was reflected inincomplete data for Antarctic taxa.Generously, Dr. John Croxall of theBritish Antarctic Survey offered assistance in updating and revising data forAntarctic species, rallying the assistance of the SCAR Bird BiologySubcommittee; a second draft containing these revised data is anticipated insummer 1994. A separate, interimCAMP document for Australian andNew Zealand penguin taxa is in preparation by the CBSG Office.

During the CAMP Workshop, penguins were reviewed on a taxon bytaxon basis to assess their vulnerabilityto extinction and to recommend conservation actions to improve theviability of their populations. Therecommendations contained in thePenguin CAMP are based only on conservation criteria; adjustments forpolitical and other constraints will bethe responsibility of regional programs. The Penguin CAMP examined17 species and 24 distinct taxa (forms,subspecies, or species if no subspecieswere contained therein). Because oftaxonomic uncertainty, blue penguinforms were considered separately, butwill likely be lumped together for thesecond draft.

Levels of Threat for PenguinSpecies

Eleven of the 24 taxa were assignedto one of three categories of threat,based on Mace-Lande criteria. None ofthe penguin taxa were assessed as being critically endangered. Three taxawere listed as Endangered: Fiordlandcrested penguins, Yellow-eyed penguins (listed as endangered on themainland of New Zealand and onStewart Island, and Vulnerable onAuckland and Campbell Islands), andHumboldt penguins.

Eight taxa were listed as Vulnerable: Snares Island crested penguins,Erect-crested penguins, Southernrockhopper penguins, the ChathamIsland form and the white-flipperedform of the blue penguins, Africanpenguins, and Galapagos penguins.

A comparison of the differencebetween assessment of threat by MaceLande criteria and by the traditionalIUCN Red List categories shows thatseven of the ten taxa that were assessed as threatened are not listed onthe current IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals.

Regional Distribution of Threatened Penguin Taxa

The majority of threatened taxa arefound in the New Zealand/Australianregion, followed by South America,and Africa. None of the Antarctic taxa,during this first examination, weredesignated as threatened.

CAMP Program RecommendationsSeventeen taxa were recommended

for Population and Habitat ViabilityAssessment (PHVA), 11 for more intensive wild management (with threepossibly recommended after PHVAfindings), nine for captive programs(with four possibly recommendedpending PHVA findings), five taxawere not recommended for captiveprograms (with 3 awaiting findings ofa PHVA).

All 24 taxa examined were recommended for research of some kind.Thirteen taxa were assessed as needingtaxonomic clarification; 21 weredesignated for survey and censuswork; one taxon was recommendedfor husbandry research; 11 were recommended for other kinds of research(ranging from energetics and ingestionof marine debris, to foraging to predation). The main point of exam.ining andresearch recommendations is to take ahard look at the kinds of data stillneeded to determine conservation action.

Levels of captive programs andtheir potential were also discussed.Captive populations, if recommended,should be treated as integral parts ofmetapopulations that are managed byconservation strategies and actionplans. If captive programs are indicated, there is an attempt to proposethe level of program required, i.e. howsoon a program should be establishedand with what objective. Under circumstance where a captive programmay be of use to reinforce wild populations, initial programs should beestablished in the country of originwhenever possible. Captive populations should be a support, not asubstitute, for wild populations. Insome cases, application of "captivetechnology" (e.g. cross-fostering, artificial incubation, hand-rearing) may besufficient to allow for species recoveryand may prove to be not only morecost-effective but more feasible in thelong term.

Nine taxa were recommended forcaptive programs; all nine are alreadypresent in captivity. Nine additionaltaxa may be recommended in the future if PHVA findings determine thatthe establishment of such is necessaryfor the conservation of the taxon.CAMP participants recommendedthat one taxa, the Magellanic penguin,be managed to extinction in captivityand that the spaces it is currentlyoccupying be used for Humboldt or


Captive populations should be a support, not asubstitute, for wild populations.

African penguins. This recommendation was formally endorsed by theAmerican Association of ZoologicalParks and Aquarium's (AAZPA) Penguin Advisory Group in Apri11992 (seepage 18 of this issue-ed. note).

Like many such documents, thePenguin CAMP document has raisedconcerns by the field community. Acommon concern is that CAMP docu-

ments are a ploy by the captive community to get more animals, or thatthey might be mis-used by the captivecommunity to extract animals from thewild. There are no recommendationsfor extraction of birds from the wild inthe Penguin CAMP draft. In reviewingthe captive populations of penguins, itis clear that there is no reason to extractbirds, for which captive populationsalready exist, from the wild at thepresent time. All taxa for which captive programs were recommended arealready present in sufficient numbersin captivity and are reproducing well.The management recommendations inthese cases are that these existingpopulations should be managed moreintensively and cooperatively and thatthey should be self-contained.

In cases where captive programsare listed as Pending, the recommendation, made by the wildlife managersand biologists present at the workshop, is that new captive programsshould not be established unless theyare indicated by a formal Populationand Habitat Viability Assessment. Fornew programs, captive populationsshould be established only if neededfor conservation. It is essential thatthese kinds of decisions come from thepeople actually working with the animals in the field, from the managers,and not from the captive community.Such programs are recommended in

the CAMP document only if they willcontribute to the long-term conservation of the species.

One of the questions that came upinformally during the course of theCAMP workshop was, "What in theworld does the captive communitycare about penguin conservation?"The captive community has an imageproblem to overcome-zoos have tra-

ditionally been perceived, especiallyby field researchers, as extractors, notconservators of nature. This is changing, however, as many zoos begin toactively support field programs and to"adopt" wildlife areas throughout theworld.

If the world con tin ues on itspresent course, some of the intensivemanagement techniques that havebeen developed in the captive community may have to be applied to themanagement of wild populations toprevent their extinction. These mayinclude things like the development ofstudbooks, cross-fostering, artificialinsemination, artificial incubation,hand-rearing, management in semina tural preserves, and othertechniques. For penguins especially,some of the techniques that are wellestablished are collection andtransport of eggs, artificial incubation,and hand-rearing. Sea World, for example, on four separate expeditions tocollect more than 2,000 eggs from subantarctic islands, reports an overall egghatchability of 75% and of the birdsthat hatched, an 84% fledge rate. Thesedata reflect techniques that were, at thetime, experimental. These tedmiquesare available, and if needed long-term,could be used to establish captive orsemi-natural populations without detriment to existing populations.

The application of captive technology or the development of captivepopulations with regard to contribution to conservation should becarefully considered individually forthreatened penguin taxa. It is not implied that captive breeding should bethe primary means of preserva tion forall threatened taxa. Of all taxa thathave been reviewed in CAMP workshops, captive breeding as the primarymeans of preserving a taxon has onlybeen recommended for one bird-theSpix's macaw (Anodorhynchus spixii). Itis, however, important to note that inorder to preserve some of the morethreatened penguin taxa, for the longterm, which means for the next 100-200years, all parties in teres ted in theconservation of penguins, field andcaptive, will need to form partnerships,pooling techniques and knowledge toexplore all options on a pathway thatwill lead to long-term penguin survival.


A Recommendation from the AAZPA Penguin Advisory Groupconcerning Magellanic Penguins (Spheniscus magellanicus)in Captivity in North America

SHERRY BRANCH

... from a conservation standpoint,there is no reason to maintain a captive

population of Magellanic penguinsin North American collections

BACKGROUNDON 18-19 AUGUST, 1992, A PENGUIN

CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT AND MANAGE

MENT PLAN (CAMP) WORKSHOP WAS HELD

in Christchurch, New Zealand, in conjunction with the IUCN/SSC CaptiveBreeding Specialist Group. At thismeeting, 25 penguin biologists, including field and captive managers, met todevelop draft conservation strategiesfor penguins. CAMPs are intended toprovide strategic guidance for application of intensive management andinformation collection techniques tothreatened taxa, providing a rationaland comprehensive means of assessing priorities for intensivemanagement, including captive breeding, within the context of species'broader conservation needs.

Based on a wild population estimate of approximately 1.3 millionpairs, relatively stable populationtrends, reasonably limited real andpotential threats, as well as other factors, a consensus was reached byparticipants that the captive management program for the non-threatenedMagellanic Penguin should be gradually eliminated in favor of expansion ofcaptive programs for the threatenedHumboldt (Spheniscus humboldtO andAfrican (Spheniscus demersus) penguins. Humboldt and African penguinnumbers are estimated at 5,000-6,000pairs and 50,000-80,000 pairs, respectively; both species face numerousthreats that continue to exacerbatepopulation declines.

The Discussion Draft Edition of thePenguin CAMP states: "Magellanicpenguins are relatively common,which may mean that it is more important for zoos to keep other species ofpenguins that are doing more poorlyin the wild and where conservationefforts are more critically needed. For

example, it may be that Magellanicpenguins are using spaces that shouldbe allocated for Humboldt penguins."All three species are currently maintained in captivity in the NorthAmerican region; all have similar spatial and environmental requirementsin captivity and compete directly foravailable exhibit space.

Recommendation of the PenguinTAG

At the Penguin Taxon AdvisoryGroup meeting held at the 1993 Southern Regional AAZPA Conference in

Lake Monroe, Florida, the membership of the TAG unanimously agreedto support the recommendation regarding the gradual elimination ofcaptive programs for Magellanic penguins, as outlined in the PenguinCAMP document. Members of theTAG concurred that, from a conservation standpoint, there is no reason tomaintain a captive population of Magellanic penguins in North Americancollections. TAG members unanimously agreed that it is in the bestinterest of the genus Spheniscus todedicate both spaces and effort towardthose species most in need of conservation programs at this time.

The Penguin TAG asks the cooperation of AAZPA member zoos andaquaria in accomplishing the following goals:

1) An immediate moratorium onbreeding Magellanic penguins inNorth American collections.

Downsizing the population will takeplace through natural attrition with noreplacement, or through placement ofbirds outside the North Americanpopulation.

2) Designation of a few institutionsas exhibit and holding institutions during the period of downsizing andsubsequent consolidation of this population (perhaps spanning a period often or more years).

3) Spaces should be reallocated firstto Humboldt and then to African penguins, as Magellanic colonies areconsolidated into fewer institutions.

In order to achieve these goals, theSpheniscus subgroup of the PenguinTAG will work closely with all institutions holding the three species. Anindividual will be designated by theTAG to track the current living population, by location, using ISIS data.

The controlled elimination andeventual replacement of the captiveMagellanic popula tion will requiremany years to accomplish and will beaccomplished with the well-being ofholding institutions in mind. No institution will be asked to give up theircolonies of Magellanic penguins without immediate replacement withHumboldt or African penguins. Thecontribution of all institutions, including those holding or exhibitingMagellanic penguins and those propaga ting target species are of equalimportance in optimally managingSpheniscus penguins in the NorthAmerican region.


The TAG is currently working on aspace evaluation that will provide insight into the possibility of combiningor relocating some birds, when appropria te, to make room for morethreatened species. We would like towork closely with each institution thatcan participate to make sure that theneeds of each institution as well as thebirds' needs are met. This concept ofphasing out an existing population is arelatively new one and it will be important that all holders of Spheniscuspenguins work together to ensure thatour collections reflect conservationgoals of the AAZPA.

The Penguin TAG membership believes that this recommendation toeliminate a well-established captivepopulation is the first such recommenda tion to origina te from anAAZPA-endorsed avian Taxon Advisory Group. The proposed action willserve as a positive model for the implementation of future recommendationsfor the joint management of multiplespecies.

Please direct questions/corrunents to:

Sherry Branch, Penguin AdvisoryGroup Chair

Curator of BirdsSea World of Florida7007 Sea World DriveOrlando, FL 32821-8097Tel 407/363-2361Fax 407/363-2377

More About the AAZPA Penguin Advisory Group (TAG)

THE PENGUIN TAXON ADVISORY GROUP(TAG) WAS FORMED IN 1992 TO ASSIST THEAMERICAN ASSOCIATlON OF ZOOLOGICALParks and Aquariums (AAZPA) institutions in managing penguinpopulations of all species. Responsibilities of the TAG include facilitatingcorruntmication on conservation issuesfor the taxon, promoting cooperationbetween conservation and research onrelated taxa, setting priorities for utilization of available captive space andhelping to expand the AAZPA Conservation program by recommendingnew studbooks and Species SurvivalPlans (SSPs). Members of the Tag include Bird Curators and othersinterested in penguin conservation. Agroup of advisors was also selected forthe TAG which includes veterinarians,field biologists and nutritionists.

The TAG met officially for the firsttime at the 1992 AAZPA National Conference in Toronto. The PenguinCAMP which was completed August

1992 in Christchurch New Zealand (seearticle on page 13-ed. note) was summarized and discussion ensued aboutthe CAMP recommendation to phaseout captive Magellanic penguins tomake room for the more endangeredHumboldt and African birds.

Existing studbooks include theHumboldt and African. Tom Schneider,Detroit Zoo, reported that the studbook petition for the crested penguinshad just been approved by the WildlifeConservationand Management Committee (WCMC) of AAZPA. Sea Worldagreed to compile the King, Emperor,AdeIie, Chinstrap and Gentoo data.

A decision was made to apply forConservation Endowment Fund support to pull a group together, in orderto compile and publish a HusbandryManual for Penguins.

The second TAG meeting tookplace at the AAZPA regional conference in Orlando, Florida, in March1993.

It was announced that $5,700 hadbeen awarded the TAG for expenses ofproducing and publishing the Husbandry Manual. This meeting will beheld in Orlando, Florida June 27-29and a copy of the completed documentsent to all U.S. institutions holdingpenguins. Subsequently the manualwill be available for sale through theTAG for other interested individualsor institutions. A detailed penguin survey had been distributed to all U.S.institutions in preparation for the husbandry manual meeting.

The TAG voted unanimously toendorse the CAMP recommendationto phase out the Magellanic population and drew up a position statementthat was distributed to all zoo directorsand bird curators of institutions holding Spheniscus penguins.

-Sherry Branch


Haemoparasites in the African (Jackass) Penguin (Spheniscusdemersus)

J-J. BROSSY

THE JACKASS PENGUIN (SPHENISCUS

DEMERSUS ) CAN BREED ANYWHERE ALONG TI-lE

WHOLE SOUTHERN AFRICAN COASTLINE, BUT

effectively there are only half a dozenmajor colonies. Most are on off-shore islands where numbers have declined; themain causes are probably competitionfor food, and oiling. Last year about 2000birds were brought in for cleaning andrehabilitation and the mortality of thesestressed birds is considerable.

The author has studied the role ofhaemoparasites in this mortality. Malaria (Plasmodium relictum) occurs in upto 20% of penguins brought in duringthe summer months. Fortunately, forreasons unknown oiling occurs mainlyin the winter, so the number of birdsexposed to malaria is less than 10% ofthe total. It has been shown that malariadoes not occur in the wild populations(Brossy 1992) which explains why theyhave no resistance to the disease. Malaria has been well documented in theAmerican literature, but therapy remains problematic.

While screening blood smears takenfrom penguins at SANCCOB (SouthAfrican Foundation for the Conservation of Coastal Birds) we found a fewcases of leucocytozoonosis. This is transmitted by simuliid flies, and occurs inour birds only during a relatively shortperiod in mid-summer (mainly December). There is an incubation period ofabout two weeks, and the disease isslowly progressive. All but one of thepenguins died, but several survived forthree weeks and other factors contributed to or caused death in many.Chloroquine was shown to reduce theperipheral parasite load but did notseem to affect survival. It is believed thatthe parasite is L. tawaki (Earle et al. 1992)

J-J .BrossyDepartment ofAnatomyMedical SchoolUniversity of Cape TownCape Town, South Africa

Cape Town, South Africa

because the organism is morphologically similar to that seen in the FjordlandCrested Penguin (Eudyptes pachyrynchus) in which L. tawaki was first described(Fallis et al. 1976). However the two penguins are geographically remote and arenot closely related. The clinical presentation suggests a local source of infection.Further investigation is needed.

Duringour search for Plasmodium wenoted, on a few occasions, smears showing large numbers of ring forms(trophozoites) in penguins which remained healthy. As malaria has beenalmost uniformly fatal, we suspectedthat we were looking at a different disease, and Dr. Bennett of the InternationalReference Centre for Avian Haematozoatogether with Dr. Earle of Onderstepoort's Veterinary ResearchLaboratory identified the parasite as aBabesia (Earle et al. 1993) naming it B.peircei (sp. nov.) after Dr. M. Peirce, whohas done so much work on the piroplasm group.

B. peircei is found in the peripheralblood of about 4% of all wild penguinstested. Testing has been done on about1000 individuals, from colonies off thecoast of Namibia, the Western CapeCoast, the Southern Cape, and the quitelarge colony at St. Croix Island off PortElizabeth on the East Cape. AtSANCCOB the prevalence is higher,with B. peircei found in the blood of 1115% of the penguins tested.

The incidence is also much higheramong the birds at SANCCOB. In thewild penguins, usually less than 1 cellper thousand will be infected. In theSANCCOB birds, incidence ranges from1 in 500, to cases where every field has

infected cells, and individual red cellsmay have 2-4 parasites each. This almostcertainly represents the stress of oilingand handling on the penguins.

Babesiosis is endemic, with noknown clinical signs, and alone does notseem to have any morbidity, but whencombined with malaria or leucocytozoonosis may aggravate the disease.Babesiosis is tick-borne but the vectorhas not yet been identified. In most tickborne diseases, e.g. biliary in dogs, anixodid tick is responsible, but so far wehave failed to find these in penguins; bycontrast we see numerous argassids. Weare analyzing the argassid tick Ornithodorus, which is found in large numberson nesting penguins, for Babesia in thehope that we will either confirm orexclude this tick as a vector.

Two penguin colonies on or near themainland are thriving: that on RobbenIsland immediately off Cape Town inTable Bay, and that on Boulders atSimon's Town on the Cape Peninsula.However because of their location bothare liable to the diseases mentionedabove, namely malaria and leucocytozoonosis-in fact one case of P.relictum has already been found on aRobben Island bird. An epizootic,though unlikely, could be disastrous.These two colonies are being carefullymonitored.

ReferencesBrossy, J-J.1992. Malaria in wild and

captive jackass penguins Spheniscusdemersus along the southern Africancoast. Ostrich 63:10-12.

Earle, KA., Bennett G.P. and Brossy,J-J. 1992. First African record ofLeucocytozoon tawaki (Apicomplexa:Leucocytozoidae) from the jackass penguin Spheniscus demersus. S. African J.Zoology 27(2):89-90.

Earle, R.A., Huchzemeyer F.W.,Brossy J-J., and Bennett, G.F. 1992. Babesia peircei sp. nov. from the jackasspenguin Spheniscus demersus. In press.


Figure 1. (Above). Typical rosette ofdividing Babesia [x10001.

Figure 2. (At right) Trophozoites (ringforms) of Babesia peircei indicated byarrows. NB: in isolation, this looks likethe malarial (Plasmodium) or othertrophozoite [xlO001.

Malaria and environmental factors

Transmission of malaria usuallywill depend on the presence of a definitive host; in our area this is usuallythe Cape Sparrow (Passer capensis) butother local birds, such as robins, sunbirds, and widows may also serve ashosts. These do not occur on the offshore islands which form the mainbreeding grounds of S. demersus. Also,these islands are too wind-swept formosquitoes or flies to survive andbreed. Since both reservoir host and

vector are lacking, the risk of spread insuch areas is minimal.

However, different conditions arefound on Robben Island, and at themainland site of Boulders.

Thriving breeding colonies of S.demersus are found in both locations.

The Robben Island colony was exterminated in the mid-19th century byhuman action, but began to re-establish itself about 15 years ago. Thepenguins have benefitted from the

island's use as a penal colony and theresulting minimal human disturbance.

Since Boulders and Robben Islandare protected from winds, and havelush vegetation, mainland birds, andareas of stagnant water, the penguinsare at risk for both malaria andleucocytozoonosis. The two coloniesare being carefully monitored for thesediseases.

-J-J. Brossy


Documents

Penguin Conservationaviansag.org/Newsletters/Penguin_TAG/Vol-6_No-2... · penguin drawings (page 1 and back cover). Articles submittedfor publicationshouldbe typed. For articles which