volume 5 number ?

March-April 1976

contents

3 Antelope

9 ZooNews

13 Zoos and

Conservation

18 BookNews

20 FONZNews

Front Cover: Strikingly beautiful and uniquely

different horns distinguish many _ antelopes

throughout the world as symbolized by the Zoo’s

own family of sable antelope.

Back cover: Ears cocked in alert, a pair of kit

foxes from the far west are recent additions to

the Zoo family.

Design-Production:

Monica Johansen Morgan

Photographs on the front cover and page 7 by

Smithsonian Institution; pp. 3, 9, 10, and 14 by

Francie Schroeder; pp. 4, 8, and 16 by Ray Faass;

drawings on p. 5 by Jordan Ross; p. 6 by Jan

Skrentny; pp. 11, 13, 23, and back cover by

Sabin Robbins; p. 17 by NZP Office of Graphics

and Exhibits; drawing on pp. 18 and 19 by Sarah

Landry with permission of Harvard University

Press.

Friends

of

the

National

is anon-profit organization of individuals and

families who are interested in supporting Zoo

education, research, and conservation.

FONZ Board of Directors 1975-76

Arthur W. Arundel, President

Montgomery S. Bradley, First Vice President

John S. Brown, Second Vice President

Stephen T. Hosmer, Treasurer

Julie P. Hubbard, Secretary

Peter C. Andrews

Theodore Babbitt

Lavell Merritt

Robert Nelson

Edward Boehm Ruth Nelson

Victor Delano John B. Oliver

Timothy V.A. Dillon Nancy Porter

Ronald Field Whayne Quin

M. Anthony Gould Ted Rivinus

Joan L. Jewett Rebecca Schergens

Donna K. Grosvenor Lee Talbot

Nella Manes

Cecil McLelland

Shirley McNair

Sabin Robbins, Executive Director

Sally Tongren

Gerald Wagner

As a FONZ, you and your family receive

many benefits—publications, discount privileges,

and invitations to specia! programs and activities

—to make your zoogoing more enjoyable and

educational.

THE ZOOGOER is published bi-monthly and

copyrighted © by Friends of the National Zoo,

c/o National Zoological Park, Washington, DC

20009, second class mailing permit approved at

the Washington, DC rate in the United States

$3 a year (of annual dues).

Zoo Staff

Dr. Theodore H. Reed, Director

Mr. Edward Kohn, Deputy Director

Office Chiefs

Mr. Jaren Horsley, Animal Management

Dr. Christen Wemmer, Conservation &

Research Center

Dr. Mitchell Bush, Animal Health

Dr. Richard Montali, Pathology

Dr. John Eisenberg, Zoological Research

Mr. Emmanuel Petrella, Facilities Manage-

ment

Mr. Robert Engle, Construction Management

Mr. Joseph Reed, Management Services

Mr. Robert Mulcahy, Graphics & Exhibits

Ms. Judy White, Education & Information

Mr. Samuel Middleton, Police & Safety

n the plains of game-rich Africa,

the most conspicuous of all

forms of wildlife are the antelope. The

herds of wildebeest, topi, eland, ga-

zelle, and impala make impressive

photographs. Their environmental

impact is even more impressive. Ecol-

ogists use the concept of “biomass”

to express the environmental impact

of animal species. In layman’s lang-

uage it is basically a measure of total

bulk of a living animal present in a

given area. On the Serengeti plains of

Tanzania, there is an estimated ante-

lope biomass of more than 27,000

pounds per square mile. That is a lot

of antelope! At such concentrations,

it is obvious that antelope play an

important role. They are a major

source of food for the East African

predators—lion, cheetah, leopard,

hyena, and wild dog, and their feed-

ing habits have tremendous impact

on the region’s vegetation.

The different antelope on earth

belong to a family of animals called

Bovidae. In English we call this fami-

ly the “bovids” or “horned ungulates.”

Its members are easily distinguished

because they have horns and have

two hooves on each foot. Of all mam-

malian families, the bovids have been

most frequently domesticated by

man. Sheep, goats, cattle, and the

Asian yaks and water buffalo are all

bovids. In contrast, the term ‘ante-

lope” refers to wild members of this

family that are generally more grace-

Previous page: All antelope have horns, but few

carry such dramatically long and symmetrical A herd of breeding Dorcas gazelle gives zoogoers a special opportunity to observe the fascinating

outgrowths as Africa’s sable antelope. interplay among individual antelope.

ful in movement and less stocky in

build than the domestic species.

The horns of antelope illustrate the

great evolutionary variety of the

bovids. In some species, like the Zoo’s

duikers and dik-diks, they are merely

short spikes. The scimitar-horned oryx

and the sable antelope have long,

gently curved horns. The bongo and

the greater kudu have twisted horns

that grow in a spiral. The horns of

each species are so distinctive that an

expert can usually identify the species

from a single horn.

From earliest times, human beings

have wondered what use horns are to

antelope. African pygmies thought

that the bongo hangs by its horns

from trees to escape hunters’ dogs.

Somewhat more scientific theorists in

the last century believed that horns

serve as defensive weapons against

predators. Other scientists later

noticed that the most vulnerable

members of antelope herds—the fe-

males and young—typically have no

horns or smaller horns than the males.

Besides, when attacked by predators,

most antelope run for safety. Contrary

to some tanciful stories, males do not

stay to defend their mates and young.

Of course, when they are cornered,

antelope with horns large enough tobe

of any use, will use them in defense.

But this defense does not seem to be

the primary reason for horns.

Only recently zoologists have begun

to study antelope societies. They have

found that horns have important func-

tions within the society. Horns are

CL?

ig >

Diverse Array of Zoo Horns

Kirk’s dik-dik

yellow-backed duiker

Dorcas gazelle

bongo

greater kudu

sable antelope

oS SS =

weapons at times, but almost always

used in contests between males of the

same species over females, territory,

or social rank. Often more important

is the use of horns in social signaling.

The way an antelope carries its horns

when approaching another can com-

municate dominance or submission.

A number of mammals of different

families have horn-like outgrowths of

the head, but only bovids have true

horns. True horns consist of a bone

core covered by a permanent outer

sheath of a hardened, non-living ma-

terial called keratin. Keratin is the

substance that makes up the claws,

hair, and hooves of mammals—

including human hair and fingernails.

All keratin is non-living protein pro-

duced by living cells, just as the

living cells of human skin produce

our non-living hair and fingernails.

In newborn dorcas gazelles, all that

exists of the horn is a little plug of

Large eyes, like those of the Zoo’s greater kudu, inspired the ancient Greeks to call such animals

“antelop” or ‘flower-eyed.”

bone under the skin of the forehead.

Soon after birth, this bone fuses with

the bone of the skull. Then, the bone

begins to grow. Keratin is produced

by the skin to cover the growing bone.

Horn-growth continues throughout

life, although it slows down inold age.

In contrast to bovid horns, the antlers

of deer are bare bone without a kera-

tin covering. Moreover, antlers are

shed and regrown annually. On the

other hand, the “horns” of rhinocer-

oses are all keratin, with no bony core.

Wild bovids are found on every conti-

nent but Australia, South America,

and Antarctica. In North America, the

only native bovids are the bison, the

musk ox, and the bighorn sheep.

There are no antelope in the New

World—in spite of the line in the

song, “the deer and the antelope

play.” The American “antelope” or

pronghorn is not a true antelope but a

different species placed in a family all

its own. In Europe, too, there are a

number of wild bovids—but not ante-

lope. The tremendous proliferation of

antelope species has taken place in

Africa and Asia.

Scientists believe that the first ante-

lope evolved in the forests of Central

Asia. They were smaller than today’s

species, and adapted to forest life.

The most primitive living antelope,

the duikers, are believed to resemble

this ancestral type, and they live in a

similar habitat. The yellow-backed

duiker, a species recently acquired by

the National Zoo, shows the spike-

like horns and the curiously hump-

backed body characteristic of these

primitive antelope.

Another small and primitive antelope

in the Zoo’s collection is Kirk’s dik-

dik. The dik-diks are, in fact, one of

the tiniest of all antelope, weighing

less than 12 pounds. Kirk’s dik-dik

lives in arid forest fringes of East

Africa. Its snout is extended into a

kind of trunk that can be twisted in

any direction to pick up scents.

The National Zoo exhibits several

examples of the larger antelope. One

of the most interesting is the scimitar-

horned oryx, a pale cream-and-brown

colored species with long horns

curved like the Oriental swords

known as scimitars. The scimitar-

horned oryx is native to desert and

near-desert regions in North Africa.

Because of excessive hunting and

competition for habitat with domestic

cattle, it is an endangered species.

The horns of the Zoo’s sable antelope

are very much like the = scimitar-

horned oryx, but the body color is

quite different, varying from deep

chestnut to almost black. The bongo,

another Zoo antelope, is one of the

rarest and most beautiful of all. Living

in the near-impenetrable mountain

forests of Sierre Leone and Kenya, the

bongo is rarely seen in zoos. The first

captive breeding took place at the

National Zoo in 1971.

The National Zoo is exceptionally fortunate in

having a breeding pair of beautiful bongo ante-

lope, rarely seen in the wild or in captivity.

Favorite prey of many predators, the wildebeest or gnu roam across the African plains in herds of

thousands. Their impact on the area’s vegetation is tremendous.

8

Most of the species of antelope at the

Zoo give birth to one or more young

every spring. The most prolific breed-

ers are the wildebeest or white-

bearded gnus. The wildebeest is not

likely to win any beauty contests, but

it certainly is one of the most success-

ful of antelope species. Herds of this

species on the Serengeti plains have

been estimated at more than amillion.

All female antelope typically give

birth to a single young at a time. In

many species, the mother leaves her

calf hidden in tall grasses for the first

two weeks of its life. She visits it only

to feed it. Thus, the calf is hidden

from predators until it is strong

enough to follow the herd. On the

other hand, the calf of some species is

strong enough to follow its mother

within a few hours after birth. Wilde-

beest—native to open grasslands

where hiding places are not available

— can run with the herd in minutes.

by Austin Hughes

Pools, Plants, Plumes

Adorn Bird House Hill

The new crane and waterfowl exhibits

at the Bird House are a beautiful

blend of pools, plants, and plumes.

Roaming grassy lawns edged in flow-

ering shrubs are the paradise, or Stan-

ley’s crane, the sarus crane, the

crowned crane, and the sandhill

crane. These species represent three

of the four genera in the crane family.

The spacious 45 by 90 foot enclosures

allow ample room for the breeding

birds’ elaborate courtship behavior.

Also on view are young sarus cranes

from last year’s and this year’s

hatches. These will become part of

the stock for the Conservation and

Research Center’s breeding program

at Front Royal, Virginia.

Almost twenty different species of

waterfowl are now paddling around

the new ponds fronting the Bird

House. Some of the more spectac-

ularly plumaged aquatic birds include

the Coscoroba swan, Radjah_ shel-

duck, and ferruginous white-eye.

By summer, new outdoor exhibits will

completely encircle the Bird House.

There will be yards for the colorful

Cassowaries, emus, rheas, and other

long-legged birds such as the secre-

tary bird of Africa. Most spectacular

of all will be the flamingo exhibit,

complete with large heated wading

pool, mud pool for nest building, and

special housing.

by Charles Pickett

Assistant Curator, Birds

Landscaped waterfowl ponds and adjoining crane yards are the beginning of a striking series of outdoor exhibits which will completely surround the Bird

House by summer.

The white tigers are back and on view at the new Lion-Tiger Hill exhibit. Four white tigers including the famed Mohini are now romping the spacious, grassy

tiers and swimming in the encircling water moat.

Zoo Exhibits New

Pair of Kit Fox

The kit fox, Vulpes macrotis, inhabits

the wastelands of the West from

Texas to California and from Oregon

to Mexico. Eight subspecies of kit

foxes are currently recognized, some

of doubtful status. One subspecies,

Vulpes macrotis macrotis, formerly

occurred in extreme southwestern

California and possibly the northwest

corner of Baja, but is now extinct. A

second California subspecies, the San

Joaquin kit fox, Vulpes macrotis

mutica, is on the endangered list and

may be gone in another decade or

two despite efforts on its behalf by

both state and federal agencies. Suit-

able habitat in the southern part of

the San Joaquin Valley where this fox

is making its last stand is fast disap-

pearing. Over 400,000 acres or 34%

of what remained was lost between

1958 and 1969 because of land devel-

opment. The process is still accel-

erating. Kit foxes seem unable to

survive on lands that have been even

slightly modified by agriculture.

Elsewhere, kit foxes have fared some-

what better, although the species was

often exterminated or its numbers

drastically reduced locally by inten-

sive control efforts directed against

coyotes. Changes in predator control

methods over the past two decades

have benefitted some kit fox popula-

tions, and they are once more a com-

Small in size but big in ears, the Zoo’s kit fox are

the smallest canid in North. America.

mon sight in parts of their range where

they had been rare or absent for many

years. Some states like Oregon and

California now give the kit fox year-

long protection.

A pair of these foxes (subspecies

nevadensis) may be seen in an enclo-

sure between the Small Mammal and

Reptile Houses. They were received

from Hogle Zoo in Salt Lake City, but

were originally caught as small pups

two years earlier in northeastern

Nevada. Kit foxes do well in captivity

but seldom rear young unless pro-

vided a secure den that simulates

what they have in nature.

The kit fox is characterized by its

small size, large ears, and_ black-

tipped tail. Adults stand a foot high

at the shoulder and weigh between

3% and 5% pounds. They are the

smallest canid in North America. By

way of comparison, an adult red fox is

about three times. heavier. Their well-

furred paws adapt them for travel

over bare, sandy soil. Other peculiari-

ties include a sebaceous gland near

the base of the tail marked by a small

patch of black hairs. The gland’s

function is unknown, but odor from

the lanolin-like oil it exudes is not un-

pleasant to humans.

Ecologically, kit foxes are usually re-

stricted to flat, sparsely vegetated

floors of desert valleys where the visi-

bility is good and vegetation consists

of scattered desert shrubs. Hunting

forays may carry them up the bot-

toms of dry washes into the lower

foothills but they seldom den in such

places. Kit foxes and a related

12

species, the swift fox, Vulpes velox,

are the only North American canids

that live year-round in burrows. Other

members of the group including red,

gray, and arctic foxes only occupy

dens during whelping season. This

habit becomes understandable when

one considers the animal’s small size,

the open nature of its habitat, and the

need for some protection from desert.

temperature extremes.

The dens have several entrances. One

especially complex system in Utah

had 24 entrances. Foxes may enlarge

their dens and what was a four-

entrance den one year may have six or

seven openings the next. Many favor-

ite den sites are occupied repeatedly.

Some seem to have been used for

hundreds of years by many genera-

tions of foxes.

Kit foxes are believed to pair for life

although the habit is not well-

documented. One pair was known to

live together for three consecutive

years and raise a litter each year. In

other pairs, one member would die or

disappear and terminate the relation-

ship before it had a chance to last

more than one breeding season. Once

established on a territory, a pair's

fidelity to this area often lasted a life-

time. Trios consisting of a male and

two females are sometimes found.

Kit foxes give birth as early as January

in the southern part of their range, but

the whelping season becomes pro-

gressively later as one moves north. In

northwestern Utah, for example, most

pups are born in March. Pups start

venturing outside the burrow when

they are about four to six weeks old,

by which time they are probably

weaned. The male provides for the

female as well as himself during the

first few weeks post-partum, but both

parents share hunting responsibilities —

after the pups begin eating solid food.

Young start accompanying adults on

hunting forays when they are about

three months old and continue to do

so until the family breaks up in late

summer or early fall. .

Kit foxes are nocturnal although there

may be some daytime activity in the

immediate vicinity of the den espec-

ially when pups are present. Hunting

activity usually begins about dark and

may last as late as one half hour

before sunrise. A kit fox will eat a

variety of foods, but mainly rabbits,

desert rodents, and birds, such as

horned larks, that nest or roost on the

ground. Black-tailed jackrabbits are

about the largest prey. These hares

are about the same weight as an adult

kit fox so foxes sometimes have diffi-

culty killing them. During whelping

season, adults bring most prey to the

dens. What is not consumed immedi-

ately is cached around the den en-~

trances or in some cases stored under-

ground. Some material brought to

the surface during den renovations

consisted of whole dessicated rodent

carcasses. A hunting fox may go three

miles from home during nightly

searches for food.

by Harold Egoscue

Mammalogist

he vast majority of human beings

dwell where little wildlife re-

mains. They have small prospect of

ever seeing significant numbers of

wild animals except in zoos. Yet in

the long run, it is this majority which

through its attitudes towards wild-

life, will determine whether animals,

parks, and refuges can survive. The

inevitable results of trends now far

progressed will be the extinction of

many more wild animals in nature,

but a few of these species may be

aided directly through zoo propa-

gation and the overall battle for en-

vironmental conservation may be

uniquely supported through zoo-

based education and promotion pro-

Previous page: Spacious, moated enclosures

such as the Zoo’s outdoor yards for the giraffes

and elephants are compelling proof that zoos

can provide exciting educational experiences.

grams. However, if we are to utilize

zoos effectively, some serious mis-

conceptions about them must be laid

to rest.

Some conservationists persist in con-

sidering zoo programs and wildlife

conservation to be mutually exclusive

if not antagonistic; no matter that

several zoos have helped to establish

parks, led national and international

battles for conservation legislation,

or even that several species which

had become extinct or nearly so in

nature were returned to the wild

from zoo-bred populations. The word

“700” more often evokes images of

the tiny barred cages of a Massa-

chusetts menagerie than the spacious

meadows of Britain’s Whipsnade.

However, if zoos are to be utilized

and improved appropriately, the term

“captivity” must be given perspec-

tive. General condemnation based on

conditions resulting from the ignor-

ance of decades ago must be

replaced with evaluations proper to

each species in each situation. There

is probably no such thing as an animal

which will not live or breed in “cap-

tivity” if only the conditions of that

captivity are well designed. The prob-

lem of providing such conditions is

not so often one of zoological knowl-

edge as it is one of economics. Mod-

ern zoos face the difficulty of decid-

ing which animals they can afford to

exhibit and propagate rather than

which they know how to care for.

The visibility in human population

centers that gives zoos such enor-

The attractive, landscaped crane yards atop Bird House Hill are one of many reasons why more Americans visit zoos than attend all national baseball and

football games combined.

mous educational potential has also

made them the undeserving targets of

some wildlife enthusiasts who, upon

seeing animals in zoos (usually the

only wildlife they have ever seen),

assume that zoos must impose signif-

icant drains upon wild animal popu-

lations. This is not the case and a few

figures will illustrate the point:

About 650,000 mammals, birds, rep-

tiles, amphibians, and fishes are ex-

hibited in the world’s zoos, and the

vast majority of the large species are

zoo-bred. By contrast, the United

States alone imported 103,154 live

mammals (mostly primates for labor-

atory use) in 1971, a fairly typical

year. At the same time, 995,160 birds

(excluding canaries and _ psittacines)

were imported, 1,795,975 reptiles and

amphibians, and 98,971,579 live

fishes. Before New York State’s

Mason Act and the Federal endan-

gered Species Act became law, the

United States annually imported vast

numbers of big cat skins. For exam-

ple, the total of 3,168 cheetahs,

17,490 leopards, 23,347 jaguars, and

262,030 ocelots were killed for the

American market and their skins

imported in 1968 and 1969 alone, far

more than have been imported for

Zoos since time began. In 1972, the

United States imported 6,511,058

skins and hides from wild animals

whose taking is permitted by law and

its hide trade is probably smaller than

that of several European nations. In

fact, even the hide and skin trade is a

moderate danger compared to the

extent and permanent nature of the

threat posed by habitat destruction

for most species. In any event, zoos

with their 650,000 specimens are not

now and never have been a significant

factor in the diminution of wild ani-

mals—but this does not relieve them

of the responsibility to shepherd their

animals carefully and to establish self-

sustaining populations of the rare

species. So.much for misconceptions.

It is time that zoos be fully in-

corporated within the conservation

community, that good ones be better

utilized as home bases for wildlife

education and protection efforts and

bad ones improved so that their po-

tentials in rare animals propagation

and education can be realized.

When it comes to potential for con-

servation education, there is little to

compare with zoos and aquariums.

There are about 900 around the world

and they are located, for the most

part, in the cities —where the people

are. Over 130,000,000 visits were

recorded at 146 zoo collections in the

United States last year, far surpassing

attendance at national baseball and

football games combined. The Bronx

Zoo’s 252 acres recorded more

visitors last year than the 3,400 square

miles of the famous Yellowstone

National Park. In fact, the zoo had

more visitors in July than the atten-

dance recorded in all of East Africa’s

national parks for the entire year.

Happily, the new generation of zoo-

goers seems to be going for the right

reasons. Dr. Neil H. Cheek, Jr. has

just completed a massive survey of

zoo visitors based upon an area-

probability sample calculated to

represent the total adult population

of the United States. He writes,

“Going to the zoo apparently means

more to people than seeing animals.

A day at the zoo seems to strengthen

ties between humans and mother

nature. Two-thirds of the zoo-goers in

the survey said they felt they learned

more about nature. Almost half said

they felt closer to nature at the zoo,

and another 40% went even further;

they said the zoo helped them feel

how beautiful life is.”

What a desperately compelling pro-

motional theatre zoo collections have

become. Any number of their animals

are rarer than Rembrandts;

Przewalski horse, Siberian tigers, Pere

David deer, sacred cranes, Indian

rhinos, and many more—all number

less than the known Rembrandts.

Where better can the cause of wildlife

protection be promoted than directly

adjacent to the remnants of living

wildlife in man’s population centers?

Zoos and aquariums offer the op-

portunity to make man aware of

animals as individuals and to use this

tool as well as sophisticated science

education to spur their preservation.

Although whales have been subjected

to indefensibly excessive slaughter for

decades, public concern for them has

developed only in the past ten years,

and there is little doubt about its

genesis. The great oceanariums can

take much of the credit. They made

whales and dolphins individuals; no

longer was the killing an impersonal

“harvest,” it was a slaughter of the rel-

15

atives of Bubbles and Shamu — of the

kin of those delightful creatures

which shook flippers with people,

made unimaginably great leaps and

demonstrated feelings easily identi-

fied with yours and mine.

Two years ago in New York, young-

sters stoned some deer at the Central

Park menagerie and killed one—it

was a zoo individual—and that made

its death an event calling forth enor-

mous media coverage and indignant

editorials. Meanwhile, 75,459 white-

tailed deer were shot by hunters in

New York State during the year past

with barely a mention in the local

press. If much of wilderness is to be

preserved, dispassionate statistics will

not be enough. Ecologically and dis-

passionately, the earthworm may be

Having successfully bred the first Indian rhino in

the western hemisphere, the National Zoo, like

others, is pioneering in the propagation of rare

species threatened with extinction in the wild.

more important than the elephant,

algae more than the giant redwoods.

Human familiarity and involvement

are an important key to the preser-

vation of species for their own sake.

Increasingly, conservationists are

looking to zoos to establish captive

reservoirs of endangered species.

National parks and refuges are inade-

quate in number and distribution and

none are ecologically independent.

Their continuation assumes the main-

tenance of stable governments and

conflicts, in some cases, with the

pressure to put more land into food

production. Support for park continu-

ation on the basis of tourist revenues

assumes that outsiders will continue

to be welcome to “Third World”

national parks and ignores the possi-

bility that the relative proportion of a

developing nation’s income derived

from tourism may decline in compari-

son with other sources such as

agriculture.

Evenan optimistic evaluation

suggests that most major Asian faunal

communities will have reached the

point of near extinction within two

decades. Conditions

better, but the future of wildlife in

much of Latin America is gravely en-

dangered. At best, parks and refuges

may be doomed to become more

zoo-like with carefully managed

animal populations restrained from

Surrounding farms by fences.

In zoos themselves, it is probably pos-

sible to maintain a number of striking

Species in captivity without gross

im Attica are.

genetic change for a century or more.

By the end of this period, it seems

reasonable to hope that the great

famines and international striving

over the earth’s resources which

appear to lie ahead may be somewhat

abated. While many parks and zoos

may be temporarily lost, the ability of

plant communities to reconstitute

themselves is encouraging and so is

the remarkable history of zoo survival

during the past century and a half. It

is just possible that there will again be

opportunities to reintroduce a few

animals into nature from zoos. In any

event, zoos are an important stock in

the conservationist’s portfolio.

Between 1907 and 1917, the New

York Zoological Society successfully

reintroduced American bison in newly

created western refuges from captive

stocks. Recently, similar programs

have aided the Hawaiian goose,

masked bobwhite, and European

bison. However, other species extinct

or nearly so in nature, such as the

Przewalski horse and the Pere David

deer, are continuing to remain zoo

wards. The prospects are for a

quantum jump in zoo-reliant species

which have no immediate prospects

for reintroduction to nature because

their habitats have been destroyed or

their habits are incompatible with

human neighbors.

Zoos are now breeding about 1,500

kinds of mammals, birds, reptiles, and

amphibians every year, but not gener-

ation after generation. The irregularity

of consistent breeding reflects in part

the limitations of zoo facilities devel-

Monkeys are always fun to watch, but innovative design and exhibitry at the National Zoo make

monkey watching also an important learning experience in primate behavior.

oped at a time when the need for

long-term propagation had not been

realized. It also attests to the problem

of economics of wild animal propaga-

tion. There isn’t any money in it.

While some rare species have

received little zoo attention, others

have been bred so abundantly as to

become a “drag on the market.” In

fact, some zoos are beginning to find

themselves with embarrassing sur-

pluses of species extinct or vanishing

in nature and it is clear that short-

term “supply and demand” eco-

nomics are inappropriate to long-

term animal breeding programs.

Too many zoo supporters consider

that a zoo must exhibit ever more

kinds of animals to attract visitors,

but the exhibition requirements of a

collection of many species usually

preclude providing enough room for

meaningful breeding populations of

endangered species. It should be

remembered that all zoos in the world

could be comfortably housed in a

space about the size of Brooklyn.

Zoo species counts must be reduced.

Expensive rural breeding farms are a

must to vanishing species propagation

programs. Clearly, economics will

play a deciding part in the zoo’s

future contributions to conservation.

Unlike many parks and refuges, zoos

are more usually supported locally

than by federal governments. The

problem of obtaining local com-

mitments to international conserva-

tion objectives is understandable and

another reason for the collaboration

of zoos and conservation groups like

the World Wildlife Fund. The devel-

opment of national or regional pools

of vanishing animals providing a

mechanism for the management of all

of the zoo specimens of a species for

the benefit of that species will be

needed and the expense of maintain-

ing long-term propagating herds of

endangered species must be faced. A

150-specimen herd of an endangered

ungulate might annually require

$75,000 to $250,000 in support at

current costs.

It has to be recognized that a future

overcrowded and ecologically

poisoned may not leave peoples who,

fifty years from now, will have econ-

omies strong enough to support

“luxuries” like zoos—or national

parks. Desperately impoverished

people will not long cultivate great

museums, symphony orchestras, or

captive herds of tigers. It seems likely

that man will do what his technology

and reproductive potential will allow

him to do. It would be unreasonably

pessimistic to suggest that he cannot

explore his own star’s planetary

‘system in the next century; it would

be unreasonably optimistic to suggest

that he will control his population and

technology enough to preserve sig-

nificant amounts of this planet’s

natural habitats and wildlife.

Already, the vast majority of human

beings have small prospect of ever

again seeing significant numbers of

wild animals except in zoos. Let us

Support zoos in their growing

responsibility.

by William G. Conway

General Director

New York Zoological Society

17

BOOK\A\S

Sociobiology

by Edward O. Wilson; Belknap/

Harvard University Press, $20.00;

697 pp., illustrated.

This is not a book to take to bed ona

cold winter night. Big in size and in

scope, it requires concentration and

some background in biology, espec-

ially genetics, as well as an aquain-

tance with statistics. However, here in

one volume, is collected most of what

is known of the biology of animal

behavior. The bibliography alone is

sixty-four pages! The glossary is

equally comprehensive. The book is

admirably illustrated with diagrams,

photographs, and drawings.

The book is divided in three sections,

the first of which covers social evolu-

tion including population biology, the

genetic basis of social evolution, and

the somewhat controversial topics of

altruism and group selection.

Social mechanisms is covered in the

second section. Topics include domi-

nance, territory, aggression, sex, and

parental care. Dominance, for exam-

ple, cantake many forms. A wolf or

rhesus monkey express it by physical

carriage. Elephants and some deer

form male and female groups each

with its own structure. Among capu-

chin monkeys there are control ani-

mals who can settle disputes within

the group without any apparent domi-

nance structure. It is not a concept

with a simple meaning.

The final section describes the social

species, from microorganisms to man.

There are fascinating glimpses of the

Lilliputian worlds of the social insects.

Ants tend herds of aphids for their

“honeydew.” Bees perform the “wag-

gle” dance that directs other workers

to fresh fields of flowers.

Vertebrate social behavior reaches its

peak among the mammals. Wilson

summarizes what is known about

most orders. Separate chapters cover

carnivores, hoofed animals and ele-

phants, the lower primates, and man.

A close mother-offspring relationship

seems to be common in all mammals.

We learn that elephants may live for

decades in matriarchical herds of fe-

males and young. Bulls form their

own herds and join others only when

a cow Is In estrous.

The carnivores display the same diver-

sity of patterns. Female black bears

are territorial, and daughters inherit

space from their mothers. The lion

pride is a sisterhood of adults who are

at least cousins and who spend their

lives in.an inherited territory. Males

are nomadic until they can take over

a pride; brothers often roam together.

A wolf pack is a family unit with sep-

arate male and female dominance.

The primates have rich, complex,

and varied social structures. Every

possible combination appears, from

solitary loris to pair-bonded gibbons

and multi-male troops of chimpan-

zees. Apes range from the solitary

orangutan to the highly social chimp,

a fact which has hampered attempts

to trace the rise of man. Wilson be-

lieves that the only way to approach

such a study is to base hypotheses on

the conservative traits of an order,

those which most members share.

Among the primates there are: aggres-

sive dominance systems with males

dominant over females, prolonged

and intensive maternal care, and.a

high degree of socialization of the

young, and matrilineal social organi-

zation. That this does not account for

man’s unique traits is apparent, but

Wilson believes that there is a genetic

basis for man’s behavior, if only a

limited one. This is one of the points

which is sure to start arguments.

The book is rich in statements which

arouse Curiosity, but are then satis-

factorily explained. Sex is an anti-

social force in evolution. Order is the

by-product of the aggressive impulses

of individuals who are members of

groups for other reasons. And what of

man? Wilson feels that further study

may show that valuable traits such as

cooperation and creativity are

linked genetically with others such as

aggressiveness and possessiveness.

“If a planned society .. . steers us

past those stresses and conflicts

which once gave destructive pheno-

types their Darwinian edge, the other

phenotypes may dwindle with them.

In this, the ultimate genetic sense,

social control would rob man of his

humanity.”

Even if one cannot manage the whole

book, it is worth dipping into. But by

dipping, one would miss the sense of

pleasure in his subject which the

author projects, and much stimula-

ting argument.

by Sally Tongren

FONZ Docent

The colorful ring-tailed lemurs of Madagascar are just one of hundreds of fascinating animals whose evolution, population biology, and social behavior are

covered in Edward O. Wilson’s new and comprehensive book.

vi Ly ay

FONZ\EV\S

ZoONight Posiponed

Because of Bicentennial crowds and

delays in completing new animal ex-

hibits, ZooNight ’76 has been sched-

uled for September instead of June.

The weather will be just as picnic-

perfect, and members will have com-

plete access to such dramatic, new

exhibits as Lion-Tiger Hill, the Ele-

phant House and Yards, and Bird

House Hill.

Dates and details for September’s

ZooNight will be sent in August.

ZooNight, always a popular member

event, will be particularly exciting

this year. Five white tigers and a pride

of rare North African lions will be

roaming their new, $2 million Lion-

Tiger Hill home. The tigers are ex-

pected to demonstrate their swim-

ming skills in the large, encircling

moat. By late summer new yards

filled with cranes, waterfowl, casso-

waries, rheas, and emus will com-

pletely circle the Bird House. And the

Bird House itself will have undergone

extensive renovation. So also, the

Elephant House will have an all-new

interior to match the enlarged,

moated yards outside.

New food service facilities by FONZ

may tempt some to forsake their

picnic baskets. Draft beer, knock-

wurst, sauerkraut, and German

20

potato salad (hot or cold) are now

being served on the umbrella-covered

roof of the Panda House. Four kiosks

will offer ice cream novelties and

Italian ice. The “Mane” Restaurant

will provide air-conditioned comfort

in a setting designed to resemble a

jungle rain forest. °

Good News; Bad News

The good news: The National Zoo has

never had so many exciting, new

animal exhibits to delight local zoo-

goers and Bicentennial visitors alike.

The bad news: On-going construction

of even more exciting exhibits has

further reduced public parking.

Instead of 1100 car spaces as in 1975,

the Zoo has only 700 for this year.

In an attempt to avoid the inconveni-

ence of frequently closing the Zoo to

incoming cars, the Zoo hopes to use

the nearby Carter Barron lot for spill-

over parking with special shuttle

buses carrying zoogoers to and from.

In the meantime, members wishing to

be assured of parking at the Zoo

should plan on arriving early, particu-

larly on weekends.

FONZ Offers Zoogoers

Fast and Fancy Foods

Zoogoers can now dine in an air-

conditioned rain forest; enjoy knock-

wurst, German potato salad, and draft

beer atop the Panda House; and

snack on hot popcorn and cold Italian

ice at five different kiosks.

It’s all part of the fast and fancy food

facilities just opened by FONZ. The

dramatically upgraded food services

parallel the opening of new animal

exhibits throughout the Park.

The “Mane” Restaurant, across from

the just-opened Lion-Tiger Hill, has

‘been completely refurbished and air-

conditioned. Seating areas have

been transformed into striking jungle

scenes using specially silk-screened,

floor-to-ceiling wallpaper. |Humi-

nation comes from large picture

windows and custom-made planter

lights. Handsome oak trim and newly

restored old fireplace complete the

unusual setting.

At the much-enlarged and renamed

Panda Gardens, brightly-colored

umbrella tables provide diners with

summer shade and a panoramic view

onto the outdoor yards of the pandas,

elephants, and giraffes. The German-

themed menu features knockwurst,

sauerkraut, German potato salad,

and draft beer.

New uniforms and an entire range of

paper products created just for the

National Zoo enhance the decor at

each facility.

iends to Join FONZ"

Tell All Your Fr

Application for FONZ Membership

Family $20 (children under 18 receive Paw Prints)

eee HICACa $410

Couple $15

Senior Citizen (over 60) $5

Patron $100

a, SUmOor{under 18) $3

ZooGoer subscription $3 (schools and libraries)

Name

Address

City/State. Zip

Phone/Home: Office:

Betier yet, give a FONZ membership

The above is a gift membership in my name:

Name

Address

be a FONZ!

and enjoy:

The Zoogoer, a bi-monthly magazine

Paw Prints, a newsletter for children

Park free at the Zoo

ZooNight, a free evening at the Zoo

Children’s names and birthdate —- month and

year — (for family and junior members):

City/State Zip

Phone/Home: Office

Make checks payable to FONZ.

All but $3 is tax deductible.

DD

_-.

_

ludes

INC

ine above a

iner than to d

panda now that the Panda Garden has umbrella

tables and an expanded menu that

knockwurst and draft beer.

Nothing could be f