Problems related to reintroduction of confiscated lorises to the wild

Initial explanation of the use of some terms in this website to avoid misunderstanding (partly based on IUCN information and Griffith et al. 1998, see also first aid and rescue chapter):
Rehabilitation: here used for the process of restoring an animal´s health, behavioural training and other measures prior to release
Translocation: transport of organisms or populations from one part of their range to another:
Conservation / benign introduction: an attempt to establish a species, for the purpose of conservation, within an appropriate habitat and eco-geographical area, but outside its recorded distribution area.
Reintroduction: an attempt to establish a species in an area which was once part of its historical range, but from which it had been extirpated or become extinct. (This term is sometimes used in a wider sense, including rehabilitation prior to release and monitoring after release).
Re-inforcement, Supplementation: addition of individuals to an existing population of conspecifics.
Release: used here for the process of release into the wild (preparations and later monitoring not included)

Reintroduction may cause some problems for surviving wild populations and ecosystems if not properly planned. In particular the following problems may occur:

Examples of what may have to be considered before reintroduction:

Some links to other websites:

Some literature:

Loris, potto reintroduction:

Streicher, U.; Nadler, T., 2003: Re-introduction of pygmy lorises in Vietnam. Reintroduction News (Newsletter of the IUCN Reintroduction Specialist Group) 23: 37-40.
See IUCN/SSC Re-Introduction Specialist Group (RSG) download page for newsletters: http://www.iucnsscrsg.org/newsletters.php


Gipps, J. H. W., (ed.), 1991: Beyond captive breeding. Re-introducing endangered mammals to the wild. Proceedings of a symposium held at the Zoological Society of London on 24th and 25th Nov. 1989. Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Foose, T. J., 1991: Viable population strategies for reintroduction programmes. Pp. 165-172 in: Gipps, J. W. H. (ed.): Beyond captive breeding; re-introducing captive mammals to the wild. Oxford, Clarendon Press. May, R. M., 1991: The role of ecological theory in planning reintroduction. Pp. 145-163 in: Gipps, J. W. H. (ed.): Beyond captive breeding. Re-introducing captive mammals to the wild. Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Kleiman, D. G., 1989: Reintroduction of captive mammals for conservation. Bioscience 39 (3): 152-161.

Disease transmission:

Mills, C., 1999: The wild, wild pest. The Sciences , March / April 1999: 10-13 (New York Academy of Sciences, New York).

Plowright, W., 1988: Viruses transmissible between wild and domestic animals. Pp. 175-194 in: Reproduction and disease in captive and wild animals; Smith, G. R.; Hearn, J. P. (eds.), Symposia of the Zoological Society of London 60, Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Woodford, H. M. (ed.), 2000: Quarantine and health screening protocols for wildlife prior to translocation and release into the wild.
Published jointly by the IUCN Species Survival Commission's Veterinary Specialist Group, Gland, Switzerland, the Office International des Epizooties (OIE), Paris, France, Care for the Wild, U.K., and the European Association of Zoo and Wildlife Veterinarians, Switzerland. Available from: Care for the Wild International, Ashfolds, West Sussex RH12 4QX, UK or as a PDF file under http://wildlife.usask.ca/bookhtml/RiskAnalysis/Quarantine.pdf. (Link: above)

Woodford, M. H.; Kock, R. A., 1991: Veterinary considerations in re-introduction and translocation projects. Pp. 101-110 in: Gipps, J. W. H. (ed.): Beyond captive breeding. Re-introducing captive mammals to the wild. Clarendon Press, Oxford.

Behaviour: natal and early influences on development

Apfelbach, R., 1995: Olfactory imprinting to food odours: the example of the European ferret (Mustela putorius f. furo L.). Pp 176-186 in: Ganslosser, U., Hodges, J. K., Kaumanns, W. (eds.): Research and captive propagation. Filander, Fürth.

Davis, J. M.; Stamps, J. A., 2004: The effects of natal experience on habitat preferences. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19 (8):411-416.   ISSN: 0169-5347
     Content: natal habitat preference induction (NHPI), resulting individual difference in habitat preference

Metcalfe, N. B.; Monaghan, P., 2001: Compensation for a bad start: grow now, pay later? Tree 16: 254-260.
     Content: effect of insufficient feeding during ontogeny on later life, compensation, overcompensation.

Pollack, V., 1994: Verändern verschiedene Futterqualitäten während der Nestlingszeit das Verhalten von Amseln? [Do different food qualities during nestling period change the behaviour of blackbirds?] Diplomarbeit, Universität Innsbruck, Austria (German).
    Content: in two bird species, groups reared with natural food (insects) later, during adulthood, showed quantitative behavioural differences as compared to a group reared with other food (both groups looked healthy)

Sachser, N.; Beer, R., 1995: Longterm influences of social situation and socialization on adaptability in behaviour. Pp 207-214 in: Ganslosser, U., Hodges, J. K., Kaumanns, W. (eds.): Research and captive propagation. Filander, Fürth.

Privacy policy / Datenschutz

Back to the top of this page
Loris and potto conservation database - reintroduction  Last amendment: 7 January 2010


Home Rescue Centers
Taxonomy, populations
Identification key Distribution maps Database for genera, species & populations
Info for field studies & wild population surveys Reintroduction to the wild Captive care
Conservation breeding
Diseases of lorises and pottos Behaviour General Info