Costly misalignment between local collection decisions and SSP genetic recommendations

Key Findings

• Financial Impact: $50,000–$250,000+ over a few‑year planning cycle for a medium zoo, when accounting for wasted enclosure space, husbandry and veterinary costs for surplus or non‑recommended animals, and transport costs for corrective transfers; these amounts can be extrapolated from the capital and operating costs associated with managing large mammals and primates that SSPs typically prioritize.[1][4][5]
• Frequency: Continuous (every SSP planning cycle, typically annually or every few years, zoos must make recurring decisions on breeding and transfers; misalignment tends to be persistent until governance and incentives are corrected).
• Root Cause: Local decision‑making that prioritizes short‑term exhibit or marketing preferences over regional genetic and demographic plans, combined with limited internal analytical capability to quantify the long‑term cost of keeping non‑priority or over‑represented animals. The complexity of studbooks and SSP recommendations—tracking family trees and genetic value of individuals across institutions—also creates room for interpretation and delay when zoo leadership is not fully engaged with TAG and SSP guidance.[1][4]