.jpg)
BIAZA Conservation Conference at Marwell Zoo Inspires Global Wildlife Action
A conservation conference feels very different when a White Rhino paddock is just across the way.
This week, I had the privilege of attending the BIAZA Conservation Conference at Marwell Zoo with the Linton Zoo director and team. The event took place in Marwell’s Science and Learning Centre, set right in the heart of the zoo. It was a brilliant location for a serious conversation about wildlife, because the subject was never abstract. Step outside, and the living reason for the work was right there.
The conference brought together zoo staff, scientists, keepers, consultants, carers, educators and conservation specialists. It also came with a welcome dose of warmth, openness and, yes, some very high-quality doughnuts.
More importantly, it showed how modern conservation works when people stop guarding their own corners and start working as one team. From Grevy’s zebras and snow leopards to great green macaws, Asian pigs, lemurs, invertebrates, amphibians and native UK species, the message was clear: protecting wildlife now means linking field projects, zoo expertise, local communities, education, research and long-term funding.
Giraffe at Marwell zoo Tropical ferns growing in biodome Statement fo=rom the Late Dr Goodall Teaching and leture room at Marwell
Why the setting at Marwell Zoo mattered
There’s something powerful about holding a conservation conference inside a working zoo.
A lecture hall in a city can still share excellent science, but a zoo places conservation in front of you. You can move from a talk about threatened species to seeing animal care, visitor education, enclosure design, keeper knowledge and public engagement all happening at once.
Marwell Zoo was a fitting host because it has a long history of conservation work, particularly with hoofstock and species management. BIAZA, the British and Irish Association of Zoos and Aquariums, plays an important role in connecting zoos and aquariums across Britain and Ireland so that institutions don’t work in isolation.
That point matters. No single zoo can save a species on its own. No field team can do it alone either. A breeding programme needs genetic planning. A reintroduction project needs safe habitat. A community project needs local trust. Education needs clear stories that people can understand and remember. Funding needs accountability. Each part depends on the others.
That’s why the conference felt so useful. It wasn’t just a series of talks. It was a reminder that conservation, consultancy, BIAZA networks and practical zoo experience can sit together in the same conversation.
For college and school learners, that’s one of the best lessons to take away. Conservation isn’t one job. It’s a web of roles, including:
Animal keepers who know individual animals and daily welfare needs
Field biologists who monitor wild populations
Vets who support health, quarantine and disease control
Educators who turn complex issues into clear public messages
Geneticists who help manage breeding programmes
Local volunteers who know the land, culture and pressures
Policy specialists who understand law, trade and protected areas
Fundraisers and project managers who keep work moving
The conference welcomed that whole mix. That’s not a small thing. Good conservation needs people who can talk across different skills without acting as if one part is more important than the rest.
The One Plan approach makes conservation bigger than the zoo gate
One of the strongest themes running through the conference was the One Plan approach.
The idea is simple, but it changes how people think. Instead of treating zoo conservation and wild conservation as separate tracks, the One Plan approach brings all populations of a species into one joined-up plan. That includes animals in the wild, animals in human care, rescued animals, managed breeding groups and sometimes future reintroduction candidates.
The approach is strongly associated with the IUCN Species Survival Commission’s Conservation Planning Specialist Group, which has long promoted joined-up planning for threatened species. Its value is easy to understand. If a species is in trouble, every safe, healthy and genetically valuable population matters.
Think of it like a school science project, but on a global scale. If each group collects data in a different way, stores it privately and never compares results, the final picture is weak. If everyone agrees on the aim, shares useful information and works to the same plan, the project becomes far stronger.
The same applies to conservation.
For example, a zoo population may help by:
Maintaining a genetically healthy safety-net population
Supporting research that would be difficult or harmful in the wild
Training keepers, vets or field staff in specialist care
Raising public awareness and funds for habitat protection
Providing knowledge for future reinforcement or reintroduction work, where suitable
This doesn’t mean every species in a zoo will be released into the wild. That’s a common misunderstanding. Reintroduction is complex and only works when the causes of decline have been tackled. There’s little sense in releasing animals into a habitat where hunting, disease, conflict or habitat loss still make survival unlikely.
The value of a One Plan approach is that it asks better questions:
What does this species need across its whole range?
Which threats are immediate and which are long-term?
Is habitat protection the priority?
Is breeding support needed?
Can local communities benefit from protecting the species?
What knowledge can zoos and field teams share?
How will success be measured?
That kind of thinking came through again and again at the conference.
Madagascar showed why local knowledge must lead conservation
Madagascar featured strongly in the discussions, and for good reason. It’s one of the most extraordinary places for wildlife on Earth.
Most of its lemurs are found nowhere else. Many of its reptiles, amphibians, plants and invertebrates are also unique to the island. That makes Madagascar a global conservation priority, but it also means mistakes can be costly. If a species disappears there, it may vanish from the planet altogether.
Lemurs are a good example. The IUCN has warned for years that lemurs are among the most threatened groups of mammals. Their pressures include habitat loss, hunting, charcoal production, mining and the wider effects of poverty and land-use change. None of those issues can be solved by simply telling people to “protect nature”.
That phrase sounds nice, but it isn’t enough.
People living close to forests often face hard choices. They may need land for crops, fuel for cooking, materials for building or income for school costs and healthcare. If conservation ignores those daily realities, it can become unfair and ineffective.
That’s why local support stood out so strongly during the conference. Conservation works better when local people aren’t treated as an afterthought. They need to be partners in the plan, not just people who are asked to change their behaviour.
Useful local involvement can include:
Paid ranger roles and habitat monitoring
Community tree nurseries
Forest-friendly farming projects
Local guiding and wildlife tourism
Craft projects linked to sustainable materials
School education led by local teachers
Community decision-making about protected areas
The best projects don’t just ask, “How do we stop people using this forest?” They ask, “How do we make the living forest worth more than the destroyed one?”
That shift matters. It creates a future where wildlife protection can bring pride, skills and income. It also reduces the risk of conservation being seen as something imposed from outside.
African species reminded us that conservation has to cross borders
Several species discussed at the conference showed how conservation challenges spread across huge areas.
Grevy’s zebra, for example, is listed as Endangered by the IUCN. It’s found in parts of East Africa, especially Kenya and Ethiopia. Unlike the more common plains zebra, Grevy’s zebra has suffered from habitat loss, competition for water and grazing, disease risk and past hunting pressures. Protecting it means thinking about dryland ecosystems, livestock, water access and community land.
That’s not simple work. A fence line on a map doesn’t always match the way animals move, or the way people use land.
Snow leopards raise a different set of challenges. They live across high mountain ranges in Central and South Asia, often in remote conditions. They’re listed as Vulnerable by the IUCN. Threats include prey loss, conflict with herders, illegal trade and climate-related habitat change. If a snow leopard kills livestock, a family may lose valuable income. Conservation must deal with that reality, not brush it aside.
Practical projects can include predator-proof livestock corrals, insurance schemes, community rangers and education that helps people understand the species’ role in mountain ecosystems. Again, local involvement is central.
Great green macaws bring in another set of issues. They’re listed as Critically Endangered by the IUCN and depend on suitable forest habitat. In parts of their range, their survival is tied closely to the protection of large trees and connected forest. A macaw can be charismatic and colourful, but the conservation work behind it is often about land planning, forest protection and reducing illegal capture.
Various Asian pigs, such as threatened wild pig species in South East Asia, also show how less famous animals matter. Some face habitat loss, hunting and disease threats. They may not attract the same public attention as big cats or parrots, but they can play important ecological roles. Wild pigs can affect seed dispersal, soil disturbance and forest structure. Losing them changes more than one species list.
The lesson is clear. Conservation doesn’t stop at national borders. Animals move, habitats connect and threats travel. Illegal trade, climate change, disease and market demand can link one country’s choices to another country’s wildlife.
Native UK species deserve the same serious attention
Global conservation can sometimes feel far away, especially when people hear about Madagascar, Central Africa or Asian mountain ranges. The conference also brought attention back to native UK species, which is essential.
The UK has its own wildlife problems. The State of Nature 2023 report, produced by a partnership of conservation and research organisations, reported that around one in six assessed species in Great Britain is at risk of extinction. That’s a sobering figure, especially in a country with strong scientific capacity and a long history of nature recording.
The pressures are familiar:
Habitat loss and fragmentation
Pollution in rivers and coastal waters
Pesticide and herbicide impacts
Climate change
Invasive non-native species
Road deaths and barriers to movement
Changes in farming and land management
Native species may not always seem as dramatic as snow leopards or macaws, but they matter just as much. Hedgehogs, bats, amphibians, pollinators, freshwater invertebrates and farmland birds all tell us something about the health of local ecosystems.
This is where schools and colleges can connect directly with conservation. A campus pond, hedgerow, wildflower strip or moth survey can teach the same principles that apply globally:
Species need suitable habitat
Small changes in land use can have big effects
Data matters
Long-term monitoring is more useful than one-off enthusiasm
Local people notice changes that outsiders miss
A student recording frogspawn dates, pollinator visits or bird numbers is using the same basic conservation skill as a field researcher overseas: careful observation.
That’s one reason BIAZA events matter. They help link the exciting global story with the everyday local one.
The difficult side of conservation needs honest discussion
One of the most valuable parts of the conference was the willingness to recognise that conservation isn’t tidy.
There are controversial questions. Zoos themselves are often part of public debate. Some people focus on animal welfare, captivity and ethics. Others focus on the role of zoos in breeding, education, research and funding. Those conversations should be taken seriously.
A good modern zoo has to earn trust. It needs high welfare standards, clear conservation purpose, skilled care, honest education and evidence that its work contributes to species protection. Being popular with visitors isn’t enough.
Conservation outside zoos also raises difficult questions.
Wind turbines can reduce carbon emissions, which helps tackle climate change, but badly placed turbines may pose risks to birds and bats. Power lines can cause bird collisions or electrocution if not designed or marked well. Modern agriculture can produce food efficiently, but it can also reduce habitat, simplify landscapes and affect insects through chemical use. Medicines can save human and animal lives, yet some pharmaceutical pollution has harmed wildlife. A well-known example is the severe decline of vultures in parts of South Asia linked to the veterinary drug diclofenac, which led to bans and safer alternatives in several countries.
These examples show why conservation can’t be reduced to easy slogans. A project may have benefits in one area and risks in another. The job is to make better decisions using evidence, planning and local knowledge.
That means asking practical questions early:
Where should infrastructure be placed to avoid key wildlife routes?
Can power lines be marked or redesigned to reduce collisions?
Can farming support wildlife through hedges, margins and soil care?
Can medicines and chemicals be managed to reduce environmental harm?
Who is affected by the decision, and who gets to speak?
The phrase “stakeholders” can sound dry, but the idea behind it is very human. It means everyone with a real connection to the issue should be involved. That includes local communities, landowners, scientists, animal carers, young people, policy makers and people whose income depends on the land.
If those voices aren’t included, conservation plans can fail even when the science is good.
The species stories made the science feel real
A strong conference doesn’t just share information. It makes people care enough to remember it.
The species discussed did exactly that.
Grevy’s zebra made the point that large mammals often need space, water and cooperation with people who share the same landscape.
Snow leopards showed how predator conservation must include the needs of herding communities.
Great green macaws reminded us that forest protection is often the real work behind saving a beautiful bird.
Lemurs highlighted the link between unique evolution, habitat loss and human livelihoods.
Invertebrates and amphibians showed that smaller species deserve attention too. They’re often sensitive to environmental change, which makes them useful indicators of ecosystem health. Amphibians, for example, can be affected by water quality, disease, climate and habitat change. Invertebrates support pollination, decomposition and food webs.
These groups also help challenge a common problem in conservation: people tend to care most about large, attractive animals. There’s nothing wrong with loving snow leopards or zebras. Charismatic species can open the door to wider interest. The key is to walk through that door and talk about whole ecosystems.
A forest isn’t saved by protecting one lemur. Grassland isn’t secured by focusing only on one zebra. A healthy ecosystem needs plants, fungi, insects, soil organisms, birds, mammals, reptiles and people making better choices.
That bigger picture came through clearly.
What schools and colleges can take from the conference
The conference had plenty for professionals, but its lessons also fit education beautifully.
Conservation is a strong subject because it brings together science, geography, ethics, business, design, politics and communication. It asks students to use evidence, but it also asks them to think about values and trade-offs.
A class project linked to the conference themes could include:
Mapping habitats around a school or college site
Comparing the conservation needs of a UK species and an overseas species
Designing a One Plan-style outline for a threatened animal
Researching how local communities benefit from wildlife protection
Studying how power lines, roads or farming affect species movement
Creating interpretation signs for a pond, meadow or wildlife area
Running a biodiversity survey across the year
The key is to avoid making conservation feel like something only experts do in distant places. Experts matter, of course. Training matters too. But the habits of conservation can start early: watching carefully, asking good questions, checking evidence, respecting local knowledge and thinking long term.
A student who learns to identify pollinators on a school field is building the same mindset needed for field surveys elsewhere. A college learner who studies zoo welfare, genetics or habitat restoration is already stepping into the wider conservation world.
That’s why events like this matter beyond the people in the room. They shape the stories, resources and partnerships that can reach classrooms, colleges and young people deciding what they want to do next.
Teamwork was the real headline
The best part of the conference wasn’t only the science, although there was plenty to learn. It was the tone.
There was a clear sense that people were there to share, not to show off. Keepers, carers, scientists, consultants, educators and specialists all had a place in the conversation. That matters because conservation can become divided if people stop listening to each other.
A field researcher may understand habitat pressures in detail. A keeper may understand the behaviour of a species through years of daily care. A local volunteer may know when an animal appears, where a forest path floods or which community leader can bring people together. An educator may know how to turn a complex issue into something a child remembers. A consultant may help shape a plan that survives funding, regulation and practical barriers.
None of those roles replaces the others.
The strongest conservation work respects different kinds of expertise. Scientific data matters. So does lived experience. So does animal husbandry skill. So does community trust.
That was the thread running through the event at Marwell Zoo. Wildlife action needs shared ownership. It needs people who can disagree honestly, solve problems practically and keep the species at the centre of the plan.
A hopeful reminder from Marwell
It’s easy to feel overwhelmed by conservation news. Species decline, habitat loss, climate change and conflict can make the problems seem too large to face.
The BIAZA Conservation Conference at Marwell Zoo offered a different feeling. Not blind optimism, but practical hope.
Practical hope looks like a zoo science centre full of people comparing ideas. It looks like keepers and scientists learning from each other. It looks like local volunteers being treated as essential partners. It looks like conservation plans that include revenue, education, welfare, genetics, habitat and culture. It looks like people caring about rhinos, lemurs, macaws, zebras, snow leopards, amphibians and native UK wildlife in the same conversation.
And yes, sometimes it looks like a table of doughnuts keeping everyone going between sessions.
The lasting lesson is simple: global wildlife action works best when it’s shared. Zoos, schools, colleges, local communities, scientists, carers and conservation organisations all have different pieces of the puzzle. When those pieces come together, threatened species get a better chance, and the people protecting them do too.
Weblinks:
Linton Zoo wwwlintonzoo.com
Animal Insights Consultancy Ltd Zoo Consultancy Services | Animal Insights Consultancy
Comments