Panda Conservation Controversies

Giant Pandas have been in the news lately. A series of New York Times investigative reports have raised doubts over the integrity of the global panda breeding program – the primary international network facilitating panda breeding since the 1980s. A recent commentary published in Nature Ecology and Evolution by a team of international scientists responds to these charges. Dr. Annah Lake Zhu of Wageningen University served as the corresponding author.

The Nature Ecology and Evolution commentary – “Global breeding programme benefits wild panda conservation” – provides further clarification and context on the New York Times reporting, noting how many of the critiques are based on practices occurring more than two decades ago, despite being presented as the current situation. Three main critiques are addressed.

First, the reports contend that politics and profit drive the breeding program, while the response shows how funds from the program have been used to support wild panda conservation. Second, the reports highlight that more pandas have been taken than released into the wild, while the response demonstrates that the focus on reintroduction has grown over the past two decades, with increasing reintroductions over time. In short, this critique applies only to the early implementation of the program. Lastly, the reports draw attention to the welfare concerns surrounding artificial insemination, a critique that also applies primarily to the early implementation of the program. The response shows how reliance on artificial breeding has decreased drastically over the years (natural mating now accounts for 70% of panda births) and how the welfare concerns associated with the technology have lessened.

The Nature Ecology and Evolution commentary underscores the critical role of the global breeding program in aiding wild panda conservation.