The “sustainability crisis” in zoos and aquariums has been a sobering reminder of how limited our resources are for maintaining viable populations of species threatened with extinction. This, combined with increasing concern among the public about the value of zoos and aquariums, suggests that the zoological profession should engage in a thorough re‐examination of our guiding principles, philosophies, and practices with regard to collection planning at global, regional, and institutional scales. An analysis of AZA cooperative breeding programs reveals that in order to make these populations viable, many more founders and tens of thousands more spaces for animals, either in existing facilities or new ones, are necessary if we want to maintain all of the species that are covered by cooperative breeding programs currently. Regional zoological associations and their associated cooperative breeding programs must be more strategic and make more scientifically defensible decisions about which species to try and safeguard in zoos and aquariums. This would enable the zoological profession to give society a “Promise List” of species that we will commit to save from total extinction. Developing such a list will require a collaborative, inclusive process that transcends zoological regions. Regional association leaders, zoo & aquarium directors, and curators must make commitments to safeguard the species on the Promise List regardless of other interests. As our profession re‐examines its philosophies and practices and finds ways to increase its capacity to provide refuge for species facing extinction in the wild, it may be possible to expand the Promise List.

Special encounters that allow contact between animals and guests are common in zoos and aquariums. Visitors to the Saint Louis Zoo may touch guinea pigs serving as ambassador animals. We evaluated two welfare indicators in ambassador guinea pigs by comparing glucocorticoid levels and body weights between periods when guinea pigs lived in a habitat accessible to the public and while off exhibit. Mean glucocorticoid levels did not differ between sexes or between on- and off-exhibit periods. There was significant individual variation, and females demonstrated greater variation than males. While on exhibit, glucocorticoid levels slightly but significantly increased in males and decreased in females. Moving guinea pigs between habitats only elicited a significant glucocorticoid response when females were moved off exhibit. Temporary closures of the exhibit had no effect on glucocorticoid levels in either sex. Analyses of the impact of handling rates on males found no impact on glucocorticoid levels. Guinea pigs’ body weights were lower while on exhibit. We conclude that guinea pigs serving as ambassador animals at the Saint Louis Zoo demonstrate comparable physiological profiles while on and off exhibit and, when used in a rotational schedule, are a suitable species for animal encounters involving contact with the public.

Animal habitats are changing around the world in many ways, presenting challenges to the survival of species. Zoo animal populations are also challenged by small population sizes and limited genetic diversity. Some ex situ populations are managed as subpopulations based on presumed subspecies or geographic locality and related concerns over genetic purity or taxonomic integrity. However, these decisions can accelerate the loss of genetic diversity and increase the likelihood of population extinction. Here I challenge the wisdom of subpopulation management, pointing out significant concerns in the literature with delineation of species, subspecies, and evolutionarily significant units. I also review literature demonstrating the value of gene flow for preserving adaptive potential, the often‐misunderstood role of hybridization in evolution, and the likely overstated concerns about outbreeding depression, and preservation of local adaptations. I argue that the most effective way to manage animal populations for the long term be they in human care, in the wild, or if a captive population is being managed for reintroduction, is to manage for maximum genetic diversity rather than managing subpopulations focusing on taxonomic integrity, genetic purity, or geographic locale because selection in the future, rather than the past, will determine what genotypes and phenotypes are the most fit. Several case studies are presented to challenge the wisdom of subpopulation management and stimulate thinking about the preservation of genomes rather than species, subspecies, or lineages because those units evolved in habitats that are likely very different from those habitats today and in the future.

Modern herpetoculture has seen a rise in welfare-related habitat modifications, although ethologically-informed enclosure design and evidence-based husbandry are lacking. The diversity that exists within snakes complicates standardizing snake welfare assessment tools and evaluation techniques. Utilizing behavioral indicators in conjunction with physiological measures, such as fecal glucocorticoid metabolite concentrations, could aid in the validation of evidence-based metrics for evaluating snake welfare. We increased habitat cleaning, to identify behavioral or physiological indicators that might indicate heightened arousal in snakes as a response to the disturbance. While glucocorticoid metabolite concentrations increased significantly during a period of increased disturbance, this increase was not associated with a significant increase in tongue-flicking, a behavior previously associated with arousal in snakes. Locomotion behavior and the proportion of time spent exposed were also not affected by more frequent habitat cleaning. These results demonstrate the need to further investigate the behavioral and physiological responses of snakes to different aspects of animal care at a species and individual level. They also highlight the need to collect baseline behavioral and physiological data for animals, in order to make meaningful comparisons when evaluating changes in animal care.