Current situation:
On Tuesday, 29 July 2025, Nuremberg City Zoo reduced the size of its group of Guinea baboons by twelve animals. This last remaining step of the cull was preceded by many years of intensive deliberation and the search for alternatives. It was carried out in consultation with the responsible supervisory authorities, the veterinary and environmental authorities and the coordinators of the European Association of Zoos and Aquariums (EAZA) conservation breeding programme. The downsizing of the group was unavoidable because the number of 43 animals in the group had far exceeded the 25 animals for which the baboon enclosure at the zoo is designed.
The zoo is aware that this decision is difficult for many people to understand and that it leaves them irritated, concerned or angry. For the zoo itself, its employees and all those involved in the decision-making process, it represents the most difficult path. It affects everyone without exception.
The experts at the zoo have discussed and examined this step intensively over many years with biologists, vets, animal keepers, zoologists, lawyers and scientists - as well as all conceivable alternatives
Since publication of the article “Baboon population management”, the Zoo has received offers from four countries to take in the baboons. Of course, we checked all offers carefully. Our Nuremberg group of baboons forms part of the European Endangered Species Program (EAZA ex-Situ Program, EEP) that normally recommends the transfer of animals. In order to make a decision, we need basic information about the husbandry conditions in the potential facility: for example, the size of the indoor and outdoor enclosures, temperature management or the facility’s expertise in keeping Guinea baboons. Information on whether the animals will be kept in a functioning social group is essential for our decision, too. None of the offers resulted in a concrete opportunity to take in our Guinea baboons. Here are the offers and reasons in detail, as of July 2025:
Reports that the Zoo has received a concrete offer from the Great Ape Project (GAP) or the Wales Ape and Monkey Sanctuary (WAMS) in the UK, are incorrect. Nuremberg Zoo directly contacted WAMS Director, Graham Garen, again via email in July 2025. He responded to this, but did not provide any information on whether or how many animals WAMS could or would take in.
He described the questions about the conditions of keeping the animals (e.g., how many animals should be kept in what area indoors and outdoors and at what temperatures, the planned group composition of the animals, or the capacity of the facility) as appalling and insulting, thus making it unlikely that he would respond.
The first request from the GAP was received on February 12, 2024 via Dr. Colin Goldner. On February 20, 2024, the Zoo sent the questionnaire to Dr. Goldner, and again to WAMS on March 14, with a response deadline of April 12. The Zoo received confirmation that this email had been sent, but no answers to the questions. On May 17, 2025, the Zoo received another request to take in the baboons from Dr. Goldner “on behalf of” WAMS. In response to the Zoo’s reply, we were asked to “resend” the questionnaire, which we did. The deadline for sending it back to the Zoo fully completed by May 31, 2025, was disregarded without comment from the GAP. Neither GAP nor WAMS have made contact with the Zoo again since then. In July 2025, Nuremberg Zoo contacted WAMS director Graham Garen again directly. Graham Garen responded to this, but did not provide any information on whether or how many animals WAMS could or would take in. The questionnaire remains unanswered to this day.
The Zoo itself also contacted a large rescue center for primates, which was unable to take in any animals. The status is therefore unchanged: There is currently no opportunity for taking in Guinea baboons from the Zoo – even if committed influencers offer to take care of the transportation.
Nuremberg Zoo and colleagues from the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria (EAZA) were able to examine the offer from an Indian zoo more closely. Currently, the Indian side is apparently no longer interested in taking in a group of Nuremberg Guinea baboons – basic information on the husbandry conditions is lacking.
The EAZA expert team categorized the offer of a Slovenian zoo as unsuitable for Guinea baboons.
An Austrian animal shelter did not provide basic information on the husbandry conditions.
The zoo has agreed the decision with the relevant authorities. The veterinary office was involved in the decision-making process and supported it. The office was also on site on 29 July 2025 to monitor the entire procedure in terms of animal welfare. In addition, the zoo coordinated the decision in advance with the Environmental Agency and colleagues from the European Endangered Species Programme (EEP) of the European Association of Zoos and Aquariums (EAZA).
Until recently, we did not have any of the information that we urgently need to make a decision on the transfer of our animals. This includes the size and equipment of the indoor and outdoor enclosures, the maximum group size that could be taken in, and the facility’s certificates of competence and husbandry license: Neither the Great Ape Project (GAP) nor the Wales Great Ape and Monkey Sanctuary (WAMS) have provided the relevant information since spring 2024. Nuremberg Zoo directly contacted WAMS Director, Graham Garen, again via email in July 2025. He responded to this, but did not provide any information on whether or how many animals WAMS could or would take in. He described the questions about the conditions of keeping the animals (e.g., how many animals should be kept in what area indoors and outdoors and at what temperatures, the planned group composition of the animals, or the capacity of the facility) as appalling and insulting, thus making it unlikely that he would respond.
It is not true that the Zoo has made further breeding with its Guinea baboons and participation in the EAZA’s European Endangered Species Program a condition for taking in individual animals. We respect that the Wales Ape and Monkey Sanctuary might not wish to participate in the conservation breeding program. Even though we firmly believe that reproduction is a basic biological need and that animals in human care should be kept in such a way that they can fulfill as many of these needs as possible.
However, without basic information such as the size and equipment of the indoor and outdoor enclosures, the maximum group size that could be taken in as well as the facility’s certificates of competence and husbandry license, the EEP cannot make a decision about the potential transfer of the animals. An essential prerequisite for us is that the animals are kept in a functioning social group, for example. The 2014 Mammal Report by the Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Regional Identity explicitly declared this to be a prerequisite for good primate husbandry: "[It] applies in general: When selecting animals to live in the same enclosure, it is not only the number of animals of the same species that is important, but, above all, that they form a socially intact group. Good and balanced social relationships are the basis for any primate husbandry.”
Filling out the questionnaire, which the Zoo uses to gather basic information on the husbandry conditions from all potential facilities, is also possible without consent to further breeding. All national and international institutions with which Nuremberg Zoo cooperates on a daily basis provide this information upon request. This also involves organizing the transport of the animals, which is complex owing to veterinary requirements, legal provisions governing animal transport in general, and, in this case, further requirements due to the location of the intended destination outside the European Union.
As usual, Nuremberg Zoo negotiates directly with a potential host facility together with colleagues from the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria (EAZA). The involvement of external third parties did not prove successful in this case and was not pursued further.
Nuremberg Zoo is currently the only zoo in Germany that keeps Guinea baboons. A total of 278 animals of this species live in zoos belonging to the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria (EAZA). In the medium term, EAZA zoos are urged to increase the space available for keeping Guinea baboons – after all, the species is coming under increasing pressure in the wild. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), to which Nuremberg Zoo also belongs, classifies Guinea baboons as potentially endangered. Over the past 30 years, their population may have already declined by 20 percent. The reasons for this decline are the loss of habitat and hunting by humans. Nuremberg Zoo would like to continue keeping these animals. The species is enabled to survive by maintaining a population in human care, which can form the basis for returns to the wild at a point when protected and suitable areas become available.
A total of 278 animals currently live in just ten zoos belonging to the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria (EAZA), including 43 animals in Nuremberg. Nuremberg Zoo is currently the only zoo in Germany that keeps Guinea baboons. The Zoo wants to continue keeping these animals in collaboration with EAZA in order to contribute towards conserving the species.
Nuremberg Zoo breeds its baboons as part of the European Endangered Species Program (EAZA ex-Situ Program, EEP). A coordinator centrally manages the breeding of EEP species based on scientific criteria. The aim is to conserve the most genetically diverse populations as possible. To this end, the participating facilities swap animals on the recommendation of the coordinator, breed young animals or pause breeding. Litter sizes and sex ratios of young animals cannot be predicted for many species – the fact that young animals are born that cannot be used for breeding is unavoidable. At Nuremberg Zoo, the baboon group has reached a size that exceeds the capacity of the enclosure, which was already expanded in 2009. A side effect of the overpopulation is an increase in conflicts with corresponding injuries to the animals. Conflicts within the baboon group manifest themselves, for example, in bite injuries. These conflicts are not unusual for baboons and also occur in the wild, but not as frequently as in the group at the zoo.
Since 2011, an interdisciplinary animal welfare committee has been examining all options and taking measures to reduce the size and growth of the group. The following six alternatives, some of which were unsuccessful and some have not yet been used, were considered:
• Transfer to other zoos
• International animal brokers
• Reintroduction into the wild
• Sanctuaries
• Contraception/reversible infertility
• Sterilization and castration/irreversible infertility
• Humane killing of surplus baboons
Animals that are managed within an EEP are primarily placed by the coordinator and according to their recommendations. If the EEP cannot help or the animals do not belong to an EEP, the zoo offers its surplus animals to all facilities that have access to the ZIMS/Species360 zoo animal database. These approx. 1,300 institutions are mainly accredited zoos of the VdZ (Association of Zoological Gardens), the EAZA (European Association of Zoos and Aquaria), the EARAZA (Eurasian Regional Association of Zoos and Aquariums) or the WAZA (World Association of Zoos and Aquariums).
What is more, the Zoo sends out its transfer and search lists directly to around 200 partner zoos in Europe, including zoos that have been approved but do not belong to the aforementioned associations. In the case of the baboons, only two zoos have taken in 16 animals since 2011. Despite various attempts, no other opportunities for transfer have emerged in recent years.
Some (e.g. Arab and Chinese) facilities are not accessible via the associations and databases to which Nuremberg Zoo belongs. In order to examine these options, too, international animal brokers and transporters are asked whether they can place the animals. If there is interest from zoos that are not organized in an association, it must first be clarified whether the husbandry conditions and operational structures are suitable. If the facilities do not meet the minimum standards called for in the Federal Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Regional Identity’s Mammal Report, the animals are not transferred there.
The Zoo only considers facilities where the animals can live integrated in a social group. The only large animal welfare organization in Europe that takes in primates until they can be placed with another keeper is currently struggling with a “waiting list” of dozens of confiscated animals. The Zoo has also made inquiries there.
The husbandry goal for all endangered species in zoos is to return them to suitable habitats. Reintroductions into the wild are subject to strict rules that were drawn up by the IUCN. As a member of the IUCN, the Zoo adheres to these rules when releasing animals into the wild (ibex, lynx, ground squirrels, Ural owls, northern bald ibises, bearded vultures, terrapins etc.). Reintroducing the Guinea baboons into the wild is not currently possible, as there are no suitable areas in their native habitats where they could be settled and live safely. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has been observing a decline in populations in the wild for decades.
They live in territory that stretches across Senegal, Guinea-Bissau, Guinea, Sierra Leone and Mali. Their habitats are increasingly coming under pressure: For example, Senegal’s Niokolo-Koba National Park, which has been on the list of UNESCO World Heritage sites in danger since 2007. Reintroduction projects take a lot of time to prepare, after which the project must be coordinated and scientifically monitored over many years. There is currently no reintroduction project for Guinea baboons and this is not planned for the reasons mentioned above. Therefore, the zoo cannot release any baboons into the wild at the moment.
A population that is kept in human care can form the basis for reintroductions into the wild if there are protected and suitable habitats at some point. Keeping them thus serves to safeguard and ensure the survival of the species.
Attempts to keep the group structure and size stable by temporarily using contraception on the females, while also reducing the group growth rate, have not achieved the desired effect. This is because the females remained permanently infertile. The Zoo has therefore not used contraception on any of the Guinea baboon females since 2018. Using contraception on the males, which would only be possible through sterilization, makes no sense, as only one fertile male could mate with all the females.
However, it is not only important for genetic and health reasons that the animals are able to reproduce: Partner selection, mating, births and rearing play a decisive role in the animal’s social life. The Zoo would like to provide all these aspects to its Guinea baboons and sees it as its responsibility to keep a socially functioning, healthy, diverse and reproductive group.
Irreversible infertility of the animals can only be envisaged in the long run if the population is to die out. As the population of Guinea baboons in the wild has been dwindling for decades and the EAZA recommends that zoological gardens build up a reserve population, it is out of the question in this case.
Zoos are legally obliged to protect species and contribute towards conserving biodiversity. Their tasks include maintaining stable and healthy populations of various species. Nuremberg Zoo is currently the only zoo in Germany that keeps Guinea baboons. A total of 278 animals of this species live in zoos belonging to the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria (EAZA). In the medium term, EAZA zoos are urged to increase the space available for keeping Guinea baboons – after all, the species is coming under increasing pressure in the wild.
Over the past 30 years, their population may have already declined by 20 percent. Nuremberg Zoo would like to continue keeping these animals. The species is enabled to survive by maintaining a population in human care, which can form the basis for returns to the wild at a point when protected and suitable areas become available.
The baboon enclosure and its indoor enclosure were significantly extended and redesigned back in 2009, and this improved the husbandry conditions. Further expanding the enclosure is neither feasible nor useful. It would merely postpone the question of how to deal with the limited space.
Since 2011, an interdisciplinary animal welfare committee has been examining all options and taking measures to reduce the size and growth of the group.
Attempts to keep the group structure and size stable by temporarily using contraception on the females, while also reducing the group growth rate, have not achieved the desired effect. This is because the females remained permanently infertile.
Using contraception on the males, which would only be possible through sterilization, makes no sense, as only one fertile male could mate with all the females. There were only a few opportunities for transfer to other facilities and so it was not possible to markedly reduce group.
It is important that the animals are able to reproduce for genetic and health reasons as well as for their social life. The Zoo sees it as its responsibility to keep a socially functioning, healthy, diverse and reproductive group.
A total of three adult males and nine adult females were culled to bring the group down to 26 adult animals and five young animals.
Over the past few months, zoo staff and external scientists have worked together to develop decision trees for each animal and for the entire group, which were used to decide which individuals to remove. Factors influencing the decisions included the age structure within the group, the gender ratio, the animal's fitness level, and whether the animal was pregnant or nursing a young animal.
Each female that was considered for removal was examined to rule out pregnancy. Until the moment when the animals were individually identified and culled in a transport crate with a bullet in accordance with animal welfare regulations, the situation was no different from transport to another location. Two animals died during inhalation anesthesia for reasons that are still unclear. The zoo sent their bodies to the pathology department to determine the causes. A total of three adult males and nine adult females were culled to reduce the group to 26 adult animals and five young animals. The remaining group consists of older, experienced animals, younger, sexually mature animals, and young animals in a balanced gender ratio.
As with all animals, the zoo has made the most of the animals' bodies wherever possible. On the one hand, it has provided various research institutions with different samples. Some of these, such as tissue samples from the spleen or liver, cannot be obtained from wild animals, but are very valuable for scientific purposes. Bones and skeletons are also prepared for research purposes. The muscle meat is fed to the predators in the zoo.
Feeding baboons to our predators began on Thursday, July 31. Among others, they were fed as high-quality food to our Asian lions, Siberian tigers, and Asian badgers. Lions, tigers, and badgers regularly hunt, kill, and eat primates in the wild. Guinea baboons, for example, are regularly preyed upon by West African lions, leopards, and spotted hyenas in Niokolo-Koba National Park in Senegal. We feed animals killed at our park to our predators, including their fur and bones. Among other things, this keeps them occupied, but it also has positive effects on the predators' health. It provides them with various nutrients and is also good for their dental health. We are also transparent in this regard: our visitors can see what our animals eat.
As with all animals, the zoo has made the most of the animals' bodies. On the one hand, it has provided various research institutions with different samples. Some of these, such as tissue samples from the spleen or liver, cannot be obtained from wild animals, but are very valuable for scientific purposes. Bones and skeletons are also prepared for research purposes.
Over the past few months, zoo staff and external scientists have worked together to develop decision trees for each animal and for the entire group, which were used to decide which individuals to remove. The decisions were based on factors such as the age structure within the group, the gender ratio, the animal's fitness level, and whether the animal was pregnant or nursing a young animal.
We always try to rehome surplus animals to suitable facilities. If this is not possible, euthanizing individual animals remains an option. This is a fundamental principle. Animals euthanized at the zoo are fed to the predators, and the zoo has been transparent about this for decades.
The remaining group consists of a balanced mix of older, experienced animals, younger, sexually mature animals, and young animals. Due to the social structure and age structure of the existing group, we have decided not to kill any more animals.
As with all animals, it was important to the zoo to put the animals' bodies to good use as far as possible. On the one hand, it provided various research institutions with different samples. Some of these, such as tissue samples from the spleen or liver, cannot be obtained from wild animals, but are very valuable for scientific purposes. Bones and skeletons are also prepared for research purposes. The muscle meat is fed to the predators in the zoo. Feeding would not have been possible after euthanasia, as drugs remain in the animals' bodies and can be dangerous to other animals. Each female that was considered for removal was examined to rule out pregnancy. Inhalation anesthesia was used for this purpose, which leaves no residue in the body.
The animals do not know what a gun is, they did not recognise the danger posed by the person shooting. The bullet is faster than sound and many times faster than the speed of nerve conduction, i.e. death was immediate and as quick as possible. All the animals were housed in very spacious transport crates. These were barred on two sides so that the animals could use these structures to climb and hold on and familiarise themselves with their new environment. No animal showed fear or even panic behaviour in the crate - on the contrary, they showed exploratory behaviour. Until they were killed, the situation for the animals was the same as if they had been transferred to another facility. The shot from a distance was unpredictable for the animals and all animals were killed quickly and in accordance with animal welfare regulations.
Overall, the group has become calmer, and the removal of the twelve animals has led to a significant reduction in stress. This will be particularly noticeable in winter, when the animals are kept in the barn due to weather conditions. Baboons are generally very active animals, and even small, loud arguments and conflicts are part of their normal behavior. Due to the change in the group structure, which would also have occurred if the twelve animals had been transferred to another enclosure, the baboons are reorganizing their social structure. In particular, the males are now forming new groups, and the females are joining them. Guinea baboons live in so-called fission-fusion systems: larger groups are constantly composed of different small groups. In addition, females switch between males, in nature animals migrate back and forth, young animals are born, others are eaten by predators. For baboons, regular changes in the social structure are therefore completely natural.
As part of a cooperation with the German Primate Center (DPZ), the Zoo supports research work on site at the Niokolo-Koba National Park in Senegal. The DBZ maintains a field station there, where staff and external scientists research the behavior of Guinea baboons. The Zoo supports them, among other things, in equipping baboons with GPS collars.
The Zoo is a non-profit organization. The income covers an average of 70% of the running costs. Subsidies from the city budget (30%) are justified by the Zoo’s services for the common good in the areas of species conservation, education and research. The selection criteria according to which the Zoo selects its animal population are very multifaceted. The criteria include, for example, endangered status, whether it is a species from the European Endangered Species Program (EAZA ex-Situ Program) or whether the species is particularly relevant for zoo education. Attractiveness for visitors is one of the criteria as well.
It is important for the animals to be able to reproduce for both genetic and health reasons: mate selection, mating, births, and rearing play a crucial role in the social life of animals. The zoo wants to enable its guinea baboons to experience all these aspects and considers it its responsibility to maintain a socially functioning, healthy, diverse, and reproductive group.
Species and nature conservation are a mammoth task involving a myriad of people and institutions with different areas of expertise and focus. Nobody can do it alone. The zoos are responsible for carrying out so-called ex-Situ species conservation. Among other things, this entails keeping and breeding animals and supporting local conservationists with their knowledge of the animals’ needs. If no one breeds animals, there will be no animals that can be released into the wild.
We regard it as our responsibility to explain difficult and emotionally challenging topics such as the culling of animals for species conservation and to engage in social discussions. That is why we actively addressed the public on this issue in February 2024 and explained the factual dilemma and its background.
Zoos play a very specific role in an extensive network of species conservation organizations. They can maintain healthy populations of animal species that can be kept and bred well in human care for generations. This gives local species conservation organizations time to restore habitats or effectively place them under protection. Zoos then release animals from their collections for reintroduction into the wild. Zoos are currently under great pressure to carry out so-called last-rescue measures, in which the last known individuals or populations are removed from the wild to prevent their extinction there. This makes the responsibility of zoos to provide space and expertise for the last-rescue of species overwhelmingly difficult. Against this backdrop, the fundamental debate about culling for the preservation of species is of fundamental importance.
According to § 1 TierSchG (Animal Welfare Law), no person may cause pain, suffering or harm to an animal without reasonable cause. According to Section 17 No. 1 TierSchG (Animal Welfare Law), it is prohibited to kill a vertebrate animal without reasonable cause. Reasonable cause for killing animals is an undefined legal concept that develops and changes with new scientific findings and legal decisions. The decisive factor for recognising reasons for killing animals is not that the reasons must be subjectively morally good, but that they must be objectively reasonable. Nuremberg Zoo has intensively discussed and examined with the Environmental Agency (responsible for species protection law) and the Public Order Office/Veterinary Office (responsible for animal protection law) as well as external experts and scientists (lawyers, veterinarians, biologists, zoologists, animal keepers) whether population management is a reasonable reason in the legal sense.
On the basis of existing case law, specialist literature and the expert assessments obtained, all the departments involved came to the conclusion that, taking into account the alternatives, there is reasonable cause and the killing is permissible. We presented the ethical dilemma and the legal assessment to the Environmental Committee of the Nuremberg City Council on 21 February 2024. Compliance with the legal requirements for culling was monitored by the veterinary office. The extent to which this political and official consensus can qualify the ‘biological indication’ as a reasonable cause will have to be decided in any investigations and possibly subsequent court proceedings. The case not only highlights an ethical dilemma, but also the need for intensive legal scrutiny of such an undefined legal concept.
Yes, that's right. However, the background was different: the male baboon took young animals that were still dependent on their mothers' milk away from their mothers and did not return them until they died. This is completely atypical behavior. It was decided to cull the animal in order to restore peace to the group and increase the young animals' chances of survival. Due to its behavior, offering the animal to other keepers was not an option. Theoretically, the animal could have been placed in an all-male group or in a group that no longer breeds. However, this option was not available in the acute situation. The baboon in 2011 was not culled due to lack of space, but because of atypical social behavior that was unrelated to density. The culling of the baboons in 2025 was necessary because the group had become too large for the enclosure, which was designed for 25 adult animals.
