Looking through a European Orangutan Studbook, I noticed that some orangutans are 'transferred' to zoos, while others are 'on loan'. Presumably this applies to other species too. Does anyone know any reasons for an animal being 'on loan' rather than 'transferred'? Presumably they can be reclaimed at some point? Does the original zoo have to be consulted about things like medical treatment? I'd be very interested in any information.
The difference between "transfered" and "on loan" is whether the ownership of that animal changed or not. "Transfered" means the new holder is also an owner of the animal and can therefore make decisions about movements etc. itself. On the other hand "on loan" animal is still owned by the previous zoo and all decisions must be done in agreement with both of them (the currect holder plus the owner). There is usually also a loan agreement with the conditions of the loan, fe who will own the future offspring etc.
All these things are normally writen in the loan agreement. So yes, the owner can ask the holder to send the loaned animal back. But in reality, most loan contracts for animals within EEPs (especially for those big prominent species like gorillas or orangs) are closed for indefinitive time and both zoos do not await that the animal (or its offspring) will accually ever return.
In case they want it back again due to either planned or unforeseen circumstances in the future. example of 'planned'- new enclosure being built so animals loaned out while work is in progress. Or to breed with an animal at another zoo(breeding loan e.g. Kingo at Paignton) example of 'unforeseen' -the zoo's other members of that species die and they need their animal(s) back again to replace them.
