Endangered Species 2010: Mammals

Tags

animals, biology, Conservation, education, endangered, extinct, IUCN Red List, mammal, wildlife

Endangered Species series main post.

Mammals (class: Mammalia) are a taxonomic group broadly defined by their milk-producing mammary glands, possession of hair and three ossicles in the middle ear. They also uniquely possess a neocortex; the area of the brain involved in higher functions. Most mammals give birth to live young though this is not true of the monotremes – platypus (Ornithorhynchidae) and echidna (Tachyglossidae) – which lay eggs. It is a relatively small taxa with only around 6,000 described species. These species range in size from Kitti’s hog-nosed bat (Craseonycteris thonglongyai) at 30-40mm and the Etruscan shrew (Suncus etruscus) which weighs only 1.8 grams, to the blue whale (Balaenoptera musculus) which with a length of 33m and a weight of 180 tons is the most massive animal known to have existed. True mammals first appeared in the Triassic when they exploited niches available to small, nocturnal predators. The group does not seem to have diversified much beyond these niches (though taxonomic orders were largely already in place) until the end of the reign of the dinosaurs c. 65 million years ago when they rapidly evolved to fill larger niches.

[1] Wund, M., Myers., P. (2005). Mammalia. Animal Diversity Web. [online]
[2] Tree of Life Web Project (1995). Mammalia. Mammals. Version 01 January 1995 (temporary). [online]
[3] Kumar, V. (2011). Mammalia. Encyclopedia of Life. [online]

Bawean deer (Axis kuhlii)
Little studied, this small deer inhabits dense upland forests of Bawean Island, Indonesia, an area of 200km². This represents the most restricted range of any deer species. Morphologically similar to the India’s closely related hog deer, they are a little-seen species due to their largely nocturnal habits. The total wild population is thought to be around 250 individuals. Predators including wild pigs, macaques and pythons may account for some individuals but their impact is likely to be minimal. Feral dogs pose a far greater threat and, along with habitat loss and a decline in habitat quality, are the main causes of continued decline.

[1] Semiadi, G., Pudyatmoko, S., Duckworth, J.W. & Timmins, R.J. 2008. Axis kuhlii. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4
[2] ARKive (2010). Bawean deer (Axis kuhlii). [online]
[3] Huffman, B. (2011). Axis kuhlii. Ultimateungulate.com. [online]
Image © Midori

Cozumel Raccoon (Procyon pygmaeus)
Also called the ‘Pygmy raccoon’, P. pygmaeus is much smaller and occurs over a far smaller range than its better-known cousin, the common raccoon (Procyon lotor). Their insular dwarfism is due to their isolation and evolution on Cozumel Island, Mexico. P. pygmaeus is thought to exhibit more specific ecological requirements than P. lotor and island-raccoon subspecies. They prefer mangrove and wetland habitats where they forage for crabs and shellfish. Such specificity in an island species inevitably limits the extent of occurrence (478km²) and population size. Indeed, there are fewer than 250 mature individuals remaining. Anthropogenic factors and the impact of hurricanes – which can account for 60% of juveniles – pose the greatest threats.

[1] Cuarón, A.D., de Grammont, P.C., Vázquez-Domínguez, E., Valenzuela-Galván, D., García-Vasco, D., Reid, F. & Helgen, K. 2008. Procyon pygmaeus. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] McFadden, K.W., Sambrotto, R.N., Medellin, R.A., Gompper, M.E. (2006). Feeding habits of endangered pygmy raccoons (Procyon pygemaeus) based on stable isotope and fecal analysis. Journal of Mammalogy. 87(3):501-509 [available online]

Maui’s dolphin (Cephalorhynchus hectori maui)
A subspecies of Hector’s dolphin, Maui’s dolphin (originally called the North Island Hector’s dolphin) is found along the West coast of North Island, New Zealand. They are largely threatened by gillnet and trawl fisheries where it they are caught as bycatch, pollution, boat strikes and inbreeding. Maui’s conform to the common dolphin stereotypes of sociability and playfulness, grouping in pods over five strong. They have a slow reproductive cycle with females calving every 2-4 years and then only producing a single offspring. Approximately 111 individuals remain. Only 28 of these are likely to be mature females.

[1] Reeves, R.R., Dawson, S.M., Jefferson, T.A., Karczmarski, L., Laidre, K., O’Corry-Crowe, G., Rojas-Bracho, L., Secchi, E.R., Slooten, E., Smith, B.D., Wang, J.Y. & Zhou, K. 2008. Cephalorhynchus hectori ssp. maui. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4
[2] Slooten, E., Dawson, S.M. (2008). Sustainable levels of human impact for Hector’s dolphin. The Open Conservation Biology Journal. 2:37-43. [available online]
[3] New Zealand Ministry of Fisheries and Department of Conservation (2007). Hector’s dolphin threat management discussion document. [available online]
Image © Will Rayment

Visayan Warty Pig (Sus cebifrons)
S. cebifrons is a gregarious pig which is endemic to the Visayan island chain – more specifically the islands of Panay, Negros and possibly Masbate – in the Philippines. The species are easily distinguished by the white band running laterally across the top of the nose which is present in both sexes. Little is known of their ecology though it is likely that in ideal circumstances it is an overall generalist. The remaining populations are fragmented, having been extirpated in 95% of the historical range by slash-and-burn agriculture, logging, hunting and hybridisation with feral animals. The species are nationally protected though enforcement is poor. The number of surviving individuals is unknown.

[1] Oliver, W. 2008. Sus cebifrons. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] Huffman, B. (2011). Sus cebifrons. Ultimateungulate.com [online]
Image © B. Gratwicke

Malabar Large-spotted Civet (Viverra civettina)
With a declining population numbering fewer than 250 mature individuals fragmented into sub-populations of fewer than 50 individuals in total, the Malabar Large-Spotted Civet is one of the planet’s most endangered mammals. Found in the Western Ghats, India, its favoured habitats of lowland swamps and forests have been completely removed. This forces the species to utilise previously undesirable degraded or secondary habitat and thickets in cashew plantations. Conflict with humans is a severe threat as the species will opportunistically raid for poultry. It does not currently exist within any protected areas.

[1] Jennings, A., Veron, G. & Helgen, K. 2008. Viverra civettina. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4
[2] Schreiber, A., Wirth, R., Riffel, M., van Rompaey, H. (1989). Weasels, civets, mongooses and the relatives: An action plan for the conservation of mustelids and viverrids. IUCN/SSC Mustelid and Viverrid Specialist Group. [available online]
[3] Animal Info (2005). Viverra civettina (V Megaspila c.). [online]

Seychelles sheath-tailed bat (Coleura seychellensis)
Sheath-tailed bats are so-called due to the projection of the short tail through the tail membrane which effectively forms a sheath. The species is found on the islands of Silhouette, Mahe and Praslin in the Seychelles. There appears to have been several precipitous population declines; in the late 1800′s – 1900′s during the clearing of lowland forests and again since the 1970′s when the species was apparently common. It is now thought that there are fewer than 100 mature individuals remaining. Habitat loss for invertebrate prey, loss of roost sites and predation by introduced species are evident threats.

[1] Gerlach, J., Mickleburgh, S., Hutson, A.M. & Bergmans, W. 2008. Coleura seychellensis. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] ARKive.org (2011). Seychelles sheath-tailed bat  (Coleura seychellensis). [online]
[3] Gerlach, J. (2007). Vocalisations of the Seychelles sheath-tailed bat Coleura seychellensis. Le Rhinolophe 18:xx-xx. [available online]

Northwest African Cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus hecki)
This sub-species exhibits a limited distribution in northwest Africa, specifically Algeria, Niger, Benin and Burkina Faso. Though very little is known about the species, it probably mirrors the ecology and life histories of other A. jubatus subspecies. There exists no sub-population of more than 50 mature individuals; the total number of mature individuals is thought to be fewer than 250 animals.

[1] Belbachir, F. 2008. Acinonyx jubatus ssp. hecki. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
Image © Farid Belbachir

Giant Sable Antelope (Hippotragus niger variani)
The Giant Sable is endemic to Angola where it inhabits the area between the Kwango and Luando rivers. This secretive species cuts a striking figure due to their large curved horns which are present in both sexes (though male horns are longer and more curved). They exhibit a preference for forest and associated riparian habitats where they a specific and preferential browsers. The population has declined and fragmented largely due to long-term military conflict and hunting; only 200-400 individuals remain. It is possible that a viable population (>50 individuals) exists within Luando Strict Reserve. Hybridisation with Roan antelope (H. equinus) is a current threat.

[1] IUCN SSC Antelope Specialist Group 2008. Hippotragus niger ssp. variani. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4
[2] Huffman, B. (2004). Hippotragus niger. Ultimateungulate.com. [online]

Dwarf Hutia (Mesocapromys nanus)
This species was thought to be extinct until an extant population was discovered. No specimens have been recorded since 1937 when the species was restricted to Zapata Swamp, Cuba. Introduced rats and mongooses and habitat destruction may have resulted in the extinction of the species some time ago. However, reports of tracks and droppings suggest that a small population may persist.

[1] Soy, J. & Silva, G. 2008. Mesocapromys nanus. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
Image depicts Demarest’s hutia (Capromys pilorides)

Brush-tailed bettong (Bettongia penicillata)
The brush-tailed bettong (or, to give it its Australian moniker, Woylie) belongs to the marsupial family Macropodidae which also includes kangaroos, wallabies and the like. Though it was once more widespread and could be found in a variety of habitats, it is now restricted to dry forest understory around Alice Springs, Western Australia. Despite conservation efforts, the species has continued to decline with some small populations disappearing altogether. There are translocated populations in Western Australia, New South Wales and South Australian islands which exhibit varying degrees of success.

[1] Wayne, A., Friend, T., Burbidge, A., Morris, K. & van Weenen, J. 2008. Bettongia penicillata. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] ARKive.org (2011). Brush-tailed bettong  (Bettongia penicillata). [online]
[3] Start, A.N., Burbidge, A.A., Armstrong,  D. (1995). Woylie recovery plan Wildlife Management Program. 16. State Recovery Plan. [available online]
Image © Gary Lewis

Yellow-tailed Woolly Monkey (Oreonax flavicauda)
The Yellow-tailed Woolly Monkey can be found in montane and cloud forest habitats of San Martin and Amazons in the Peruvian Andes. Originally described from a skin in the early 1800′s, it was re-discovered in 1974 (and anyone wishing to delve into this species’ history should note that it was reassigned from the genus Lagothrix to Oreonax in the early 2000′s). Since this time, the species has suffered a significant population decline as its previously inaccessible habitat was opened up by colonisation projects, road building, logging and other such projects. Habitat loss is a continued threat as is subsistence hunting by natives. Current population numbers are unknown.

[1] Cornejo, F., Rylands, A.B., Mittermeier, R.A. & Heymann, E. 2008. Oreonax flavicauda. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4
[2] Mittermeier, R.A., Wallis, J., Rylands, A.B. et al., eds (2009). Primates in Peril: The World’s 25 Most Endangered Primates 2008–2010. Illustrated by S.D. Nash. Arlington, VA.: IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist Group (PSG), International Primatological Society (IPS), and Conservation International (CI). pp. 1–92. [available online]
[3] Buckingham, F., Shaneee., S. (2009). Conservation priorities for the Peruvian yellow-tailed woolly monkey (Oreonax flavicauda): a GIS risk assessment and gap análysis. Primate Conservation (24). [available online]
Image © Platyrhinnus

Iriomote cat (Prionailurus iriomotensis)
This extremely rare and elusive species is endemic to the 284km² Japanese island of Iriomote, 200km off the coast of Taiwan. Despite the largely mountainous evergreen nature of the island, the cat apparently favours lowland wetland, streams and small hills. Loss of this lowland habitat over the course of the last decade may have resulted in population decline. There are fewer than 100 individuals remaining though the population is contiguous.

[1] Izawa, M. 2008. Prionailurus bengalensis ssp. iriomotensis. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] Okamura, M., Doi, T., Sakaguchi, N., Izawa, M. (2000). Annual reproductive cycle of the Iriomote cat Felis iriomotensis. Mammal study. 25:75-85. [available online]

Pygmy three-toed sloth (Bradypus pygmaeus)
B. pygmaeus is thought to have diverged from the mainland brown-throated sloth (B. variegatus) lineage when the island of Escudo de Veraguas split from the Panamanian mainland c. 8900 years ago. The species seems to exist on nutritionally poor red mangrove leaves. Its island home is less than 5km²; what little habitat it supports is declining is quality. There is no information available on its population status.

[1] Samudio, R. & Members of the IUCN SSC Edentate Specialist Group 2008. Bradypus pygmaeus. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] Anderson, R. P., Handley, C. O., Jr. (2001). A new species of three-toed sloth (Mammalia: Xenarthra) from Panama, with a review of the genus Bradypus. Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 114(1):1–33. [available online]
Image © Bryson Voirin

Riverine Rabbit (Bunolagus monticularis)
The Riverine rabbit, probably the most endangered lagomorph in the world, is endemic to the Karoo region of South Africa. Its population has been severely fragmented due to anthropogenic impacts on the landscape. These factors have also served to isolate the remaining sub-populations, limiting or omitting effective gene flow. Though the rate of habitat loss has been arrested, hunting and accidental snaring does occur and the remaining population may become extinct within 50 years without intervention. There are fewer than 250 breeding pairs remaining.

[1] South African Mammal CAMP Workshop 2008. Bunolagus monticularis. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] ARKive.org (2011). Riverine rabbit  (Bunolagus monticularis). [online]
Image © van Dyke

Of Hawks and Buzzards

Tags

bird, Conservation, education, endangered, nature, species, taxonomy, wildlife

Ridgway's Hawk (Buteo ridgwayi)

In my previous blog post, I noted that Ridgway’s hawk (Buteo ridgwayi) has been lumbered with a misleading common moniker, taxonomically speaking. As a member of the genus Buteo, it is in fact a buzzard and not a true hawk, all of which are species of the genus Accipiter. Both genus are indeed members of the same family, Accipitridae. Commenting on the aforementioned post,  Snailquake queried the difference.

It is true that there are a great many similarities between hawks and buzzards and that the common names associated with each group often differ between countries. For example, vultures (most commonly Turkey Vultures, Cathartes aura) in the US are commonly saddled with the name ‘buzzard’ while true buzzards are often referred to as hawks.  In this context, buzzard is a word which carries negative connotations, as exemplified by the use of the word ‘buzzard’ to define one who scrounges (scavenges). Despite a lack of consistency in terminology, there are some features which may be used to distinguish between Buteo and Accipiter*:

• Buzzards generally have longer wings which exhibit long, splayed primary feathers, in contrast to the short, rounded wings of hawks.
• Hawks exhibit a longer, narrower, more manoeuvrable tail, giving then greater aerial agility. Buzzard tails are generally broad and rounded.
• Buzzards are generally slower fliers, poorly adapted to pursuing swift prey. This contrasts with hawks who rely on great bursts of speed to ambush prey items.
• Hawks often inhabit and hunt in more densely wooded areas whereas buzzards often require more open habitat.
• Hawks tend to have longer legs.
• Hawks exhibit a procoracoid foramen; an opening in front of the coracoid bones which is reduced or absent in other species (Olson, 2006).

Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis)

Ridgway’s Hawk is, of course, not the only species to be saddled with a taxonomically incorrect common name. There are many examples of harriers and buzzards being labelled hawks, including Red-tailed Hawks (Buteo jamaicensis) and Marsh Hawks (Hen Harriers, Circus cyaneus). Even the Peregrine Falcon (Falco peregrinus; belonging to the family Falconidae) has been called the ‘Duck Hawk’. Thus it is evident that there is great variation in common accipitrid nomenclature which is largely dependant on location. Here in the U.K. we have only two true hawk species – the Sparrowhawk (Accipiter nisus) and the Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis) – amongst our birds of prey which also include the Common Buzzard (Buteo buteo). It is likely that the British once called all raptors ‘hawks’ (the American propensity for such may be a cultural carry-over) but that has since been superceded by recognition of the true phylogeny.

*Note that these are not hard-and-fast rules.

References

Olson, S.L. (2006): Reflections on the systematics of Accipiter and the genus for Falco superciliosus Linnaeus. Bull. B.O.C. 126: 69-70. [PDF link]

Endangered Species 2010: Birds

Tags

bird, Conservation, education, endangered, extinct, nature, Science, series, species, wildlife

Endangered Species series main post.

Birds first appeared during the Late Jurassic, arising from amongst the therapod dinosaurs; the infamous Archaeopteryx has been dated to c 150-145 mya. Modern birds are, by and large, much more accomplished fliers than the early avians and have evolved to fit all manner of ecological niches. There are around 9,000 known species. Representatives can be found all around the world, enriching our lives as they go about the messy business of living. Birds are generally defined by several characteristics: a toothless beak; feathers (that many dinosaurs are known to also have feathers has raised etymological issues); high metabolism; hard-shelled eggs; lightweight, robust skeleton. As birds are so varied in distribution and form, they are threatened by a great many natural and anthropogenic factors. This might seem to be counterintuitive; surely an organism capable of flight can escape such pressures. For some species, this is possible. Others are less capable of responding to limiting factors and thus exhibit similar responses to threats as do other taxa.

[1] Waggoner, B., JRH (1996). Introduction to the Aves. University of California at Berkeley. [online]
[2] Tudge, C. (2009). The Secret Life of Birds. Penguin. [available to buy]

Campbell Islands Teal (Anas nesiotis)

A. nesiotis is a nocturnal local endemic of Dent Island, New Zealand. The species was first described in 1886 but was not collected from Dent Island until 1975. In 1990, the breeding population was estimated at 60-100 birds, which declined further to 25 pairs in 1998. The species has been successfully introduced to Codfish and Campbell Islands. The total population is now estimated to be around 200 birds, though this includes captive specimens. Alien species, severe weather and avian diseases are primary threats.

[1] Birdlife International (2010). Anas nesiotis. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] Birdlife International (2010). Anas nesiotis. [online]

Black-breasted Puffleg (Eriocnemis nigrivestis)

The attractively named black-breasted puffleg is a hummingbird endemic to Ecuador where it inhabits the north-western slopes of the Volcan Pichincha and the Cordillera de Toisan. The Pinchincha population numbers approximately 160 individuals and is restricted to an area of around 34km². The total wild population has been estimated at between 250 and 999 individuals. Deforestation and habitat destruction is the greatest cause of past decline and the greatest ongoing threat to the species.

[1] Birdlife International (2010). Eriocnemis nigrivestis. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] Birdlife International (2010). Eriocnemis nigrivestis.  [online]
Image © Benjamin Schwartz

Enigmatic Owlet-nightjar (Aegotheles savesi)

Sighted only once since 1960, A. savesi is endemic to New Caledonia where it likely exists as a tiny and spatially restricted population. Little is known of the species, even amongst local people. It is thought that it exploits a more terrestrial lifestyle than that of other Aegotheles species. Based on a similar species – A. cristatus – it is thought that introduced predators and habitat loss are primary threats.

[1] Birdlife International (2010). Aegotheles savesi. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] Birdlife International (2010). Aegotheles savesi. [online]

Bengal Florican (Houbaropsis bengalensis)

The Bengal florican is a bustard – the Family Otididae which includes the heaviest flying bird, the great bustard (Otis tarda) – which occurs in two populations; one in India, through Nepal, the other in southeast Asia. These populations fragmented into small sub-populations. The total global population is thought to be between 250 and 999 individuals. There have been no recent surveys of the Indian population. The primary threat is loss of key grassland habitat.

[1] Birdlife International (2010). Houbaropsis bengalensis. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] Birdlife International (2010). Houbaropsis bengalensis. [online]

Blue-throated Macaw (Ara glaucogularis)

A much loved staple of the pet trade, the blue-throated macaw saw its population decimated in three generations. The remaining wild population – estimated at around 250-300 individuals – is found in Llanos de Mojos, Bolivia. Drastic reduction of the trade in wild-caught birds has halted the decline and there are signs of recovery. Other threats are hunting for feathers and meat, inter-specific competition and inbreeding of fragmented sub-populations.

[1] Birdlife International (2010). Ara glaucogularis. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] Birdlife International (2010). Ara glaucogularis. [online]
Image © Jeff Kubina

Masafuera Rayadito (Aphrastura masafuerae)

The Masafuera Rayadito is a member of the ovenbird family (Furnariidae), a family famous for the horneros (Furnarius spp.) which build oven-like clay nests. The Rayadito is more demure, nesting in natural cavities. It is found only on the island of Alejandro Selkirk in the Juan Fernandez Islands, Chile. Recent surveys put the population at c. 248 birds though based on availability of suitable habitat, the total population may number as many as 1,000. Primary threats are habitat loss, climate change and an increase in red-backed hawks (Buteo polysoma exsul).

[1] Birdlife International (2010). Aphrastura masafuerae. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] Birdlife International (2010). Aphrastura masafuerae [online]

São Tomé/Dwarf Olive Ibis (Bostrychia bocagei)

First sighted in 1990, this species was long considered a subspecies of the larger olive ibis (Bostrychia olivacea). It is endemic to São Tomé, São Tomé e Príncipe where it inhabits catchments in the south-west and centre of the island. Threatened by habitat loss and intense hunting pressure, the population has dwindled to fewer than 50 birds.

[1] Birdlife International (2010). Bostrychia bocagei. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] Birdlife International (2010). Bostrychia bocagei [online]
Image © Christian Hinzen

Réunion Cuckoo-shrike (Coracina newtoni)

Neither a cuckoo nor a shrike, C. newtoni can be found in two small patches of forest to the north of the island of Reunion in the Indian Ocean. One of these sub-populations now consists of fewer than 25 individuals. From 2003 to 2007, numbers of unpaired males increased by over 10% every year, indicative of a heavy male skew in the population. Predation by rats, disturbance, invasive plants and inter-specific competition continue to contribute to the decline of the species. Fewer than 25 breeding pairs remained as of 2007.

[1] Birdlife International (2010). Coracina newtoni. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] Birdlife International (2010). Coracina newtoni. [online]
Image © Jean-Michel Probst

Kaempfer’s Woodpecker (Celeus obrieni)

Since collection of the type specimen in 1926, this Brazilian woodpecker was thought extinct for several decades. However, a male was caught in a mist net in 2006; several specimens have been recorded since. It is known from several states where it is thought to be associated with bamboo and babassu palm forest. The current population is cautiously estimated at 50-250 individuals. Due to the number of captures and the likely size of its range, however, it is likely that the population is large and the species may soon be downlisted.

[1] Birdlife International (2010). Celeus obrieni. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] Birdlife International (2010). Celeus obrieni.  [online]
Image © Ciro Albano

Ridgway’s Hawk (Buteo ridgwayi)

Thos familiar with bird taxonomy will notice that the common name of this species is a misnomer. Rather than being a true hawk (Accipiter spp.), Ridgeway’s is in fact a buzzard (Buteo spp.). Once recorded from Haiti and many associated islands, the species is now likely restricted to Los Haitises National Park in the Dominican Republic. The species is undergoing an annual decline of c. 5-10% of breeding pairs at one site which also experiences 10-15% annual forest loss. There were estimated to be between 80 and 120 breeding pairs as of 2006. A translocation effort by the Peregrine Fund is ongoing.

[1] Birdlife International (2010). Buteo ridgwayi. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] Birdlife International (2010). Buteo ridgwayi. [online]

Black Stilt/Kakī (Himantopus novaezelandiae)

This species has been subjecty to intensive management efforts since 1981 when the population was just 23 individuals. Despite contstant effort, the species remains one of the rarest shorebirds in the world. The wild population has almost certainly been saved from extinction by the annual release of large numbers of captive-bred birds. Once widespread across North and South islands of New Zealand, breeding is now restricted to the Waitaki Valley on South Island. The total population stood at 78 birds as of 2007-08, 20 of which were breeding pairs. Predators, nest-site disturbance and stochastic weather events are the primary threats.

[1] BirdLife International (2009). Himantopus novaezelandiae. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] BirdLife International (2009). Himantopus novaezelandiae.  [online]
Image © Yang Zhang

White-chested White-eye (Zosterops albogularis)

Looking much like a colourful warbler, Z. albogularis inhabits Norfolk Island where the remnant population is confined to Norfolk Island National Park. Despite occasional reported sightings, official surveys have been unable to find a single individual. If the species persists, it does so in low numbers. It is threatened by rat predation and the destruction and alteration of suitable habitat.

[1] Birdlife International (2010). Zosterops albogularis. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] Birdlife International (2010). Zosterops albogularis. [online]

Beck’s Petrel (Pseudobulweria becki)

Recently rediscovered (2007-08), Beck’s petrel is generally found along the island chain which includes Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands. The extent of its breeding range or area of occupancy whilst at sea are unknown. The global population is thought to be larger than originally estimated due to the sighting of around 160 birds between New Britain and New Ireland in 2008. The species may be threatened at its breeding grounds by invasive predators.

[1] Birdlife International (2010). Pseudobulweria becki. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] Birdlife International (2010). Pseudobulweria becki. [online]
Image © Hadoram Shirihai

Raso Lark (Alauda razae)

As its common name attests, A. razae is found only on the islet of Raso (7km²) in the Cape Verde Islands. The species’ population appears to fluctuate in response to climactic conditions with recorded numbers veering from a low of 20-50 pairs to around 250 individuals. The species is especially vulnerable during periods of low abundance as the sex ratio becomes skewed 3:1 towards males. Primary threats are grought and nest predation.

[1] Birdlife International (2010). Alauda razae. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4.
[2] Birdlife International (2010). Alauda razae. [online]

Endangered Species 2010: Reptiles

Tags

Animalia, biology, Conservation, education, endangered, IUCN Red List, nature, reptile, species, wildlife

Endangered Species series main post.

The reptiles are a grouping of several vertebrate orders which are largely characterised by having ‘scaly’ skin, leathery-shelled amniotic eggs and breathing air. They are also generally exothermic, utilising their environment to raise and maintain their body temperature (hence ‘cold blooded’), though there are exceptions such as Leatherback sea turtles (Dermochelys coriacea) which can maintain a body temperature several degrees warmer than the surrounding water.

There are four extant orders of reptiles: Crocodilia (crocodiles, alligators, etc.), Sphenodontia (tuataras), Squamata (lizards, snakes, etc.) and Testudines (turtles and tortoises). These four groups collectively contain over 8,500 species (over 90% of which belong to the order Squamata; there are only 2 sphenodontids) which range in size from the dwarf gecko (Jaragua Sphaero) at 1.6 cm and 120 milligrams to the Komodo dragon (Varanus komodoensis) at up to 10 feet long and 80+ kilograms. Of course even the Komodo dragon would have been dwarfed by some of its long-extinct dinosaur relatives.

[1] Tudge, C. (2000). The Variety of Life. Oxford University Press.
[2] Zootaxa: Reptiles. [link]

Crocodylia

Chinese alligator (Alligator sinensis)

The Chinese alligator is an inhabitant of the lower reaches of that much abused water-course, the Yangtze river (Anhui, Jiangsu and Zhejiang Provinces), which is home to a number of endangered taxa and was home to the recently-declared-extinct Yangtze river dolphin (Lipotes vexillifer), or ‘Baiji’. While generally amphibious in habits, A. sinensis is dependent on terrestrial nesting, basking and burrowing sites. The wild population is fragmented over a small area of occurrence. There are approximately 200 adults remaining.

[1] Crocodile Specialist Group 1996. Alligator sinensis. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.3
[2] Britton, A. (2009). Alligator sinensis (Fauvel, 1879). Crocodilian species list. [link]

Siamese crocodile (Crocodylus siamensis)

Previously common across much of southern Asia, the Siamese crocodile has been extirpated from the majority of its former range. Indeed, it is possible that the species is no longer present in many areas which it is currently believed to inhabit. Current population levels are unknown; the species is threatened by habitat destruction, hunting and persecution.

[1] Crocodile Specialist Group 1996. Crocodylus siamensis. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.3
[2] Britton, A. (2009). Crocodylus siamensis (Schneider, 1801). Crocodilian species list. [link]

Squamata

Monte Cristo arboeral alligator lizard (Abronia montecristoi)

The species which comprise the genus Abronia are collectively and commonly known as alligator lizards due to their wedge-shaped heads and pseudo-crocodilian morphology. A. montecristoi is native to El Salvador and Honduras where it typically inhabits cloud forests. Like many inhabitants of such ecosystems, A. montecristoi is threatened by habitat loss and climate change. Little is known of the species ecology or population levels.

[1] World Conservation Monitoring Centre 1996. Abronia montecristoi. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.3.
[2] McCranie, J.R., Wilson, L.D. (1999). Status of the Anguid Lizard Abronia montecristoi. Journal of Herpetology, 33(1): 127-128.

Smith’s dwarf chameleon (Bradypodion taeniabronchum)

B. taeniabronchum is a little-known inhabitant of South African montane fynbos (Western Cape natural shrub/heathland). First described in 1831, the species is adept at avoiding detection due to its facility for impromptu crypsis and small size (<20cm). Little is known about the species ecology or population size.

[1] World Conservation Monitoring Centre 1996. Bradypodion taeniabronchum. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.3.
[2] Tolley, K.A., Burger, M. (2004). Distribution of Bradypodion taeniabronchum (Smith 1831) and other dwarf chameleons in the eastern Cape Floristic Region of South Africa. African Journal of Herpetology. 53(2): 123-133. [available online]
Image © Devi Stuart-Fox and Adnan.

Lacépède’s ground snake (Liophis cursor)

L. cursor is a colubrid species restricted to the 0.2km² Caribbean island of Rocher du Diamant. Like other Liophis species, L. cursor is entirely terrestrial, hunting its prey in moist habitats. Until recently, the species could be found on the island of Martinique. However, since the introduction of the small Asian mongoose (Herpestes auropunctatus), L. cursor populations on Martinique have suffered dramatic declines and the species is probably no longer present.

[1] Breuil, M. 1996. Liophis cursor. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.3
[2] Henderson, R.W., Bourgeois, R.W. (1993). Notes on the diets of West Indian Liophis (Serpentes: Colubridae). Caribbean Journal of Science. 29(3-4): 253-254. [link]
[3] Henderson, R.W. (1992). Consequences of predator introductions and habitat destruction on amphibians and reptiles in the post-Columbus Westy Indies. Caribbean Journal of Science. 28(1-2): 1-10. [link]

Phelsuma antanosy

P. antanosy is a small gecko (~10cm) which inhabits two small, low-altitude coastal forests in the Tolagnaro region of Madagascar. The two populations are split into several sub-populations which inhabit bounded by forest fragments. One inhabited forest fragment in Sainte Luce will almost certainly be lost to an ilmenite mine. While the species may be relatively common in these forests (this is purely hypothetical), their restricted distribution (~9km2), a decline in habitat quality and habitat destruction. It is especially susceptible due to its reliance on two species of tree, both of which are heavily exploited resources.

[1] Jenkins, R., Randrianantoandro, C. & Ramanamanjato, J.B. 2007. Phelsuma antanosy. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.3.

Anegada ground iguana (Cyclura pinguis)

This large-bodied iguana was once common across Puerto Rico but is now predominantly restricted to Anegada Island, the Virgin Islands. Between 1968 and 1991, its population density fell from 2.03/ha to 0.36/ha; based on recent surveys and estimates, there are only 164 individuals remaining on Anegada. Two founder populations have been established on associated islands (Necker and Guana) but even taking these populations into account, the total number of individuals is approximately 200. The species is threatened by habitat alteration by introduced grazers and predation by introduced carnivores.

[1] Mitchell, N. 1996. Cyclura pinguis. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.3.
[2] Mitchell, N. (N/K). Anegada Island iguana. IUCN Iguana Specialist Group. [link]
[3] IUCN (2010). Anegada iguana, Cyclura pinguis: 2006 – 2010 species recovery plan. IUCN. [link]
Image © Glenn Gerber.

El Hierro giant lizard (Gallotia simonyi)

This particularly large wall lizard grows up to 60cm in length (a large proportion of which is tail) and is found on the island of El Hierro in the Canary Islands. Once relatively abundant, predation by introduced species and over-collection resulted in population declines and fragmentation. The declines had halted by the time of the last report (2008) but control of feral cats ceased in 2002 which may result in resumed declines. Several populations have been reintroduced to neighbouring islands. Nevertheless, only 300 – 400 individuals remain.

[1] Jose Antonio Mateo Miras, Valentin Pérez-Mellado, Iñigo Martínez-Solano 2008. Gallotia simonyi. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.3.
[2] ARKive.org. Hierro giant lizard  (Gallotia simonyi). ARKive.org. [online]

Bermuda rock skink (Plestiodon longirostris)

P. longirostris is the only terrestrial vertebrate endemic to the archipelago of Bermuda. Habitat loss to agriculture and residential developments has resulted in the decline of this once common species. The impacts of habitat development are exacerbated by invasive species and pollution. Though the species currently inhabits several islands, Southampton Island is believed to be home to the only viable sub-population (~400 animals).

[1] Conyers, J. & Wingate, D. 1996. Eumeces longirostris. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.3.
[2] Davenport, J. Hills, J., Glasspool, A., Ward, J. (2001). Threats to the Critically Endangered endemic Bermudian skink Eumeces longirostris. Oryx. 35:332-339.
Image © Brian Gratwicke.

Golden lancehead (Bothrops insularis)

This arboreal pitviper is native to the island of Ilha da Queimada Grande, Brazil; an area of less than 0.5km2. While the population is currently stable, the limited area of occurrence and declining fertility amongst the population ensure its place on the Red List.

[1] Marques, O.A.V., Martins, M. & Sazima, I. 2004. Bothrops insularis. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.3.
Image © OAV Marques.

Testudines

Dahl’s toad-headed turtle (Mesoclemmys dahli)

There is little information available on this Bolivar State (Colombia) native. It is known to inhabit forest ponds and brooks where it feeds on molluscs, insects, fish and amphibians. Habitat loss is likely to be the primary threat.

[1] Tortoise & Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group 1996. Mesoclemmys dahli. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.3.
[2] Ernst, C.H., Altenburg, R.G.M., Barbour, R.W. (N/K). Phrynops dahli. Turtles of the World. [online]
Image depicts Mesoclemmys tuberculata.

River terrapin (Batagur baska)

While this species can be found in Malaysia, Indonesia, Bangladesh and India, the fragmented and declining nature of the small sub-populations put it at very real risk of extinction. Threatened on many fronts – overexploitation of adults and eggs, habitat loss, accidental trapping and netting, pollution, siltation, etc. – it is no surprise that populations have plummeted in the last 25 years. The species is sporadically protected across its range.

[1] Asian Turtle Trade Working Group 2000. Batagur baska. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.3.
[2] Asian Turtle Conservation Network (2006). Batagur baska. Asianturtlenetwork.org. [online]
Image © Pandiyan V.

Burmese star tortoise (Geochelone platynota)

This species, endemic to Myanmar, is readily identified by the beautiful pattern of yellow lines radiating from central points on its black carapace. This is actually an inverted perception of the true colouration as the lines reflect the colour of the carapace which is covered by dark patterning. While a popular and much sought-after pet, little is known of its wild ecology. Over-collection for the Asian food and medicine market and the international pet trade has resulted in a dramatic decline in numbers. The species – possibly the most endangered tortoise – currently exists in three areas in the wild, two of which are protected areas.

[1] Asian Turtle Trade Working Group 2000. Geochelone platynota. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.3.
[2] ARKive.org (2010). Burmese starred tortoise  (Geochelone platynota). ARKive.org. [online]

Assessing Species Rarity

Tags

biodiversity, biology, Charles Darwin, Conservation, Conservation biology, endangered, environment, IUCN Red List, nature, Science, wildlife

In 1859, Charles Darwin wrote that “rarity is the precursor of extinction”. This fundamental concept – that some species are at greater risk of extinction than others – often forms the basis for the allocation of otherwise scare resources in conservation biology. This focus on rare and endangered species has been increasingly justified by a number of studies which have highlighted the roles species play in maintaining ecosystem function and demographic stability in sympatric communities.

Relative species abundance is an extremely important issue in conservation and  is frequently far more complex than may be immediately evident. Indeed, simply quantifying the term ‘rare’ is not as simple as one would think. All species occur at differing levels of abundance; it therefore follows that some species can be defined as common while others can appropriately be described as being rare. However, rarity is itself a relative concept and is subject to a great many factors, including endemism, local population size, niche specialisation and the scale of the investigation.

In a broad sense, there are three issues relevant to the definition and identification of rare species.

• The first concerns the geographic scale within which the investigation is being conducted. A species may appear rare on a local scale but be common on a regional or global level. The question of scale can greatly affect which species qualify as rare, as is the case with the European pine marten (Martes martes) which, while being listed as a species of least concern in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species over the entirety of its European range, is considered vulnerable in the UK and is protected by the Environmental Protection Act, 1990.
• Second, geographic range and abundance are not necessarily independent criteria; common species are more likely to be locally abundant, whereas rare species tend of exhibit narrow planes of distribution and low local abundance.
• Third, there is the potential for the underestimation or complete omission of species from recording lists due to crypsis or other methods of avoidance.

A number of strategies have been proposed to classify species according to relative abundance. However, just as there are no singular definitions of rarity, so different aspects of abundance have been widely discussed, reviewed and adopted by a multitude of authors. Whether species are defined as rare is often contextually dependent on the method used to measure abundance.

The IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) use their own criteria when assessing species abundance. The primary criteria include population size, geographic range and the projected population size over a given period. In order to full quantify their assessment, the organisation also takes other factors such as habitat quality, exploitation, pollution, competitive species, hybridisation and introduced species into account. This approach is designed to incorporate as many parameters and influencing factors as possible so that accurate assessments can be made. It is so highly regarded that several countries including Canada, Mexico and Australia use IUCN criteria as a basis for their national strategies when assigning conservation priorities to rare or endangered species.

Probably the most well known and widely used system for quantifying and classifying species rarity is that proposed by Rabinowitz (1981; Rabinowitz et al., 1986), who classified status according to three parameters: population size (somewhere large and everywhere small), geographic range (wide and narrow) and habitat specificity (broad and restricted). There are of course limitations inherent in this system, not least the suggestion that applying these criteria is a subjective and context-dependent endeavour. but it appears to be broadly effective nonetheless. It is  worth noting that several studies, each surveying disparate taxa, have been unable to classify any organisms in the category of narrow distribution, broad habitat specificity and small population size.

Species that are threatened with extinction are often considered to be rare, though it is important to note that the converse is not always true; a species may be described are rare according to any one of several definitions, but is not necessarily at risk of extinction. Understanding the mechanisms underlying ecosystem interactions and rarity is of increasing importance given anthropogenic impacts which have been shown to greatly affect the abundance and distribution of species.

References & Sources

Flather, C. H., Sieg, C. H. (2007). Species rarity: definition, classification, and causes. In: Raphael, M. G., Molina, R. (eds). Conservation of rare or little-known species: biological, social, and economic considerations. Island Press, Washington, DC. P 40-66.

Gaston, K.J. (1994). Rarity. Chapman & Hall: London.

Magurran, A. E. (2004). Measuring biological diversity. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing

Magurran, A.E. (2005). Ecology: linking species diversity and genetic diversity. Current Biology. 15, p 597 – 599.

Rabinowitz, D. (1981). Seven forms of rarity. In: Synge, H. (ed.). The biological aspects of rare plant conservation. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK. P 205–217.

Rabinowitz, D., Cairns, S., Dillon, T. (1986). Seven forms of rarity and their frequency in the flora of the British Isles. In: Soulé, M. E. (ed.). Conservation biology: the science of scarcity and diversity. Sinauer, Sunderland, Massachusetts, USA. P 182-204.

The Global Strategy for Plant Conservation

Tags

botany, education, endangered, Science, wildlife

This article is a very roughly edited and heavily abridged version of a 2007 essay written for a University module. It has been edited, in light of my impending move to Leeds, so as to provide an overview of the GSPC, thereby excusing myself from researching and writing a lengthy update.

The Global Strategy for Plant Conservation was adopted in 2002 at the sixth meeting of the Conference of Parties. Primarily concerned with plant conservation, the Strategy also targets several other areas including sustainability and the sharing of derived benefits.

Though it is called the ‘Global Strategy’, it also provides guidelines for action at all levels, with each having a role of equal importance. Local governments and organisations, connected on a regional and national level are able to provide a far more detailed and effective strategy than one coordinated on a national level alone. This network of organisations and institutions can have a larger role to play as their findings may impact on the development of objectives on a global level. The emphasis is on collaboration between organisations and countries to meet a series of goals and targets by the year 2010 with the ultimate goal being to halt plant diversity loss entirely.

While plants are globally recognised as a vital part of both our diet and our environment, the number of globally critically endangered species has grown, with current estimates ranging from 60,000 to around 100,000.

• The introduction of alien species has a detrimental affect on many indigenous plants, often out-competing them for available resources and growing with more vigour.
• Many plants are valuable commodities, both for aesthetic and economic reasons. Unsustainable harvesting or collection practises have decimated many populations.
• Plants are not only at risk from negligence by collectors, but also from forestry and agricultural practises. Changes in the way land is used can have a detrimental effect on the local population.
• Nitrogen deposition can affect plant diversity worldwide in natural and semi-natural ecosystems. Around fifty percent of the world’s floral diversity is contained within the 34 designated biodiversity hotspots all of which have a high rate of N deposition. Other pollutants may be equally problematic.
• Though the media and a minority of scientists contest the specific causes, there is little argument to the fact that the planet is currently undergoing a shift in global climate. Already several species have been seen to extend their Northern boundaries, decreasing in the South. The implications of this are profound, as there will come a point for many species when they cannot spread any further in one direction, thus facing extinction.

To address these issues, the Convention sets out key objectives for all parties. These range in scope, from linking existing plant conservation strategies, mobilisation of resources and documenting the flora of a region and trends in its composition to supporting sustainable harvesting and educating on the importance of plant biodiversity.

Compiling a taxonomic database would be the first step in what is a very ambitious plan. Much of the success of the Convention lies with how the parties deal with issues which have a direct effect on plant populations: climate change, pollution and unsustainable practises. While change may be difficult to implement on a national level, much relies on the success of other initiatives such as the Kyoto Protocol and the recognition of atmospheric nitrogen levels.

The Conference of the Parties invites both international and regional organisations to adopt, implement and endorse the Global Strategy with the aim of bringing to a halt the loss of global plant diversity. However, as countries have been reticent in signing more binding agreements in the past, the Conference puts forward the idea that all the targets are flexible and can be developed by the parties involved so that it works alongside their current priorities and interests.

The idea of this degree of flexibility in such a scheme can have both positive and negative effects. On the one hand, participants have the freedom to effectively choose their own targets and prioritise accordingly without having to reorganise their current commitments. This means that the Convention is likely to have a diluted, but more widespread effect. On the other hand, parties could see the Convention as an opportunity to reinforce their environmental credentials with little pressure to meet pre-set targets.

Continual assessment is the only way to appropriately prioritise species for conservation and to assess the effectiveness of current strategies. To this effect, the IUCN has devised a set of criteria for such assessments that has been agreed on an international basis. The IUCN also provides accurate and up to date information, assessing the relative danger to each species.

The factors that place such high restrictions on plant conservation mean that to conserve all plants in situ is an impossible task. If the Convention is unsuccessful, ex situ collections may yet be the last refuges for many species.

References

Australia Government (1996). National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity. [online]

Convention on Biodiversity (2002). Convention on Biodiversity. [online]

Convention on Biological Diversity (2006). Global Strategy for Plant Conservation. [online]

IUCN-WWF Plants Conservation Programme (1987). Centres of Plant Diversity: A Guide and Strategy for Their Conservation. Surry: Chiltern

Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2004). Plant diversity challenge

The UK’s response to the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation. Peterborough.

Phoenix, G.K., Hicks, W.K., et al. (2006). Atmospheric nitrogen deposition in world biodiversity hotspots: the need for a greater global perspective in assessing N deposition impacts. Global Change Biology 12, 470–476.

McClean, Doswald, Kuper, et al. (2006). Potential impacts of climate change on

Sub-Saharan African plant priority area selection. Diversity and Distributions, 12, 645–655.

Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (2005). Understanding and Conserving the Earth’s Biodiversity Hotspots. [online]

Plantlife (2005). Global Strategy for Plant Conservation. [online]

Biodiversity Hotspots

Tags

animal, Conservation, education, endangered, nature, plant, species, wildlife

“To qualify as a hotspot, a region must meet two strict criteria: it must contain at least 1,500 species of vascular plants (> 0.5 percent of the world’s total) as endemics, and it has to have lost at least 70 percent of its original habitat.” Biodiversityhotspots.org

First identified by Norman Myers in 1988, the initial ten hotspots slowly grew in number as more recognisable areas were identified. Since a reassessment in 1996 by Conservation International, the number of hotspots has grown to thirty-four, with habitats ranging across all terrestrial ecosystems and into the marine environment. (Image © Conservation International. Click to hugificate from Biodiversityhotspots.org)

Areas currently identified as biodiversity hotspots:

• Contain approximately 50% of the world’s endemic flora.
• 40% of the world’s endemic vertebrates.
• Have had their terrestrial coverage reduced from 11.8% to 1.4%

Anthropogenic effects have led to the decline and extinction of many species and it is only now, as there is a growing awareness of just how many species are on the edge, that we are spurred into action on a global scale.

The Biodiversity Hotspot initiative is by no means unique in the ever-changing world of environmental conservation. The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) has its own Global 200 initiative in which 200 areas have been researched and designated areas of high conservational priority. Both initiatives cover many of the same geographic areas – though the designated hotspots are much larger in scale – and involve many of the same target species and investigative techniques.

To have two disparate systems seemingly working to the same end does not make sense logically or economically. Were the two initiatives to cross boundaries on a practical level, then perhaps a more detailed view of the situation could be forthcoming from their coordinated efforts. That they overlap also means that a great deal of funding is channelled into very specific areas of study, to the neglect of others.

Critics have argued that the identified hotspots (and thus, the WWF’s ecoregions) are very fragile and under great stress, so to preserve pockets of biodiversity to the exclusion of others which cover a wider geographical area seems  to be an approach designed to appease the masses; almost environmental propaganda. However, if we were to lose these ‘pockets’, we would lose over half of our planet’s biodiversity almost overnight.

More on a Bloody Big Fish

Tags

animals, Conservation, endangered, IUCN, nature, Red List, species

The most recent endangered species list posted on this blog – Endangered Species 2010: Fish Part 1 – Actinopterygii – featured the ruddy great Atlantic goliath grouper (Epinephus itajara), a critically endangered, sub-tropical, widely distributed reef predator.

It’s like the Sarlaac, only in the sea. With a fish head. And no tentacles. Alright, it’s nothing like the Sarlaac really. It is however an excellent image. © Douglas David Seifert

While browsing through the back issues of the open-access Endangered Species Research journal, I came across volume 7 number 3; a themed issue dealing with the ‘Range-wide status and conservation of the Goliath grouper’.

“This THEME SECTION of ESR focuses on the Range-wide status of the Goliath grouper. The goliath grouper Epinephelus itajara  is one of the world’s largest and longest lived epinephalids. Heavily targeted by artisanal and recreational fisheries throughout its broad distributional range, the global declines in abundance and extirpation of goliath grouper spawning aggregations are of growing concern. Innovative research and management approaches coupled with international collaborative efforts are needed to address this pressing conservation problem. “

Just in case you missed the link-tastic text above and are even a little interested, you can also click here, here or here to go and do some goliath grouper-related reading.

Endangered Species 2010: Map 2 – From Annelids to Molluscs

Tags

arthropod, endangered, insect, IUCN, Red List, species

Endangered Species 2010 Series main post.

This map describes the location of critically endangered arthropod, annelid, lamprey, cnidarian, onychophoran and molluscan species according to IUCN criteria as listed in the first five posts of the Endangered Species 2010 series.

Note that species were chosen randomly from the IUCN Red List (CR) with the only requirement being that a reasonable amount of information was available. Overlaps exist in several locations, specifically Bermuda, California and French Polynesia.

Key:
Yellow – Arthropods (Part 1 ; Part 2)
Blue – Annelids, lamprey, cnidarians and onychophorans
Red – Molluscs

View Larger Map

View Arthropods, annelids, lamprey, cnidarians, onychophorans and molluscs in a larger map

What Happens When a Model Consumes Rhino Horn (or not, as the case may be)?

Tags

Chinese medicine, CITES, Conservation, endangered, illegal, nature, Science, wildlife

In a Sunday Times interview with Mark Edmonds, supermodel Elle Macpherson briefly discussed the taste and effectiveness of powdered rhino horn [1], a substance internationally banned in accordance with Appendix I of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) [2]. The pampered and overpaid clothes-horse is either ignorant of the facts surrounding the medicinal properties of rhino horn and the state of rhino populations worldwide, or she simply doesn’t care. The relevant excerpt from the interview can be read below:

“Witter: You’re said to be a great fan of Chinese medicine. What does powdered rhino horn taste like?

E MacP: A little bit like crushed bone and fungus in a capsule. Does the job though.

Witter: How do you know that it works? A lot of people say Chinese medicine is quackery.

E MacP: Put it this way, works for me.” [1]

Astonishingly, there has been little reaction to this news in the popular media. Contrast this with the front-page attention given to other celebrity indiscretions and it’s clear to see why many people are crying foul. To quote environmentalist Tony Fitzjohn of the George Adamson Wildlife Preservation Trust:

“This is incredibly irresponsible. I have never been so disgusted in my 40 years of trying to save wildlife. Her remarks mean that people will come after these scarce and ancient animals with guns.

Men die protecting them, and the well-being of countries that rely on tourism and wildlife are diminished by those in search of a supposed elixir.” [3]

Of course, it’s possible that Elle has been misled and misinformed. If that is the case then the potential exists for her to be educated on this matter, publicly admit her guilt and commit her support to rhinoceros conservation. It’s also possible that she’s entirely dispassionate about the issue. Either way, it is vital that she is held publicly accountable and charged with the purchase and use of an illegal substance and punished to the full extent of the law.

---

17:26

I began writing this post around an hour ago with the full intention of going into the issues surrounding rhino conservation  and I may still do that in a future post. However, while researching the story, I became aware that the model has released a statement countering the criticism interview wherein she claims her statement has been misinterpreted [4]:

“To be clear, I have never knowingly consumed or encouraged consumption of any products derived from endangered species.” [4]

When the story first broke, I, along with my partner, my friends and colleagues, were incensed that such a flippant remark and irresponsible behaviour had garnered no attention nor had the person who made said remarks been held to account. Thus I wrote to several news outlets and conservation groups in an effort to get this story pushed to the forefront of the public domain:

Dear sir/madam,

I feel I should draw your attention to a potentially high-profile story which has appeared on both the Mongabay and Sunday Times websites. You should be aware that Ms. Elle Macpherson has admitted consuming powdered rhino horn, an illegal substance which underpins the decline and extinction of rhinoceros species worldwide. Rhino horn is simply made of keratin – the same protein as makes up your hair and fingernails – and has been shown to have no medicinal value whatsoever. All rhinos are protected under, and trade in rhino horn is prohibited according to, Appendix I of CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species).

Ms. Macpherson’s admission betrays a startling level of ignorance with regards to medicine, endangered species, international law and basic biology. Moreover, based on her assertation that it “…works for me.”, I would be surprised if she had not recommended this product to her colleagues.

Many of my friends and colleagues are disgusted by this revelation and believe that this story should be widely publicised and her actions damned. It is our opinion that in light of this confession, Ms. Macpherson should be held accountable for consuming an illegal, unnecessary product which is sourced in a devastating manner.

Please note that this email has so far been sent to several conservation and news organisations.

Sincerely,

Anthony Hallam

Sources:

http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/fashion/article7139977.ece?token=null&offset=0&page=1

http://news.mongabay.com/2010/0702-hance_macpherson.html

Note that while I’ve taken such action before regarding a number of issues, it’s not something I make a habit of. Unfortunately:

• I received no response from any news outlet.
• One company offered the expected platitudes relating to conservation of endangered species.
• I received a response from one conservation organisation wherein the responder noted that my email had been sent to a superior for their attention and that I would receive a further response in 2-3 days. To be fair, that time has not yet elapsed and they did note that if I had not heard back then I should contact them again. In light of the recent statement from the model’s camp, I’m not entirely sure it’s worth it; I’ll only be referred to her statement.
• One conservation organisation noted that they had published a story on their website at the end of June. They made no mention of whether they had attempted to further the issue.
• Another conservation (requested anonymity) organisation noted that they were attempting to contact Ms. Macpherson to resolve the issue. I quote part of my subsequent response below:

“Thank you for your informative response. I must say that it rather highlights one of the issues at hand, that being awareness and promotion of this particular incident. The story on Mongabay came as a surprise to myself and my colleagues. While this may be initially unsurprising, the facts that all  are variously zoology and/or conservation students, tutors and professionals indicates how little publicity Ms. Macpherson’s folly has garnered. I am sure you share our disgust that models on drugs are headline news (to use an appropriate analogy) while a model consuming internationally illegal rhino horn doesn’t get a mention.

I understand your decision to contact Ms. Macpherson [directly]. Indeed, I truly hope she has been misinformed and misled and will make a public apology (though I am personally of the opinion that even if this comes to pass, she should be held accountable as any member of the public would be). However, I am also of the opinion that by pursuing such a low-key course of action, you (that is, the organisation) are not taking advantage of an opportunity to widely promote the plight of rhinoceros species and damn the actions of those who partake in illegal activities.”

It is with this last dialogue in mind that I come to a quote from the recent press release:

“Four out of five species of rhino are under immediate threat, mainly due to illegal slaughter for their horns. I want to urge everyone to join my utter condemnation of anything that further endangers their already precarious future. Killing rhinos because some people think its horn is an aphrodisiac is beyond appalling.”

It certainly sounds like someone’s had a word her ear about rhino conservation. Further, was the intimation that she was taking it as an aphrodisiac? I must confess that I did wonder why a model would take this substance seeing as it has was always supposed to have had phallic and masculine overtones. [Edit: Apparently it  also (fails to) detect poison and reduce fever]

Far be it from me to call her a liar. It’s certainly true that context is everything and it may very well be a case of crossed wires. Her high-profile boycotting of Nobu restaurants came about because they continued to sell critically endangered bluefin tuna, so she can’t be said to be completely ignorant of conservation issues.

“I was twittering with a Times journalist about the taste of herbal medicines and made a flippant comment inferring I had tasted rhino horn.” [4]

“Witter: You’re said to be a great fan of Chinese medicine. What does powdered rhino horn taste like?

E MacP: A little bit like crushed bone and fungus in a capsule. Does the job though.

Witter: How do you know that it works? A lot of people say Chinese medicine is quackery.

E MacP: Put it this way, works for me.” [1]

However, if context is indeed everything, then there is no misunderstanding unless Mark Edmonds wilfully edited the interview before publication and there’s no indication that this was the case. As things stand, I call bullshit.

Update – 09/01/10

Since originally publishing this post, I have received responses from two further organisations. Note that the anonymity of the majority of the organisations mentioned throughout this post is granted due to the fact that I had  not requested permission to reproduce their emails. Two of the organisations specifically requested anonymity.

The first reponse was brief and held a note of caution. That said, it was stated that the organisation had yet to decide on the best course of action and that this (i.e. the recent statement from Macpherson’s camp) may not be the last we hear of this issue. I sincerely hope that this is the case. Here is an excerpt from my response email:

“It is my hope that the issue is not left to rest and that such a potentially high-profile incident should serve as a springboard to heighten awareness of rhinoceros conservation and indeed conservation in general.”

The second response was far more infuriating. It should be noted that I emailed this organisation following the disappointing responses from others. In my email, I stated:

“I would hope that your organisation might be able to publicise this story where others have sadly and disappointingly failed.”

Unfortunately, the organisation in question informed me that they are not currently working with rhinos and so would be unable to help, though they did provide me with contacts for possible assistance (all of which I had already pursued). The particularly galling thing about this response was that at no point in my email had I requested they begin a rhinoceros project. From the quote above it is clear that my intention was to heighten the profile of the story. In the same email, I stated:

“What hope for us when models taking drugs [is] front-page news but models partaking of internationally illegal substances derived from protected species does not even warrant a mention.”

Allow me to paraphrase thus: What hope for us when an environmental organisation is unwilling to publicly rebuke a high-profile celebrity and seize the opportunity to further promote conservation?

I despair.

Update – 13/07/10

There was a little more to that press release, including one paragraph which I feel that I should include here:

“I am going to redouble my efforts because of this Twitter incident. The WWF has a list of all the protected species that are under threat and I would urge everyone to look that up and see what brilliant work they are doing.”

And, to quote my reponse to the sender of that little bit of information:

“While I must admit to being extremely skeptical (I have trouble accepting it was merely ‘banter’ and the claim for her statement being taken out of context is bizarre as the question and answer, and indeed those immediately preceding them were pretty simple and explicit) I sincerely hope that she delivers on her commitment to redouble her efforts; such a high-profile supporter of conservation initiatives would be a valuable asset.

Perhaps a conservation organisation could hold her to that commitment and use her in a campaign. “

---

[1] Witter: Elle MacPherson. The Sunday Times. [online]

[2] Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). (2010). Appendices I, II and III. [online]

[3] Kay, R. (2010). Elle’s beastly beauty secret. Mail Online. [online]

[4] Stv (2010). Elle Machpherson statement: star denies using banned animal products. [online]