Photo 8.1
Basking Malachite Damselfly Chlorolestes apricans (Endangered) a localized endemic from the Eastern Cape, South Africa, was on the verge of extinction, but raising its profile is now leading to conservation action.
Photo: © Michael Samways.
Most threats to biodiversity are the result of human actions, and human actions alone can prevent many species from becoming extinct. This section provides an overview of the main types of responses that can be applied to the conservation of the world's species, with a focus on those at greatest risk of extinction. It is mostly based on information on conservation measures required or in place for each species, collected through the Red List assessment process. Here, five broad groups of conservation responses are considered:
Research action, which provides the knowledge on which other conservation responses are based;
Communication and education, which creates the public awareness needed to support most conservation practice, and the human capacity required for implementing it;
Policy-based actions, fundamental to provide the institutional support, human and financial resources, and legal framework required for effective species conservation;
Habitat and site-based actions, which protect species in their natural habitats; and
Species-based actions, addressing species-specific threats and conservation needs required for ensuring the species' long-term persistence.
This section discusses conservation responses in relation to the IUCN Red List, and does not attempt to be a comprehensive analysis of each of these types of responses. Only preliminary data are available on the extent of conservation responses required by species, and even less exists on which conservation responses are already in place. Such data, and consequently the information provided in this section, are highly biased towards the better-assessed groups (birds and amphibians).
The Red List Programme does not endorse any particular conservation responses discussed in this section, as these need to be decided on a case-by-case basis. In practice, most species require not one but a combination of several responses that adequately address the species' particular ecological requirements and the specific threats affecting it. Naturally, not all conservation responses are equally effective to all species, and some take longer to produce effects than others. Understanding which responses work best with particular species and threats is thus critical to informing conservation decisions in the face of scarce conservation resources, but the effectiveness of conservation responses has thus far been poorly documented. A notable exception is a 2004 review of 5,500 key actions proposed for 1,186 threatened birds in 2000 (BirdLife International 2000; Figure 8.1). This revealed that 67% of these species have had at least some of these actions implemented (as determined from a review by a worldwide network of over 100 experts), even though the full set of proposed actions has been undertaken for only 5% of the species, and for at least 17% of the species no action has been carried out. However, not all of the actions implemented have already benefited species directly: for only 24% of globally threatened bird species this has been the case, by mitigating threats or through inferred or measured effects on population size, trends and productivity. For 26% of the species, the action has had no direct benefit yet, and for the remaining 17% of species where one or more actions have been implemented, the effects are unknown. Actions that have not directly benefited species have not necessarily been ineffective, as some involve essential research (which paves the way for effective conservation management) and some take time to produce noticeable effects.
Conservation action frequently needs to be tailored to the specific circumstances affecting particular species. It is thus more effective if supported by adequate knowledge on the species (taxonomy, biology and ecology, population numbers and trends, range, and habitat status), on the threats affecting the species, and the most effective measures for addressing those threats. Although the IUCN Red List is biased towards the better-studied groups and regions, many species already assessed by the Red List still require substantial improvement in the knowledge base to support effective conservation action.
The Red List Category Data Deficient (DD) is assigned to a species when there is inadequate information to make a direct, or indirect, assessment of its risk of extinction based on its distribution and/or population status (IUCN 2001). There are currently 3,580 species listed on the IUCN Red List as DD (see Tables 2.2 and 2.3), including 2,882 animals and 698 plants. These figures demonstrate that even for the best-known taxonomic groups there are still substantial numbers of species lacking even the basic information needed to determine their threat status. Data Deficient species are mainly concentrated in regions with high biodiversity that have been poorly studied (as is the example with amphibians in Figure 8.2). Similarly, 23% (18 out of 78) of DD birds are found in the very poorly studied New Guinea region. Our understanding of the distribution of many Data Deficient species is tempered by records of specimens collected only once (e.g., many species of gerbil Gerbillus in North Africa), some of which might not be valid species. However, many DD species might well be threatened, and therefore in need of conservation attention. Consequently, DD species, and the regions where they occur, are priorities for research action (though not necessarily for immediate conservation action). Having said this, a map of DD species does not necessarily highlight the areas that are the least known (especially in very poorly known groups and regions), as it does not account for undescribed species.
Figure 8.1
The extent and effectiveness of conservation actions underway for globally threatened birds (source: BirdLife International 2004b). (a) Level of implementation of the 5,500 key actions proposed for 1,186 globally threatened birds in 2000 (BirdLife International 2000). (b) Effect of the actions implemented in benefiting the species' conservation status.
Photo 8.2
The Indian Ocean Bottlenose Dolphin Tursiops aduncus (pictured here) was only recently recognized as being distinct from the Bottlenose Dolphin T. truncatus. But due to the muddled taxonomy, widespread distribution ranges and considerable overlap in occurrence, both species are listed as Data Deficient until greater clarity is obtained.
Photo: © Vic Peddemors.
Figure 8.2
Global distribution map of Data Deficient amphibian species, mapped as the number of species per square degree cell. Note: this map is only an approximation, as for most DD species extent of occurrence is poorly known; this map does not include the 90 DD species whose range is unknown.
Figure 8.3
Research actions: (a) needed and in place for all species and for all threatened species of amphibians; and (b) needed for globally threatened birds.
For the other non DD species on the IUCN Red List, there are at least some data on which the status assessment was based. In many cases, however, this information is very limited, and further research is urgently needed to guide conservation actions aimed at improving species' conservation status. For amphibians, for example, 97% of all threatened species need research action, but for only 9% of the species is some action already in place (though the reliability of these numbers is low). For birds, research action is needed for 92% of all globally threatened species (Figure 8.3). Most species in need of research action require baseline information on their population numbers and range (fundamental to guiding in situ conservation action, establishing baselines for monitoring), and knowledge of the species' population and range trends (critical for the application of the IUCN Red List Criteria). Monitoring of range and population trends is frequently needed, and this will contribute directly to the development of biodiversity indicators (see Section 4; Butchart et al. in press a and b). Many species lack basic data on biology and ecology needed to understand habitat requirements, capacity for population recovery, dispersal ability, and vulnerability to environmental change. In some cases, further research is needed to clarify the taxonomic status of species, which may reveal currently unknown species that face high extinction risk (Figure 8.3). Better data are frequently needed on the threats affecting species' populations and on the effectiveness of conservation measures (e.g., the threats responsible for drastic declines in amphibian species in many parts of the world, and adequate conservation responses; Collins and Storfer 2003; Kiesecker et al. 2003).
Increased stewardship of natural resources is urgently needed, not only in the communities in direct contact with particular threatened species, or inhabitants of cities in those countries holding these species, but worldwide. Indeed, most of the ultimate causes of species' declines lie in patterns of consumption of people living in distant parts of the world. Communication and education actions (e.g., Box 8.1) are fundamental to promoting responsible decisions. These include: recognizing and being willing to pay higher prices for products (such as wood) and services (such as tourism) obtained in ways that promote habitat protection; reducing patterns of over-consumption; providing public support for policies that promote conservation; and providing private support to conservation action. Zoos, aquariums and botanical gardens play an important role in raising the public awareness and understanding of the threats and conservation needs of threatened species (Miller et al. 2004). Effective conservation action requires adequate technical capacity, which is frequently lacking in those parts of the world that need it the most. Local technical capacity is fundamental to: the collection and interpretation of data on the conservation status of, and threats to, species; supporting decisions on effective conservation responses; and guiding the implementation of conservation programmes. Capacity development also includes institutional strengthening, the development of legal and policy frameworks, and ensuring that a variety of stakeholders have an active role in decisionmaking on protected areas and their management (Carabias and Rao 2003).
Photo 8.3
Botanical gardens play a major role in educating the public about threatened plants and the need to conserve them.
Photo: © Craig Hilton-Taylor.
The IUCN Red List plays an important role in many of these communication and education processes. As a reliable standard for the identification of globally threatened species, it is an invaluable tool for efforts aimed at raising awareness for the need to conserve species and their habitats. The more than 120 Specialist Groups and Task Forces of the IUCN Species Survival Commission (IUCN/SSC), which provide the bulk of the Red List data, contribute directly to local capacity building and raising awareness. The IUCN/SSC Action Plans synthesize the available information on species threat status and provide guidance for future conservation action.
A good example of community education and awareness playing an important role is in the conservation of the Critically Endangered Yellow-eared Parrot Ognorhynchus icterotis and the Vulnerable Wax Palm Ceroxylon quindiuense on which the Parrot depends for nesting and roosting. Wax palms are traditionally cut down to adorn processions and churches throughout the Colombian Andes each Palm Sunday (one week before Easter Sunday). Fundación ProAves, a Colombian Non-Governmental Organization, has successfully been working with the Roman Catholic Church to support alternatives to cutting down wax palms for adorning traditional processions, in addition to an intensive environmental awareness campaign nationwide. ProAves also helped to establish an ecological group, “Friends of Nature”, which distributed palm and parrot posters, held musical concerts and theatre productions, and worked on capacity-building of the local police.
Photos 8.4, 8.5 and 8.6
Conservation action is addressing some of the key issues but the future of the yellow-eared Parrot Ognorhynchus icterotis (Critically Endangered) remains extremely uncertain.
Photo: © Fundacion ProAves - www.proaves.org.
Based on information provided by Paul Salaman
Policy-based actions are essential for providing the institutional support, human and financial resources, and legal framework required to ensure effective species conservation. Frequently, such actions occur through the development and implementation of legislation at the national or sub-national levels, or through international agreements (Table 8.1; Figure 8.4). Legislation is sometimes directed at the protection of particular species, such as by regulating the harvesting of individuals (e.g., Convention for the Regulation of Whaling; Table 8.1 and Box 8.2), their trade (e.g., CITES; Figure 8.5), or alterations in their habitat (e.g., Ramsar Convention; Table 8.1). Legislation can also promote habitat protection, most noticeably through the creation of protected areas: 241 countries or territories are recognized by the 2004 World Database on Protected Areas as having officially designated protected areas of some type (WDPA Consortium 2004). Legislation may also protect habitat by regulating land use patterns at a broader scale (e.g., Brazil's Forest Code; Table 8.1), or through the regulation of anthropogenic activities that are frequently the least direct but most pervasive causes of species declines (e.g., pollution generated by industry, transport leading to the introduction of invasive species, consumption of fossil fuels leading to climate change; Table 8.1).
The role of multilateral environmental agreements (Table 8.1; Figure 8.4) has grown during the last decade, as human impacts intensify and span across national boundaries more often. There are now more than 500 international treaties that concern the environment, and most countries have ratified key international treaties (although significant gaps remain). These agreements are a means to adopt harmonized approaches and resolve trans-boundary problems with neighbouring states. They increasingly offer access to worldwide knowledge, tools and financial resources, and they can give conservation agencies a stronger mandate domestically (Steiner et al. 2003). Nevertheless, most conservation action takes place at the national level, and the national legal framework remains crucial in the effective implementation of the vast majority of conservation programmes (Table 8.1). Naturally, legislation is only useful if adequately implemented, and such implementation is lacking in many cases.
Policy-based actions are frequently implemented as a top-down approach, but their effectiveness is in many cases hindered by a lack of involvement with the local communities that are the direct users of biodiversity resources, and by inadequate financial resources for their implementation. Community management promotes a stewardship of the natural resources, particularly when complemented by the development of adequate livelihood alternatives. Outstanding examples of community management can be found in the web site of the Equator Initiative (http://www.undp.org/equatorinitiative/index.htm), a United Nations Development Programme initiative designed to reduce poverty through the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in the equatorial belt by fostering, supporting and strengthening community partnerships. One of those examples is Torra Conservancy, a community-based conservancy covering 352,000 hectares of land in the Kunene region of northwestern Namibia, which has established sustainable hunting and eco-tourism activities that have earned significant profits for the entire community.
Photo 8.7
All cycads are listed on Appendices I or II of CITES. The endemic Chinese cycad Cycas panzhihuanensis (Near Threatened), although still abundant, is rapidly declining due to habitat loss and collection for the horticultural trade.
Photo: © John S. Donaldson.
Table 8.1
Examples of national legislation and international agreements for the conservation of particular species, for the protection of sites or habitats, and for the regulation of activities that can pose threats to biodiversity. Dates correspond to the date when the agreement entered into force. For international agreements, there is an indication of whether their scope is universal (any country can ratify it) or regional. Note: many of these laws/agreements could be listed under two or more categories (e. g. , the European Union Habitats Directive simultaneously provides for the protection of species and sites/habitats, and for the regulation of activities).
Figure 8.4
Rate of ratification of the main international treaties that concern biodiversity conservation (source: BirdLife International 2004b): Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); Convention on Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar Convention); World Heritage Convention (WHC); UN Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD); United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC); Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); and Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS).
Exploitation of Southern Right Whales Eubalaena australis is traditionally supposed to have begun in the 1770s, when first American, and then British and French whalers moved into the South Atlantic. By 1850 they had removed an estimated 125,000–150,000 right whales in the Southern Hemisphere, and the population had declined to less than one-tenth of its original size. Despite this reduction, right whales only received protection in 1935, when a League of Nations agreement came into effect, by which time there may have been as few as 300 individuals left in the Southern Hemisphere. For decades a sighting of a Southern Right Whale was a rare event, but since the 1970s there have been encouraging signs of a recovery in a number of localities. Regular aerial surveys off Argentina, Australia and South Africa have recorded rates of increase of 7–8% a year, close to the maximum possible biologically (Best et al. 2001). In other localities, notably Namibia, New Zealand and Mozambique, signs of recovery have been slower in coming. Nevertheless, by 1997 there were an estimated 7,000 right whales in the Southern Hemisphere, or about one-eighth to one-tenth of original numbers. This is more southern right whales than at any time in the last 150 years.
Based on information provided by Peter Best, IUCN/SSC Cetacean Specialist Group
Figure 8.5
Current coverage of those amphibian species threatened by over-exploitation for international trade in Appendices I and II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Appendix I of CITES includes species threatened with extinction (trade permitted only when the purpose of the import is not commercial); Appendix II includes species not necessarily threatened with extinction, but for which trade must be controlled in order to avoid utilization incompatible with their survival. The Global Amphibian Assessment revealed 99 amphibian species that are adversely impacted by exploitation for the international trade, including 35 species that are globally threatened. Currently, only 36 of these species (16 of the globally threatened species) are listed on Appendices I or II of CITES.
Retaining viable populations in their native habitats is an essential conservation response for ensuring the long-term persistence of species (although such actions are frequently not sufficient on their own; e.g., Newmark 1996). Habitat and site-based conservation actions are needed for 73% of all amphibian species, 88% of the threatened amphibians, and 76% of the threatened birds. On the positive side, the Global Amphibian Assessment reported that some action is already in place for 65% of the threatened amphibians (Figure 8.6).
Photo 8.8
Leptopelis susanae (Endangered) is a treefrog that occurs only in the Gughe Mountains of southern Ethiopia, where it is threatened by forest clearance. It does not occur in any protected areas.
Photo: © Malcolm Largen.
Figure 8.6
Habitat and site-based conservation responses: (a) needed and in place for all species and for threatened species of amphibians; and (b) needed for globally threatened birds.
Habitat and site-based action frequently takes place by maintaining or conserving existing habitat, with the aim of preventing future habitat loss and degradation (the main threat to biodiversity; see section 6.2). In some cases, however, maintaining the quality of current habitat might not be sufficient, and habitat management is required to increase carrying capacity (e.g., control of brood parasites, for Kirtland's Warbler Dendroica kirtlandii, Box 8.3), or habitat restoration may be needed to recreate the conditions in which species can persist (e.g., eradication of invasive predators of the Rarotonga Monarch Pomarea dimidiata, Box 8.4).
The recent recovery of Kirtland's Warbler Dendroica kirtlandii illustrates the potential of active habitat management in securing populations of threatened species (Probst et al. 2003). The warbler's exacting requirements for breeding habitat – stands of young (5–23 years old) Jack Pine Pinus banksiana growing on well-drained soils– mean that its breeding range is confined to a small area in Michigan's Lower Peninsula, United States. Counts of singing males in 1951 and 1961 totalled 432 and 502 respectively, but this declined to 201 in 1971. A suite of measures was then put in place to stabilize the population.
These measures included the control of Brownheaded Cowbird Molothrus ater (a brood parasite of the warbler), annual population censuses, and active management of the species' Jack Pine habitats. The population remained relatively stable between 1971–1987, with suitable habitat regenerating after wildfires or management action apparently offset by ‘losses’ due to the increasing over-maturity of many older pine stands. However, following further management action and two large wildfires, the amount of suitably aged habitat doubled between 1987 and 1990, and the warbler population more than tripled between 1990 and 2000 in response. By 2000, the population had reached the maximum projected carrying capacity within its core breeding range (in Michigan's Lower Peninsula), with the number of peripheral breeding records (in Wisconsin and Michigan's Upper Peninsula) increasing over the same period.
Photo 8.9
Kirtland's Warbler Dendroica kirtlandii (Vulnerable).
Photo: © Dave Currie
Figure Box 8.3
As a result of intensive habitat management, the breeding population of Kirtland's Warbler more than tripled between 1990 and 2000.
Taken from BirdLife International (2004b)
The Rarotonga Monarch (or Kakerori) Pomarea dimidiata is endemic to the Pacific island of Rarotonga (in the Cook Islands). Although common in the mid- 1800s, the species subsequently declined rapidly, and following the collection of a few specimens in the early 1900s, was not recorded again until 1973. In 1983, 21 birds were discovered, and a survey in 1987 estimated the population to number 38 individuals, but declining (Robertson et al. 1994). A recovery plan was prepared in 1988, and implementation began later the same year. Intensive control of predators (particularly black rats Rattus rattus) reduced adult mortality from 24% to 9%, with nesting success increasing from 15% to 63% (Robertson et al. 1994). By 2000, the population had reached 221 individuals (see figure below), and in 2001 – 2003 30 young birds were transferred to the rat-free island of Atiu (200km northeast of Rarotonga) in an apparently successful attempt to establish a second ‘insurance’ population (H. Robertson and E. Saul in litt. 2004).
Figure Box 8.4
Intensive management has led to the recovery of Rarotonga Monarch (Endangered).
Taken from BirdLife International (2004b), and based on information provided by Hilary Aikman, Rod Hitchmough, Don Merton and Hugh Robertson (New Zealand Department of Conservation) and Ed Saul (Takitumu Conservation Area, Cook Islands)
Protected areas are areas of land and/or sea especially dedicated to the protection and maintenance of biological diversity, and of natural and associated cultural resources, and managed through legal or other effective means (IUCN 1994b). They are a major tool for habitat protection, and to create the conditions for effective habitat management and restoration. Most countries of the world have established networks of protected areas, with 11.5% of the global land area, but less than 0.5% of the world's oceans, under some type of formal protection (Chape et al. 2003). Existing protected areas make a valuable contribution to species conservation worldwide (Bruner et al. 2001), with many species now restricted to protected areas, having lost their habitat elsewhere (e.g., the Critically Endangered Pygmy Hog Sus salvanius, which had a previously extensive range in the Himalayan foothills and is now restricted to the Manas Sanctuary in India; Oliver and Roy 1993; see also Box 8.5 on the Southern White Rhinoceros Ceratotherium simum simum). In practice, however, protected areas have a wide diversity of legal status and management types (Brandon et al. 1998), and quite variable effectiveness in retaining their biodiversity values (Harcourt et al. 2001).
Moreover, there are many species not yet covered by any protected area: a global gap analysis revealed 1,486 species, including 846 threatened species, of mammals, birds, amphibians and freshwater turtles and tortoises not covered by protected areas in any part of their ranges (Table 8.2). These “gap species”, identified by overlaying the distribution maps of species with the 2004 World Database on Protected Areas, correspond to 13% of all species and 19.9% of all threatened species analysed. The number of gap species doubles if only protected areas of reasonable size (>1,000 ha) and of stricter conservation classifications (IUCN Protected Area Categories I-IV; IUCN 1994b) are considered (Table 8.2). It is noteworthy that the information on whether or not each amphibian species occurs in a protected area, provided by the Global Amphibian Assessment experts, indicates that a higher fraction of amphibians (33% of all species, 39% of all threatened species) are identified as gap species than by the methodology outlined by Rodrigues et al. (2004) (see Table 8.2 and Appendix 2h). Irrespective of the exact numbers, these results demonstrate that the global network of protected areas is still far from completed in terms of coverage of species, and even less so for the coverage of threatened species. The gap species are mainly concentrated in regions of high endemism in the world's tropical forests, particularly in montane regions and islands (Figure 8.7).
The Southern White Rhinoceros Ceratotherium simum simum, which had been fairly widespread throughout Namibia, Botswana, Zimbabwe, Mozambique and South Africa early in the nineteenth century, had by the turn of the twentieth century been reduced to two relict populations on the Zimbabwe-Mozambique border and in Umfolozi Game Reserve in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. The former became extinct, leaving the small population of 20-50 rhinos in Umfolozi Game Reserve, which was proclaimed in 1897, as the only ones left in the world. Afforded protection, numbers increased, and the population expanded into the adjoining Hluhluwe Game Reserve, and by 1960 there were at least 700 animals, possibly more as game counts in those days normally underestimated numbers. Within a year it had become both possible and necessary to capture animals for translocation to other reserves within their former range, and hence the Natal Parks Board's “Operation Rhino” was launched. Over the next 30 or so years, more than 4,500 white rhinos were moved out of the Hluhluwe- Umfolozi Park and other reserves in KwaZulu-Natal. Many have been donated to conservation authorities in especially Namibia, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Botswana and Mozambique, and since 1986 more than 1,000 have been sold, mainly by auction to the private sector. By 2002, the numbers of free-ranging southern white rhinos in Africa had increased to over 11,500 distributed between 250 populations in seven countries, of which about 11,000 were in South Africa. The Southern White Rhino is now listed as Near Threatened on the IUCN Red List. A quarter of Africa's Southern White Rhino population is privately owned, and it is an important contributor to the economic viability of the wildlife industry.
Photo 8.10
Southern White Rhinoceros Ceratotherium simum simum (Near Threatened).
Photo: © Craig Hilton-Taylor.
Based on information provided by Martin Brooks, IUCN/SSC African Rhino Specialist Group
Table 8.2
Numbers of species of mammals, turtles, amphibians and threatened birds whose ranges do not overlap any protected area, or which do not overlap any protected area larger than 1,000ha classified under IUCN Protected Area Categories I-IV (“gap species”). Values in parenthesis are the percentage of gap species analysed within a given taxonomic group. Values in italics are the estimates of the number of amphibian gap species obtained from the Global Amphibian Assessment database. For methods, see Appendix 2h and Rodrigues et al. 2004.
Figure 8.7
Density map of gap species of mammals, amphibians, freshwater turtles and tortoises, and threatened birds per half-degree cell, created by overlaying the ranges of all threatened species not covered by any protected area.
A finer-scale approach for investigating species coverage in protected areas is by mapping sites known to be essential for the persistence of each species and investigating their level of formal protection. As an example of the uses of the Red List, BirdLife International has been collecting this information through their Important Bird Area (IBA) programme. This programme seeks to locate, document and protect networks of sites (areas that can be delimited and, potentially, managed for conservation) critical for the conservation of the world's birds (e.g., Fishpool and Evans 2001). Of the 608 IBAs identified for the presence of globally threatened birds in Africa, 219 (36%) are not protected, highlighting 44 species (20% of the total number on Africa) not covered by protected areas (Figure 8.8a). Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) expand the IBA approach to other taxa (Eken et al. in press). A preliminary analysis of KBAs for eight taxa (mammals, birds, amphibians, freshwater fish, reptiles, arthropods, gastropods, and plants) in Madagascar revealed 91 unprotected sites, corresponding to 65% of the 141 sites identified thus far, and translating into 78 gap species (Figure 8.8b). The Alliance for Zero Extinction (AZE) (www.zeroextinction.org) has been mapping site occurrences of a particular subset of globally threatened species: those Critically Endangered (CR) or Endangered (EN) species that are restricted to single localities. Of the 595 AZE sites identified so far for mammal, bird, turtle, crocodile, iguana, amphibian, and conifer species, at least 257 (43%) are not protected, corresponding to 299 gap species (Figure 8.8c). Again, these numbers confirm that large fractions of the world's threatened species are lacking coverage in protected areas.
Investigating species coverage in protected areas is just a first step for assessing their effectiveness as conservation tools. Except for particular species/regions (e.g., Caro 2000; Sinclair et al. 2002), little information exists on the extent to which protected areas are affecting the overall conservation status of species. However, some insights can be obtained by comparing the coverage in protected areas for species with different population trends. We found a statistically significant association between species of amphibians that are gaps and species that are decreasing, while non-gap species are more likely to be stable or increasing than expected, but an opposite tendency for threatened birds (Table 8.3). These mixed results do not clarify whether protected areas are contributing to preventing species declines overall.
Table 8.3
Comparison of percentages of species with decreasing and stable/increasing populations for gap and non-gap species of amphibians and threatened birds. Amphibian gap species were identified through two methods (see Table 8.2): overlap between maps of species distributions and of protected areas (global gap analysis; Rodrigues et al. 2004) and through information from specialists (Global Amphibian Assessment). More gap species tend to be decreasing than would be expected by chance, while the tendency is for non-gap species to have higher percentages of stable or increasing species. For methods, see Appendix 2h.
Figure 8.8
Maps of the coverage of threatened species in protected areas and gaps in protection at the site scale; three examples: (a) African Important Bird Areas triggered by the presence of globally threatened bird species (Fishpool and Evans 2001; BirdLife International 2004b). (b) Key Biodiversity Areas of Madagascar triggered by the presence of globally threatened species of mammals, birds, amphibians, freshwater fish, reptiles, arthropods, gastropods and plants (preliminary unpublished data provided by Zo Lalaina Rakotobe, Luciano Andriamaro, Harison Rabarison, and Harison Randrianasolo). (c) Sites identified that are triggered by the occurrence of Critically Endangered or Endangered species that are restricted to a single site (www.zeroextinction.org; for 47 sites, protected status is unknown). In all cases, sites with partial protection are coded as “protected”.
Photo 8.11
The African Wild Dog Lycaon pictus (Endangered) has disappeared from much of its former range due to ongoing conflict with humans, infectious disease, and habitat fragmentation.
Photo: © Endangered Wildlife Trust.
For many species, habitat protection requires conservation action at a scale larger than that of single protected areas. This is the case for species with very large spatial requirements (e.g., the Endangered African Wild Dog Lycaon pictus, whose home ranges can extend beyond 2,000km2, larger than 95% of protected areas in Africa; Woodroffe et al. in press), migratory species (e.g., the Critically Endangered Atlantic Sturgeon Acipenser sturio; Beamesderfer and Farr 1997), and species predicted to suffer substantial range shifts due to climate change (e.g., several threatened species of Proteaceae in South Africa; Midgley et al. 2003; see Box 6.3). For these species, in situ conservation requires the establishment of networks of protected areas, adequately connected though a matrix of favourable habitat that allows for species movement through, and persistence in, the broader landscape.
In many cases, habitat protection on its own is not sufficient, and direct intervention is required to mitigate or eliminate specific threats to species. Ex situ conservation (through captive breeding/artificial propagation) can offer insurance against extinctions by providing a source population for future re-introductions or reinforcement of wild populations. Currently, there are 36 species of animals and 25 species of plants classified as Extinct in the Wild (e.g., Box 8.6), and for which any chance of recovery requires a combination of ex situ conservation, recovery of the conditions required for species' persistence in natural habitats, and successful reintroductions (provided suitable habitat exists and/or threats have ceased). Captive breeding combined with reintroductions or population reinforcement have already prevented many species from becoming extinct (e.g., the Mallorcan Midwife Toad Alytes muletensis, Box 8.7; and the Black-footed Ferret Mustela nigripes, Box 8.8), and might be particularly pertinent for the conservation of several species of Asian freshwater turtles and tortoises, currently over-exploited as local food sources and for the international trade (van Dijk et al. 2000). Ex situ conservation might also be the only measure currently available for preventing the extinction of many amphibian species that are suffering drastic declines (Young et al. 2001; see section 6.5). The Global Amphibian Assessment identified this as a required measure for 201 (11%) of the globally threatened species.
Translocation is another species-based action that has been crucial in rescuing species from extinction. These can be either re-introductions into previous habitat from where the species has been lost (e.g., Southern White Rhinoceros; Box 8.5) or benign introductions into areas of suitable habitat that have not been previously colonized by the species (e.g., translocation of Rarotonga Monarch and Black Robin individuals to predator-free islands; Boxes 8.4 and 8.9).
Species threatened by over-exploitation typically require conservation measures that either prevent or discourage harvesting (e.g., trade control through CITES; Table 8.1), or promote sustainable use. The latter may involve harvest management (e.g., Whiskery Shark; Box 8.10) or commercialization of farmed individuals (e.g., crocodile farming in Papua New Guinea and Cuba; Ross 1998) to reduce pressure on wild populations. The capture, shearing and release of wild Vicuñas Vicugna vicugna in the Southern Andes is an example of an ancient method of sustainable use (Torres 1992). Many species may benefit from well-managed programmes of non-consumptive uses, particularly tourism (e.g., marine turtles, Tisdell and Wilson 2002; and gorillas, McNeilage et al. 2001).
Formerly common growing below St. Helena's central ridge at 500–750m, the endemic Redwood Trochetiopsis erythroxylon grew with a tall straight trunk to a height of 6 metres, with a hard reddish-brown wood and large white pendant, campanulate flowers flushing pink when fading. It was the tree preferred by early settlers of the island for building and was also used extensively for tanning. Early in the 18th century within 60 years of the island being settled, it had become extremely rare. By 1875, the Redwood was reduced to just 17 or 18 trees, two in the wild and the rest cultivated in gardens. It finally became Extinct in the Wild around 1960 when the last tree at High Peak died.
The story for the past 40 years is no less harrowing. The Redwoods derived from this single tree were frail and prone to die-back, with older trees not attaining a height of more than 2.5m. Eight trees were planted around the island in private gardens, which prevented crosspollination and further eroded the gene pool when individuals died without propagation. Recent glass house experiments provided direct proof that the Redwood is suffering from inbreeding depression, which has a severe effect on fitness (Rowe 1995). In 2003, over 300 Redwoods (the largest number of Redwoods the island has known for over three centuries), were established in a small plot of private land below the central ridge. There is considerable difference in the growth and vigour of the individuals, which indicates that fitness can to a certain extent (to what extent is not known at this stage) be rescued by crossing. A further obstacle to the survival of this species comes in the form of a tiny, probably endemic, Tineid moth whose larvae bore into living wood. How severe an effect it will have on future re-introduction efforts is yet to be seen. For now the goal must be to maximize out-breeding to try to recover the vigour indicated by historic descriptions. With continuity of effort we might be successful in keeping Redwoods alive within their historic range but the successful reintroduction of the St. Helena Redwood can only be judged by generations to come when it is reinstated in stature and successfully regenerating.
Photo 8.12
St. Helena Redwood Trochetiopsis erythroxylon (Critically Endangered).
Photo: © Rebecca Cairns-Wicks.
Based on information provided by Rebecca Cairns-Wicks, IUCN/SSC South Atlantic Islands Plant Specialist Group
The Mallorcan Midwife Toad Alytes muletensis was originally described in 1977 from fossil remains found on the island of Mallorca, in the Balearic Islands of Spain. In 1979, living tadpoles and small toads of this species were first discovered in the remote, narrow limestone gorges of the Sierra de Tramuntana mountains in the north of the island.
In all, a total of 13 separate breeding populations were discovered; combined, these contained an estimated world population of 1,000 to 3,000 animals.
Both fossil and subfossil remains of this species suggest that it was widespread over much of Mallorca until about 2,000 years ago. The species then greatly declined following the introduction to the island of the predatory Viperine Snake Natrix maura and the competitive Green Frog Rana perezi. More recently, the species has suffered from habitat loss through the overextraction of water from the streams in which it breeds. In view of the severe population fragmentation and continuing decline of the already small global population of this species, it was listed as Critically Endangered in the 1996 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals.
During 1985, a captive-breeding programme was initiated for the toad; this had the specific aim of providing animals for re-introduction at suitable release sites. The first re-introductions took place in 1989, and following these initial releases the species was re-introduced into several more sites. In addition to the reintroduction process, conservation measures were undertaken to assist in the recovery of the existing wild populations (Burley and Garcia 1997).
The re-introductions and associated habitat creation and management programmes have been very successful. Both the range and number of populations of the Mallorcan Midwife Toad have moderately, but constantly, increased. While the current, successful recovery programme will probably need to be continued indefinitely, the conservation status of the species is considered to have improved so much that it has been listed as Vulnerable on the 2004 IUCN Red List.
Photo 8.14
The Bwindi population of the Mountain Gorilla Gorilla beringei in Uganda (this population is Critically Endangered while the species as a whole is Endangered) benefits from tourism.
Photo: © Jean-Christophe Vié.
Based on information provided by Joan Mayol Serra, Richard Griffiths and Neil Cox
The Black-footed Ferret Mustela nigripes, one of North America's rarest mammals, depends on an endangered ecosystem for survival. Prairie dogs Cynomys spp., keystone species of this ecosystem and the ferrets' main prey, have been seriously decimated over the last century. Black-footed ferrets were considered to be Extinct in the Wild in 1985, when the last known free-ranging population collapsed due to an epizootic of canine distemper, combined with a widespread epidemic of sylvatic plague. In an effort to save the species, all freeranging ferrets remaining in the wild (18 animals), were brought into captivity. As a result of effective captive breeding and re-introduction programmes, and a certain amount of good fortune, black-footed ferrets are making a come-back from the brink of extinction. Since 1987, almost 5,000 kits have been born in captivity and more than 1,800 ferrets have been released in the wild steppes of North America. Re-introduction efforts began in 1991 and, to date, black-footed ferrets have been released into prairie dog complexes of Wyoming, South Dakota, Montana, Arizona, Colorado, Utah, and Mexico.
Adaptation of significant research findings into management techniques has notably enhanced recovery efforts. Since 1998, and for the first time since the initiation of the Black-footed Ferret recovery programme, there were more black-footed ferrets in the wild (approximately 400 adults and juveniles) than there were in captivity. The current programme direction focuses on identifying and developing more effective and cost-efficient breeding and re-introduction techniques, and on preserving and managing habitat that can support large, widely distributed prairie dog complexes of all prairie dog species. The successful re-establishment of black-footed ferrets will help increase awareness of prairie dog conservation needs and, consequently, all other species that depend on this ecosystem will benefit from efforts to recover this very seriously threatened carnivore.
Photo 8.13
Black-footed Ferret Mustela nigripes (currently listed as Extinct in the Wild, but is pending reassessment).
Photo: © Dean Biggins.
Based on information provided by Astrid Vargas
The Black Robin Petroica traversi is endemic to the Chatham Islands (New Zealand). The spectacular rescue of this species from its tiny refuge on Little Mangere Island is one of the most remarkable successes in species conservation (Butler and Merton 1992; Aikman et al. 2001). Following human settlement of the islands, black robins declined rapidly as their forest habitat was lost and degraded, and due to predation by introduced rats and cats. In 1976, when the population had declined to just seven birds, the remaining individuals were relocated to nearby Mangere Island, where 120,000 trees had been planted to provide suitable habitat. Nevertheless, by 1980, numbers had fallen to five (four males and a single female) – the smallest population of any bird species for which precise figures were known at the time. Nest protection, supplementary feeding, and a cross-fostering programme (with the congeneric Tomtit P. macrocephala) were then established, and the population began to recover steadily. Individuals were later introduced to South East Island, and by 1989 the population had topped 100 individuals (Butler and Merton 1992), at which point management ceased. The population continued to rise until carrying capacity was reached in the late 1990s, since when it has been stable at around 250 birds (D. Merton in litt. 2004).
Figure Box 8.9
Intensive management has led to the recovery of the Black Robin (Endangered).
Taken from BirdLife International (2004b), and based on information provided by Don Merton
Responses preventing the spread of infectious agents or parasites (e.g., quarantine regulations and the control of ships' ballast water; Table 8.1) are fundamental in reducing such threats. However, responses that address the disease agents/parasites directly are becoming more pertinent as increasing numbers of globally threatened species are being affected by disease (see Sections 3.8 and 6.5). Such responses include vaccination (e.g., against the morbillivirus that affected the Critically Endangered Mediterranean Monk Seal Monachus monachus, Osterhaus et al. 1998; against rabies for the Endangered African Wild Dog Lycaon pictus, Woodroffe 2001), but also the removal of the affected individuals, removal of other disease hosts/reservoirs, reduction of connectivity between affected and healthy populations, provision of medicine, and translocation of healthy individuals to captivity or to places non-affected by the disease.
Whiskery sharks Furgaleus macki, have been caught in commercial fisheries in Western Australia since the 1940s. In the early years, longline fisheries captured small numbers, but introduction of multifilament gillnets in the 1960s increased catches. Concerns about mercury levels in sharks in the mid-1970s saw a reduction in catches for a few years. However, once these concerns were addressed and dedicated wellequipped shark fishing vessels entered the fishery, levels of fishing effort and catches rose dramatically. The late 1970s and early 1980s saw the Whiskery Shark population reduced to approximately 30% of preharvest levels. In the mid-1980s Western Australia introduced management to the gillnet fishery, restricting levels of fishing effort, and taking other management measures (Simpfendorfer and Donohue 1998). Since then Whiskery Shark abundance has remained relatively stable at 30–40% of pre-harvest over a period of 12 years (approximately two generations) (Simpfendorfer et al. 2000). The final phase of management measures was implemented in 2000/01 and early indications are that there have been significant and steady increases in the species' abundance in the centre of its range for the last 4–5 years, that the size of mature females has begun to increase, and that a 'pulse' of young adult whiskery sharks is currently recruiting into the fishery. To ensure the continued recovery of this stock, two-month closures of significant portions of the species range within the target fishery are being considered to further reduce adult mortality and boost recruitment. Continued management of the fishery has maintained Whiskery Shark abundance at this lower level and should lead to a gradual recovery of the stock in the short to medium term.
Based on information provided by Colin Simpfendorfer and Rory McAuley, IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist Group
Globally threatened species frequently require a combination of conservation responses to ensure their continued survival, encompassing research, species-specific actions, site and habitat based actions, policy responses, and communication and education.
While many species already receive some conservation attention, many others do not, and the majority require substantially greater action to improve their status.
Species can be, and many already have been, saved from extinction. However, this requires a combination of sound research, careful coordination of efforts, and, in some cases, intensive management.
Improving the effectiveness of conservation action requires a better understanding of the needs for such action across species, the extent to which it is being applied, and the effects it has had in preventing species extinctions.
The IUCN Red List information can be used in many different ways as a conservation tool. The Red List can be used to: provide information on the conservation status of individual species; guide the listing of individual species in national or international legislation; aid in conservation planning and priority setting; help to identify priority species for conservation action and recovery planning; and support educational programmes.