2016 Evaluation of Pas and TB in Wildlife

Management Evaluation of Protected Areas

Tuberculosis in Captive and Free-Ranging Wildlife

8 – 11 February 2016

17th Sharjah International Conservation Forum for Arabia’s Biodiversity

Management Evaluation of Protected Areas; Tuberculosis in Captive and Free-Ranging Wildlife

8-11 February 2016

Compiled by Philip Seddon1, Mike Knight2, David Mallon3, Jane Budd4, Gerhard Steenkamp5 and Sarah May6

Organised by Environment and Protected Areas Authority (EPAA) Government of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates

1 Department of Zoology, University of Otago PO Box 56, Dunedin, New Zealand Email: [email protected]

2 Park Planning and Development, South African National Parks Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Summerstrand Campus PO Box 7700, Port Elizabeth 6031, South Africa Email: [email protected]

3 Manchester Metropolitan University, UK, & IUCN/SSC Conservation Planning Sub-Committee Email: [email protected]

4 Breeding Centre for Endangered Arabian Wildlife Email: [email protected]

5 Department of Companion Animal Clinical Studies, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria South Africa Email: [email protected]

6 Environmental Consultant Email: [email protected] 17th Sharjah International Conservation Forum for Arabia’s Biodiversity

Recommended citation: EPAA (2018). 17th Sharjah International Conservation Forum for Arabia’s Biodiversity. Environment and Protected Areas Authority, Sharjah, UAE.

Reproduction of this publication for educational, conservation or other non-profit purposes is authorised without prior written permission from the copyright holder provided the source is fully acknowledged. Reproduction of this publication for sale or other commercial purposes is prohibited without prior written permission of the copyright holder. The designation of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of the material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of EPAA or other participating organisations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of EPAA or other participating organisations.

Cover photo: © Sarah May Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I

PROTECTED AREAS AND PLANNING THEME 1

Country Protected Areas Network Updates 1

Introduction 1

Method 1

Results 4

Protected areas network. 4

What is wild 15

Conclusion 17

References and Further Reading 17 Appendix 1: IUCN Protected Areas Categories System 18

Appendix 2: Arabian Peninsula Habitats 19

VETERINARY THEME 20

Tuberculosis in Captive and Free-Ranging Wildlife – An Overview 20

Introduction 20

Diagnosing tuberculosis in wildlife 20

Species specific considerations 22

Tuberculosis treatment of wildlife 22 Research Necropsy Report Form 24

Capture Myopathy 30

Introduction 30

The capture myopathy disease complex 30

Conclusion 31

PARTICIPANT LIST 33

i Figures

Figure 1 The frequency (N = 65) of opinion of what size of protected area that would support a wild population of Arabian oryx. 15

Figure 2 The frequency (N = 69) of opinion of the degree of intensity of management that would be acceptable in supporting a wild population of Arabian oryx. 15

Figure 3 The average (+ SD) score of what size of protected area would support a wild population of Arabian oryx by respondent occupation category. 16

Figure 4 The average (+ SD) score of what intensity of management would be acceptable for a wild population of Arabian oryx, by respondent occupation category. 16

Figure 5 The three stages of stress. 31 Tables

Table 1 Example of a Protected Areas Data Sheet. 3

Table 2 Summary of status of protected areas in the Arabian Peninsula, inclusive of Iraq and Syria. 4

Table 3 Summary file of status of protected areas in the Arabian Peninsula. 5

ii Executive Summary The 17th Sharjah International Conservation Forum for Arabia’s Biodiversity (SICFAB) was held at the Breeding Centre for Endangered Arabian Wildlife in Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, on 8– 11 February 2016. This regional forum brought together over 150 participants representing UAE, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Yemen, Oman, Qatar and Iraq, as well as from the UK, USA, South Africa, Italy and New Zealand. The Sharjah workshops are hosted by the Environment and Protected Areas Authority of the Government of Sharjah, under the patronage of H.H. Sheikh Dr Sultan bin Mohammed al Qasimi, Member of the Supreme Council and Ruler of Sharjah. The forum had three major themes: 1. Species assessment theme. The species assessment theme conducted a review of the distribution and conservation status of all mammals in the Arabian region. Two working groups assessed the conservation status of all species (>160) of terrestrial mammals in the Arabian region, the Arabian Peninsula and Syria and Iraq. A third working group reviewed the status and distribution of the 22 species of marine mammals in the Arabian region, the first time this exercise has been undertaken. The regional Red List assessment for both terrestrial and marine mammals will be published under the auspices of the IUCN and is not part of this report. 2. Protected areas and planning theme. The protected areas and planning theme worked in conjunction with the mammal assessments to compile an up-to-date register of all biodiversity of protected areas in the region to facilitate an evaluation of current mammal protection and future needs. A comprehensive compilation of summary data on biodiversity in protected areas was completed. Over 150 protected areas were identified, and the boundaries of key areas were mapped to facilitate a gap analysis of current and future conservation needs for threatened mammals. 3. Veterinary theme. The veterinary theme addressed the issue of wild ungulate disease diagnosis and management, with an emphasis on tuberculosis, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, and was expanded to consider the complications associated with mass game capture and the use of short- and long-acting tranquilisers. The veterinary delegates discussed disease surveillance of important zoonotic diseases and accurate diagnosis of M. tuberculosis in wildlife species in the Middle East. The focus was to facilitate discussion of disease occurrence within the region and to equip the attendees with a good understanding of diagnostic pitfalls surrounding the testing and interpretation of M. tuberculosis screening. Capture myopathy was also discussed in more detail, building on from introductory lectures presented at the 2015 workshop and introducing important recent research into this poorly understood but preventable complex.

i Protected Areas and Planning Theme Dr Mike H. Knight & Prof Philip J. Seddon

Country Protected Areas Network Updates

Introduction The protected areas and planning theme focused on consolidating the most comprehensive list of protected areas on the Arabian Peninsula to date. There has been a pressing need for such a list given the growth in the number of protected areas, their importance in the conservation of the region’s biodiversity, and the increasing threats that the region’s protected areas face. This review complimented the IUCN Red Listing revision of the region’s mammal species. An important consideration kept in mind throughout the workshop was the fact that many of the larger mammalian species are confined to protected areas, most of which are either fenced or confined through human activities, and this may affect the viability and wildness of these populations. There has been considerable debate around what constitutes wild animal populations. Stanley- Price & Mallon (2013) have defined wild populations as populations of species that persist in viable numbers in representative parts of their indigenous ranges, in dynamic and resilient ecosystems, over spatial and temporal scales that allow natural selection to take place, with minimal human interference. The individual perception of what constitutes a wild population can also be affected by personal and professional focus, exposure and knowledge of the diversity of types, sizes, and management intensity of specific protected areas in the Arabian Peninsula. Delegates to the 17th SICFAB were polled for their understanding of what constitutes a wild population.

Method 1. Protected areas network – Prior to the meeting, delegates were requested to complete a data sheet for the protected areas within their area (Table 1, together with its two Appendices). This collated the latest information on the status, classification, proclamation, size, as well as information on the objectives, threats, and main activities of each protected area in the Arabian Peninsula (including Iraq and Syria). In addition, the latest spatial data on protected area boundaries was collated to facilitate a gap analysis of the importance of reserve networks for mammal conservation across the Arabian Peninsula. Delegates with knowledge of the protected areas of the regions were asked to verify some of information during the course of the meeting. 2. What is wild – The opinion of when a species (the example used was a large ungulate such as the Arabian oryx) is considered wild was assessed through a questionnaire provided to delegates during the meeting. The questionnaire sought to investigate two aspects associated with wildness: the degree of confinement and the intensity of management. For the degree of confinement delegates were asked to indicate what size of area would, in their opinion, be sufficiently large to support a wild population of Arabian oryx. The sizes classes were: <1; 1-10; 11-100; 101-1 000; 1 001-10 000 km2; and up to an unfenced area. The intensity of management was assessed by indicating on a scale ranging from captive managed, intensively managed, lightly managed, conservation dependent, to self-sustaining.

These categories were defined in relation to Arabian oryx as: 1. Captive Managed: Management interventions that provide food, care, and breeding for individual animals that are entirely reliant on humans. 2. Intensively Managed: Almost fully reliant on direct human intervention, such as ongoing provision of food and water. 3. Lightly Managed: Intermittent long-term human management, such as provision of food and water during drought conditions only. 4. Conservation Dependent: Relying on conservation actions directed at extrinsic factors relating to human behaviour, e.g., ongoing anti-poaching patrols. 5. Self-sustaining: No conservation management interventions. Respondents were categorised by occupation into the following: Academic/scientist (SC); Administrator (AD), Curator (CU); Veterinarian (VE); Conservation Manager (CM); and Other (OT).

Source: Environment Agency – Abu Dhabi, Coordination Committee for the Conservation of the Arabian Oryx and IUCN/SSC Antelope Specialist Group (2010). Arabian Oryx Regional Conservation Strategy and Action Plan. EAD, General Secretariat for the conservation of the Arabian Oryx.

Table 1 Example of a Protected Areas Data Sheet. COUNTRY

Official name of protected area

Location (region &/or map reference)

Designation (IUCN Category or other; see Appendix 1)

Date of establishment Agreed Gazetted (distinguish between agreed and gazetted)

Management Authority

Protected Area Size (km2)

Major habitats (see Appendix 2)

Reason for designation

Date of most recent management plan

Staff numbers (approximate) Permanent Temporary

List two of the primary protected area objectives

Objective 1

Objective 2

List the top two most important threats to the protected area and indicate why these were selected

Threat 1

Threat 2

List the top two most critical management activities

Activity 1

Activity 2

Date assessment completed

Names of assessors

Results Protected areas network. A total of 182 protected areas were reviewed (Table 2). Of these, 41% have completed profiles, 19% are under review, and 40% have no data. There was considerable variation throughout the region in the quality of current data. An estimated total of 87 or 48% of the protected areas had some form of national gazetting. This also varied considerably between states. Data for Qatar, Syria, and for many of the UAE protected areas were incomplete. The list of protected areas in the Arabian Peninsula (inclusive of Syria and Iraq) is recorded in Table 3.

Table 2 Summary of status of protected areas in the Arabian Peninsula, inclusive of Iraq and Syria. Key: CO = Completed; UR = Under Review; ND = No Data

Status of reviews

Number Number % Estimated CO UR ND PAs gazetted gazetted area (km2)

Bahrain 6 2 3 1 2 33% 18.20

Iraq 4 4 0 0 4 100% 5 367.00

Jordan 19 17 0 2 15 79% 1 638.09

Kuwait 5 0 5 0 3 60% 366.71

Lebanon 8 8 0 0 8 100% 574.21

Oman 16 15 0 1 15 94% 9 270.66

Qatar 10 0 0 10 0 0% 0.00

Saudi Arabia 45 18 0 27 17 38% 90 282.34

Syria 12 0 0 12 0 0% 0.00

United Arab Emirates 48 11 20 17 18 38% 7 796.88

Yemen 9 0 7 2 5 56% 4 561.31

182 75 35 72 87 48% 119 875.41

41% 19% 40% 48%

Table 3 Summary file of status of protected areas in the Arabian Peninsula. Key: CO = Completed; UR = Under Review; ND = No Data

Country PA Name Sheet Status of International National Year Area (Km2) Digital Digital review (gazetted) degrees N degrees E

Al-Areen Wildlife Park and Nature Reserve 1981 5.33 26.003643 50.504313 CO Reserve Hawar Islands Nature Reserve 1995 CO (agreed) Bahrain Ras Sand Mangrove UR Nature Reserve ?

Tubli Bay UR Nature Reserve ? 12.47 26.179377 50.585770

Dohat Arad UR Nature Reserve ? 0.40 26.261343 50.626893

Bahrain / Mashtan Island 0.03 25.807565 50.682059 ND 5 Qatar?

Hawizeh Marsh ( Hour Al- 2008/02/01 1377.00 CO IUCN ,CMS Hawizeh)

Iraq Central Marsh CO IUCN ,CMS 01-Oct-15 2197.00 Hammar Marsh CO IUCN ,CMS 01-Oct-15 1788.00 Sawa Lake CO IUCN ,CMS 01-Sep-15 5.00 Azraq Wetland Reserve CO Ramsar IV 1987 9.04 31.828809 36.841145 Ajloun Forest Reserve IV 1987 6.77 32.382576 35.756191 CO (agreed) Al Khayouf Special Special conservation 2012 CO Conservation Area (agreed) Jordan Dana Biosphere Reserve CO II, IV BR 1993 291.45 30.697059 35.491313 Dibeen Forest Reserve IV 2004 8.60 32.236774 35.814006 CO (agreed) Fifa Nature Reserve Nature reserve 2011 26.12 30.957853 35.422281 CO (agreed) Mujib Biosphere Reserve CO UNESCO IV BR 2011 213.27 31.477437 35.615904

Country PA Name Sheet Status of International National Year Area (Km2) Digital Digital review (gazetted) degrees N degrees E

Qatar Nature Reserve CO IV 2011 109.54 29.903958 35.098586

Rahmah_Excluded ND 21.97 30.019366 35.194347

Rahmeh 53.39 30.024963 35.244921 ND

Shaumari Wildlife Reserve CO IV 1978 20.17 31.742304 36.780793

Tal Al Arbeen Special Special conservation 2013 CO Conservation Area (agreed) Wadi Ibn Hammad Special Special conservation 2013 64.52 31.302392 35.588038 CO Conservation Area (agreed) Wadi Rum Protected Area 2011 728.76 29.537263 35.394701 CO UNESCO WHS Jordan (agreed) 6

Yarmouk Forest Reserve CO Nature reserve 2010 26.37 32.705765 35.744203

Humrat Maein Special Special conservation ? 73.10 31.667706 35.613978 CO Conservation Area Homret Main-Sweimeh CO Special conservation 0.66 31.757481 35.583265

Al Eishah Special Conservation 2010 CO Area Aqaba Marine Park CO MPA IV 1997 (agreed) 59.74 29.387466 35.117989 Al-Doha Reserve UR 1988 0.79 29.358597 47.815773

Al-Doha Reserve Natural 0.26 29.349014 47.822986 UR Reserve Kuwait Al-Sulaibikhat UR ? 0.23 29.325481 47.881877

Sabah Al-Ahmad UR II 1987 324.72 29.575877 47.803492 Sulaibiya / Kabbed UR II 1988? 40.70 29.184148 47.688538 Al Shouf Cedar Nature No. 532 550.00 UNESCO Lebanon Reserve and Biosphere CO 1996/07/24 Biosphere Reserve Reserve

Country PA Name Sheet Status of International National Year Area (Km2) Digital Digital review (gazetted) degrees N degrees E

Bentael Nature Reserve CO Birdlife IBA Nature Reserve No. 11/1999 0.11 Horsh Ehden Nature Reserve Nature Reserve no. 121 of 1.10 CO Birdlife IBA 1992 Jabal Moussa Natural Site CO UNESCO Biosphere Reserve 06-Feb-12 6.50 Jabal Rihane CO UNESCO Biosphere Reserve BR 2007 11.30 Lebanon Palm Island Nature Reserve Nature Reserve no. 121 of 4.20 CO Ramsar Site 1992 Tannourine Cedar Forest Nature Reserve no. 9 of 1999 0.62 CO Birdlife IBA Nature Reserve Tyre Coast Nature Reserve Nature Reserve no. 708 dated 0.38 CO Ramsar Site 5 Nov 1998 7

Al Diymaniyat Islands Nature IV Nature Royal Decree 205.43 23.847602 58.064693 CO Reserve Reserve 23/1996 Al Jabal Al Akhdar Scenic IV Nature Royal Decree 120.48 23.153597 57.640212 CO Reserve Reserve 80/2011 Al Qurum Nature Reserve / IV Nature 1970 0.94 23.619944 58.478007 CO Mangrove Park Reserve Al Saleel National Park IV Nature Royal Decree 240.00 22.362690 59.187423 CO Reserve 50/1997 Al Wusta Wetland Reserve Royal Decree Oman CO Proposed Ramsar 51/2014 Al Wusta Wildlife Reserve Royal Decree 2828.30 19.855075 57.310136 CO II 4/1994 Jabal Qahwan Nature Reserve Royal Decree 288.35 22.233381 59.375974 CO 50/2014) Jabal Samhan Nature Reserve Royal Decree 4696.01 17.519276 54.982189 CO II 48/1997 Turtle Reserve IV Nature Royal Decree CO Reserve 25/1996

Country PA Name Sheet Status of International National Year Area (Km2) Digital Digital review (gazetted) degrees N degrees E

The Nine Khawars Reserve of IV Nature Royal Decree 12.43 17.027714 54.326297 CO Dhofar Reserve 49/1997 Wadi Sereen Nature Reserve CO Nature Reserve 1975 780.59 23.181217 58.601038

Khor Salalah Nature Reserve 1970-80? 0.65 16.997204 54.069898 CO (agreed) Oman Ras Alshajor CO Nature Reserve 1982 (agreed) 92.26 22.926451 59.122617

Al Khwair Nature Reserve CO Nature Reserve 2004 (agreed) 0.30 23.586551 58.418037

Oman Botanic Garden CO Nature Reserve 2006 4.94 23.555965 58.138198

Ra's Al Hadd ND 218.18 22.429853 59.783744

Al Reem ND 1153.77 25.729370 51.031926

8 Khor Al Udeid Fish Sanctuary ND 1833.12 24.710498 51.364556

Al Eraiq ND 54.80 24.758255 50.918405

Al Rafa ND 53.33 25.270441 51.332448

Al Thakhira ND 293.61 25.742755 51.592896 Qatar Al Wusail ND 34.72 25.516441 51.473838

Hawar Islands ND 141.96 25.670436 50.777646

Sunai ND 3.90 25.529898 51.398863

Um Alamad ND 5.73 25.512092 51.394625

Um Qarn ND 24.69 25.496173 51.434758

Al-Khunfah CO SNR Ia, RUR VI 1988 20295.94 28.522656 38.584186

At Taysiyah CO RUR VI, also Wilderness Area Ib 1995 4136.84 28.319266 43.647736 At-Tuybayq RUR VI, also SNR 1991 12282.83 29.717918 37.390948 Saudi CO Ia Arabia Farasan Islands CO SNR Ia, II, RUR VI, NR Ib, also BR IV 1989 5403.39 16.789427 41.901105 Harrat al-Harrah SNR Ia, RUR VI, 1989 13809.99 30.893984 38.818775 CO BR IV

Country PA Name Sheet Status of International National Year Area (Km2) Digital Digital review (gazetted) degrees N degrees E

Ibex Reserve CO SNR Ia, II, RUR VI 1988 (agreed) 2044.36 23.422241 46.483200 Jabal Shada al-A'la RUR V, VI, also SNR 2002 76.35 19.838259 41.320913 CO Ia, II Mahazat as-Sayd CO SNR Ia 2247.84 22.249134 41.879346

Majami' al-Hadb CO RUR VI, SNR Ia, II, III, also BR IV 1989 2269.65 21.414883 43.693010 Nafud al-'Uraq RUR VI, with core 1995 2035.15 24.958644 42.586747 CO NR Ib and BR IV Raydah CO NR IV, also SNR Ia 1989 6457.52 18.196817 42.396668

Saja / Umm ar-Rimth CO RUR VI, also NR Ib 1995 6502.52 22.971191 42.584483

Umm al-Qamari Islands RUR VI, also SNR 1988 4.27 18.976515 41.095696 CO Ia

9 Uruq Bani Ma'arid RUR VI, NR I1, II, also 1994 12715.69 19.362087 45.598558 CO Saudi V Arabia Ra's Suwayhil / Ra's al- Vi, Ia and IV 2016 (agreed) CO Qasbah Al Wajh Bank CO WHS? 2016 (agreed) Jabal Aja CO II, with Ia, VI, IV 2016 (agreed) Harrat 'Uwayrid CO 2016(agreed)

Al-Ahsa' National Park ND 53.66 25.462657 49.700616

Al-Ghat National Park ND 58.46 25.925019 45.049077

Al-Ha'ir Wetland ND 29.57 24.366640 46.871501

Al-Haysiyah ND 192.55 24.921197 46.172194

Asir National Park ND 6457.52 17.993732 42.131219

Asir National Park ND 2.71 18.096147 42.705996

Dhahran Nature Reserve ND 1.79 26.277281 50.109678

Dhina Waterfall ND 1.48 18.907997 42.205232

Country PA Name Sheet Status of International National Year Area (Km2) Digital Digital review (gazetted) degrees N degrees E

Hafr al-Batin ND 738.50 27.553114 45.236234

Hafr al-Batin ND 265.68 27.812457 45.419094

Hafr al-Batin ND 3252.67 28.239569 44.921466

Hima Huraymila National Park ND 189.89 25.057928 45.962940

Hima Quraysh ND 53.47 21.307846 40.504231

Jabal al-Kawr ND 199.40 21.026064 42.835617

Rawdat at-Tanhah ND 36.67 26.069908 46.483932

Rawdat Khuraym ND 171.51 25.359852 47.313696

Sabkhat al-Fasl ND 4.46 27.060570 49.502411

The Haram of Al-Madinah ND 216.41 24.459559 39.615538 10 Saudi

The Haram of Makkah ND 572.82 21.401742 39.821410 Arabia Wadi as-Suq ND 101.36 24.307011 47.612540

Wadi Laban ND 198.84 24.589538 46.380781

Wadi Laban ND 151.59 24.586658 46.401762

Yanbu' Coastal Conservation 2.79 23.996144 38.155730 ND Area Yanbu' Coastal Conservation 1.10 23.977540 38.191719 ND Area Yanbu' Coastal Conservation 5.41 23.932774 38.280953 ND Area Bulthama Protected Area ND 3.05 26.889589 50.964275

New Al Mashabiya ND 4.77 24.686290 50.872844

Abu Kubeiss ND

Syria Al Sha-ara ND

Cedar- Fir ND

Country PA Name Sheet Status of International National Year Area (Km2) Digital Digital review (gazetted) degrees N degrees E

Fanar ibn Hani ND

Ghab Lake ND

Jabal Abou Rojmen ND

Lajat ND

Om Al Toyour ND Syria Ras El Bassit ND

Sabkhat al-Jabbul Nature ND Reserve Showla (Choula) ND

Wadi el-Azib (Ghrib) ND

11 Dubai Desert Conservation 2003 (agreed) 234.37 24.827191 55.659750 CO II Reserve Ras Al Khor Wildlife Sanctuary UR Ramsar 2007 (agreed) 2.67 25.190719 55.319663 Jabal Ali Marine Sanctuary UR 15.75 24.962952 54.946425

Al Marmoum Conservation UR Reserve Al Wohoosh Desert Conservation Reserve UR Hatta Mountain Conservation UAE UR Reserve Jabal Nazwa Conservation UR Reserve Ghaf Nazwa Conservation UR Reserve Al Aqa II 1988 1.36 25.488017 56.365072 UR (agreed) Al Faqeet-Rul Dibba II MPA 1988 UR (agreed)

Country PA Name Sheet Status of International National Year Area (Km2) Digital Digital review (gazetted) degrees N degrees E

Bidiyah UR Dadna II MPA 1988 0.05 25.524578 56.370751 UR (agreed) The Wadi Wurayah National Ramsar 2010 126.42 25.409393 56.257257 CO Park Al Watba Wetland Reserve Ramsar IV 1988 UR (agreed) Al Yasat SNR Ia 2005 UR (agreed) Arabian oryx Protected Area IV 1988 6584.24 23.199021 54.765598 UR (agreed)

12 Bul Syayeef UR ? MPA

Houbara Protected Area UR IV ? 774.36 24.001921 53.078960 Marawah UNESCO MAB SNR and VI 2007 (BR UAE UR status) Ain al Faydah (Fazyad) UR ?

Jabal Ali UR ?

Elebridi Protected Area Nature Reserve 2007 18.97 25.240474 55.947846 CO (agreed) Ad Dhelaimeh Nature Reserve 2007 CO (agreed) Al Qurm wa Lehhfaiiah Ramsar Nature Reserve 2013 8.05 24.987468 56.324930 CO (agreed) Lemdynah CO Nature Reserve ? Meleiha Protected Area Nature Reserve 2007 CO (agreed) Sir Bu Nair Island Ramsar Nature Reserve 2000 Amiri 13.25 25.232957 54.219213 CO Decree 25.

Country PA Name Sheet Status of International National Year Area (Km2) Digital Digital review (gazetted) degrees N degrees E

Wadi Helo Protected Area Nature Reserve 2007 17.40 25.047238 56.192385 CO (agreed) Wasit Nature Reserve Nature Reserve 2007 (Emir CO Decree no. 7) Elmenther Greenbelt Protected ? 2007 CO Area (agreed) Ain al Faydah (Fazyad) UR ?

Al Gheil PA ND 0.98 25.002285 56.336574

Al Naseem ND 1.14 25.331528 55.988626

Al Wathba Wetland Reserve ND 4.62 24.256666 54.604953

Al Yasat PA ND 2043.45 24.398352 51.868048 13

Al Zawraa (Khour Ajman) PA ND 2.11 25.429058 55.485237

UAE Al-Badia PA ND 0.44 25.424190 56.367286

Al-madina PA ND 12.95 25.173978 55.797276

Al-Ramthaa PA ND 0.91 25.364213 55.476621

Al-Ramthaa PA ND 0.90 25.365802 55.463875

Al-zolaimaa PA ND 1.95 25.266902 55.805163

Bul Syayeef ND 282.40 24.348300 54.349655

Jabal Al-Fayah PA ND 8.85 25.152758 55.836178

Jabal Al-Fayah PA ND 24.93 25.091012 55.830857

Jazerat Al Tuyur ND 1.69 25.603540 56.342717

Khor Kalbaa PA ND 11.27 25.000774 56.367263

Lemdynah Protected Area ND 19.06 25.053077 55.972794

Marawah Marine PA ND 4247.74 24.363545 53.265253

Country PA Name Sheet Status of International National Year Area (Km2) Digital Digital review (gazetted) degrees N degrees E

Aden Wetlands UR II IV ? Balhaf-Bir Ali Burum 2011 UR (agreed) Bura'a II UNESCO MAB 2011 47.55 14.874404 43.436063 UR (agreed) Detwah Lagoon Ramsar 2007 580.00 UR (agreed) Yemen Hawf UR IV, Ib 2005 461.13 16.638043 52.866870 Otuma Forest UR Ib ? 49.03 14.452821 44.002065 Socotra Archipelago UR UNESCO-MAB 1996 3423.61 Sharma Jethmoun Protected ? 0.52 14 ND Area

Kamran Island Marine ? ND Protected Area

TOTAL 143402.13

What is wild Protected areas of 1 000 – 10 000 km2 and >10 000 km2 were considered by most delegates to provide sufficient space to support a wild population of Arabian oryx (Figure 1). There appeared to be consensus that fencing might not be an issue, provided the areas were greater than 1 000 km2. Furthermore, delegates showed the same pattern whether from the conservation or the veterinary focused theme.

Figure 1 The frequency (N = 65) of opinion of what size of protected area that would support a wild population of Arabian oryx.

20 18 16 14 12 10 8 Frequency 6 4 2 0

Degree of confinement

It also appeared that delegates accepted that a wild population could have a limited degree of management intervention with the majority accepting lightly managed and conservation dependent situations as still being wild (Figure 2).

Figure 2 The frequency (N = 69) of opinion of the degree of intensity of management that would be acceptable in supporting a wild population of Arabian oryx.

15 Frequency 10

0 Captive Intensively Lightly Conservation Self-sustaining Dep. Management intensity

15 Veterinarians, scientists, and conservation managers generally agreed that areas of >1 000 km2 are sufficiently large to support a wild population of Arabian oryx (Figure 3). The curators and other groups accepted a smaller area. By contrast the ‘Other’ category of respondents was the least accepting of management interference in wild populations, by comparison with the other groups that were quite similar (Figure 4).

Figure 3 The average (+ SD) score of what size of protected area would support a wild population of Arabian oryx by respondent occupation category.

Figure 4 The average (+ SD) score of what intensity of management would be acceptable for a wild population of Arabian oryx, by respondent occupation category.

16 Conclusion The consolidated list of protected areas for the Arabian Peninsula (inclusive of Syria and Iraq) is evidently incomplete. This is to be finalised at the 2017 workshop. Delegates to the 17th SICFAB largely agreed that in their definition of what would constitute a wild population of Arabian oryx, it was acceptable for a population to be in fenced protected areas, provided these were >1 000 km2. Delegates also agreed that wild Arabian oryx could be exposed to some degree of management. The notion of wild populations having to be within unfenced areas without any management interference appeared unrealistic and generally unsupported. There were also marginal differences between occupation categories and their opinion of what constitutes a wild population of Arabian oryx.

References and Further Reading Stanley-Price M & Mallon D. 2013. The fall of the wild. Oryx. 47 (4): 467–468.

17 Appendix 1: IUCN Protected Areas Categories System http://www.iucn.org/about/work/programmes/gpap_home/gpap_quality/gpap_pacategories/ IUCN protected area management categories classify protected areas according to their management objectives. The categories are recognised by international bodies such as the United Nations and by many national governments as the global standard for defining and recording protected areas and as such are increasingly being incorporated into government legislation.

Ia Strict Nature Reserve Category Ia are strictly protected areas set aside to protect biodiversity and possibly geological/geomorphical features, where human visitation, use and impacts are strictly controlled and limited to ensure protection of the conservation values. Such protected areas can serve as indispensable reference areas for scientific research and monitoring.

Ib Wilderness Area Category Ib protected areas are usually large unmodified or slightly modified areas, retaining their natural character and influence without permanent or significant human habitation, which are protected and managed so as to preserve their natural condition.

II National Park Category II protected areas are large natural or near natural areas set aside to protect large- scale ecological processes, along with the complement of species and ecosystems characteristic of the area, which also provide a foundation for environmentally and culturally compatible, spiritual, scientific, educational, recreational, and visitor opportunities.

III Natural Monument or Feature Category III protected areas are set aside to protect a specific natural monument, which can be a landform, sea mount, submarine cavern, geological feature such as a cave or even a living feature such as an ancient grove. They are generally quite small protected areas and often have high visitor value.

IV Habitat/Species Management Area Category IV protected areas aim to protect particular species or habitats and management reflects this priority. Many Category IV protected areas will need regular, active interventions to address the requirements of particular species or to maintain habitats, but this is not a requirement of the category.

V Protected Landscape/ Seascape A protected area where the interaction of people and nature over time has produced an area of distinct character with significant, ecological, biological, cultural and scenic value: and where safeguarding the integrity of this interaction is vital to protecting and sustaining the area and its associated nature conservation and other values.

VI Protected Area with Sustainable Use of Natural Resources Category VI protected areas conserve ecosystems and habitats together with associated cultural values and traditional natural resource management systems. They are generally large, with most of the area in a natural condition, where a proportion is under sustainable natural resource management and where low-level non-industrial use of natural resources compatible with nature conservation is seen as one of the main aims of the area.

Appendix 2: Arabian Peninsula Habitats Peninsula Arabian 2: Appendix

Source: Biodiversity Rapid Assessment Outcome Booklet, AGEDI. (2013) https://agedi.org/?portfolio=local- national-regional-biodiversity-rapid-assessment

19 Veterinary Theme Prof. M. Miller, DVM, MPH, PhD; Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa. Tuberculosis in Captive and Free-Ranging Wildlife – An Overview

Introduction Tuberculosis (TB) is distributed worldwide in domestic animals and wildlife. It is a zoonotic re- emerging disease. Eradication programs have been implemented for certain species in different countries. Testing, quarantine, and transport requirements have been implemented for non- regulated species, such as elephant and other wildlife. The World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) regulates diagnostic test procedures, production of tuberculins, and provides recommendations for managing health risks for bovine TB in animals. In addition to the direct impact of TB on animal health due to morbidity, mortality, and loss of productivity, it has socioeconomic effects due to loss of income, ecotourism; food security effects due to condemned animal products, quarantine and trade restrictions; environmental effects due to spillover to other species and changes in ecosystem balance; as well as having zoonotic disease potential. Animals may be infected by a number of members of the Mycobacteria tuberculosis complex, including M. bovis, M. tuberculosis, M. mungi, M. microti, M. pinnipedii, M. caprae, M. africanum, M. orygis, and Dassie bacillus. TB is difficult to diagnose, treat, and manage in domestic species. This is compounded in wildlife by the lack of diagnostic tests, handling risks, dealing with multiple parties responsible for managing wildlife, and public perception. Mycobacteria are classified based on biochemical and phenotypical characteristics. Cultures can take up to 8 weeks or more. Positive cultures are identified by the presence of acid-fast rod shaped bacteria. DNA probes are used to identify different mycobacterial species. Stains can be identified using restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLP), spoligotyping, and DNA sequencing. M. tuberculosis has been found in non-human primates, elephants and sporadically in parrots, tapir, black rhinoceros, Rocky mountain goats, fennec foxes, snow leopard, jaguar and other zoo animals. M. bovis is the most common cause of TB in free-ranging and captive wildlife. There are disease reservoirs in wildlife populations globally – i.e., European badger, brushtail possum, African buffalo, white-tailed deer, and wood bison. This organism also infects carnivores and scavengers, such as lion, leopard, cheetah, baboon, and hyena. Sporadic cases can be found in almost any mammal. Other MTBC are found in voles, hyrax, llamas, pigs, ferrets (M. microti); primates, cattle, pigs (M. africanum), seals (M. pinnepedii); hyrax (Dassie bacillus); mongooses (M. mungi); and meerkats (M. suricattae).

Diagnosing tuberculosis in wildlife Diagnosing TB in wildlife requires selection of appropriate tests and interpretation since there is no one ideal test. Direct tests are based on detection of mycobacteria in samples. The gold standard test is identification of bacteria by culture and speciation. However, this method may not detect infection based on location of infection, intermittent shedding, difficulty in obtaining samples, sample handling, and difficulty growing organisms in culture. Acid-fast stain (Ziehl-

20 Neelsen) can provide a rapid presumptive diagnosis but requires additional confirmation. Immunohistochemical stains can be used to confirm biopsy or necropsy samples. Direct PCR from tissues can provide a rapid diagnosis if results are positive. Indirect or immunological tests detect the immune response of a host to mycobacteria. The intradermal tuberculin test is the most commonly used test in animals. It is based on a delayed hypersensitivity response to tuberculin proteins injected intradermally, which is measured at 48- 72 hours after injection. Purified Protein Derivative (PPD) from M. bovis and M. avium are used for single or comparative tests. Mammalian Old Tuberculin (MOT) is a less standardised crude preparation that has been used in the past. Numerous factors can affect the Tuberculin Skin Test (TST); anergy occurs in advanced TB resulting in a false negative response. Certain species have a high rate of false positive responses (e.g., camels, tapirs, bongo antelope, and orangutans). The skin test is unreliable other species such as elephants and rhinoceros. Cross- reactivity may also occur in animals with exposure to environmental mycobacteria and lead to false positive reactions (e.g., reindeer). In vitro tests of cell-mediated immunity include lymphocyte transformation, cytokine production (e.g., gamma interferon), and cytokine gene expression. These tests usually require a single blood sample, although sample handling may affect results. The tests are laboratory-based. Serological tests measure the humoral immune response. These tests assume that infected animals will develop an antibody response, which varies significantly between species. Enzyme- linked immunoassay (ELISA) and multiantigen print immunoassay (MAPIA) incorporate a panel of antigens to detect serum antibodies. Rapid tests (e.g., STAT-PAK, DPP) based on lateral flow chromatography have also been used in wildlife to detect antibodies to specific mycobacterial antigens.

Mycobacterium tuberculosis

Source: Hiolski, E. (2017). Science. doi:10.1126/science.aal0920

21 Species specific considerations There are significant species differences in transmission routes, disease progression and pathological lesions. It is important to carefully observe changes in order to avoid misdiagnosis.

Ungulates TB in ungulates is primarily transmitted through aerosols or exposure to contaminated pasture. Clinical signs are usually absent until cases become advanced. There may be progressive emaciation, coughing, and lagging behind the herd. Infection is typically chronic and lesions may only be detected on post-mortem examination. Lesions are usually found in the lungs, thoracic and head lymph nodes. These consist of small to coalescing granulomas with a fibrous capsule and central area of mineralised or caseous necrosis.

Carnivores Carnivores can be infected via ingestion, inhalation or percutaneous routes. Signs can include swollen joints, non-healing skin wounds, poor hair-coat, progressive weight loss and corneal opacity. Macroscopic lesions may appear and proliferative, with areas of consolidated lung tissue and fibrosis of the pleura. However, location and type of lesions may vary significantly between species and members of the MBTC.

Tuberculosis treatment of wildlife Tuberculosis treatment of wildlife is not recommended, and is often prohibited by animal health regulations. However, there have been reports of treatment in captive wildlife, especially elephants. Both M. tuberculosis and M. bovis are reportable diseases. Diagnosis leads to restrictions in animal movement, concerns for human and animal health and potentially euthanasia. The management and control of tuberculosis relies on detection, removal and prevention of reintroduction. Research is underway to advance TB diagnostics in wildlife. This focuses on development of blood-based tests and identification of novel biomarkers for different species. There are public health implications for TB in wildlife. The potential for zoonotic TB can occur through direct contact with infection wildlife, ingestion of animal products, or environmental contamination. The lack of tools for detection of TB in wildlife presents a limitation to address public health concerns associated with animal TB. If you suspect TB: 1. Get a complete health history of the individual and herd/group 2. Determine history of TB at the facility and surrounding area 3. Perform individual animal testing using an appropriate suite of tests for that species, and include as many as possible of the following: a. Tuberculin skin test (TST) where possible/feasible. Perform a comparative cervical intradermal test by shaving a patch on either side of the neck and inject the recommended volume (for species and according to product) of bovine PPD in one side and avian PPD on the other (record lot # and expiry date in medical records). Measure skin thickness at 0 hours and at 72 hours; look for (and describe) any swelling, erythema, necrosis, heat. Theoretically, the bovine PPD site should be more inflamed than the avian site if infected. b. Blood-based immunoassays for TB: 4. Interferon gamma release assay (e.g., Bovigam, QFT)

22 5. Serological testing (e.g., DPP, MAPIA or PPD ELISA) 6. Other experimental assays may be available 7. NOTE: assays may be species-specific so discuss with your lab before collecting samples a. Radiographs in species where this is feasible b. Tracheal and/or gastric lavage (1-2mL/kg) for mycobacterial culture and PCR. Centrifuge fluid and resuspend in 0.2 ml of saline; use a small drop to make a smear for acid-fast staining (Ziehl-Neelsen); freeze the remaining sample if it will not be analysed immediately. c. In animals that are euthanised or die, perform a thorough post-mortem examination with special attention to palpation and visualising lesions in thin slices of head, neck, thoracic, abdominal and peripheral lymph nodes. d. Collect samples of lymph nodes and other organs in 10% buffered formalin for histopathology; collect duplicate samples in sterile containers and freeze for mycobacterial culture and PCR. e. Perform Ziehl-Neelsen stain of impression smears from any suspect lesions. Important: contact laboratories and determine their capability of performing assays and other cultures. Store duplicate samples so that repeat testing can be performed at multiple laboratories. Aside from interpretation difficulties due to species variation and testing validation in those species, TB diagnosis in the region remains problematic and is confounded by the lack of access to a wide base of in-country screening that is reputable and comparable. Samples generally have to be exported internationally to ensure an appropriate suite of tests is carried out. The following UAE-based laboratories carry out limited mycobacterium screening tests: CVRL: Immunochromatographic test and culture with identification by PCR Central Veterinary Research Laboratory P.O. Box 597, Dubai, UAE Tel : 00971-4-337 5165 Fax: 00971-4-336 8638

Nad al Sheba Veterinary Clinic: Ziehl Neelsen staining of prepared slides Off Street 34 Nad al Sheba 1 00971 562 760 434 Included below is a necropsy reporting form that is used at Stellenbosch University in South Africa to systematically and accurately record all findings and observations in Suspected TB cases. Stellenbosch University hosts the National Research Foundation in Animal TB.

Research Necropsy Report Form

Date: ID: Species: Age: Very Male Femal ………..years……….month Calf Juv. Sub adult Adult Old old : e: s Ear Tag no: Transponder no: Lab ID: Condition: 1 2 3 4 Mass:……………………kg Euthanased: Died: 5

Immobilisation &/or euthanasia method:

GPS Ref: Autolysis: mild S……………….E………… Location: moderate severe ……. Skin test results: Bov 0 hr Bov 72 hr Av 0 hr Av 72 hr Blood samples: EDTA heparin serum other History:

Immobilisation date for TST and blood collection ______

Bovigam results______

IP-10 results______

Immobilisation date for TST read +/- blood collection______

Cull date ______

______

General Instructions • Check box for all tissues/organs Lesion scoring system for lymph nodes: examined. 0 – no visible lesions Provide description of any • 1 – small focal lesion abnormalities observed in adjacent box, including size, shape, presence 2 – several small foci or single large lesion of lesions, parasites, etc. 3 – multifocal or confluent lesions • Check box for all samples collected.

• If lesions are present, place these in separately labeled containers; otherwise samples can be pooled as indicated.

Tag Date: ID: Examiner: No:

SU SU SU Other Lymph nodes Lesions - Formalin Frozen frozen

LN Lymph nodes Collected Collected Collected Description Score Size: □ small □ normal □ enlarged Lesions present: □ Y □ N Distribution: □ focal □ multifocal □ diffuse # Lesions: □ single □ 2-5 □ multiple (>5) □ confluent Retropharyngeal Contents: □ necrotic □ (R & L) proliferative □ caseous □ mineralised Lesion capsule: □ none □ immature □ fibrous Consistency: □ soft □ normal □ firm Follicles: □ Y □ N Color change: □ Y □ N Other: Size: □ small □ normal □ enlarged Lesions present: □ Y □ N Distribution: □ focal □ multifocal □ diffuse # Lesions: □ single □ 2-5 □ multiple (>5) □ confluent Mandibular Contents: □ necrotic □ (R & L) proliferative □ caseous □ mineralised Lesion capsule: □ none □ immature □ fibrous Consistency: □ soft □ normal □ firm Follicles: □ Y □ N Color change: □ Y □ N Other: Size: □ small □ normal □ enlarged

Parotid Lesions present: □ Y □ N (R & L) Distribution: □ focal □ multifocal □ diffuse # Lesions: □ single □ 2-5

25 Tag Date: ID: Examiner: No:

SU SU SU Other Lymph nodes Lesions - Formalin Frozen frozen

LN Lymph nodes Collected Collected Collected Description Score □ multiple (>5) □ confluent Contents: □ necrotic □ proliferative □ caseous □ mineralised Lesion capsule: □ none □ immature □ fibrous Consistency: □ soft □ normal □ firm Follicles: □ Y □ N Color change: □ Y □ N Other: Size: □ small □ normal □ enlarged Lesions present: □ Y □ N Distribution: □ focal □ multifocal □ diffuse # Lesions: □ single □ 2-5 □ multiple (>5) □ confluent Tonsils Contents: □ necrotic (R & L) □ proliferative □ caseous □ mineralised Lesion capsule: □ none □ immature □ fibrous Consistency: □ soft □ normal □ firm Follicles: □ Y □ N Color change: □ Y □ N Other: Size: □ small □ normal □ enlarged Lesions present: □ Y □ N Distribution: □ focal □ multifocal □ diffuse # Lesions: □ single □ 2-5 □ multiple (>5) □ confluent Other head/neck Contents: □ necrotic LN (specify) □ proliferative □ caseous □ mineralised Lesion capsule: □ none □ immature □ fibrous Consistency: □ soft □ normal □ firm Follicles: □ Y □ N Color change: □ Y □ N

26 Tag Date: ID: Examiner: No:

SU SU SU Other Lymph nodes Lesions - Formalin Frozen frozen

LN Lymph nodes Collected Collected Collected Description Score Other:

Size: □ small □ normal □ enlarged Lesions present: □ Y □ N Distribution: □ focal □ multifocal □ diffuse # Lesions: □ single □ 2-5 □ multiple (>5) □ confluent Contents: □ necrotic Tracheobronchial □ proliferative □ caseous □ mineralised Lesion capsule: □ none □ immature □ fibrous Consistency: □ soft □ normal □ firm Follicles: □ Y □ N Color change: □ Y □ N Other: Size: □ small □ normal □ enlarged Lesions present: □ Y □ N Distribution: □ focal □ multifocal □ diffuse # Lesions: □ single □ 2-5 □ multiple (>5) □ confluent Contents: □ necrotic Mediastinal □ proliferative □ caseous □ mineralised Lesion capsule: □ none □ immature □ fibrous Consistency: □ soft □ normal □ firm Follicles: □ Y □ N Color change: □ Y □ N Other:

27 Tag Date: ID: Examiner: No:

SU SU SU Other Lymph nodes Lesions - Formalin Frozen frozen

LN Lymph nodes Collected Collected Collected Description Score Size: □ small □ normal □ enlarged Lesions present: □ Y □ N Distribution: □ focal □ multifocal □ diffuse # Lesions: □ single □ 2-5 □ multiple (>5) □ confluent Contents: □ necrotic Prescapular □ proliferative □ caseous (R & L) □ mineralised Lesion capsule: □ none □ immature □ fibrous Consistency: □ soft □ normal □ firm Follicles: □ Y □ N Color change: □ Y □ N Other: Size: □ small □ normal □ enlarged Lesions present: □ Y □ N Distribution: □ focal □ multifocal □ diffuse # Lesions: □ single □ 2-5 □ multiple (>5) □ confluent Contents: □ necrotic Lung □ proliferative □ caseous (R & L) □ mineralized Lesion capsule: □ none □ immature □ fibrous Consistency: □ soft □ normal □ firm Follicles: □ Y □ N Color change: □ Y □ N Other: Other Size: □ small □ normal LNs or organs □ enlarged (specify) Lesions present: □ Y □ N Distribution: □ focal □ multifocal □ diffuse # Lesions: □ single □ 2-5 □ multiple (>5) □ confluent Contents: □ necrotic □ proliferative □ caseous □ mineralised Lesion capsule: □ none □ immature □ fibrous

28 Tag Date: ID: Examiner: No:

SU SU SU Other Lymph nodes Lesions - Formalin Frozen frozen

LN Lymph nodes Collected Collected Collected Description Score Consistency: □ soft □ normal □ firm Follicles: □ Y □ N Color change: □ Y □ N Other:

Bovine TB abscess in submandibular lymph node in wild deer head.

Source: Deer Alliance Blog (2015). Bovine Tuberculosis in Wild Deer. http://deeralliance.ie/blog/bovine-tuberculosis-in-wild- deer/Bovine%20TB%20abscess%20in%20submandibular%20lymph%20node%20in%20wild%20deer%20head

29 Capture Myopathy

Introduction Capture myopathy and other handling side effects were discussed as a sequel to the chemical immobilisation overview; to highlight the importance of careful handling of hoof stock during capture events and the consequences of inappropriate handling. Capture related mortality rates higher than 1-2% are unacceptable. It is our duty of care to minimise stress and injury during handling. Stress is the body’s reaction to abnormal states that disturb the normal physiological equilibrium. Stress can result in capture myopathy (aka muscular dystrophy, white muscle disease, capture disease) which is a disease complex most commonly associated with capture/handling/pursuit/restraint and transportation of wild species. Capture myopathy is a complex multifactorial metabolic disease that occurs when an animal cannot cool itself (hyperthermia). Prevention is the only treatment for this condition, once it starts it is always ultimately fatal. Predisposing factors influencing the incidence of capture myopathy include species (more skittish is more prone), environment (extreme temperatures, humidity, extreme terrain) other concurrent disease, signalment (age, pregnancy etc), nutrition (vitamin E status), drugs and capture related factors such as repeated handling, prolonged restraint, excessive fear.

The capture myopathy disease complex The capture myopathy disease complex is classified into various syndromes, all of which may present in conjunction with another syndrome. Capture shock syndrome occurs during immobilisation and often results in death 1-6 hours after capture. Ataxic myoglobinuric syndrome is the most common form that presents within a few hours to days post capture. Ruptured muscle syndrome presents 1-2 days post capture. Delayed per-acute syndrome is the rarest form. There is a wide margin of onset of clinical signs/death, it is important to always include capture myopathy as a differential diagnosis in collapsed hoof stock or wader birds that have been captured within the past few weeks.

Temperature and stress As stated by Meyer et al (2008), immobilisation of wild ungulates using capture drugs can also commonly result in an extremely high body temperature from which lethal hyperthermia may develop. This is due to increased cellular oxygen consumption in animals that are already compromised due to drug-induced hypoxia and also a high metabolic demand that is caused by the intense activity of escape attempts (Meyer et al, 2008). If the cellular oxygen consumption, and therefore cellular energy production, cannot be met then the animals’ normal cellular function and integrity becomes disrupted and multiple organ failure (as occurs in capture myopathy) ensues. The study carried out by Meyer et al (2008) aimed to investigate the underlying cause of the very high temperature spikes that are seen in immobilised wild ungulates. This study found that the main factor influencing body temperature changes during chemical capture events was caused by fright stress and was directly correlated with immobilisation induction time (how long it took for the animal to lose consciousness). The authors report a remarkable reduction in the incidence of hyperthermia in animals that experienced shorter recumbency times. Respiratory depressive effects and disruption of physiological function of drug combinations used for chemical immobilisation were also examined as decreasing the time to recumbency may also result in increased hypoxia due to drug-induced respiratory depression. The effects of environment were found to be insignificant. However, in order to minimise the incidence of hyperthermia during chemical capture

30 precautionary steps should be taken to reduce the length, duration and intensity of capture- induced hyperthermia. Meyer et al (2008) concluded from their study that limiting the thermal consequences of capture requires limiting the fright stress the animal experiences and selecting a chemical immobilisation protocol that ensures rapid recumbency but without dangerously compromising respiratory function. Another study carried out by Meyer et al (2008) measured body temperature during different capture events: chemical capture, net capture and exposure to another stressor. Body temperature increase was significantly influenced by the level of stress in response to capture. This study also found that in order to reduce deaths caused by capture induced hyperthermia, it is important to focus on reducing stress responses by avoiding excessive chasing, selecting appropriate drug combinations to minimise induction time and considering the effects of environmental conditions during and after the capture event. Stress can be divided into three stages (as illustrated in Figure 5): 1) Stage of alarm where the perceived threat occurs 2) Stage of resistance or adaption during which the fight or flight response is initiated 3) Stage of exhaustion/recovery. An animal in a state of severe acute stress/exhaustion is readily pushed into adrenergic overload, resulting in neurogenic and cardiogenic overload and collapse.

Figure 5 The three stages of stress.

Treatment Treatment for capture myopathy is generally considered ineffective but principle aims should include oxygen supplementation, pain relief (ethical and prognostic), benzodiazepines for muscle relaxation and anxiety reduction, vitamin supplementation (A, C and E) for antioxidant and supportive properties, therapeutic and supportive fluid therapy and correction of metabolic acidosis. The use of butorphanol is also often used to reduce the suppressive side effects of the opioids that were used in the induction protocol.

Conclusion Prevention is better than cure. It is important to understand the behaviour and physiology of individual species. Recognising the environmental limitations, use of experienced personnel and using recognised and refined capture techniques to ensure minimum possible handling during capture events will help to reduce the incidence of capture myopathies. Ensuring immobilisation drugs are effective and have safe, rapid induction and recovery are also important, as is the use of tranquilisers to reduce stress where indicated. Consider capturing family or herd groups where appropriate. Be aware of complications that can be avoided and plan to avoid those complications!

31 References Albayrak H, Ozan E, Gur S. 2010. A serologic investigation of epizootic hemorrhagic disease virus (EHDV) in cattle and Gazella subgutturosa subgutturosa in Turkey. Trop Anim Health Prod. 42 (8): 1589-91. doi: 10.1007/s11250-010-9610-6. Epub 2010 Jun 3. Al-Ruwaili MA, Khalil OM, Selim SA. 2012. Viral and bacterial infections associated with camel (Camelus dromedarius) calf diarrhea in North Province, Saudi Arabia. Saudi J Biol Sci. 19 (1): 35-41. doi: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2011.10.001. Epub 2011 Oct 18. Arif A, Schulz J, Thiaucourt F, Taha A, Hammer S. 2007. Contagious caprine pleuropneumonia outbreak in captive wild ungulates at Al Wabra Wildlife Preservation, State of Qatar. J Zoo Wildl Med. 38 (1): 93-6. Bazargani TT, Hallan JA, Nabian S, Rahbari S. 2007. Sarcoptic mange of gazelle (Gazella subguttarosa) and its medical importance in Iran. Parasitol Res. 101 (6): 1517-20. Epub 2007 Aug 5. Chaber AL, Lignereux L, Al Qassimi M, Saegerman C, Manso-Silván L, Dupuy V, Thiaucourt F. 2014. Fatal transmission of contagious caprine pleuropneumonia to an Arabian oryx (Oryx leucoryx). Vet Microbiol. 173 (1-2): 156-9. doi: 10.1016/j.vetmic.2014.07.003. Epub 2014 Jul 14. Elzein EM, Housawi FM, Bashareek Y, Gameel AA, Al-Afaleq AI, Anderson E. 2004. Severe PPR infection in gazelles kept under semi-free range conditions. J Vet Med B Infect Dis Vet Public Health. 51 (2): 68-71. Frölich K, Hamblin C, Jung S, Ostrowski S, Mwanzia J, Streich W J, Anderson J, Armstrong RM, Anajariyah S. 2005. Serologic surveillance for selected viral agents in captive and free-ranging populations of Arabian oryx (Oryx leucoryx) from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. J Wildl Dis. 41 (1): 67–79. Greth A, Gourreau JM, Vassart M, Nguyen-Ba-Vy, Wyers M, Lefevre PC. 1992. Capripoxvirus disease in an Arabian oryx (Oryx leucoryx) from Saudi Arabia. J Wildl Dis. 28 (2): 295- 300. Hoffmann B, Wiesner H, Maltzan J, Mustefa R, Eschbaumer M, Arif FA, Beer M. 2012. Fatalities in wild goats in Kurdistan associated with Peste des Petits Ruminants virus. Transbound Emerg Dis. 59 (2): 173-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1865-1682.2011.01270.x. Epub 2011 Nov 10. Kasim AA, Alyousif MS, Al Shawa YR. 1991. Redescription of Eimeria gazella Musaev, 1970 (Apicomplexa: Eimeriidae) from the Arabian gazelle, Gazella gazella arabica (Artiodactyla: Bovidae) in Saudi Arabia. Parassitologia. 33 (2-3): 107-9. Mohammed OB, Davies AJ, Hussein HS, Daszak P, Ellis JT. 2003. Hammondia heydorni from the Arabian mountain gazelle and red fox in Saudi Arabia. J Parasitol. 89 (3): 535-9. Ostrowski S, Anajariyya S, Kamp EM, Bedin E. 2002. Isolation of Brucella melitensis from Arabian oryx (Oryx leucoryx). Vet. Rec. 150 (6): 186-188. Soares JF, Pereira H, Desta FS, Sandouka M, Macasero W. 2015. Causes of mortality of captive Arabian gazelles (Gazella arabica) at King Khalid Wildlife Research Centre, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, from 1988 to 2011. J Zoo Wildl Med. 46 (1):1-8. Tarello W, Theneyan M. 2008. Corynebacterium pseudotuberculosis and Corynebacterium renale isolated from two Arabian oryx (Oryx leucoryx). Vet Rec. 162 (26): 862-3. Yeşilbağ K, Alpay G, Karakuzulu H. 2011. A serologic survey of viral infections in captive ungulates in Turkish zoos. J Zoo Wildl Med. 42 (1): 44-8. Wazed A, Mollah M, McKinney, PA. 1999. Brucellosis and suspected paratuberculosis in a Nubian ibex (Capra ibex nubiana) - a case report. Wildlife Protection Office, P.O. Box 27942, Dubai, UAE. (E-mail: [email protected]).

32 Participant List OMAN IRAQ Andrew Spalton Hana Ahmad Raza Office for the Conservation of the Environment, Nature Iraq Diwan of the Royal Court [email protected] [email protected]

ITALY Hadi Al Hikmani Giovanni Amori Office for the Conservation of the Environment, Diwan of the Royal Court IUCN/SSC Small Mammal Specialist Group [email protected] [email protected] Dr Khaled Al Rasbi JORDAN Oman Mammal Breeding Centre Ehab Eid [email protected] The Royal Marine Conservation Society of Mahmood Alabri Jordan Royal Court Affairs, Veterinary Services [email protected] [email protected] Thabit Al Share Dr Robert Baldwin The Royal Society for the Conservation of Nature Five Oceans Environmental Services [email protected] [email protected]

Zuhair Amr Saleh Al Rahbi [email protected] Ministry of Environment and Climate Affairs Salem Bait Bilal KUWAIT Ministry of Environment and Climate Affairs Mijbil Almutawa The Scientific Centre, Kuwait QATAR [email protected] Adrian Grant Al Wabra Wildlife Preservation Roqaya Al Ostath [email protected] Kuwait Zoo Salah Behbehani Esmari Rowan-Harrod The Scientific Centre, Kuwait Al Wabra Wildlife Preservation [email protected] SAUDI ARABIA Yaarub Al-Yahiya Abdulaziz N Alagaili The Scientific Centre, Kuwait King Saud University [email protected] [email protected] Zahra Al Wazzan Ahmad ibn Hasan al-Zahrani Kuwait Zoo Saudi Wildlife Authority [email protected] Ahmed ibn Ibrahim Al-Boug NEW ZEALAND Saudi Wildlife Authority [email protected] Prof Philip Seddon University of Otago [email protected]

33 Ali Salim Alfaqih UAE Taif University Dr Aamir Younis [email protected] Ministry of Environment and Water Dr Eitimad Ahmed Dr Adriana Nielsen Hail University Wadi Al Safa Wildlife Centre [email protected] Ahmed Abdalla Al-Ali Dr Gian Lorenzo D'Alterio Environment & Protected Areas Authority King Khalid King Khalid Wildlife Research Centre [email protected] GianLorenzo.D'[email protected] Alan Stephenson Hamad ibn Hadi Al-Qahtani HE Sheikh Butti Al Maktoum's Wildlife Centre Saudi Wildlife Authority [email protected]

Khalid ibn Ali Al-Shaykh Dr Anne-Lise Chaber Saudi Wildlife Authority Wildlife Consultant and Veterinary Services Dr Mohammed Shobrak [email protected] Taif University Balazs Buzas [email protected] Al Mayya Breeding Centre Dr Naif ibn Ahmad Al-Hanoush [email protected] Saudi Wildlife Authority Chris Joubert [email protected] Breeding Centre for Endangered Arabian Dr Osama B. Mohammed Wildlife King Saud University [email protected] [email protected] Dr Chris Lloyd Othman Abd-ar-Rahman Llewellyn 2 feet 4 paws Saudi Wildlife Authority [email protected] [email protected] Dr Christiana Hebel [email protected] SOUTH AFRICA Dr Adrian Tordiffe Dr Claudia Kaiser University of Pretoria Zabeel Veterinary Hospital [email protected] [email protected]

Dr Gerhard Steenkamp Cornillie van de Feen University of Pretoria Breeding Centre for Endangered Arabian Wildlife [email protected] [email protected] Dr Michael Knight Cyrintha Joubert South African National Parks Breeding Centre for Endangered Arabian [email protected] Wildlife Prof Michele Miller [email protected] Rare Species Conservatory Foundation Declan O'Donovan [email protected] Wadi Al Safa Wildlife Centre Peter Bradshaw [email protected] [email protected] Eszter Gulyas Crown Prince Office, Government of Fujairah

34 Fadi Yaghmour Kevin Hyland Environment & Protected Areas Authority Wildlife Protection Office [email protected] [email protected]

Greg Simkins Dr Lamees Ali Dubai Desert Conservation Reserve Ministry of Environment and Water [email protected] Larry McGillewie Hassena Ali Nakhli Wildlife Ministry of Environment and Water [email protected] Hiba AlShehhi Lisa Hebbelmann Ministry of Environment and Water Environment & Protected Areas Authority [email protected] [email protected]

Dr Himanshu Das Dr Louis Lignereux Environment Agency - Abu Dhabi Environment Agency - Abu Dhabi [email protected] Hind AlAmeri Environment Agency - Abu Dhabi Lyle Glowka [email protected] UNEP/CMS Office - Abu Dhabi [email protected] Hollis Stewart Lehbab Conservation Maktoum Al Mazrouei [email protected] Environment Agency - Abu Dhabi Ida Tillisch Manal Almazrouei EWS-WWF Environment & Protected Areas Authority [email protected] Manya Russo Jacky Judas EWS-WWF EWS-WWF Marina Antonopolou [email protected] EWS-WWF [email protected] Jane Budd Breeding Centre for Endangered Arabian Meyer de Kock Wildlife Al Bustan Zoological Centre [email protected] [email protected]

John Pereira Mikhail Korshunov Environment & Protected Areas Authority Al Mayya Breeding Centre [email protected] Moegamat Johaar Bassier Dr Judit Nagy Lehbab Conservation Al Mayya Breeding Centre [email protected]

Kate Burns Nahla Al Noobi Al Bustan Zoological Centre Ministry of Environment and Water [email protected] Obaid Al Shamsi Kevin Budd Ministry of Environment and Water Breeding Centre for Endangered Arabian Oliver Kerr Wildlife EWS-WWF [email protected] [email protected]

35 Paola Ferreira Dr Valentina Caliendo EWS-WWF Al Wasl Veterinary Clinic [email protected] [email protected]

Paul Vercammen Vladimir Korshunov Breeding Centre for Endangered Arabian Al Mayya Breeding Centre Wildlife Walter Tavares [email protected] [email protected] Peter Dickinson Yassir Hamdan Al Kharusi Ski Dubai, Majid Al Futtaim Environment Agency - Abu Dhabi [email protected] [email protected] Peter Roosenchoon Dubai Desert Conservation Reserve UK [email protected] Dr Craig Hilton-Taylor IUCN Red List Unit Pritpal Soorae [email protected] Environment Agency - Abu Dhabi [email protected] Dr David Mallon IUCN/SSC Antelope Specialist Group Rashed Al Zaabi [email protected] Environment Agency - Abu Dhabi [email protected] Dr Paul Bates Harrison Institute Reem Al Moheri [email protected] Ministry of Environment and Water

Reza Khan YEMEN Dubai Municipality: Public Parks and Horticultural Department Dr Abdul Karim Nasher [email protected] Sana'a University [email protected] Dr Riaan Mulder Abdullah Abu Alfotooh Nakhli Wildlife Environment Protection Authority [email protected] [email protected] Dr Soledad Garcia Breeding Centre for Endangered Arabian Dr Ali Al Najjar Wildlife Sana'a Zoo [email protected] ali.alnajjar@alsana'azoo.ae

Stephen Bell Dr Masa'a Mahdi Al Jumaily Dubai Desert Conservation Reserve Sana'a University [email protected] [email protected]

Dr Susannah Philip Breeding Centre for Endangered Arabian Wildlife susannah.philip@bceaw/ae

Tamer Khafaga Dubai Desert Conservation Reserve [email protected]