DOCSLIB.ORG

Reintroduction: Challenges and Lessons for Basic Ecology

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reintroduction: Challenges and Lessons for Basic Ecology PERSPECTIVES This kind of misunderstanding prob- ably explains the poor level of involvement Reintroduction: challenges and by ecologists, and particularly population biologists, in reintroduction programs - lessons for basic ecology only slightly more than half of the reintro- ductions involve professional biologists’. Franqois Sarrazin Academic laboratories generally face con- straints preventing them from sustaining Robert Barbault long-term and costly applied projects on their own. On the other hand, as Lindburglr Ecology is a subject where theoretical predictions are often difficult to test emphasized, many biologists ‘outside the experimentally in the field. To address this challenge, the Ecological Society community of zoo professionals’ argue of America suggested exploltlng large-scale envlronmental management decisions in that the large amount of money necessary a scientific way. This ‘adaptive management’ constitutes one of the purposes of the for single species reintroduction could be Sustainable Biosphere Initiative. Meanwhile, In the current context of the blodiversity spent far more usefully to protect whole crisis, translocations and particularly reintroductions of threatened species are ecosystems from destruction. They also becoming more numerous. It Is time for ecologists and wlldllfe managers underline that environmental conditions to collaborate on these unique opportunltles for large-scale studles. at the time of release are rarely exactly the same as those prevailing before extinc- Francois Sarrazin and Robert Barbault are at 1’UniversitCPierre et Marie Curie, tion, and the extinction causes are often Laboratoire d’Ecologie,URA 258 CNRS,BZt A. 7eme Ctage,7 Quai Saint Bernard, difficult to determine and to quantifyis. BP 237,75252Paris Cedex 05, France ([email protected]). Furthermore, reintroductions in devel- oped countries - particularly reintroduc- tions of large vertebrates - generally sup he threats to biodiversity resulting real-scale hypothetico-deductive experi- pose that the future population will be Tfrom human activities, and the under- ments in ecology. artificially maintained at least for some standable reluctance to perturb their time because of continuing human impact study subject, often prevent ecologists The mutual scepticism of field on the ecosystemia. This is against the from developing their own large-scale ex- conservationists and population IUCNrecommendations, but often remains periments. Therefore, long-term monitor- biologists difficult to prevent. In many cases, the ing or experiments on model species are Despite the recent development of con- reintroduced populations contain few in- often used, but this may limit the range of servation biology as a science’a-12,the gap dividuals, at least during the first years, testable hypothesesi-3. Meanwhile, faced between field conservationists and scien- and they may be difficult to observer. with the increasing numbers of trans- tists persists. Caughley” distinguished two Moreover, some behavloural traits exhib- location&s, the International Union for approaches in conservation biology: the ited by these individuals can be altered by Conservation of Nature (now IUCN- The declining population paradigm and the captivity or human imprinting, or by low World Conservation Union) proposed in small population paradigm. The first inves- density of conspecifics. These negative 1987 to define reintroduction as the intro- tigates extinction processes empirically effects may vanish in the first wild-born duction of a species in a previously occupied case by case, and the second theoretically generation, at least for species in which area in order to improve the conservation considers the consequences of smallness social learning and cultural transmission of the species. Reintroduced individuals on population viability. In restoration ecol- are low. However, demographic and even may come from captive breeding pro- ogy1sJ4, reintroduction suffers from the behavioural studies require long-term ef- grams or be translocated from natural same discrepancy between practical works fort, to achieve sufficient sample sizes and populations. The IUCNalso recommended published in grey literature (see Ref. 15) relevant observations in the second gen- that reintroduction programmes incorpo- and a comparatively poor theoretical eration. The possibility of controlling and rate feasibility studies and preparatory, background. replicating should also be considered. To introduction and monitoring period@. Practical reasons explain this situation. assess the particular effect of population Moreover, restoration of the original habitat Non-governmental organizations, which foundation on any biological trait, it is de- and amelioration of causes of extinction usually initiate reintroduction programs, sirable to study a control sample in natu- were considered as essential conditions are supported by sponsors requiring maxi- ral conditions. This is possible in the case for these projects. Unfortunately, the mum efficiency in terms of time and cost. of local reintroduction -that is, where rem- monitoring period that should follow re They aim at protecting and restoring bio- nant populations persist in other areas - introductions often remains neglected4JJ diversity, but the understanding of the but not when reintroduction constitutes or is documented only in ‘grey’ literature. mechanisms of population extinction and the only way to restore a species that is Our purpose is to show that, in order growth is not their first priority. Moreover, extinct in the wild. to combine the recommendations of the Kleiman et al.6 suggested that reintroduc- Overall, the scepticism of scientists IUCN and the Sustainable Biosphere tion success seemed more linked to bio- results from the basic problem of reintro- Initiativeg,reintroduction programs should political conditions and long-term funding duction: the initial decision concerning re- systematically include ecologists who are than to scientific rigour. Obviously reintro- introduction is usually a pragmatic choice proficient in population biology and gen- duction in a hostile human contexti6, and and not a scientific one. Indeed, even when etics, behavioural ecology and evolution. with low funding, would be very unlikely the IUCN conditions are respected, the They could then generate a fruitful ap- to succeed whatever the biological back- decision of release remains a political one. proach for testing hypotheses in basic ground, but once funding and local agree- Because the role of biodiversity in gen- ecology, and particularly in population ment are obtained, the success of reintro- eral, and of one species in particular, is biology (Box 1). Without overlooking con- duction remains a question of population often hard to establish from a strictly servation issues, reintroduction programs viability involving demographic, genetic, scientific point of view, philosophical, aes- could provide important opportunities for behavioural and ecological processes. thetic or more economic reasons usually 474 0 1996, Elsevier Science Ltd PII: SO169-5347(96)20092-S TREE vol. I I, no. II November I996 lead to such projects. Therefore, ecolo- ment of reintroduction methods, which demographic parameters can be used to gists generally have fewer arguments in can be useful in other project@. Recently, determine what kind of individuals should favour of reintroduction than against it. Cade and Temple’s reviewed the success be protected or which measures should We want to show that the planning and of numerous bird reintroduction programs be adopted to maintain and encourage the monitoring of reintroduced populations according to the methods involved. It expansion of a population. may be relevant for both conservationists appeared, however, that even the success Again, population dynamics models and ecologists provided that they work criterion was not clearly defined among that integrate demographic parameters togetherGJ9. authors. For example, Craig and Reed (in and behavioural data recorded in the field Ref. 15) think that a three-year breeding can lead to simulations and tests of a priori Reintroduction preparation and population with a recruitment rate that is hypotheses. The use of previous results knowledge of species biology higher than the death rate of adults de- to design further decisions is a central Whenever reintroduction managers scribes successful reintroduction. Accord- concept of adaptive management, that is, use scientific tools, the questions they aim ing to Minimum Viable Population stud- learning by doing2. In that purely applied to answer are generally focused on the ies, Beck et af.7 consider 500 free-living context, population ecologists should preparation phase of translocations. The individuals as representing good success therefore collaborate on reintroduction challenge of captive breeding20 requires and regret the low availability of published programs. studies of the genetic consequences of in- results using this criterion. However, with- Some projects on Arabian oryx (Oryx breedingzi, behavioural consequences of out taking into account life history traits, feucoryx)23, black-footed ferrets (Mustela captivity22, and population consequences habitat quality or the eventual metapopu- n@-ipes)16~35or golden lion tamarin (Leonto of infectious diseasesi8, involving mainly lation structure (which varies widely pithecus rosafia)30 are now recognized for veterinary and zoo biologists. Many efforts between reintroduced populations),
Load more

Recommended publications
  • EU Zoo Inquiry Report Findings and Recommendations
    1 THE EU ZOO INQUIRY 2011 An evaluation of the implementation and enforcement of EC Directive 1999/22, relating to the keeping of animals in zoos. REPORT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Written for the European coalition ENDCAP by the Born Free Foundation 2 THE EU ZOO INQUIRY 2011 An evaluation of the implementation and enforcement of EC Directive 1999/22, relating to the keeping of animals in zoos. REPORT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3 CONTENTS Page ABBREVIATIONS USED ............................................ 04 TERMS USED ............................................................... 04 FOREWORD ................................................................. 05 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................ 06 EC ZOOS DIRECTIVE 1999/22, SUCCESS, FAILURE – OR WORK IN PROGRESS? ..... 08 THE EU ZOO INQUIRY 2011 FINDINGS 11 INTRODUCTION .......................................................... 12 METHODOLOGY .......................................................... 14 TRANSPOSITION ........................................................ 17 IMPLEMENTATION ..................................................... 22 ENFORCEMENT ........................................................... 28 COMPLIANCE .............................................................. 30 COUNTRY REPORTS AND UPDATES 41 AUSTRIA............................................................ 42 BELGIUM........................................................... 43 BULGARIA ........................................................ 44 CYPRUS............................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Toward Successful Reintroductions: the Combined Importance of Species Traits, Site Quality, and Restoration Technique
    Kaye: Toward Successful Reintroductions Proceedings of the CNPS Conservation Conference, 17–19 Jan 2009 pp. 99–106 © 2011, California Native Plant Society TOWARD SUCCESSFUL REINTRODUCTIONS: THE COMBINED IMPORTANCE OF SPECIES TRAITS, SITE QUALITY, AND RESTORATION TECHNIQUE THOMAS N. KAYE Institute for Applied Ecology, P.O. Box 2855, Corvallis, Oregon 97339-2855; Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331 ([email protected]) ABSTRACT Reintroduction of endangered plant species may be necessary to protect them from extinction, provide connectivity between populations, and reach recovery goals under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. But what factors affect reintroduction success? And which matter more: traits inherent to the species, qualities of the site, or reintroduction technique? Here I propose that all three interact. First, reintroduction success will be highest for endangered species that share traits with non-rare native species, invasive plants, and species that excel in restoration plantings as reviewed from the ecological literature. Ten traits are identified as common to at least two of these groups. Second, reintroductions will do best in habitats ecologically similar to existing wild populations and with few local threats, such as non-native plants and herbivores. And third, the methods used to establish plants, such as planting seeds vs. transplants or selecting appropriate microsites, will influence outcomes. For any reintroduction project, potential pitfalls associated with a particular species, site, or technique may be overcome by integrating information from all three areas. Conducting reintroductions as designed experiments that test clearly stated hypotheses will maximize the amount and quality of information gained from each project and support adaptive management.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecosystem-Level Effects of Keystone Species Reintroduction: a Literature Review Sarah L
    REVIEW ARTICLE Ecosystem-level effects of keystone species reintroduction: a literature review Sarah L. Hale1,2 , John L. Koprowski1 The keystone species concept was introduced in 1969 in reference to top-down regulation of communities by predators, but has expanded to include myriad species at different trophic levels. Keystone species play disproportionately large, important roles in their ecosystems, but human-wildlife conflicts often drive population declines. Population declines have resulted in the necessity of keystone species reintroduction; however, studies of such reintroductions are rare. We conducted a literature review and found only 30 peer-reviewed journal articles that assessed reintroduced populations of keystone species, and only 11 of these assessed ecosystem-level effects following reintroduction. Nine of 11 publications assessing ecosystem-level effects found evidence of resumption of keystone roles; however, these publications focus on a narrow range of species. We highlight the deficit of peer-reviewed literature on keystone species reintroductions, and draw attention to the need for assessment of ecosystem-level effects so that the presence, extent, and rate of ecosystem restoration driven by keystone species can be better understood. Key words: ecosystem restoration, ecosystem-level effects, keystone species, population declines, reintroduction species in their ecosystems. Wolves prevent ungulate overpop- Implications for Practice ulation, and in doing so prevent overbrowsing of vegetation • More research into ecosystem-level effects of keystone (McLaren & Peterson 1994), and provide scavengers with car- species reintroduction is required to fully understand if, rion in winters (Wilmers et al. 2003). Sea otters consume sea and to what extent, keystone species act as a restoration urchins (Strongylocentrotus spp.), thereby maintain the integrity tool.
    [Show full text]
  • The Network of Conservatoires Botaniques Nationaux in France Bardin & Moret
    The network of Conservatoires Botaniques Nationaux in France Bardin & Moret The network of Conservatoires Botaniques Nationaux in France and the implementation of the GSPC: results of fifteen years of activities Ph. Bardin and J. Moret Conservatoire Botanique National du Bassin parisien, Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, France Abstract The Conservatoire Botanique National of the Bassin Parisien: a leading role in plant diversity conservation in the French Ministry of Ecology and Sustainable Development (Departement Ecologie et Gestion de la Biodiversite) In France, the Conservatoires Botaniques Nationaux are responsible for the conservation of plant diversity. The Conservatoire Botanique National of the Bassin Parisien, which comes under the National Museum of Natural History, has five main activities, which are in total accordance with the targets of the GSPC. The communication will present many advancements which have been obtained in these five domains: 1. The ambitious programme of biodiversity inventory: it allows us today to provide a widely accessible list of two thousand known species, with more than three million data items (the seventh GBIF contributor). The database is useful to support public policies for territorial projects including biodiversity 2. The research activity is carried out on very limited size populations and include demographic and genetic studies, the development of protocols and relevant tools for ecological engineering 3. A large programme of ex situ conservation, with a seed bank, an in vitro micropropagation unit and a living collection as a back up for the in situ conservation projects 4. Numerous in situ programmes are carried out: population reinforcement, reintroduction and transplantation. At the same time, an ecological management of habitats is established to protect the ecosystems 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Potential for Species Reintroductions in Canada
    Evaluating the Potential for Species Reintroductions in Canada JAY V. GEDIR, TIAN EVEREST, AND AXEL MOEHRENSCHLAGER Centre for Conservation Research, Calgary Zoo, 1300 Zoo Road NE, Calgary, AB, T2E 7V6, Canada, email [email protected] Abstract: Species reintroductions and translocations are increasingly useful conservation tools for restoring endangered populations around the world. We examine ecological and socio- political variables to assess Canada’s potential for future reintroductions. Biologically ideal species would be prolific, terrestrial, herbivorous, behaviorally simple, charismatic, easily tractable, or large enough to carry transmitters for post-release evaluations, and would have small home range requirements. Sociologically, Canada’s large geographic area, low human density, high urban population, widespread protectionist views towards wildlife, and sound economic status should favor reintroduction success. Canada has implemented legislation to safeguard species at risk and, compared to developing countries, possesses substantial funds to support reintroduction efforts. We support the reintroduction guidelines put forth by the World Conservation Union (IUCN) but realize that several challenges regarding these parameters will unfold in Canada’s future. Pressures from the rates of species loss and climate change may precipitate situations where species would need to be reintroduced into areas outside their historic range, subspecific substitutions would be necessary if taxonomically similar individuals are unavailable,
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Actions
    CHAPTER 4 Conservation Actions Table of Contents Take Action! Get Involved! ................................................................................................................... 5 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 9 Background and Rationale ................................................................................................................. 9 Conservation Action Classification System .................................................................................... 11 Conservation Action Description ........................................................................................................ 12 Best Practices for Conservation Actions ............................................................................................. 15 International Conservation Actions ................................................................................................ 15 Overview ........................................................................................................................................... 15 Regional Conservation Actions ........................................................................................................ 19 Regional Conservation Needs Program .............................................................................................. 19 Regional Action .............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Finding Correlations Among Successful Reintroduction Programs: an Analysis and Review of Current and Past Mistakes
    Finding Correlations among Successful Reintroduction Programs: An Analysis and Review of Current and Past Mistakes by Jillian Estrada A practicum submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science (Natural Resources and Environment) at the University of Michigan April 2014 Faculty advisor(s): Professor Bobbi Low, Chair Dr. M. Elsbeth McPhee Abstract In the past half century the world has seen a dramatic decline in species. More and more species are being pushed to brink of extinction. In the past, there have been several methods utilized to mitigate these trends, however with the recent surge of local extinctions, reintroductions have become a growing conservation tool. Despite many disadvantages of developing a reintroduction plan, hundreds have been attempted over the past 40 years, with mixed outcomes. Some conservationists have studied the factors associated with success; however the criteria on which their assessments were based were flawed. I attempted to complete my own assessment of successful programs using detailed program information along with life history traits of focal species. My results illustrate the many obstacles faced by reintroduction biologists. Based on the limitations faced throughout this study, I conclude that conservationists must take a step back and address the many issues with current reintroduction protocols prior to attempting any further assessments. My recommended solutions to some of these issues include defining universal criteria for a reintroduction program to be considered successful; monitoring, logging, and disseminating standardized data; and collaborating with captive facilities that have the ability to offer additional support. ii Acknowledgments Advisors Dr. Bobbi S. Low, Co-Chair, Professor of Natural Resources, School of Natural Resources and the Environment, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Of the Endangered Species Act
    Wyoming Law Review Volume 1 Number 1 Article 8 January 2001 From Population Segregation to Species Zoning: The Evolution of Reintroduction Law under Section 10(J) of the Endangered Species Act Frederico Cheever Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/wlr Recommended Citation Cheever, Frederico (2001) "From Population Segregation to Species Zoning: The Evolution of Reintroduction Law under Section 10(J) of the Endangered Species Act," Wyoming Law Review: Vol. 1 : No. 1 , Article 8. Available at: https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/wlr/vol1/iss1/8 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Law Archive of Wyoming Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Wyoming Law Review by an authorized editor of Law Archive of Wyoming Scholarship. Cheever: From Population Segregation to Species Zoning: The Evolution of R WYOMING LAW REVIEW VOLUME 1 2001 NUMBER 1 FROM POPULATION SEGREGATION TO SPECIES ZONING: THE EVOLUTION OF REINTRODUCTION LAW UNDER SECTION 10(J) OF THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT Federico Cheever I. INTRODUCTION "Recovery" has become the rhetorical focus of the Endangered Species Act and with good reason. The Act defines recovery as "the use of all methods and procedures . .necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to [the Endangered Species Act] are no longer necessary."' Re- covery efforts demonstrate that the Endangered Species Act is not about stopping development, but about saving species; not about maintaining species on the brink of extinction but, instead, "conserving" or "recover- * Associate Professor of Law, University of Denver College of Law.
    [Show full text]
  • Reintroduction of Captive Animals Into Their Native Habitat: a Bibliography
    TITLE: REINTRODUCTION OF CAPTIVE ANIMALS INTO THEIR NATIVE HABITAT: A BIBLIOGRAPHY AUTHOR & INSTITUTION: Kay A. Kenyon, Librarian National Zoological Park Branch Smithsonian Institution Libraries Washington, D.C. DATE: September 1988 LAST UPDATE: August 1995 TABLE OF CONTENTS General . 1 Invertebrates . 9 Fish . 11 Reptiles and Amphibians . 13 Birds . 18 Mammals . 35 GENERAL Newsletter: Re-Introduction News. 1990,-- no. 1--. Chairman, RSG: Dr. Mark Stanley Price. Edited by Minoo Rahbar. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction Specialist Group, c/o African Wildlife Foundation, P.O. Box 48177, Nairobi, Kenya. Fax (254)-2-710372; Tel (254)-2-710367. 1968 Petrides, G.A. 1968. Problems in species' introductions. IUCN Bulletin, New Series, 2(7):70-71. 1969 Wayre, P. 1969. The role of zoos in breeding threatened species of mammals and birds in captivity. Biological Conservation, 2(1):47-49. 1977 Brambell, M.R. 1977. Reintroduction. International Zoo Yearbook, 17:112-116. Kear, J. & A.J.Berger. 1977. The problem of breeding endangered species in captivity. International Zoo Yearbook, 17:5-14. Sankhala, K.S. 1977. Captive breeding, reintroduction and nature protection: the Indian experience. International Zoo Yearbook, 17:98-101. 1978 Jungius, H. 1978. Criteria for the reintroduction of threatened species into parts of their former range. In: International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources. Threatened Deer, pp. 342-352. Morges, Switzerland: IUCN. 1979 Anon. 1979. Reintroduction hazards. Oryx, 15:80. 1980 Campbell, S. 1980. Is reintroduction a realistic goal? In: M.E. Soule and B.A. Wilcox, eds. Conservation Biology: An Evolutionary-Ecological Perspective, pp. 263-269. Sunderland, Massachusetts: Sinaur.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Potential for the Restoration of Vertebrate Species in the Cairngorms National Park
    Assessing the potential for the restoration of vertebrate species in the Cairngorms National Park: a background review © Peter Cairns © David Hetherington © David Hetherington Internal report by Dr David Hetherington Cairngorms National Park Authority Ecology Advisor February 2013 Executive Summary To meet biodiversity objectives from the first National Park Plan, the Cairngorms National Park Authority commissioned this review as a systematic approach to identify vertebrate species that previously inhabited the Cairngorms and which could be subject to conservation action to restore them to the National Park. A review of contemporary and modern literature was carried out to identify which species had occurred in the region in the past, but which are either absent or very localised today because of human activity. The broad scope of the Holocene period – the 10,000 years or so since the end of the Ice Age - when the climate was broadly similar to today, was used to determine nativeness. Experiences from other cultural landscapes in the UK and elsewhere in Europe were called on where relevant to judge the likely potential ecological and socioeconomic impacts of species restoration in the Cairngorms National Park. For each species an account summarises information on their ecological function; national or international conservation and legal status; historical occurrence; potential socio- economic impacts; and experiences of restoration elsewhere. In order to help pinpoint those species which offered the best nature conservation and socio-economic opportunities for the Cairngorms National Park, each was assessed against five key criteria: conservation status; ecological function; potential land management impacts; potential economic contribution; and recolonisation ability. The review identified a long-list of 22 native species whose distribution had been severely impacted on by humans, through activities such as habitat modification, over-exploitation, or persecution.
    [Show full text]
  • AGENDA Reintroductions for Saving Species
    TUESDAY 28 NOVEMBER 2017 ZSL SCIENCE AND CONSERVATION EVENT The Meeting Rooms, Zoological Society of London, Regent’s Park, London NW1 4RY AGENDA Reintroductions for saving species – meet the wildlife movers Chair: Dr John Ewen, Institute of Zoology, ZSL _______________________________________ Receive the following communications: Dr Mark Stanley Price, WildCRU, University of Oxford Thoughts on reintroductions in a changing world Dr Sarah J Converse, US Geological Survey, Washington Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, School of Environmental and Forest Sciences (SEFS) and School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences (SAFS), University of Washington Tough choices: making better decisions for greater conservation success Dr Martin Gaywood, Scottish Natural Heritage People and reintroductions: the Scottish experience Dr Axel Moehrenschlager, Calgary Zoological Society Centre for Conservation Research Who does, or should, decide what is moved for conservation? _______________________________________ ZSL SCIENCE AND CONSERVATION EVENTS ABSTRACTS Reintroductions for saving species – meet the wildlife movers Tuesday 28 November 2017 The Meeting Rooms, The Zoological Society of London, Regent’s Park, London NW1 4RY Thoughts on reintroductions in a changing world Dr Mark Stanley Price, WildCRU, University of Oxford Reintroductions have demonstrably increased over the last 40 years or so, with varying levels of success, usually as assessed by the practitioners. We have seen the development of simple do’s and don’ts about reintroductions evolve
    [Show full text]
  • THE ASIATIC ONE HORNED RHINOCEROS (Rhinoceros Unicornis) in INDIA and NEPAL – ECOLOGY MANAGEMENT and CONSERVATION STRATEGIES
    THE ASIATIC ONE HORNED RHINOCEROS (Rhinoceros unicornis) IN INDIA AND NEPAL – ECOLOGY MANAGEMENT AND CONSERVATION STRATEGIES SATYA PRIYA SINHA BITAPI C.SINHA QAMAR QURESHI 2011 CONTENTS Introduction Morphological Features of Indian Rhinoceros Ecological Aspect Behavioral Aspect Legal Status Conservational Implications Past and Present Distribution Status of Rhino Areas in India and Nepal Rhino Reintroduction Programme in India and Nepal Action Plans for Rhino Conservation in India and Nepal Declaration of IUCN - Asian Rhino Specialist Group (AsRSG), Meeting held in Kaziranga NP, Assam, 1999 Declaration of IUCN - Asian Rhino Specialist Group (AsRSG), Meeting held in Kaziranga NP, Assam, 2007 Bibliography INTRODUCTION The Asiatic one-horned Rhinoceros/ Greater Indian One-horned Rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis) is perhaps the most endangered species of Indian mega fauna and one of the five remaining species of rhinoceros of an approximately 30 genera that once roamed the world (Nowak and Paradiso, 1883). Rhinoceroses first appeared in the late Eocene period. The oldest Indian rhinoceros like species was Brontops robustus, but the genus Rhinoceros may be traced back to the Pliocene period in northern India, and fossilized remains show that these animals were dwellers of riversides and marshes. In India, the rhinoceros has an old and traditional-linked history. The representation of the rhinoceros ichnographically or its mention in written accounts has been reviewed by a number of authors including Yule and Burnell (1903), Ali(1927), Ettinghausen (1950), Rao (1957) and Rookmaaker (1982). Although most of these quote sixteenth and seventeenth century accounts by medieval authors and other secondhand information’s, the accounts by Al Beruni and Ibn Batuta, two historians and scholars of the same period, are among the more authentic and details one.
    [Show full text]