Mongolian Journal of Biological Sciences 2005 Vol. 3(2): 3-15 Proceedings of the Mongolian Biodiversity Databank Workshop: Assessing the Conservation Status of Mongolian Mammals and Fishes: I - Results and Outputs of the Workshop Emma L. Clark1, Joanne F. Ocock1, Sarah R. B. King2 and Jonathan E.M. Baillie1*, 1Zoological Society of London, Regent’s Park, London, NW1 4RY, England. 2Steppe Forward Pro- gramme, Biology Faculty, National University Mongolia, Ulaanbaatar 210646, Mongolia. E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. *Corresponding author: Jonathan. [email protected] Abstract The Mongolian Biodiversity Databank Workshop was held at the National University of Mongolia and Hustai National Park from 1st October to 4th November, 2005. Participants assessed the conserva- tion status of all Mongolian mammals and fishes using the IUCN Categories and Criteria, and also met the other main objectives of the workshop, including: creating a Biodiversity Databank, revising species lists and maps for Mongolian mammals and fishes, and developing Summary Conservation Action Plans for a number of threatened or commercially important species. This article includes information about the IUCN Categories and Criteria used to assess Mongolian mammals and fish and these outputs. The Biodiversity Databank holds baseline data on the ecology, distribution, threats, conservation measures, and conservation status for all Mongolian mammals and fishes. Revised species lists have been agreed upon for the Biodiversity Databank project including 128 native species of mammals and 64 native spe- cies of fish. Digital maps have been produced for all mammals and fish, where data exists. Results of the workshop should provide baseline information for conservation of Mongolian biodiversity and provide resources for researchers. Keywords: biodiversity, databank, extinction risk, fish, mammal, Mongolia, threat Introduction Mongolia’s economy and landscape have un- fish presented in further papers. dergone rapid changes since the early 1990s, but The project was funded by the World Bank and the impact of these changes on the conservation implemented by the Zoological Society of Lon- status of Mongolian wildlife has been poorly docu- don (ZSL) (regionally represented by the Steppe mented. From October 1st to November 4th 2005, Forward Programme) and the National University over 70 of the world’s leading Mongolian biodiver- of Mongolia, in collaboration with the Mongolian sity specialists participated in the first Mongolian Academy of Science, the Ministry for Nature and Biodiversity Databank Workshop to identify the the Environment, the World Conservation Union conservation status of Mongolian species, and thus (IUCN) as well as many other regional and inter- form a baseline from which future trends can be national organisations. measured. Included in the Workshop was a small ex- Extensive research and data collection before pert working group focussing on Mongolian fishes. and during the workshop, and an ongoing review The main objectives of the meeting were to develop process following the workshop has resulted in five an agreed species list for Mongolian mammals and main products. These are: fishes, populate the Mongolian Biodiversity Da- 1. A species list of Mongolian mammals and tabank, develop detailed distribution maps for all fishes, in line with current nomenclature. Mongolian mammals and fish, assess the conserva- Historically, there has been poor commu- tion status of Mongolian mammals and fishes and nication between Russian, Chinese, Mon- identify measures necessary to conserve species of golian and Western scientists, resulting in concern. This paper highlights the main findings of little agreement over accepted Mongolian the workshop, with more detailed discussion of the species lists for most taxonomic groups. status of and threats to Mongolian mammals and The workshop was an ideal forum to 4 Clark et. al. Mongolian Biodiversity Databank results consolidate species lists, apply the Interna- Criteria. The following three days of the workshop tional Code of Zoological Nomenclature, were held at Hustai National Park, south-west of and develop an agreed list of all mammals Ulaanbaatar, where further training took place and and fishes in Mongolia. the main objectives of the workshop were carried 2. The Mongolian Biodiversity Databank. out. The final day of the workshop was held again This stores information on taxonomy, at the National University of Mongolia where the ecology, geographic distribution, popula- major findings were presented to a broad audience tion size, threats, utilisation, conservation of policy makers, journalists, scientists, conserva- measures and conservation status. The tionists and students. The findings presented here databank is held at the National University and in the subsequent papers are the results of the of Mongolia and is publicly available. efforts of specialists who participated in the work- . Up-dated, digitised and peer-reviewed shop, many of whom have dedicated their lives to distribution maps of Mongolian mammals studying Mongolian biodiversity. The results are and fishes. During the workshop, experts based on data from the scientific literature, reports developed the most up to date and accurate of governmental and non-governmental organi- distribution maps of all Mongolian mam- sations (NGOs), data from museums and expert mals and fishes. However, most species knowledge. remain poorly studied and we envision that The Steering Committee, comprised of rep- as more research is conducted, substantial resentatives from NGOs, academic institutions changes will occur, which we encourage. and government, provided support and guidance These maps can be used to display the throughout the implementation of the project. It is distribution of specific species or com- the intention of the Committee and ZSL to continue bined together to highlight areas with to develop the Mongolian Biodiversity Databank high species richness or areas with high with the next goal being the conservation assess- numbers of threatened species. Such maps ment of all Mongolian vertebrates. are important for communicating the state of Mongolian biodiversity and for setting The Red Lists for Mongolian mammals and fishes priorities. Red Lists, such as the 1997 Mongolian Red 4. A Red List for Mongolian mammals and Book of threatened species (Shiirevdamba, et al., for Mongolian fishes. Mongolian mam- 1997), have been in existence for nearly 60 years mals and fishes were assessed with the (Baillie & Groombridge, 1996). However, only re- IUCN Categories and Criteria for the first cently have a set of quantitative criteria been de- time. These Categories and Criteria have veloped by the IUCN to help standardise the way been designed to evaluate a species’ risk of in which species are classified according to their extinction. This system is more transparent extinction risk (Mace, 1994). The IUCN Red List and objective than previous approaches as Categories and Criteria were officially adopted in it is based on quantitative criteria and clear 1994 and revised in 2001 (IUCN, 2001). They are justification for each conservation assess- now recognised as an international standard and ment is given. used by countries and organisations throughout the 5. Summary Conservation Action Plans for world. The Red Lists compiled at the Mongolian species of particular conservation concern. Biodiversity Workshop use the new IUCN Regional At the workshop, participants developed Categories and Criteria (IUCN, 2003). action plans intended to highlight species The Red Lists only include wild populations in- that are of particular concern, and alert side their native range or populations resulting from policy-makers and conservationists to ac- benign introductions. The information in these ar- tions that need to be taken if these species ticles is presented and discussed at the species level. are to maintain viable populations into the Thus distinct subspecies within Mongolia, such as future. Saiga tatarica monogolica, an important Mongolian st On the 1 October, at the National University of subspecies of the saiga antelope, is referred to as Mongolia in Ulaanbaatar, the aims of the workshop Saiga tatarica. The only taxa that are referred to were presented and instruction was given on the at the subspecies level are the Gobi bear (Ursus application of the IUCN Red List Categories and arctos gobiensis), the Bactrian camel (Camelus bac- Mongolian Journal of Biological Sciences 2005 Vol. 3(2) 5 trianus ferus) and Przewalski’s horse (Equus ferus ing assessments on a global scale. For example, a przewalskii). The Gobi bear was included because regional assessment has to take into account species the subspecies was identified as an extremely im- that migrate between countries, or populations that portant taxa for Mongolian conservation and was are restricted to one country but dependant on im- assessed at the subspecies level. The Bactrian camel migration from another. The categories and criteria is referred to as Camelus bactrianus ferus rather for regional application are adjusted to account for than Camelus bactrianus to make it clear that only these differences. Two new definitions are included the wild population is being considered. Recent in the categories at the regional level. These are taxonomic evidence (Oakenfull et al., 2000) sug- Regionally Extinct (RE) and Not Applicable (NA) gests that although they are genetically distinct, the (Table