Rapid Assessment Report to support development of a Methodology for the Assessment of Priorities for International Species Conservation (MAPISCo)
Synthesis of lessons learned regarding targeted conservation actions
Prepared for the MAPSICo Project
by the
United Nations Environment Programme
World Conservation Monitoring Centre
March, 2012
UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre PREPARED FOR 219 Huntingdon Road Cambridge CB3 0DL DISCLAIMER United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0) 1223 277314 The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect Fax: +44 (0) 1223 277136 the views or policies of UNEP or contributory Email: [email protected] organisations. The designations employed and the Website: www.unep-wcmc.org presentations do not imply the expressions of any
opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP or ABOUT UNEP-WORLD CONSERVATION contributory organisations concerning the legal MONITORING CENTRE status of any country, territory, city or area or its The UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre authority, or concerning the delimitation of its (UNEP-WCMC), based in Cambridge, UK, is the frontiers or boundaries. specialist biodiversity information and assessment centre of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), run cooperatively with WCMC, a UK charity. The Centre's mission is to evaluate and highlight the many values of biodiversity and put authoritative biodiversity knowledge at the centre of decision-making. Through the analysis and synthesis of global biodiversity knowledge the Centre provides authoritative, strategic and timely information for conventions, countries and organisations to use in the development and implementation of their policies and decisions.
The UNEP-WCMC provides objective and scientifically rigorous procedures and services. These include ecosystem assessments, support for the implementation of environmental agreements, global and regional biodiversity information, research on threats and impacts, and the development of future scenarios.
CITATION UNEP-WCMC. 2012. Rapid Assessment Report to support development of a Methodology for the Assessment of Priorities for International Species Conservation (MAPISCo): Synthesis of lessons learned regarding targeted conservation actions. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge.
Table of Contents Introduction ...... 4 Lessons learned ...... 4 UK National Ecosystem Assessment (NEA) ...... 5 National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans ...... 8 Marine Assessments ...... 13 Species – focussed Multi-lateral Environmental Agreements- lessons from CITES and CMS ...... 16 References...... 21 ANNEX ...... 22 Annex 1. Annex 1 Information extracted and summarised from the UK NEA, Chapter 4- Biodiversity in the context of ecosystem services:...... 22 Annex 2. A list of indicators which address Aichi Target 12 and the number of countries that have developed each indicator from Fourth National Reports ...... 26 Annex 3 Species mentioned in a sample of 20 Fourth National Reports on NBSAP implementation, and actions described...... 27 Annex 4 2010 BIP Indicators ...... 44 Annex 5 Species Case studies ...... 45
Introduction Defra is seeking to maximise returns on investment for international species conservation by developing a methodology to prioritise species of conservation concern which also provide consequential or wider benefits to biodiversity and human well being (MAPISCo project). Development of this methodology is being undertaken by the University of Newcastle with support from other organisations. UNEP-WCMC has undertaken a rapid assessment to draw-out lessons learned regarding targeted actions from experience of:
the UK National Ecosystem Assessment (UK NEA); National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans of the Convention on Biological Diversity (NBSAPs); the Biodiversity Indicators Partnership (BIP); marine assessments; and Multi-lateral Environmental Agreements (MEAs);
The major consequential benefits drawn from specific CBD Aichi targets to consider in prioritising species for international conservation support include:
species that have a clear link to ecosystem services (Target 14, incorporating Target 15, specifically on the sequestration of carbon); species whose conservation minimises habitat loss, degradation and fragmentation and promotes management and protection of sensitive areas (Targets 5, 7 and 11, with greater emphasis on 5 and 7 relating to forests and agriculture/aquaculture than on Target 11 relating to marine and freshwater habitats); sustainable use of species, especially fisheries, invertebrates and aquatic plants (Target 6); species which provide important genetic resources for cultivation, domestication, cultural and other soci-economic purposes (Target 13).
Ecosystem services are defined here according to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) which categorises services as: provisioning or production services (i.e. products such as food and fuel), regulating services (ecosystem processes such as air, climate and water regulation, pollination), cultural services (non-material benefits such as aesthetic values, recreation and tourism) and supporting services which ensure continuity of other ecosystem services (i.e. photosynthsis, nutrient cycling and primary production) (MA, 2005).
It is intended that this paper will provide some insight to support discussions that aim to determine how to make links between particular species/species groups and a variety of consequential or wider benefits in prioritising species conservation.
Lessons learned
In the context of prioritising species for international conservation efforts which may also have consequential benefits, the following lessons/questions may be of interest.
4
UK National Ecosystem Assessment (NEA)
The UK NEA analyses the UK‟s natural environment in terms of the benefits it provides to society. It considers past, present and future trends in ecosystem services and their values. This section summarises key findings and some of the approaches used in the UK NEA, which may be of relevance to prioritising species for international conservation.
Key findings from the UK NEA (2011) were:
Biodiversity underpins all ecosystem services by playing a wide range of functional roles within terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems. Ecosystem functions are more stable over time in experimental ecosystems where biodiversity levels are relatively high1 and there are comparable effects in natural ecosystems. This evidence taken together show sthat the level and stability of ecosystem services tend to improve with increasing biosdiversity; Microorganisms, fungi and plants play important roles in provisioning and regulating services (e.g. nutrient cycling and biomass production); vertebrate groups contribute to cultural services but only play a role in underpinning 30% of provisioning and regulating services; The number of biodiversity groups playing an important ecosystem role varies between ecosystem services. For example, of 17 identified biodiversity groups, 3 were important for water quality, 11 were important for crops, livestock and fish and all 17 were important for wild species diversity; Biodiversity monitoring data in the UK (status and trends) is related to cultural importance of biodiversity groups. Well established data for culturally important species exists (such as birds), but limited data are available for several groups (such as microorganisms and fungi) precluding assessments of status and trends over time; Management will need to consider a wide range of biodiversity groups to provide multiple services and associated values; In the UK there is a cultural divide among biodiversity groups and associated ecosystem services; whilst status and trend data may exist on culturally important groups (e.g. birds), data on associated cultural services, such as the values and benefits derived from birds, are lacking. Quantifying the impact of biodiversity change on cultural services is difficult. For provisioning and regulating services, data on changes in the services are often available yet status and trend information on the biodiversity is lacking.
Rather than focus on individual species, the UK NEA considered biodiversity groups and assessed their importance in underpinning ecosystem services (A summary of the sources of evidence used by the NEA was extracted from Chapter 4 of the NEA and is presented in Annex 1). Whilst it was recognised that it was broadly known which biodiversity groups play important roles in ecosystem services, quantitative data linking biodiversity status and trend data with ecosystem services delivery are lacking. The importance of biodiversity groups in underpinning ecosystem services covered by the UK NEA was therefore qualitatively assessed. Evidence for biodiversity-ecosystem service relationships was determined by expert opinion, which in many instances relied on experts‟ assumptions and personal experiences rather than empirical evidence, using a similar approach to that adopted by the EASAC study (EASAC 2009).
1 Established but incomplete evidence (UK NEA, 2011)
5
In order to identify key biodiversity groups, importance was categorised as low, medium or high, and level of uncertainty was identified within available evidence. The table below (Table 4.2, reproduced below from the UK NEA Technical Report) illustrates the importance of different biodiversity groups in underpinning ecosystem services, which provides a basis for comparison across groups (Norris et al., 2011). It does not consider the functional mechanisms involved. Importance is illustrated by colour; the size of circle indicates the degree of uncertainty in available evidence.
The concept of importance was used to assess „sensitivity‟ of ecosystem services to changes within the biodiversity group. High importance means the ecosystem service is relatively sensitive to changes in that biodiversity group, for example, diversity levels, presence or abundance of specific functional groups, individual species or even genotypes. This approach does not consider irreplaceability; where the functional roles that biodiversity provides cannot be replaced by artificial processes, nor does it involve an understanding of the key biodiversity involved in terms of genes or species.
6
The UK NEA identified that land use change and pollution were the main direct drivers of biodiversity change in the UK, with emerging evidence suggesting climate change was impacting across a wide range of UK biodiversity groups, and that exploitation has a significant impact on marine ecosystems (on target and non-target species). These findings are similar to those of the Millenium Ecosystem assessment.
Lessons: Experience from the UK NEA (and the Biodiversity Indicators Partnership), indicates that although, the biodiversity groups that play important roles in ecosystem services are generally recognised, quantitative data linking biodiversity status and trend data with ecosystem services delivery are generally lacking.
Furthermore, global biodiversity monitoring data (status and trends) is largely available for culturally important biodiversity groups (i.e. birds and mammals), but limited data is available for several important functional groups (such as microorganisms and fungi).
To provide multiple services and associated values, a wide range of biodiversity groups could be considered in the prioritisation exercise.
The approach used by the UK NEA to collate expert opinion to evaluate the strength of evidence for species/ species group ecosystem services may be useful for prioritisation methodology.
7
National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans
National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) are the principal instruments for implementing the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and its Strategic Plan at the national level. The Convention requires that a national biodiversity strategy (or equivalent instrument) is prepared, and that this is mainstreamed in all activities which have an impact on biodiversity. NBSAPs and reports on their implementation also provide information on development of indicators within Parties. The most recent set of reports were the Fourth National Reports (submitted in 2009-2010).
Recently, Prip et al. (2010) assessed NBSAPs as a tool for national implementation of the Convention. In general, it was concluded that NBSAPs have generated important results, such as improving understanding of biodiversity, its value and what is required to address threats, as well as increased coverage of protected areas and better protection of endangered species. However, it was recognised that NBSAPs had not attenuated the main drivers of biodiversity loss and that further mainstreaming of biodiversity is required to meet time- bound and measurable national biodiversity targets which have to date been included in very few NBSAPs.
With regard to species conservation, and prioritisation, a sample review of 10% of the Fourth National Reports2 concluded that, all but one of the reports consulted listed at least five species of national importance to the country (see Annex 2). In some cases, reference to individual species was linked with consequential benefits such as economic importance or as a genetic resource, or for its role as an indicator of the health of its ecosystem. Some comments also refer to the importance of protecting an utilised species for wider benefits, for example, for the Guyanan endemic Carapa akuri which is exploited for oil, it was noted that “this single tree can save a forest”.
Regarding species prioritisation and Aichi Target 123, of the 190 countries that submitted a Fourth National Report, less than half (87 of 190, including the European Union) had developed a species-related indicator. Of those 87, 59 countries were low or middle income economies (as defined by the World Bank), and 28 were countries defined as high income economies (see Annex 3).
Lessons:
A review of a sample of 20 NBSAPs indicated that countries are reporting on existing targeted actions for individual priority species. A more comprehensive study of species references within the Forth set of National Reports may be of benefit, to examine national priority species and potential links with consequential benefits.
2 Albania, Angola, Australia, Belize, Brazil, Cameroon, Canada, China, Guyana, Islamic Republic of Iran, Madagascar, Myanmar, Nepal, Norway, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Portugal, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago. 3 By 2020 the extinction of known threatened species has been prevented and their conservation status, particularly of those most in decline, has been improved and sustained
8
Biodiversity Indicators Partnership
The Biodiversity Indicators Partnership (BIP) is a global initiative, currently involving over forty organizations, established to promote and coordinate development and delivery of biodiversity indicators in support of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). The BIP also works to provide support to decision makers developing and using biodiversity indicators at a national level.
Initially, a suite of indicators were developed to track progress towards the 2010 CBD Biodiversity target „to achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national level as a contribution to poverty alleviation and to the benefit of all life on Earth‟ (Decision VI/26). Seventeen headline indicators, some of which comprise composite indicators, were developed within seven focal areas (see Annex 4). A number of these indicators are based on species data, with some focusing on trends in the status and trends of biodiversity and others considering sustainable use of species and ecosystem services provided by species. This section is based on these species-focused indicators.
Development of indicators to monitor progress towards the Aichi targets is now under discussion, with a recommendation by the CBD‟s Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice to the CoP (next in October 2012) to establish indicators against which the targets can be measured.
Information on current species - based indicators is summarised below4:
The Living Planet Index (LPI) is calculated using time-series data on more than 7000 populations of over 2,300 species of mammal, bird, reptile, amphibian and fish from all around the globe. The Global LPI is the aggregate of two equally-weighted indices of vertebrate populations - the temperate and the tropical LPIs – calculated as the geometric mean of the two. The tropical LPI consists of the terrestrial and freshwater species populations found in the Afrotropical, Indo-Pacific and Neotropical realms and marine species populations from the zone between the Tropics of Cancer and Capricorn. The temperate LPI includes all terrestrial and freshwater species populations from the Palearctic and Neartic realms, and marine species north and south of the tropics. In the tropical and temperate LPIs the overall trends in terrestrial, freshwater and marine species are given equal weight. The results of the LPI are published biennially in the Living Planet Report.
The Global Wild Bird Index (WBI) will aim to measure population trends of a representative suite of wild birds, to act as a barometer of the general health of the environment and how it is changing, but is only currently available for Europe and North America, but being developed elsewhere.
The Red List Index (RLI) shows changes in the overall extinction risk of sets of species, with RLI values relating to the proportion of species expected to remain extant in the near future without additional conservation action. The RLI can be
4 Unless otherwise stated, information in this section has been derived from information on the website of the Biodiversity Indicators Partnership: http://www.bipindicators.net/
calculated for any set of species that has been assessed at least twice for the IUCN Red List. At present, RLIs are available for all birds, mammals, corals and amphibians (with the latter two based on preliminary data), and an RLI for cycads is due very soon. One challenge in expanding the taxonomic coverage of the RLI is that repeated Red List assessments of all species in poorly known, species-rich groups (e.g. insects, fungi, plants, etc) would be extremely costly. As a result, a sampled approach to the Red List Index has been developed to provide a measure more taxonomically representative of the world‟s biodiversity.
The Status of Species in Trade indicator uses the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species to track changes in the conservation staus of internationally traded bird species and bird species listed on CITES Appendix I and II.
The Wild Commodities Indicator tracks changes in the sustainability of use of a selection, or „basket‟ of wild animals and plants. There are two components to this indicator. The primary indicator is an indicator that tracks changes in the size of populations of these species since 1970. This analysis is based on the Living Planet Index (WWF/ZSL) and the index will compare population trends in the vertebrate species in the „basket‟ versus non-utilised vertebrates. The second component combines population and harvest data to track the sustainability of the harvest of a selection of highly utilised species. This harvest-based index has been newly developed. The Harvest index is calculated using the ratio between the „real‟ harvest and the maximum sustainable harvest which a population can support. Data collection for this component is ongoing and it is currently being trialled on a selection of marine and terrestrial species. The Marine Trophic Index indicator (MTI) is calculated from catch composition data collected by the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO). The data, although catch based, can be disaggregated into different taxonomic classifications from very broad groupings (e.g. Fish, crustaceans and molluscs) to habitat based fish (demersal, bathydemersal, etc.) to species and genus. It is possible to report on a combination of thematic and spatial themes. The Fishing- in-Balance (FiB) index provides further information.
The Biodiversity For Food And Medicine Indicator measured using a subset of the (RLI) for animals used for food and medicine and plants used for medicinal purposes medicinal plants. A Red List Index (RLI) for birds, mammals and amphibians used for food and medicine has been produced. This uses data from repeated assessments of the status of each species for the IUCN Red List, and illustrates overall trends in the extinction risk over time. An Accessibility Index based on primary data from selected countries were collected to investigate how the accessibility of species used for food and medicine is changing over time for poorer people. Price data has been collected for food and medicine „baskets‟ from markets in eight countries, representing Latin America, Africa and Asia, regions chosen for their high biodiversity. „Baskets‟ represent commonly used wild food (animals) and medicinal (plants and animals) products, with different species selected for each country. Price data were collected from vendors at the markets for a standard unit of the goods.
10
The Nutritional Status Of Biodiversity Indicator- most available data on food composition are on wild, indigenous and underutilized food. Most data are available for Asia, followed by Africa, Oceania and America.
Trends In Genetic Diversity, is currently indicated by the representation of crop wild relatives in ex situ collections as measure of the status of Plant genetic resources for food and agriculture (PGRFA). An indicator to show trends in livestock (by assessing proportion of breeds by risk status category) is in development. There are at least 1,750 individual genebanks worldwide, which collectively maintain about 7.4 million accessions, a 1.4 million increase since 1996. However, the majority (>70%) of these accession refer to duplicates held either in the same or a different collection. The number of accessions of minor crops and crop wild relatives (CWR) has increased in the past 14 years, but these categories remain generally underrepresented in ex situ collections.
Lessons:
Species focused indicators show a taxonomic bias towards vertebrate groups. The IUCN Red List and the Living Planet Index were key datasets, with one or both of these used in at least five indicators. However, if data for other groups were available, methodologies used to calculate the indicators could potentially be adapted for other species selected through the MAPISCo process.
Many ecosystem service indicators consider thematic areas (e.g. water quality) or habitat related issues (e.g. river fragmentation) rather than relate to individual species. Those based on species information were: the „Marine Trophic Index‟, the „Nutritional Status of Biodiversity‟ and „Biodiversity for Food and Medicine‟ and to some extent the forthcoming Forest Fragmentation Indicator. The data used to calculate these indicators by definition include species that may play an important role in the provision of ecosystem services considered in each of the relevant indicators.
The impacts of use of species varies according to the indicators. There are some indications that certain utilised species (birds) may be faring better than non-utilised species supporting a „use it or lose it‟ approach. However, trends may be related to the type of the use, with internationally traded bird species, on average, less threatened than utilised species that are not internationally traded. The picture relating to marine fisheries is unclear.
Discussions are ongoing in the CBD arena regarding an agreed set of indicators to assess progress towards the Aichi Targets (and therefore the wider benefits of species conservation). It may be useful for the MAPISCo species prioritisation process to consider the relevance of the CBD discussions on indicator development and the need for indicators to assess the effectiveness of species conservation action.
According to the BIP, species directly used by humans on a large scale consist of a few tens of domesticated animals, a few hundred crop plant species (with exceptions for ornamental and horticultural species) and few tens of major plantation timber species.
11
12
Marine Assessments
There are significant gaps in our understanding of processes and trends in the marine environment, and a general lack of scientific data on which to base conservation policy. This is true for species assessments. IUCN assessments for marine species lag significantly behind those within terrestrial biomes. The Global Marine Species Assessment (launched by IUCN SSC and a range of partners) was initiated in 2006 with the aim of assessing 20,000 marine species. This was to include all marine vertebrates, primary habitat producers such as corals, seagrasses and mangroves; and selected invertebrate families of crustaceans, echinoderms, and molluscs. As of 2011, 10,500 species have been assessed (GMSA, 2012). Extinction risk appears high for many marine species, with around 15% of all marine species assessed as Critically Endangered, Endangered or Vulnerable (GMSA, 2012).
To assess the state of the marine environment, the UN General Assembly launched the Assessments of Assessments (AoA) in 2005. It was established as a foundation for development of a regular process for global reporting and represents the most comprehensive initiative to date to better coordinate ocean governance. Assessments were deemed necessary, as it was recognised there is a lack of any overview of the marine environment, in particular on the links between the state of the marine environment and cross cutting issues of human health, seafood safety and sustainable fisheries.
The AoA process used the Global and Regional Assessments of the Marine Environment Database5 – an extensive collection of scientific research and data holdings of relevance to the marine environment. The AoA report‟s central recommendation calls for a mechanism that builds on existing global, regional and national institutions and processes while integrating available information (including socio-economic data) on how seas and oceans are being used (Assessments of Assessments, 2009).
Some findings of the AoA (2009) which may be relevant to species prioritisation under MAPISCo were as follows:
Extensive assessments of species not commercially exploited are less common, there is also a lack of research on marine resources harvested outside EEZs; Assessments of lower trophic levels have primarily been conducted in seas around developed countries; Assessments of protected species are more extensive in the developed world; Coverage of open oceans and deepsea areas beyond national jurisdiction is weak and datasets are sparse; Assessments that integrate ecosystem components may occur in a given sector (i.e. ecosystem approach to fisheries), but even if there are strong fisheries assessments in some global regions they frequently have no linkages to other assessments covering habitat, water quality or other ecosystem features; There is generally major gaps in global coverage of data in the marine environment; Many assessments are not reproduced, so there is no regular cycle linking monitoring and assessment to measures adopted to evaluate progress; Without integrated marine assessments, there may be no basis for priority setting across sectors and or/ecosystem components or to evaluate tradeoffs affecting environmental, social and economic aspects.
5 http://www.unep-wcmc-apps.org/gramed/
13
Marine agreements
There are a broad range of existing conventions, agreements and initiatives that specifically focus on the marine environment, which may have a global, regional or taxonomic emphasis. They include the multiple Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOs) of the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO). The agreements themselves appear to vary significantly in approaches and effectiveness.
For example, the OSPAR Convention seeks to protect the Marine Environment in the NE Atlantic. It works with participating governments to monitor and assess the status of the seas by setting internationally agreed goals and checking delivery. The OSPAR Quality Status Report concludes that exploitation of stocks under its jurisdiction continues beyond sustainable limits, and the status of a large number of stocks could not be assessed due to lack of data (OSPAR, 2010). It has assessed and prioritised species which require protection in order to guide the OSPAR Commission in its work on conservation of marine biodiversity6. The list is based on nominations of the Parties, with data reviewed by ICES, and includes 4 mammals, 9 birds, 2 reptiles, 22 fish and 5 invertebrates.
It may be useful to consider whether species already prioritised under OSPAR (or other marine agreements) could provide consequential or wider benefits, and use these species as a starting point in a prioritisation exercise. However, there does appear to be a general lack of data linking species and ecosystem function in the marine environment, and a species- based approach may be problematic.
CCAMLR (the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources) aims to conserve marine life in the Southern Ocean. It has made steps towards an ecosystem- based approach to fisheries management, which aims to minimise the risk of fisheries effecting dependent and related species. In accordance with its ecosystem approach, CCAMLR assumes that the system is dominated by the complex of species most important in the food chain, and has designated those indicator species which may reflect changes in the ecosystem. It is concerned about indirect effects of removal of one trophic level on another; for example, management of krill also includes dependent species such as seabirds and seals, which are monitored through the CCAMLR Ecosystem Monitoring Programme (CEMP). The CCAMLR approach to management requires continual refinement as more is learned about functional relationships between key species within Antarctic ecosystems (Kock, 2000).
Lessons:
For marine species, it will useful to consider species which have already been prioritised under marine assessments, conventions or agreements, and identify those which may provide consequential benefits. However, there appears to be a general lack of data for the marine environment linking species and ecosystem services, for example.
6 OSPAR List of Threatened and/or Declining Species and Habitats
14
An alternative approach may be to consider the ecosystem based approach favoured by CCAMLR, and direct efforts towards species which are considered to be important in the food chain.
15
Species – focussed Multi-lateral Environmental Agreements- lessons from CITES and CMS
For the rapid assessment of MEAs, two species-related conventions CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna) and CMS (Convention on Migratory Species) were considered. The basis for selection of species included: a) well documented targeted MEA actions, b) known overlap between conventions or c) known/likely consequential benefits. Examples were chosen to represent species listed in CITES and CMS Appendices I and II from a range of taxonomic groups, and species occurring within different ecosystems (marine, forest, drylands, etc.). Given the rapid nature of the assements, species choices were based on expert opinion rather than systematic review.
Five case studies are summarised in Table 1. These include 3 species, and 2 species groups protected by one or more of the species-related global MEAs (CITES and CMS). In addition to the key consequential benefits, other consequential benefits are also noted (supporting evidence is presented in Annex 5 Species Accounts).
Lessons Links between targeted MEA species-related actions and wider consequential benefits are often anecdotal and underlying causal relationships may be unclear without further targeted research. However, the wider role of species is recognised within a number of species related MEAs, as indicated in the Preambles to CITES and CMS. But once species are listed, MEAs such CITES give little prominence to the ecosystem role of species beyond ensuring that species do not become depleted through international trade and can thus continue to deliver their roles within ecosystems.
The species–related MEAs have generally been focussed on vertebrates, often charismatic species. The micro-organisms, fungi and lower plants which can be so important in maintaining ecosystem function are generally overlooked, but potentially encompassed by conventions that focus on habitats such as Ramsar, the regional Berne convention and the habitat-related POWs of the CBD.
In terms of sustainable harvesting, CITES has directly influenced patterns of trade and seeks to ensure that international trade in species listed within the Appendices does not threaten the survival of species. The convention is legally binding, has “teeth”, and has created mechanisms to deal with non-compliance, such as the Review of Significant Trade. There have been a number of conservation success stories, associated with CITES controls which can contribute to sustainable livelihoods. (e.g. Saiga antelope, vicuña, crocodilians).
Over-exploitation is a key driver of biodiversity loss in the marine environment and Aichi Target 6 has a specific focus on fish, invertebrate stocks and aquatic plants, all of which are under-represented in the CITES Appendices. Listing commercially exploited marine species remains a challenge for the convention. But work on species such as sharks has led to collaboration with FAO and encouraged further developments at national and regional levels. The broad engagement of CITES
16
Parties has been important in this regard, in contrast to the more limited membership of Regional Fishery Management Organisations.
CMS focuses on management of the species through coordinated actions. There are successes (e.g. Saiga, marine turtles). Effective conservation may be limited by the weakest link in the partnership but specific actions, such as establishment of protected areas are likely to contribute to wider benefits.
Some evidence of species-ecosystem service relationships were found or inferred based on available scientific evidence for individual species/species groups species covered under CITES and CMS (see summary table on page 17). Of the limited experience from this review, there was some apparently strong evidence for individual species contributing to ecosystem services (e.g. gorillas as seed dispersers). It is possible that evidence linking species groups to ecosystem function may be more comprehensive than for individual species, but in general even for species groups (and particularly those in marine ecosystems), information gaps are apparent.
Efforts to protect and increase habitats, as well as prevent habitat loss have been enhanced through MEA actions, e.g. prevention of habitat destruction though opportunities for sustainable use in the case of birdwing butterflies, possibly through protected area designation for Saiga and Gorilla.
It is difficult to determine whether conservation improvements achieved since listing on MEAs are solely attributable to the conventions themselves; there are likely to be other factors affecting conservation success/failure.
17
Table 1. Summary of case study species subject to multilateral protection, and potential consequential benefits Species/species Saiga tatarica Sharks Swietenia macrophylla Birdwing butterflies Gorilla spp. group (Class Chondrichthyes) MEA (s) CITES (II), CMS (II) CITES (II), CMS (I & CITES (II) CITES (I and II) CITES (I), CMS (I) II) Priority Provide ecosystem services
Aichi targets Aichi Provisioning* Food (locally), but Artisanal fisheries, Industrial wood Bushmeat supplies main use is traditional commercial fisheries (timber), fibre. (historically) medicinal (horns). (traded for meat, fins, Previously highly teeth and jaws). Oils traded historically used. internationally. Regulating Some species such as Air quality maintenance, Pollination services C. carcharias are apex local climate regulation, predators and have a water regulation, functional role of mitigation of climate keeping prey change, natural hazard populations in check regulation (floods, and maintain marine landslides), soil ecosystem stability. formation, soil erosion control. Cultural Traditions of Sport fisheries as Aesthetic values Aesthetic values Recreation and migratory peoples trophies (large ecotourism species); Teeth may have cultural significance. Recreation and ecotourism Supporting Role in steppe ? nutrient cycling Primary production, Large frugivores - ecosystem of nutrient carbon storage and therefore important cycling during sequestration, seed dispersers. migration. biodiversity Maintenance of maintenance, provision populations may of habitat, nutrient and benefit Critically water cycling. (Most Endangered Vanellis studies on carbon gregarious (Sociable sequestration conducted lapwing) in plantations).
Protection/restoration Concession management Planting food sources for Protected areas Minimise of range of habitats plans could contribute to ranching could support developed as a result habitat used by Saiga habitat management protection of the habitat of flagship species,
18
Species/species Saiga tatarica Sharks Swietenia macrophylla Birdwing butterflies Gorilla spp. group (Class Chondrichthyes) loss/degradation addressed by CMS e.g Virungas National and MoU. (PA network in Park. fragmentation Steppe habitat in Kazakhstan increased through GEF funding). Sustainable use Unsustainable Significant Unsustainable Unsustainable international Great Apes listed on international trade international trade in international trade trade addressed through CITES Appendix I addressed through sharks and their addressed through the the CITES Review of therefore trade the CITES Review of products; fishing is CITES BMWG and Significant Trade process; prohibited. Significant Trade unsustainable for a Review of Significant promotion of ranching process, but illegal number of species. Trade process. through CITES has trade persists. contributed to sustainable livelihoods Maintenance of Preventing over- Widely planted outside Ranching is a form of genetic exploitation and historical range for cultivation; this production resources ensuring the timber production. system can sustain or even migration continues enhance wild populations should support and therefore genetic continued genetic resources. mixing Other Aichi targets Aichi Other Flagship species Yes? Yes Yes Yes - Important flagships Yes – CMS has – people aware for invertebrate promoted through of values of conservation. Year of Gorilla. biodiversity and steps to conserve spp.(1) Species Stat of all populations Conservation status of extinction favourable. CITES major traded species likely prevented, trade suspensions and to be much poorer without conservation CMS MoU between controls under CITES. status of species range States have improved and likely contributed. maintained (12) Development of CMS MoU includes CMS Action Plans effective measures to address refer to NBSAPS NBSAPs (17) Saiga conservation in NBSAPs
19
General comments
It would be useful for the workshop to consider whether all four of the consequential benefits identified should be viewed equally, or whether certain wider benefits may be viewed as more important than others.
For species protected under MEAs, it is often challenging to tie the benefits of MEAs directly to changes in species status. However, MEAs can play an important role in encouraging the development of national implementing legislation, whilst, international processes can encourage scrutiny of national implementation and assessment and may help to co-ordinate action across species ranges, in areas outside national jurisdiction and to leverage political will.
Where synergies occur, coordinated targeted species actions by multiple conventions are likely to provide cost effective solutions (e.g. Saiga tatarica).
Valuation of species (in terms of economic values contributing to sustainable livelihoods and functional values of ecosystem services) have not been taken into account here, and will be a significant factor in any prioritisation process.
20
References Assessments of Assessments 2009. URL: http://www.unga-regular- process.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=11&Itemid=11 EASAC (European Academies Science Advisory Council) (2009) Ecosystem services and biodiversity in Europe. European Academies Science Advisory Council. Global Marine Species Assessment (GMSA) 2012. http://sci.odu.edu/gmsa/. Accessed 2/3/2012. Kock, K-H, 2000. Understanding CCAMLR‟s Approach to Management. CCAMLR. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: biodiversity synthesis. World Resources Institute, Washington DC. Norris, K. 2011. Biodiversity in the Context of Ecosystem Services. Chapter 4 in: UK National Ecosystem Assessment. Technical Report. OSPAR. 2010. URL: http://qsr2010.ospar.org/en/index.html Prip, C., Gross, T., Johnston, S., Vierros, M. 2010. Biodiversity Planning: an assessment of national biodiversity strategies and action plans. United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies, Yokohama, Japan. UN National Ecosystem Assessment (2011). UK National Ecosystem Assessment. Technical report. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge.
21
ANNEX Annex 1. Information extracted and summarised from the UK NEA, Chapter 4 - Biodiversity in the context of ecosystem services: According to research for the UK National Ecosystem Assessment, it is widely accepted that biodiversity plays a wide range of key functional roles within terrestrial, freshwater and marine ecosystems (Hooper et al. 2005; Raffaelli 2006; Worm et al. 2006; Palumbi et al. 2009). It was the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) in 2005 which first linked these functional roles with the concept of ecosystem services (MA 2005). Subsequent work, such as the European Academies Science Advisory Council‟s (EASAC) report on Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity in Europe and the report, Reviewing the Economics of Biodiversity Loss: Scoping the Science, produced as part of The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) project, has attempted to be more explicit about how biodiversity underpins the delivery of ecosystem services, and considers the potential consequences of biodiversity loss for future service delivery (Balmford et al.2008; TEEB 2008; EASAC 2009; TEEB 2009). While there is often a broad understanding of which biodiversity groups are important in underpinning specific ecosystem services, such assessments are frequently hampered by a critical lack of quantitative data on biodiversity and ecosystem service relationships at the scales (spatial and temporal) typical of real-world ecosystems (Balmford & Bond 2005; Kremen 2005).
While there has been considerable research on the relationships between biodiversity and ecosystem function over the last 20 years (Hooper et al.2005; Raffaelli 2006), much of this work has limitations in terms of understanding real-world ecosystems (Srivastava & Vellend 2005). Studies have typically been undertaken on small-scales and within highly simplified experimental ecosystems but insights from natural systems are beginning to accumulate (Benayas et al. 2009). There is some quantitative evidence from studies of crop pollination services (Kremen et al. 2002) and disease regulation (Keesing et al. 2006). But, there is still a need to identify the functional components of biodiversity that deliver ecosystem services, whether it be related to an aspect of diversity per se (e.g. species diversity); or that the service depends on a specific functional group or even an individual species that plays a specific functional role. Biodiversity is generally thought to enhance the stability of ecosystems (Hooper et al. 2005) through increased functional diversity that buffers ecosystem processes against temporal or spatial perturbation (Loreau et al. 2003).
The UK has, perhaps, the most comprehensive data on biodiversity status and trends of any country in the world, but these data are not routinely linked to ecosystem services. For example, it is well known that pollinating insects play a crucial role in providing pollination services to agricultural crops (Klein et al. 2007; Zhang et al.2007). While there is evidence of pollinator losses in the UK (Biesmeijer et al. 2006), we have a very limited understanding of the consequences of these losses for pollination services, or of how environmental change is likely to impact on pollination systems. Yet pollination is one of the best understood biodiversity-ecosystem function-ecosystem service relationships. While we often understand that a particular ecosystem service (e.g. pollination) is likely to be sensitive to changes in specific biodiversity groups (e.g. pollinating insects), we are not able to quantify this sensitivity.
Key to understanding the links between biodiversity and ecosystem services is both the definition of biodiversity and the availability of monitoring data. Whilst functional groups may arguably be more closely linked to provision of ecosystem services than species diversity per se, much of the UK biodiversity data tends to relate to taxonomic groups distinguished by specific monitoring programmes (e.g. www.nbn.org.uk), which, in turn, provide the data that are used to report on status and trends.
The UK NEA concluded that all UK ecosystem services are sensitive to changes in more than one biodiversity group and this finding has important implications for the concept of multifunctional ecosystems and the implementation of an „ecosystems approach‟ in the UK. The importance of managing ecosystems to provide multiple services and associated values is becoming increasingly recognised both at an international level (Chan et
22
al. 2006; Kareiva et al. 2007; Naidoo et al. 2008; Norris 2008; Bennett et al. 2009; Nelson et al. 2009) and in a UK context (Anderson et al. 2009).
However, the scientific challenges involved with developing the necessary evidence base are significant, but research programmes are emerging that aim to better understand the functional links between biodiversity and ecosystem services in the context of UK ecosystems (e.g. www.nerc.ac.uk/research/themes/tap/tap-phase2.asp).
Status and trend information for selected UK biodiversity groups:
Monitoring of marine zooplankton diversity in the North Atlantic shows that higher diversity regions have moved northwards over time (Beaugrand et al. 2010);
Data on average species richness of vegetation in plots in the open countryside (fields, woods, heaths and moors), linear features, and areas targeted for their botanical interest in GB between 1978 and 2007 indicates a decline in species richness in each dataset (Carey et al. 2008; Countryside Survey data owned by NERC – Centre for Ecology &Hydrology);
Monitoring of butterflies, using composite population trend from 1976 to 2009 for 25 species of butterfly which are specialists of semi-naturalhabitats, indicates that populations have more than halved over the time period (data from Butterfly Conservation, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology and Defra; JNCC 2010);
The sustainability indicator for UK marine fin-fish stocks for 1990 to 2008 shows an improvement in sustainability from the late 1990s (Armstrong & Holmes 2010);
UK ‘Quality of Life’ indicators such as population trends of wild birds show differing results. The composite population trends of UK breeding bird species (n=114) with subdivisions showing grouped species 'trends for seabirds (n=19), water and wetland birds (n=26), woodland birds (n=38), and farmland birds (n=19) show that on average, populations of woodland and farmland birds have fallen between 1970 and 2008 by 14% and 47% respectively (data from RSPB, British Trust for Ornithology, JNCC and Defra; Population trends for wild mammals were sufficient to assess population change for 35 species (n=25 native wild species, n=10 non-native wildspecies; this represents 53% of all UK terrestrial mammals). The data on the 11 species of native bat included in this summary are for 10 years to 2007; for all other species, trends were assessed over 25 years (data from JNCC 2007).
References Anderson, B.J., Armsworth, P.R., Eigenbrod, F., Thomas, C.D., Gillings, S., Heinemeyer, A., Roy, D.B. & Gaston, K.J. (2009) Spatial covariance between biodiversity and other ecosystem service priorities. Journal Of Applied Ecology, 46, 888–896. Armstrong, M. & Holmes, I. (2010). An indicator of sustainability for marine fin-fish stocks around the UK: 1990– 2008. CEFAS, Lowestoft. Balmford, A. & Bond, W. (2005) Trends in the state of nature and their implications for human well-being. Ecology Letters, 8, 1218–1234. Balmford, A., Rodrigues, A., Walpole, M., Ten Brink, P., Kettunen, M., Braat, L. & De Groot, R. (2008) Review of the economics of biodiversity loss: scoping the science. Cambridge, UK: European Commission (contract: ENV/070307/2007/486089/ ETU/B2). Beaugrand, G., Edwards, M. & Legendre, L. (2010) Marine biodiversity, ecosystem functioning and the carbon cycle. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 107, 10120–10124. Biesmeijer, J.C., Roberts, S.P.M., Reemer, M., Ohlemuller, R., Edwards, M., Peeters, T., Schaffers, A.P., Potts, S.G., Kleukers, R., Thomas, C.D., Settele, J. & Kunin, W.E. (2006) Parallel declines in pollinators and insect-pollinated plants in Britain and the Netherlands. Science, 313, 351–354. Benayas, J.M.R., Newton, A.C., Diaz, A. & Bullock, J.M. (2009) Enhancement of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services by Ecological Restoration: A Meta-Analysis. Science, 325, 1121–1124.
23
Bennett, E.M., Peterson, G.D. & Gordon, L.J. (2009) Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecology Letters, 12, 1394–1404. Carey, P.D., Wallis, S., Emmett, B.A., Maskell, L.C., Murphy, J., Norton, L.R., Simpson, I.C., Smart, S.M. (2008) Countryside Survey: UK Headline Messages from 2007. NERC/Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, 30pp. (CEH Project Number: C03259). Chan, K.M.A., Shaw, M.R., Cameron, D.R., Underwood, E.C. & Daily, G.C. (2006) Conservation planning for ecosystem services. Plos Biology, 4, 2138–2152. EASAC (European Academies Science Advisory Council) (2009) Ecosystem services and biodiversity in Europe. European Academies Science Advisory Council. JNCC (Joint Nature Conservation Committee) (2007) Results of the Tracking Mammals Partnership (TMP) Surveillance [online] Available at:
24
Zhang, W., Ricketts, T.H., Kremen, C., Carney, K. & Swinton, S.M. (2007) Ecosystem services and dis-services to agriculture. Ecological Economics, 64, 253–260. www.nerc.ac.uk/research/themes/tap/tap-phase2.asp. e.g. www.nbn.org.uk,
25
Annex 2. A list of indicators which address Aichi Target 12 and the number of countries that have developed each indicator from Fourth National Reports Number of Indicators considered to address Aichi Target 12 countries with indicator 1.2.1 Living Planet Index 1 1.2.3 Global Wild Bird Indicator 2 1.2.4 Waterbird Indicator 3 1.4.1 Red List Index and Sampled Red List Index 20 2.2.2 Status of species in trade 1 4.5.2 Biodiversity for food and medicine 3 1.1.4 Nature Index 1 1.1.22. Changes in bird biodiversity index 2 1.1.25. Lists and status of endangered species 2 1.1.27. Trends of officially recognized threatened species 10 1.1.29. Common Bird Index 2 1.2.4. Indicators of trends in abundance & distribution of selected species 23 1.2.5 National red list assessment 9 1.2.6 Population of key species (trends, etc) 10 1.2.7 Plant diversity and conservation status 5 1.2.14 Number of indegenous fish protected 1 1.2.15. Species status (threats- at risk, maybe at risk, sensitive or secure) 8 1.2.16. Bird population/ trends by habitat type (including breeding) 6 1.2.17. Sea bird population 2 1.2.18. Species conservation status (change in status) 4 1.2.19. Change in population of threatened species 1 1.2.20. Sustainability indicator for species diversity 2 1.2.21. Number of animal species have disappeared and reintroduced 1 1.2.28 Number of Initiatives for species conservation 1 1.2.31 Change in status of species vs red lists 1 1.4.2. Population & abundance indices for threatened and endemic species 12 1.4.3. Number of species in the IUCN Red List and national Red Lists 9 1.4.5. Changes in status under other lists (e.g.. CMS, CITES) 3 1.4.6. Endangered species in protected areas 4 1.4.10. The number of confiscations of illegally traded wildlife species regulated under CITES 1 1.4.12 Status of endangered species (general indicators) 2 1.4.12 Endangered and protected species 1 1.4.13 Number of protected species 2 1.5.5 Number of threatened species restored and reclaimed 1 1.5.21 Cities Biodiversity Index 1 1.5.24 Number of ex-situ initiatives 1 1.7.1. Indices of the number of species protected and protection measures 2 1.7.2.Conservation measures for endangered species 1 1.7.4. Indices of species restoration, reintroduction and rehabilitation 1 2.1.15. Cases of illegal trade of wildlife 3 2.1.16 Exports of valuable commercial species 3 4.5.7. Number of wild species used in food and medicines 2 4.6.27 Increase and recovery of plant species essential to livelihoods 1 4.7.19. Number of native plants used in reforestation activities 1 4.7.20. Natural capital index 3
26
Annex 3 Species mentioned in a sample of 20 Fourth National Reports on NBSAP implementation, and actions described.
Country Species/species group Latin name (common name) Actions described/ comments Albania Ursus arctos (Brown bear) Action Plan elaborated.
Lynx lynx (Lynx) Action Plan elaborated. Phalacrocorax pygaeus (Pygmy cormorant) Action Plan elaborated. Cetaceans Action Plan elaborated. Posidonia oceanica (seagrass meadows) Action Plan elaborated. Angola Gorilla gorilla (Lowland gorilla); Pan troglodytes (Chimpanzee) Measures introduced in 2004 to prevent poaching. Border Guard Police in Cabinda assisted in mobilizing campaign against hunting of gorillas and chimpanzees. Psittacus erithacus (Grey parrot) Considerable pressure from trade in live specimens for pet trade Mekerel (Cichlidae family), Bagre (Bagridae family), Cabuenha Most cultivated fish species with major trade value in Angola (Cyprinidae family ), Barbus viviparus, B. puellus, Aplocheilichthys johnstonii, Pelmatocromis ruwet Loudetia simplex, Parinari punila, Syzygium spp., Magnistipula Found in Cameia National Park. eglandulosa, Polygonium panigerum Brachystegia wangermeeana, Brachystegia boehmii, Uapaca Found in Cangandala National Park. benguelensis, Erythrina abyssinica, Dyospiros sp, Piliostygma spp., Burkea spp., Strychnos spp., Dombeya spp. Welvitschia mirabilis Found in Iona National Park. Colophospermum mopane Found in National Park of Mupa. Giraffa camelopardalis angolensis (Giraffe) National Park of Mupa established to protect the giraffe. Hipportragus niger varini (Palanca Negra Gigante), Studies conducted on species ecology and biology. Trichechus senegalensis (African manatee) Australia Lagorchestes hirsutus (Mala) and Phascogale calura (Red-tailed Returned to the Northern Territory following exclusion of exotic predators. phascogale) Asterias amurensis (Pacific seastar) Impacts on scallop production (costs AUD$25 million per year) Solenopsis invicta (Red imported fire ant) National Red Imported Fire Ant Eradication Program responsible for removing all Red Imported Fire Ant colonies from south east Queensland. Wasmannia auropunctata (Electric ant) National Electric Ant Eradication Program - electric ant populations eradicated from areas where they were detected. Surveillance to ensure they have been completely eradicated. Chromolaena odorata (Siam weed) Siam Weed Eradication Program is increasing monitoring efforts, reducing the number of plants allowed to seed. Miconia calvescens and M racemosa (Miconia), Mikania micrantha Queensland Four Tropical Weeds Eradication Program targets these species (Mikania vine), Clidemia hirta (Koster‟s curse), and Limnocharis for eradication. flava (Limnocharis) Chrysanthemoides monilifera ssp. rotundata (Bitou bush) NSW Bitou Bush Threat Abatement Plan prioritises species at greatest risk from Bitou bush and sites where control is critical. Biological control programme introduced. Pongo pygmaeus (Orangutan) Australia supporting Orangutan conservation in Indonesia with a four-year
27
$500,000 partnership with the Nature Conservancy. Chelonia mydas (Green turtle) and Natator depressus (Flatback Hay Point Foreshore Development Project aims to protect and revegetate turtle) the point and foreshore which is a nesting site for marine turtles. Phascolarctos cinereus (Koala) Koala Venture partnership between University of Queensland and Rio Tinto Coal Australia, Australia's longest running koala study. Findings of the study used to guide management. Lathamus discolor (Swift parrot) Long-term monitoring programme developed with Bendigo Mining, Swift Parrot Recovery Team and the Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment. Plus land secured with habitat for the Swift parrot. Belize Penaeus vannamei (Pacific white shrimp) Aquaculture Oriochromis niloticus, O. mosambiques and O. aureus hybrids Tilapia farming. Species farmed since 2003. Rachycentron canadum (Cobia, Black kingfish) Commercial cage-farming Pantera onca (Jaguar) Important indicator species for health of forest ecosystems. Study carried out by Panthera to determine health of the population. Crocodylus moreletii (Morelet's crocodile) Plans for national assessment of populations of crocodile. Tapirus bairdii (Tapir) Belize's National animal. Epinephelus striatus (Nassau grouper) Fishing moratorium Macro brachium spp (River shrimp), Agnostes monticola Species being considered for aquaculture. (Mountain mullet), Cichlasoma synspilum (Tuba), Cichlasoma uropthalmus (Crana), Petenia splendida (Bay Snook), Ictalurus furcatus (Blue catfish), Dermatemys mawii (Hicatee (river turtle)), Strombus gigas (Queen Conch), Panulirus argus (Spiny lobster), Penaeus schmitti (White shrimp), Centropomus undecimalis (Common snook), Epinephelus striatus (Nassau grouper), Chelonia midas (Green turtle) Iguana iguana (Iguana), Crocodylus moreletii (Morelet's Established breeding programmes. crocodile), and Dermatemys mawii (Hicattee) Harpia harpyja (Harpy eagle) Harpy Eagle Reintroduction Programme. Current research project BFREE. Ara macao (Scarlet macaw) Current research project Mark McReynolds Alouatta pigra (Howler monkey) & Ateles geoffroyi (Spider Current research project University of Calgary monkey) Falco deiroleucus (Orange-breasted falcon) Current research project Peregrine Fund Trichechus m. manatus (Manatee) Belize Manatee Rehab Centre Brazil Lophius gastrophysus (Blackfin goosefish) Intensively exploited - overfished status. Lutjanus synagris (Snapper), Ctenosciaena gracilicirrhus (Barbell Identified as species with potential for increasing fishing capture in drum), Upeneus parvus (Dwarf goatfish), Arius grandicassis (Sea REVIZEE Report. catfish) Aristeopsis edwardsiana and Aristeus antillensis (Deep sea Identified as sensitive to exploitation, requiring strong control of fishing shrimps) activities. Lopholatilus villarii (Batata), Epinephelus niveatus (Snowy Identified as potential resources for exploitation. grouper), sharks of genus Squalus, Mustelus canis (Dusky smooth-hound) Thunnus atlanticus (Blackfin tuna) Catch may be expanded throughout the Northeast region. Hemiramphus brasiliensis (Ballyhoo) Underexploited but increased fishing effort must be accompanied by
28
measures to increase the length of fish at first capture. Xiphias gladius (Swordfish) Most accessible for artisanal fishing. Decapterus tabl (Roughear scad) Potential resource Opisthonema oglinum (Atlantic thread herring), Selene setapinnis Identified as under exploited. (Atlantic moonfish) Illex argentinus (Argentine squid) Potential resource Manihot esculenta (Cassava), Zea mays (Maize), Oryza sativa Core collections prioritized by EMPRAPA Genetic Resources and (Rice) Biotechnology Coffea spp. (Coffee) Pre-breeding programme developed by Campinas Agronomical Institute Cotton, Arachis hypogaea (Peanut), Oryza sativa (Rice), Cucurbita Brazilian Ministry of the Environment identification and mapping of land spp. (Cucurbits), Manihot esculenta (Cassava), Zea mays (Maize), race varieties / wild relatives. Bactris gasipaes var. chichagui (Peach-palm) Ananas comosus (Pineapple), cotton, Arachis hypogaea (Peanut), Germplasm collection. Oryza sativa (Rice), Ipomoea batatas (Sweet potato), Anacardium occidentale (Cashew), Dioscorea spp. (Yam), Manihot esculenta (Cassava), Hevea brasiliensis (Rubber tree) Heliconia spp., Ananas spp., Anthurium spp. Genetic markers used to study the species. Caryocar brasiliense (Pequi); Copaifera langsdorffii (Copaíba); Studies on population genetics. Euterpe edulis (Heart of palm); Swietenia macrophylla (Mahogany); Caesalpinia echinata (Brazil wood); Capsicum spp. (Peppers and sweet peppers); Cedrella fissilis (Cedar); Ceiba pentandra (Sumauma); Carapa guianensis (Andiroba); Amburana cearense (Cerejeira); Manilkara huberi (Massaranduba); Symphonia globulifera (Anani); Cocos nucifera (Coconut); Araucaria angustifolia (Araucaria); Hymenaea coubaril (Jatoba); Bagassa guianensis (Tatajuba); Jacaranda copaia (Parapara); Dipteryx odorata (Cumaru); Bactris gasipaes (Pupunha); Annona crassiflora (Araticum); Bertholletia excelsa (Brazil nut); Orbignya phalerata (Babassu); and Ilex paraguariensis (Erva mate). Bactris gasipaes var. chichagui (Wild peach palm) Conservation areas in the Arc of Fire where the species is found require better protection. Podocnemis unifilis (Tracajás / freshwater turtle) Community conservation work protecting breeding pairs, eggs, newborn turtles, releasing newborn turtles into the river - for sustainable use of the turtle as a food resource. Arapaima gigas (Pirarucu) Successful sustainable management practices in Conservation Units. Bertholletia excelsa (Brazil nut) Environmental certification in Chico Mendes Extractive Reserve Leontopithecus spp. (Lion tamarin) Preserved in Private Reserves of the Natural Heritage (RPPN) Leontopithecus rosalia (Golden lion tamarin) Strong increase in wild and captive population as a result of Golden Lion Tamarin Action Plan. Leontopithecus rosalia (Golden lion tamarin), marine turtles Status of these species improved through long-term projects on Action (except Leatherback turtle (Dermochelys coriacea)), Plans. Megaptera novaeangliae (Humpback whale), Eubalaena glacialis (Right whale), Amazonian freshwater turtles, Brachyteles arachnoides (Wooly spider monkeys).
29
Diomedea chlororhynchos [Thalassarche chlororhynchos]; Diomedea ICMBio developed Action Plans for these species. exulans; Diomedea melanophris [Thalassarche melanophris]; Macronectes giganteus, and Procellaria aequinoctialis Balaenoptera musculus, Balaenoptera physalus, Caretta caretta, Action Plans under preparation. Chelonia mydas, Dermochelys coriácea, Eretmochelys imbricata, Eubalaena australis, Lepidochelys olivacea, Megaptera novaeangliae, Physeter macrocephalus, Pontoporia blainvillei, and Trichechus inunguis Sea turtles, Megaptera novaeangliae (Humpback whale) Long-term conservation programmes in existence. Caryocar brasiliensis (Pequi) Initiative under the National Policy on Sustainable Development of Indigenous Peoples and Traditional Communities Bothrops jararaca (Jararaca) 106 patent requests Copaifera duckei (Copaiba), Pilocarpus sp. (Jaborandi), Mikania Patents granted for species. glomerata (Guaco), Hybanthus arenarius (Ipecacuanha), Solanum absconditum (Jurubeba), Baccharis altimontana (Carqueja), Secondatia sp. (Catuaba), Dorstenia sp. (Carapiá) and Davilla rugosa (Cipó caboclo) Achatina fulica (Giant African snail) State and local initiatives to control invasive species. Bubalus bubalis (Wild buffalo), Tecoma stans (Yellow elder), PROBIO project (1996-2006) funded projects to combat invasive sp. Gomphrena elegans, Prosopis juliflora (Algarroba), Tupinambis merianae Sus scrofa scrofa (European wild boar), Lepus europaeus Parana state-level plan for the Control of Alien Invasive Species. (European hare), Callithrix penicillata and C. Jacchus (Common marmosets), Apis mellifera (African bee), Ictalurus punctatus (Channel catfish), Macrobrachium rosenbergii (Giant Malaysian shrimp), tilapias, Clarias gariepinus (African catfish), Micropterus salmonoides (Black bass), Lithobates catesbeianus (Bull frog), Cordylophora caspia (Hydroid), Corbicula fluminea (Freshwater mussel), and Limnoperna fortune (Golden mussel) Euterpe longibracteata (Assai), Hevea brasiliensis (Rubber), Government Policy to Warrant Minimum Prices under the Program to Orbignya phalerata (Babassu), Bertholletia excels (Brazil nut), Support the Commercialization of Products from Extractive Activities. Copernicia prunifera (Carnauba), Caryocar brasiliensis (Pequi), Ruizodendron ovale (Piassava), Dipteryx alata (Baru), Spondias tuberose (Umbu), and Hancornia speciosa (Mangaba) Cameroon Gnetum africanum (Eru) Vegetable exported to Europe and America. Inventory ongoing, exploitation increasing. Carpolobia spp. (Cattle sticks) Regularly taken from Takamanda Reserve to Nigeria as a non-timber forest product. Cyathea camerooniana (Tree fern) Used as traditional fencing / building materials. Heavily threatened with extinction. Eichhornia crassipes (Water hyacinth), Azolla filiculoides (Red Invasive alien species. Planned GEF-Cameroon Project on the Development water fern), Nypa fruticans (Nypa palm), Pistia stratoites (Water and Implementation of a National Monitoring and Control System lettuce), Mimosa pigra (Giant sensitive plant), Procambarus Framework for Living Modified Organisms. clarkia (Lousiana crayfish), Cyprinus carpio (Common carp).
30
Coturnix japoma (Quail) OCACAN agro-ecological organisation promotes the cultivation of quail. Prunus africanum Limbe Botanic and Zoological Garden emphasise sustainable management. Tauraco persa (Guinea Turaco), Psittacus erithacus (Gray parrot), Special attention for threatened species. Gorilla gorilla (Gorilla), Loxodonta africana (African elephant) Canada Oncorhynchus kisutch (Coho salmon), Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Populations declined (1986-2006) in the Strait of Georgia. (Chinook salmon), Ophiodon elongatu (ling cod), Gadus macrocephalus (Pacific cod) and inshore rockfish Oncorhynchus keta (Chum salmon), Oncorhynchus nerka Populations relatively stable in the Strait of Georgia. (sockeye salmon), Merluccius productus (Pacific hake), Clupea pallasii (Pacific herring), Squalus acanthias (spiny dogfish), Theragra chalcogramma (walleye Pollock) Gadus morhua (Northern cod) Population not recovered following fishing moratorium. Pandalus borealis (Northern shrimp) and Chionocetes spp. (snow Fisheries now important in eastern Canada. crab) Rangifer tarandus (Caribou) Important subsistence harvest. Petromyzon marinus (Sea lamprey) Canada and US spent over $25 million per year to control the species in the Great Lakes region. Aquatic invasive species network established for managing this and other invasive alien species. Cyprinus carpio (Asian carp) Challenge to prevent introduction to Great Lakes. Dreissena polymorpha (Zebra mussel) and Dreissena rostriformis Invasive species displacing native crustacean Diporeia. (Quagga mussel) Dendroctonus ponderosae (Mountain pine beetle) Population explosions as a result of milder winter temperatures / fire suppression. Rangifer tarandus pearyi (Peary caribou) and Rangifer tarandus Designated as endangered and threatened respectively by COSEWIC. caribou (Woodland caribou) Rangifer tarandus caribou (Woodland caribou) Provincial and federal / territorial governments developing plans to protect caribou. National science review on state of the knowledge of woodland caribou published April 2009. Rangifer tarandus (Caribou) Circum Arctic Rangifer Monitoring and Assessment (CARMA) programme set up in 2004 to monitor caribou in circum Arctic. Mustela nigripes (Black-footed ferret) Black-footed ferret / Black-tailed prairie dog Recovery Team established in 2005, plan to release ferrets in fall 2009. Gavia spp. (Loons) Canadian Lakes Loon Survey monitors breeding success of loons. Ursus arctos (Grizzly bear) Eco tourism - Grizzly bear viewing Cervus elaphus (Elk), Meleagris gallopavo (Wild turkey), Species restoration by Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters Salmo salar (Atlantic salmon) Quercus garryana (Garry oak) Garry oak woodland recognised as important plant community. Frasera caroliniensis (American colombo) Protected area established by Hamilton (Ontario) Naturalists Club to protect the species. Hyperoodon ampullatus (Northern bottlenosed whale) Protected within the Gully MPA off Nova Scotia China Cervus elaphus (Wapiti / Elk), mustangs, Saiga tatarica (Saiga Reintroduced to their natural habitats. antelope) Glycyrrhiza spp. (Liquorice), Ephedra sinica, Cordyceps spp. Plants with economic / medicinal values grown on China's natural (Aweto), Saussurea spp. (Snow lotus) and Cistanche spp. (Saline grasslands.
31
cistanche) Ailuropoda melanoleuca (Giant panda), Panthera tigris (tiger), Priority species for rescue, population restoration and maintenance under Pantholops hodgsonii (Tibetan antelope) and Procapra przewalskii the 'National Plan for Wildlife Conservation and Nature Reserve (Przewalski‟s gazelle) Construction'. Taxus chinensis (Chinese yew) Ex-situ conservation cultivation area. Ailuropoda melanoleuca (Giant panda) Population increase since 1980s Rhinopithecus roxellana (Golden snub-nosed monkey) Populations under first class state protection. Taxus chinensis Under special state protection. Population continued to expand. Eupatorium adenophorum, Artemesia spp. (Ragweed), Solenopsis Invasive alien species targeted for removal. invicta, Alternanthera philoxeroides (Alligator weed), Cenchrus pauciflorus and Lissorhoptrus oryzophilus Panthera tigris altaica (Siberian tiger), Panthera tigris amoyensis Breakthroughs in technology for rescuing, feeding and breeding species. (South China tiger), Rhinopithecus roxellana (Golden snub-nosed monkey) Caragana spp., Salix spp., Hippophae spp. (Sea-buckthorn), Chinese government encouraged development of biological industries of Lycium chinense (Chinese wolfberry), Prunus dulcis (Almond) these species. Guyana Clusia spp (Kufa) and Heteropsis flexuosa (Nibi, Tibisiri), Non timber forest products harvested. In 1999 the export value of NTFPs Manilkara bidentata (Balata latex) and Carapa guianensis was US$1,120,612 (Crabwood oil) Tapirus terrestris (Tapir), Agouti paca (Labba), Dasyprocta agouti Highly valued by Amerindian people for subsistence. (Agouti), Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris (Capybara) Harpia harpyja (Harpy eagle), Arapaima sp. (Arapaima), Species important for ecotourism. Melanosuchus niger (Black caiman), Pteronura brasiliensis (Giant river otter), Alouatta seniculus (Red howler monkey), and Ateles paniscus (Black spider monkey) Carapa akuri Oil from the tree is an important source of natural oil for Makushi Amerindians and the cosmetic market. “The species is also endemic to the region and may be at risk from logging, providing new impetus for protecting its diverse rainforest habitat”. “This single tree can save a forest,” according to Pierre-Michel Forget. Dasyprocta leporina (Red-rumped agouti) Main seed disperser of Carapa akuri. Adenanthera pavonina (Redbead tree or Red Sandalwood tree), Environmental Protection Agency prepared materials to raise awareness of Psidium guajava (Guava), and Leucaena leucocephala (Jumbie these invasive species. bean). Columba livia (Common pigeon), Herpestes javanicus (Indian mongoose), and Oreochromis mossambicus (Mozambique tilapia) Arapaima gigas (Arapaima) Arapaima Action Plan to allow sustainable harvest of the fish population. Panthera onca (Jaguar), Podocnemis expansa (Giant river turtles), Protected within Iwokrama Firest by Iwokrama International Centre for Arapaima gigas (Arapaimas), Harpia harpyja (Harpy eagles) and Rain Forest Conservation and Development. Pteronura brasiliensis (Giant otters) Dermochelys coriacea (Leatherback turtle), Lepidochelys olivacea Institutions eg. Iwokrama, WWF, CI facilitate ecological / taxonomic (Olive ridley turtle), Chelonia mydas (Green turtle), Eretmochelys studies. Guyana Marine Turtles Conservation Society conduct / facilitate imbricate (Hawksbill turtle), Arapaima gigas (Arapaima), biodiversity monitoring. Podocenmis expansa (Giant river turtle), Melanosuchus niger
32
(Black caiman) Carduelis cucullata (Red siskin) New population discovered. Management plan to protect the species being developed by the South Rupununi Conservation Society. Melanosuchus niger (Black caiman) Research carried out by Iwokrama 2000-2002. Lemna minor (Duck weed) and Bactrocera sp. (Carmambola fruit Ministry of Agriculture and NARI working on control of invasive alien fly) species. Islamic Ferula gummosa (Galbanum) Widespread plant which is widely used in different industries eg. medicine. Republic of Income from galbanum export in 1998 was 180,000 USD. Iran Huso huso (Beluga), Acipenser guldenstadti (Russian sturgeon), Commercial fish species. A. persicus (Iranian sturgeon), A. stellatus (Sevruga) Clupeonella delicatula, C. engrauliformis, C. grimmi Commercial fish species. Rutilus frisii kutum (Kutum), Mugil auratus and M. saliens Commercial fish species. (Mullets), Cuprinus carpio (Carp), Abramis brama (Bream), Lucioperca lucioperca (Pikeperch), Rutilus rutilus (Roach) and Salmo trutta caspius (Salmon) Acinonyx jubatus venaticus (Asiatic cheetah) „Conservation of the Asiatic Cheetah, its Natural Habitat and Associated Biota‟ GEF project to identify key Asiatic cheetah habitat. Project will enable suitable management of these areas. Grus leucogeranus (Siberian crane) UNEP/GEF project „Siberian Crane Wetland Project‟ led by International Crane Foundation. International initiative to address threats at 16 internationally important wetlands along Siberian Crane flyways. Grus leucogeranus (Siberian crane), Numenius tenuirostris Iran joined a Memorandum of Understanding for these species under the (Slender-billed curlew), Marine turtles Convention on Migratory Species. Canis lupus (Wolf), Canis aureus (Common jackal), Ovis vignei Resident in Nayband Marine-Coastal National Park - declared in 1978. vignei (Wild sheep), Oryctolagus cuniculus (Rabbit), whales, dolphins Dama dama mesopotamica (Persian fallow deer) & Equus onager Captive breeding programmes. (Onager) Acinonyx jubatus venaticus (Asiatic cheetah), Grus leucogeranus Main conservation attention and measures for these threatened species. (Siberian crane), Equus onager (Onager), Chlamydotis undulata Captive breeding programmes for some of the species have started. (Houbara bustard), Dama dama (Fallow deer) Panthera tigris virgata (Caspian Tiger) Government of Iran implemented measures to reintroduce Siberian Tiger to Iran, in 2010 a pair of tigers transferred from Russia to Iran. Acinonyx jubatus venaticus (Asiatic Cheetah) Fines for illegal poaching raised from 2500 USD to 20000 USD, GIS maps prepared for cheetah habitats. Procyon lotor (Raccoon) Invasive species - main and identified pathways of spread are controlled. Azolla spp. Activities on invasive species underway. Madagascar Mantella aurantiaca, M. cowani and M. milotympanum Habitats of these species will be included in new set of protected areas. Anodonthyla rouxae and Rhombophryne coronata Special attention should be paid to these species when defining new protected areas. Calumma hafahafa Present in a recently introduced protected area. Monias benschi and Uratelornis chimaera Afforded legal protection when Mikea forest integrated into Madagascar's Protected Area System. Labourdonnaisia madagascariensis Bark used by weavers.
33
Pledagis falcinellus and Sterna fuscata Threatened by egg collection Crocodylus niloticus madagascariensis Threatened by egg collection Mantidactylus grandidieri, M. guttulatus, Boophis goudoti Threatened by hunting and poaching. Dypsis basilonga, Borassus madagascariensis, and Marojejya Important food species. insignis, Hyphaene coriacea and Dypsis decaryi Raphia spp, Bismarckia nobilis, and Ravenala madagascariensis Used for building, ropes and clothing. Ocotea, Khaya madagascariensis, Commiphora spp, Calophyllum High quality timber trees. chapelieri, Diospyros spp. Evodia belahe Used as ferment for traditional alcoholic beverage Dalbergia baroni Wood used for sawlog, marquetry, and making of floors Dalbergia greveana Wood used for sawlog, structural timber, and carving; the bark is used for medicinal purposes Dalbergia monticola Wood used for sawlog and joinery Diospyros perrieri Ebony used for carving and joinery Khaya madagascariensis Redwood used for joinery and crafts, gum resin Ocotea cymosa Hardwood used for timber and joinery Phyllarthron madagascariense Wood used for craft-making and the leaves for medicinal purposes Prunus africana Used for medicinal purposes Astrochelys yniphora Tortoise Action Plan. Plan to increase viability of wild and captive populations and halting illegal trade. Crocodylus niloticus National Crocodile Management Action Plan. Improve conservation, management and sustainable use. Haliaeitus vociferoides, Eutriorchis astur, Amaurornis oliveri, Anas Species selected as conservation targets. Haliaeitus vociferoides (Peregrine melleri, Anas bernieri, Aythya innotata Fund, in the Wetland Complex of Manambolomaty), Eutriorchis astur (Peregrine Fund, Masoala), Amaurornis oliveri (Asity Madagascar, NPA Mahavavy Kinkony), Anas melleri (Durrell, NPA Alaotra), Anas bernieri (Durrell), and Aythya innotata (Peregrine Fund & Durrell). Ardeola idae, Pheonicopterus minor Action plans developed for migratory species. Hypogemus antimena (Vositse) Conservation Action Plan, protect remaining habitat, create captive population as safety net, enforcing forest legislation. Raphia farinifera (Raffia) Marovoay farmers transplant wild seedlings to regenerate the species. Ocotea cymosa, Phyllarthron madagascariense, and Dalbergia sp Species held in Tsimbazaza Botanical and Zoological Park. Prunus africana Specific national action plan implemented - for sustainable use of species genetic resources. Khaya madagascariensis Assessment of an ex situ protective plantation of the species. Dalbergia monticola Study carried out on genetic diversity, reproductive physiology, impact assessment of fragmentation on D. monticola in eastern forest of Madagascar. Mantella cowani, Mantella auriantica Conservation action plans implemented by different environmental actors eg. ASG, CI, MATE, UADBA, MAVOA. Two new protected areas created Mangabe (Moramanga) and Fohisokina (Antoetra) which are habitats for both M. cowani and M. auriantica. Discophus antogilii Conservation and observation site of tomato frog established in Maroantsetra (Tomato Frog Village).
34
Calumma parsonii, Furcifer campani, Furcifer rhinoceratus and Research conducted on traded species. Brookesia decaryi. Crocodilus niloticus madagascariensis Management plan, monitoring centres improved, inventories on rivers Propithecus candidus, Prolemur simus Lemur conservation plan developed. Paretroplus petiti, P. dambabe, Ratsirakia legendrei Captive breeding programmes. Catharanthus roseus Species cultivated successfully over 4ha since 1989 by SIMPEXMA. Bruguiera gymnorhiza and Lumnitzera racemosa Mangrove fringe important in stabilizing river banks. Opuntia stricta Control of invasive species in Androy region. Adenia firingalavensi, A. olaboensis, A. subsessifolia, Cyphostemma Commercial plant species proposed to CITES. elephantopus, C. laza, Operculicarya decaryi, O. hyphaenoides, Senna meridionalis, Zygosicyos pubescens, Z. tripartitus Myanmar Coelogyne ecarinata Orchid unknown in cultivation but it has great potential. Batagur (Kachuga) trivittata (Burmese roofed turtle) critically endangered, in situ conservation protection of remnant wild population, ex situ: captive breeding programme at Yadanabon Zoo. Gardenia obtusifolia (Rubiaceae), Melia toosendan (Meliaceae), Chemical properties studied - species shown to have anti-cancer properties. Hesperethusa caenulata (Rutaceae), Tephrosia candida (Leguminosae) and Annona spp.(Annonaceae) Panthera tigris (Tiger) National Tiger Action Plan produced, Tiger Protection Units used to step up tiger protection. Hukaung Valley Wildlife Sanctuary established in 2004. Cervus eldii thamin (Eld's deer) Largest known wild population supported in Chatthin and Shwesettaw Wildlife Sanctuaries. Elephas maximus (Asian elephant) Project focussed on conservation of wild elephants in Alaungdaw Kathapa National Park and Htamanthi Wildlife Sanctuary. Geochelone platynota (Burmese star tortoise) Significant population protected within Minzontaung Wildlife Sanctuary. Turdoides gularis (White-throated babbler) and Crypsirina Endemic to Myanmar found within Minzontaung Wildlife Sanctuary. cucullata (Hooded treepie) Orcaella brevirostris (Irrawaddy dolphin) Play an important role in helping local fishermen to corral fish into nets. Important in the culture and economy of local people. Tursiops aduncus (Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphin), Sousa Species recorded in Mergui Archipelago. Current efforts include chinensis (Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin), Stenella longirostris investigating incidental catches in gillnet fisheries and incorporating roseiventris (Dwarf spinner dolphin), S. attenuata (Pantropical cetaceans as an integral component of conservation planning for the spotted dolphin), Neophocaena phocaenoides (Finless porpoise), archipelago. Orcaella brevirostris (Irrawaddy dolphin) and Balaenoptera edeni (Bryde's whale (small form)) Crocodylus porosus (Estuarine crocodile) Surveyed by Forest Department and WCS. Programme of law enforcement and habitat protection shown to be necessary. Dugong dugon (Dugong) Caught as bycatch. Conservation headed by Department of Fisheries, laws relating to fisheries have provisions for conservation of rare and endangered species. 71 fish species including Danio spp. and Botia spp. Listed as exported aquarium fish species. Kerivoula kachinensis (Kachin woolly bat) New to science - discovered by Harrison Institute and Yangon University bat studies. Craseonycteris thonglongyai (Kitti's hog-nosed bat) Funds secured for a study on the species.
35
Tadarida plicata (Free-tailed bat) Funds secured for analysis of social / economic role of the bat in the guano industry. Eretmochelys imbricate (Hawksbill turtle), Chelonia mydas (Green Department of Fisheries programme on Thameehla Island hatchery turtle), Caretta caretta (Loggerhead turtle), Lepidochelys aolivace established. Memorandum of Understanding on “Conservation and (Olive Ridley turtle), Management of the Marine Turtle and their Habitats of Indian Ocean and and Dermochelys coriacea (Leatherback turtle) South-East Asia (IOSEA)” signed between DOF Myanmar and IOSEA. Lagenaria vulgaris (Bottle gourd) Collection and conservation of local varieties. Dioscorea spp. (Yam) and Amorphophalus spp. (Elephant food Exploration and collection of species for conservation of plant genetic yam) resources. Cucumis sativus (Cucumber) Diversity of C. sativus landraces in Myanmar. Lagenaria vulgaris (Bottle gourd) Collection and conservation of local varieties. Nepal Gelochelidon nilotica (Gull-billed tern) and Sterna aurantia (River Population studies. tern) Catreus wallichi (Cheer pheasant) Maintained population in Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve. Panthera tigris (Tiger) Population maintained. Panthera tigris (Tiger), Uncia uncia (Snow leopard), vultures Target to reduce decline of selected big cat and birds of prey. Target challenging but achievable to reduce species decline. Rhinoceros unicornis (Greater One-horned Rhinoceros), Antilope National target to maintain populations. Reaching the target is challenging cervicapra (blackbuck), crocodiles Gavialis gangeticus (Gharial) but achievable. and Crocodylus palustris (Broad-snouted crocodile), Moschus chrysogaster (musk deer) Pterocarpus marsupium (Bijaya sal), Dalbergia latifolia (Satisal), National target to maintain populations of plant species. Reaching the Taxus wallichiana (Loth salla) target is challenging but achievable. Gavialis gangeticus (Gharial), and Elephas maximus (Asian National target to monitor the populations of major animal species and elephant), Swertia chirayita, Nardostachys grandiflora, medicinal plant species. Reaching the target is challenging but achievable. Neopicrorhiza scrophulariiflora, Cordyceps sinensis (Yarsa gumba) Daphne bholua (Lokta), D. papyracea, Edgeworthia gardneri Target to implement forest certification mechanism in CF for major NTFPs. (Argeli), Girardinia diversifolia (Allo) Reaching the target is not certain due to insufficient or lack of comparable data. Rauvolfia serpentina, Bergenia ciliata, Asparagus racemosus, Target to reduce unsustainable harvesting of selected medicinal plants. Aconitum species Reaching the target is not certain due to insufficient or lack of comparable data. Pseudois nayaur (Blue sheep), deer, dolphin. Target to Reduce illegal hunting of selected game animals. Reaching the target is not certain due to insufficient or lack of comparable data. Pine resin (khoto), Shorea robusta (Sal seed), Kutch, Ritha, Common Non Timber Forest Products Timur, Dalchini and Tejpat, Sabai grass or Babiyo, Lokta, Satawari or Kurilo, Chirayito, Jatamansi, Padamchal and Sugandhkokila Oryza nivara, O. rufipogon, O. granulata, O. officinalis Diversity of wild rice species in Nepal. Panthera tigris (Tiger), Uncia uncia (Snow leopard) Populations managed through census. Uncia uncia (Snow leopard) Approximately 27% snow leopard habitat protected. Rhododendron sp. Rhododendron Conservation Programme Uncia uncia (Snow leopard) Goal 2 - implement snow leopard conservation action plan. Panthera tigris (Tiger) Goal 2 - implement tiger action plan for Nepal.
36
Vultures (Gyps bengalensis (White-rumped vulture), Gyps Goal 2 - enhance vulture conservation with captive breeding. tenuirostris (Slender-billed vulture)) Elephas maximus (Asian Elephant) Goal 2 - endorse Elephant conservation action plan. Pterocarpus marsupium, Dalbergia latifolia, Taxus wallichiana Maintain population Gavialis gangeticus (Gharial), Elephas maximus (Asian Elephant) Monitor populations Swertia chirayita, Nardostachys grandifora, Neopicrorhiza Monitor populations of medicinal plant species. scrophulariflora, Cordyceps sinensis Daphne bholua, Daphne papyracea, Edgeworthia gardneri, Implement forest certification mechanism. Girardinia diversifolia Salmo guirdneri, Salmo frutta, Oncorhyclus rhodurns Monitor introduced fish species Gyps bengalensis (White-rumped vulture), Gyps tenuirostris Vulture Conservation Action Plan - drafted by BCN (Bird Conservation (Slender-billed vulture) Nepal), NTNC, RSPB and ZSL, awaiting approval. Vulture Conservation Breeding Centre established. Jatayu restaurant established in Nawalparasi district of Nepal under the implementation of Bird Conservation Nepal, where pesticide-free carcasses are fed to the vultures in collaboration with local communities. Sharp increase from 21 individuals in 2004/2005 to 272 individuals in late 2008, although population only 17 in 2005/2006. Pterocarpus marsupium, Dalbergia latifolia, Taxus wallichiana High medicinal and timber values - threatened due to overharvesting / illegal cutting. Ailurus fulgens (Red panda) Need to raise awareness and education to protect the species. Rauvolfia serpentina, Bergenia ciliata, Asparagus racemosus and Regulate unsustainable harvesting. Aconitum species Bubalus bubalis (Wild buffalo), Ursus thibetanus (Asiatic black Species given high priority protection. bear), Panthera tigris (Tiger), Ailurus fulgens (Red panda), Moschus chrysogaster (Musk deer), Elephas maximus (Asian elephant), Bos gaurus (Gaur), Canis lupus (Tibetan wolf), Rhinoceros unicornis (Greater One-horned Rhinoceros) Mikania micrantha, Eichhornia crassipes and Parthenium Management plans for invasive species should be implemented by 2010. hysterophorus Norway Crex crex (Corncrake) National management plan developed. Ursus arctos (Brown bear) Population increasing in Norway. Lynx lynx (Lynx) National goal to gain 65 annual breeding females. Canis lupus (Grey wolf) National goal is 3 reproducing females annually. Hypogymnia physodes (Monk‟s hood lichen) and Parmeliopsis Populations expanded. ambigua (Green starburst lichen) Oxalis acetosella (Wood sorrel) and Gymnocarpium dyopteris Populations declined as delayed response to soil acidification. (Oak fern) Picea abies (Norway spruce), Pinus sylvestris (Scots pine), Betula Average crown densities declined. spp. (Birch) Gyrodactylus salaris Efforts to eradicate the species which is a salmon parasite. Margaritafera margaritafera (Freshwater pearl mussel) Classified as vulnerable by Norwegian Red List. Lakes limed as a temporary measure to counteract acidification. Rana lessonae (Pool frog) and Triturus cristatus (Great Crested Threatened by fish introductions Newt)
37
Anser erythropus (Lesser white fronted goose) Norway preparing National Management Plan, also have introduced population monitoring, removal of predators in breeding area. Alopex lagopus (Arctic fox) Management plan developed. Measures include red fox control, supplementary release of arctic foxes, monitoring. Gulo gulo (Wolverine) National target for reproduction to occur 39 times annually. Rangifer tarandus (Wild reindeer) Population threatened by habitat fragmentation. Micromesistius poutassou (Blue whiting), Gadus morhua (cod), Threatened by fishing activities. Reinhardtius hippoglossoides (Greenland halibut), Sebastes marinus (Redfish), Sebastes viviparous (Norway haddock / lesser redfish), Brosme brosme (Tusk), Phoca vitulina (Common seal) and Phocoena phocoena (Common porpoise) Laminaria hyperborea (Tangle kelp) Exploited commercially. Mallotus villosus (Capelin), Melanogrammus aeglefinus Sustainable exploitation managed by Norwegian / Russian fishery (haddock), Eleginus navaga (Arctic cod) commission. Clupea harengus (Norwegian spring-spawning herring) Population managed cooperatively by EU, Norway, Russia, Iceland, Faeroes. Pagophilus groenlandicus (Harp seal) Harvested in Norway. Cystophora cristata (Hooded seal) Harvested in Norway. Halichoerus grypus (Grey seal) and Phoca vitulina (Common Both species harvested. seal) Balaenoptera acutorostrata (Minke whale) Harvested in Norway. Paralithodes camtschaticus (Alaskan king crab) Management regime introduced in 2008 to maintain a harvestable population. Uria aalge (Common guillemot) Population increasing. Uria lomvia (Brunnich's guillemot) Population monitoring work. Rissa tridactyla (Kittiwake) Population stable on Svalbard, decreasing on mainland. Ursus maritimus (Polar bear) Population count carried out from 2004. New count and population estimate planned for 2010. Rangifer tarandus platyrhynchus (Svalbard reindeer) Svalbard population legally protected since 1925. Limited hunting permitted in restricted areas. Lynx lynx (Lynx), Gulo gulo (Wolverine), Ursus arctos (Brown National monitoring programme for predators. DNA analyses used for bear), Canis lupus (Grey wolf), Aquila chrysaetos (Golden eagle) monitoring Gulo gulo, Ursus arctos, Canis lupus, but to a lesser degree for Lynx lynx and Aquila chrysaetos. Papua New Psophocarpus tetragonolobus (Winge bean) Important part of the diet in Papua New Guinea forests & cultivated in Guinea around 50 developing countries. Philippines Galirallus calayanensis (Calayan rail), Loriculus camiguinensis New species discovered in past 5 years. Highlight the importance of (Camiguin hanging parrot), Apomys camiguinensis (Philippine identifying & establishing KBAs and IBAs. forest mouse) and Rafflesia mira Brontispa longissima (Coconut leaf beetle) and Pseudococcidae Caused devastation to crops in certain parts of the country. Recent (mealy bugs) advances in biotechnology, e.g. PRSV-resistant papaya, are addressing some of the problems posed by these pests and diseases. Pomacea canaliculata (Golden apple snail) Infests rice paddies. Recent advances in biotechnology, e.g. PRSV-resistant papaya, are addressing some of the problems posed by these pests and diseases.
38
Sardinella tawilis (Freshwater sardinella) World's only commercial freshwater sardine. Marine turtles and Dugong dugon (Dugong) 5 year Memorandum of Agreement from 2004-2009 forged between DENR, Mayor of Davao City, Davao Light and Power Company Inc. for marine turtle and dugong conservation. Chelonia mydas (Green turtle), Eretmochelys imbricata (Hawksbill Protected within the Turtle Islands Heritage Protected Area. Major nesting turtle) area for green turtles. Rhincodon typus (Whale shark) Protected species in the Philippines. Whale shark aggregation sites identified as priority conservation areas. Megaptera novaeangliae (Humpback whale) Observed off Babuyan Islands, area being developed as a model ecotourism site for cetacean interaction. Orcaella brevirostris (Irrawaddy dolphins) Experts propose minimizing fishing gear-dolphin interactions to avoid dolphin mortalities. Portugal Austropotamobius pallipes (White-clawed crayfish) Species apparently disappeared and no suitable habitat available due to invasive species. Margaritifera margaritifera (Freshwater pearl mussel) and Unio Habitat restoration and reintroductions are needed. crassus Emys orbicularis (tortoise) and Lacerta monticola (mountain Poor prospects - loss of habitat extent and quality. lizard) Coronella austriaca (snake) and Vipera seoanei (viper) High degree of population fragmentation. Lynx pardinus (Iberian lynx) In pre-extinction scenario. Lutra lutra, Genneta genneta, and Herpestes ichneumon Stable population trends. Canis lupus (Grey wolf) Population stable. Capra pyrenaica (Mountain goat) Trend of population expansion. Limited distribution and numbers, very vulnerable to stochastic events. Inbreeding problems should also be considered. Lynx pardinus (Iberian lynx) Plan of Action for the Conservation of the Iberian Lynx, facilitates species conservation. Agreement of cooperation between Spain and Portugal allows ex situ conservation and reintroduction. Pterodroma madeira (Maderia petrel), Pterodroma feae (Cape RAM action plans, species benefited from LIFE projects and allowed Verde petrel), Monachus monachus (Mediterranean monk seal) rehabilitation and habitat conservation. Centroscymnus coelolepis (Portuguese dogfish) and Centrophorus Monitoring programme for deep sea sharks. squamosus (Leafscale gulper shark) Prionace glauca (Blue shark) and Isurus oxyrinchus (Atlantic Data from commercial long-line vessels collected. mako) Polybius henslowi (Pilado), Pollicipes pollicipes (Barnacle), Exploitation regulated by specific legislation. Epinephelus marginatus (Grouper) Linaria ricardoi Microreserve Monte do Outeiro, Cuba, designated for this species' conservation. Armeria pseudarmeria, Dianthus cintranus subsp. cintranus Peninha, Serra de Sintra microreserve designated. Armeria neglecta Assumed this species occurs in the designated Cerros de Mombeja microreserve. Lavandula latifolia Private reserve Sociedade Broteriana wild genes reserve. Asphodelus bento-rainhae Preparation of management plan. Culcita macrocarpa, Trichomanes speciosum and Lycopodiella Actions to manage and conserve habitat.
39
cernua Convolvulus fernandesii, Linaria ricardoi, Marsilea quadrifolia, "National plan for conservation of endangered flora" aimed to implement Narcissus scaberulus, Omphalodes kuzinskyanae, Plantago conservation measures. algarbiensis, Plantago almogravensis and Tuberaria major Hyacinthoides vicentina and Festuca duriotagana and populations Project to promote the conservation of natural values of Monfurado Site, of Quercus faginea and Quercus pyrenaica management trials to expand populations of species of flora of community interest. Asplenium hemionitis Develop conservation plan for the species. Quercus suber (Cork oak), Quercus ilex (Holm oak) and Quercus Promote sustainable management of cork oak, holm oak and Pyrenean oak pyrenaica (Pyrenean oak) forest pastoral systems. Narcissus pseudonarcissus subsp. nobilis, Iris boissieri, Melittis In situ conservation in protected areas developed. melyssophyllum Narcisus fernandesii Monitoring / safeguarding the population in the Natural Park of Guadiana Valey. Juniperius brevifolia, Vaccinium cylindraceum, Laurus azorica, Reintroducing plant species in the Natura 2000 Network. Angelica lignescens, Myrsine retusa, Erica azorica, Calluna vulgaris, Picconia azorica, Myrica faia, Leontodon sp., Tolpis azorica, Festuca petraea, Azorina vidalii, Prunus azorica, Frangula azorica, Viburnum subcordatum, Solidago sempervirens, Tolpis suculenta, Ilex azorica, Woodwardia radicans, Ranunculus cortusifolius, Lotus azoricus and Dracaena draco subsp. draco Marsilea azorica Fencing to protect the single population of the species on Terceira Island. Angelica lignescens, Azorina vidalii, Cerastium azoricum, Corema Botanical Garden of Faial developed procedures to collect and germinate sp., Daboecia sp., Lotus azoricus, Myosotis maritima, Sanicula rare seeds. azorica, Silene uniflora and Veronica dabneyi Quercus pyrenaica, Quercus rotundifolia, Prunus lusitanica, Sorbus Nurseries in Nature Reserve of Serra da Malcata aim of propagating plant aucuparia, Viburnum tinus, Fraxinus angustifolia and Sorbus species. Plants then returned to degraded areas to aid recovery eg. after latifolia forest fires. Pyrrhula murina Previous LIFE project for Azores Bullfinch recovery. Omphalodes kuzinskyanae, Plantago almogravensis, Plantago Within LIFE project, breed plants in nursery to increase population size. algarbiensis, Tuberaria major, Linaria ricardoi and Convolvulus fernandesii Leuzea longifolia Species reintroduction as part of LIFE project. Veronica dabneyi, Myosotis azorica Recovery of population in the Autonomous Regions of Azores Lathyrus sativus (Grass pea) Lathyrus breeding programme. Corylus avellana (Hazel nut), Humulus lupulus (Hops), Laurus Wild plant species of food value. nobilis (Laurel), Prunus avium (Cherry), Prunus spinosa (Plum), Pyrus bourgeana (Pear), Rubus ulmifolius (Blackberry), Sambucus nigra (Elder), Vaccinium myrtillus (Blueberry) and Vitis vinifera subsp. sylvestris (Grapevine) Fragaria vesca (Strawberry), Mentha pulegium (Pennyroyal), Herbaceous plants of food value. Rorippa nasturtium-aquaticum (Watercress), Narcissus spp. (Narcissus), and Trifolium resupinatum (Clover)
40
Myrtis comunis (Myrtle), Pistacia lentiscus (European mastic), Species of food value. Olea europaea var. sylvestris (Wild olive tree) and Asparagus spp. (Asparagus) Acacia sp., Carpobrotus edulis, Cryptomeria japonica, Pittosporum ICNB and MADRP promoted actions to control / eradicate invasive alien undulatum, Arundo donax, Lantana camara and Eichhornia species. crassipes Acacia longifolia Project with aims to reduce areas of sand dune invaded by Acacia longifolia. Pittosporum undulatum, Hedychium gardnerarum, Regional Plan for the Eradication and Control of Invasive Flora Species in Hydrangea macrophylla, Arundo donax, Gunnera tinctoria, Clethra Sensitive Areas - aims to eradicate 16 species of invasive plant in sensitive arborea, Carpobrothus edulis, areas of the Azores. Lantana camara, Ailanthus altíssima, Polygonum capitatum, Drosanthemum floribundum, Acacia melenoxylon, Ulex europaeus, Ipomoea indica, Rubus ulmifolius, Pteridium aquilinum Hydrangea macrophylla Removal of the species in the Autonomous Regions of Azores. Rumex azoricus Reintroduction to Autonomous Regions of Azores. Pittosporum undulatum, Arundo donax, Carpobrotus edulis and Control of invasive species in Autonomous Regions of Azores. Lantana camara Erica azorica, Picconia azorica, Myrica faya and Ipomea indica Reintroduction projects in Autonomous Regions of Azores. Cryptomeria japonica Cutting of specimens of the introduced species to allow natural habitats to recover in Autonomous Regions of the Azores. Pittosporum undulatum and Acacia melanoxylon Control of species. Gunnera tinctoria, Clethra arborea and Dicksonia antarctica Control of exotic vegetation. Pittosporum undulatum, Acacia melanoxylon, Gunnera tinctoria, Control of exotic vegetation. Clethra arborea and Hedychium gardneranum Carpobrotus edulis Eradication in Ponta de Sao Laurenco in Autonomous Regions of Madeira. Nicotiana glauca Monitoring and eradication in Selvagens Islands, Autonomous Regions of Madeira. Eichornia crassipes, Acacia sp. Develop a National Plan for Control and Eradication of Invasive Species. Solomon Coffea spp. (Coffee), Vanilla planifolia (vanilla), Piper Grown for export. Islands methysticum (kava) Marine turtles National Marine Turtles Action Plan 2008 - 2012 Holothuroidae (Sea cucumbers), Trochus spp. (trochus), reef Addressed in site specific management plan of Arnavon Island Marine fishes, Chanos chanos (milk fish), Tridacna spp. (clam shells), Conservation Area. megapode eggs Dolphins and Dugong dugon (dugong) Efforts to collect data on these species. Scombridae (Tuna) Tuna management plan - manage tuna in EEZ Achatina fulica (Giant African Snail) Ministry of Agriculture Quarantine division leads in extermination / control of the species Pterocarpus indicus, Intsia bijuga, Vitex coffasus, Xanstemon sp, Species prevented for export under the Forest Resources and Timber Mangroves Utilization Act Eretmochelys imbricata (Hawksbill turtle) Hawksbill turtle sanctuary in the Arnavon Islands - now a marine conservation area Holothuroidae (Bêche de Mer, Sea cucumbers) Ban on harvest and export under fisheries law.
41
Trochus spp. (Trochus), Tridacna spp. (Giant clam shells), Research work into reseeding coral reefs with the species. Holothuroidae (Sea cucumbers) Eretmochelys imbricata (Hawksbill) and Dermochelys coriacea Establishment of marine conservation areas. (Leatherback turtle) Holothuroidae (Sea cucumbers) and Tridacna spp. (Giant clam Research facilities at World Fish Centre. shells) Dolphins Local community and NGO (Earth Island Institute) collaboration to reduce traditional capture and export of dolphins. Trochus spp. (Trochus), Astacoidea (Crayfish), Nephropidae Size limits when harvesting species under Fisheries Act. (Lobsters), Birgus latro (Coconut crab), Holothuroidae (Bêche de Mer, Sea cucumbers) Marine turtles, marine mammals, crocodiles, Anthozoa Export / exploitation controlled by Fisheries Act. (corals), marine shells Cocos nucifera (Copra), Elaeis spp. (Oil palm), Theobroma cacao Under long term management for agriculture. (Cocoa), Capsicum spp. (Chilli), Vanilla planifolia (Vanilla), Piper methysticum (Kava) Sea turtles, Dugon dugon (Dugong) Environmental events for awareness eg. Year of the Sea Turtles, Year of the Dugong South Africa Loxodonta africana (African elephant), turtle, Gypaetus barbatus Management plans developed. (Bearded vulture), Tyto capensis (Grass owl), Anthropoides paradiseus (Blue crane), Bugeranus carunculatus (Wattled crane), Hirundo atrocaerulea (Blue swallow) Mellivora capensis (Honey badger) Partnership to encourage bee-keepers to protect their hives from honey badgers, to reduce the number of badgers trapped by bee-keepers. Accreditation - "badger-friendly" honey. Aspalathus linearis (Rooibos) Area under cultivation threatening endemic plants and animals. Initiative to promote biodiversity and sustainable production. Solanum tuberosum (Potato) Cultivation in Cape Floristic Region. Guidelines to encourage potato farmers to farm responsibly for biodiversity conservation. Cycadales (Cycads), Haliotis spp. (Abalone) and rhino - Concerns over possible over-harvesting. Ceratotherium simum (White rhinoceros), Diceros bicornis (Black rhinoceros) Haliotis spp. (Abalone) Fishery recently closed. Illegal harvesting despite fishery closure is of concern. Rhino - Ceratotherium simum (White rhinoceros), Diceros bicornis Increase in poaching a concern. (Black rhinoceros) Trinidad and Lutjanus spp (Snappers), Micropogonias furnieri (Croaker), Commercially important species. Tobago Sharks, Scombridae species (Tunas, mackerels – kingfish and Spanish mackerels), Litopenaeus spp. (shrimp), and Farfantepenaeus spp., Xiphias gladius (Billfish), sciaenids, Opisthonema oglinum (Herring) and Caranx spp (Cavalli) Pipile pipile (Piping guan) Endemic to Trinidad and critically endangered. Surveys indicate new population in the Northern Range. Protected under law: Environmentally Sensitive Species Rules 2001. Since designation in 2007 level of awareness
42
and protection has increased, preventing further declines. Trichechus manatus (West Indian manatee) and Campylopterus Designated under Environmentally Sensitive Species Rules 2001. ensipennis (White-tailed sabrewing hummingbird) Dasyprocta leporina (Brazilian agouti), Mazama americana The most popular game species. trinitatis (Red brocket deer), Dasypus novemcinctus (Common long-nosed armadillo), Cuniculus paca (Spotted paca or lappe), Tayassu tajacu (Collared peccary or quenk), Caiman crocodilus (Common caiman) Alouatta seniculus insularis (Red howler monkey) and Cebus Illegally hunted. albifrons trinitatis (White-fronted capuchin) Leopardus pardalis (Ocelot) Sometimes killed illegally by hunters. Pipile pipile (Pawi) Sometimes illegally hunted. Eunectes murinus (Anaconda), Ara ararauna (Blue-and-golden Inhabit protected area targeted for restoration (Nariva Restoration and macaw), Trichechus manatus (American manatee) Carbon Sequestration project) Phyllodytes auratus (Golden tree frog) Likely to be designated as an Environmentally Sensitive Species Dermochelys coriacea (Leatherback turtle), Chelonia mydas (Green Species considered for designation as Environmentally Sensitive Species. turtle), Eretmochelys imbricata (Hawksbill turtle), Lepidochelys olivacea (Olive Ridley turtle), Caretta caretta (Loggerhead turtle), Leopardus pardalis (Ocelot), Phyllodytes auratus (Golden tree frog), Cyclopes didactylus (Silky anteater), Mannophryne olmonae (Bloody Bay poison frog), Eudocimus ruber (Scarlet ibis), Epinephelus itajara (Goliath grouper), Lontra longicaudis (River otter or Neotropical Otter), Antipathes atlantica (Black coral)
43
Annex 4 2010 BIP Indicators
44
Annex 5 Species Case studies
Saiga tatarica (Saiga antelope)
1. Species overview
Populations occur in steppes and semi-deserts of Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation, although in winter, some animals reach Uzbekistan (Mallon, 2008) and northern Turkmenistan (Bekenov et al., 1998; Mallon, 2008). The population of Saiga antelope (including Saiga borealis) was estimated as c. 50 000 animals, down from 1 250 000 in the mid 1970s (Mallon, 2008). The species was classified as Critically Endangered in the IUCN Red List, noting observed declines of over 80% in 10 years, with the continuing decline severely skewing sex ratios leading to reproductive collapse (Mallon, 2008). However, CMS reports that the population is currently around 100,000 animals, with the majority of populations stable or increasing (CMS, 2011).
S. tatarica form groups of tens to hundreds of animals, but may concentrate in groups of thousands, particularly during calving and migration (Bekenov et al., 1998). Seasonal migrations of up to 1000 km take place from steppe areas in the north of range in summer (where there is rich grazing on grass, herbs and shrubs) to return to the desert in autumn.
Major threats to S. tatarica were reported to be uncontrolled illegal hunting for horns (which are used in traditional medicines) and meat, destruction of key habitats and traditional migration routes, and increases in steppe fires (Mallon, 2008). Agricultural abandonment was reportedly a problem in some areas, as cattle-grazing had formerly maintained grass species eaten by S. tatarica, which were being replaced by inedible species (Mallon, 2008). Severe winters were also reported to cause mass mortality in some years (Mallon, 2008). Climate change is a longer term threat (Berger et al., 2008).
2. MEA management and targeted actions
S. tatarica was listed in CITES Appendix II on 16/02/1995 and in CMS Appendix II on 23/12/2002. The species was included in Phase IV of the CITES Review of Significant Trade at the 15th meeting of the Animals Committee (AC15) in 1999 based on concerns regarding high levels of legal and illegal trade for traditional medicines. At AC16 recommendations for Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation were formulated, requesting detailed information on distribution and abundance of the species, the scientific basis for determining that export quantities were non-detrimental, and development of a system to securely mark legally acquired parts of S. tatarica. The CITES Standing Committee (SC) concluded that the recommendations were not satisfactorily addressed and import suspensions for the two countries were formed on 10/08/2001.
CITES and CMS jointly held a workshop in 2002 resulting in a draft MoU between range States, including an Action Plan for the species‟ conservation, restoration, and sustainable use (AC19 Doc. 8.6, AC19 WG8 Doc. 1). It was signed by Kazakhstan in 2006 and the Russian Federation in 2009 (CMS, 2009).
At the 13th CITES Conference of the Parties (CoP) in 2004, the EC drew attention to the conservation of S. tatarica being a matter of urgent concern, with ongoing population declines owing to overexploitation for domestic and international trade and habitat
45
degradation (CoP13 Doc. 32). The CoP adopted a number of draft decisions, which directed range States to sign the MoU and implement the Action Plan to restore habitat and population and enhance transboundary and international cooperation through inter alia a regional conservation and management strategy, address CITES implementation problems and report annually on progress (CoP13 Doc. 32).
Signatories to the MoU endorsed a Medium Term International Work Programme (2007- 2011) which included goals to enact and implement adequate CITES legislation; carry out annual population counts and monitoring of S. tatarica populations; and to expand and enhance the national protected area networks, with emphasis on protecting key areas (birthing and rutting) and migratory corridors (CMS, 2006). Its long term vision was to restore populations to the point that sustainable use could again be envisioned, with the goal to halt, and where possible reverse, the decline of Saiga populations in 5 years (CMS, 2006).
At CITES CoP14, further decisions were directed towards the range States to implement the MoU 2007-2011 Work Programme regarding implementation, anti-poaching, sustainable use and trade, human factors, awareness, mapping distribution, protected areas, monitoring and captive breeding, some population-specific measures, as well as reporting on them.
Milner-Gulland (2009) reported that good progress towards the CMS MoU and Saiga conservation had been made during 2008-2009 in terms of raising public awareness in all range states, anti-poaching efforts, monitoring in China. It was suggested that the status of all populations except those of Ustiurt were favourable (Milner-Gulland, 2009). The CITES SC withdrew its recommendations to Parties to suspend trade in S. tatarica from Kazakhstan and the Russian Federation in 2010 (CITES SC59 – notification 2010/12).
Signatories of the CMS MoU agreed an updated Medium Term International Work Programme for 2011-2015 (CMS, 2010). A large range of measures to be taken were defined to fully address implementation of the MoU. The Secretariats of CITES and CMS and the CITES Management Authority of China also convened a workshop to engage the Traditional Chinese Medicine industry in recovery of the saiga antelope to strengthen cooperation between consumers and range States. The CITES Secretariat also funded a study of the trade in Saiga antelope horns and other parts in South East Asia (CoP14 inf. 18).
3. MEA contribution to consequential benefits from protection of Saiga antelope
Ecosystem services: Transboundary cooperation is essential due to the large scale migration of this species. The CMS MoU provides a framework for international conservation throughout the species range, and it is likely CMS efforts have contributed to recovery of populations. It can be inferred that this has led to maintenance of species roles in the ecosystem, including a number of supporting services such as nutrient cycling during vast migrations in grassland steppe and semi-arid desert habitats. It is also inferred that the Critically Endangered sociable lapwing Vanellis gregarious (a wading bird) may be directly dependent on habitat created by the grazing Saiga, as a strong correlation between population declines of both species was apparent (Lachmann, 2005).
Minimising habitat loss: The CMS MoU directs signatories to expand and enhance protected areas networks to benefit Saiga, with emphasis on protecting key areas (birthing, rutting), migratory corridors and areas which may be subject to emerging threats. Saiga populations are insufficiently protected due species vast range, (Mallon, 2008, CMS
46
workshop report, 2011). Protection of corridors is an urgent action for the species (Berger et al., 2008). An ecological network on the right bank of the Volga River to protect Saiga was proposed (Lushchekina et al., 2005). Current protected areas include Chernye Zemli Biosphere Reserve in Russian Federation, which was created in 1990 (prior to listing on CMS /CITES) to protect Saiga antelope. Protected areas are being implemented in Kazakhstan, but do not take into account projected future distributions as a result of climate change (Singh et al., 2011). Four studied populations in Kazakhstan are under severe threat due to lack of protection as well as habitat loss, poaching, and gaps in ecological knowledge (Singh et al., 2010).
Whilst there has been some designation of protected areas within S. tatarica‟s range since listing in CMS Appendix II which may also benefit other species, it appears that current actions may not adequately be driving protection of habitats.
Sustainable use: The sustainable use of Saiga tatarica has been driven forward by CITES. The convention has effectively used sanctions (through the Review of Significant Trade and resulting suspensions) to deal with poor compliance by range States. Whilst it has ensured that international trade does not continue to threaten the survival of the species, illegal poaching aimed at Saiga horns does persist.
Maintenance of genetic resources: not a cultivated species, but maintenance of species for local food may be important.
47
Sharks (Class Chondrichthyes)
1. Overview of the group
Of the 465 shark species currently described, a high proportion are globally threatened. Eleven species are categorised as Critically Endangered, 15 as Endangered, 48 are Vulnerable, 67 Near Threatened, 115 are of Least Concern and 209 are Data deficient (IUCN Shark Specialist Group, 2012). Sharks have low reproductive capacities which make them vulnerable to exploitation. Global shark populations are experiencing declines; unregulated and unreported trade is a major factor. Fishing mortality is reported to be the greatest threat, either from shark fisheries (mainly for the finning industry) or other fisheries which catch sharks in fishing gear (IUCN Shark Specialist Group, 2012).
2. MEA management and targeted actions
Three species are listed on Appendix II to CITES. Cetorhinus maximus (Basking shark) and Rhincodon typus (Whale shark) were both listed in 2002, and Carcharodon carcharias (Great White) was listed in 2004. C. carcharias and Cetorhinus maximus are also listed on Appendices I and II of the CMS; Appendix II also includes R. typus, Isurus oxyrinchus (Shortfin Mako shark), I. paucus (Longfin Mako shark), Lamna nasus (Porbeagle) and northern Hemisphere populations of Squalus acanthias (Spiny dogfish).
Aside from the species listed above, CITES has also focused on sharks that are not listed in the appendices to the convention through adoption of Resolution Conf. 12.6 (2002). This resolution identified a lack of progress through the International Plan of Action on the Conservation and Management of Sharks (IPOA-sharks) prepared by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), where States which conduct shark fisheries or regularly take sharks are encouraged to develop a National Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Shark Stocks (NPOA-Sharks).
The resolution encouraged Parties to identify endangered shark species that require consideration for inclusion in the Appendices if management and conservation does not improve and engage with fisheries departments on implementation of IPOA-Sharks, and requested Management Authorities (MAs) collaborate with customs authorities to improve species-specific data collection. It also directed the CITES Animals Committee to critically review progress towards FAO IPOA-sharks (NPOA-Sharks) by major fishing and trading nations and to review information on shark assessments with a view to identifying species for possible listing and to make recommendations on improving conservation of sharks and the regulation of international trade.
At CITES CoP13 (2004), a number of Decisions concerning sharks were adopted, directing Parties to improve their data collection and reporting of catches, landings and trade in sharks (at species level where possible) towards the development of NPOA-Sharks, to seek assistance to build capacity to manage their shark fisheries, and take note of a number of species-specific recommendations.
The CITES Animals Committee identified a number of shark species where it was though necessary to take action to improve data collection, management, conservation and trade (contained in document CoP14 Doc 59.1, Annex 3). At CoP15, resolution 12.6 was revised, urging Parties to develop NPOA-Sharks and to improve research and data collection on shark fisheries and trade and to discuss CITES within RFMOs, and encouraging
48
improvement in data collection, management and conservation measures for sharks through domestic, bilateral, RFMOs or other measures.
The CMS developed an MOU on the Conservation if Migratory Sharks, which came into effect in February 2010, with ten signatories. The MoU‟s objective is to achieve and maintain a favourable conservation status for migratory sharks based on the best available scientific information, taking into account the socio-economic and other values of these species for the people of the Signatories. Specific objectives include improving understanding of populations through research, monitoring and information exchange; ensuring that directed and non-directed fisheries for shark are sustainable; ensuring to the extent practicable the protection of critical habitats and migratory corridors and critical life stages of sharks; increasing public awareness of threats to sharks and their habitats, and enhance public participation in conservation activities; and enhancing national, regional and international cooperation
3. MEA contribution to consequential benefits from protection sharks
Ecosystem services: There is no evidence directly linking MEA protection of sharks to maintenance of ecosystem services; however it could be inferred that improved management of the species listed in CITES and CMS contributes to sustained shark populations, which provide ecosystem services.
Shark species provide different ecosystem services dependent on their position in the food chain. As an apex predator, it is assumed that C. carcharias plays an important role in maintenance of marine ecosystem stability by, for example, keeping prey populations in check (CITES CoP13 Prop. 32). Whilst the effects of declines may be difficult to predict, ecosystem modelling suggests in certain ecosystems the depletion of apex predator sharks can have negative effects on other species directly or indirectly through the food web (Stevens et al. 2000), and indiscriminate removal of apex predators from marine habitats could disastrously upset the balance within the sea‟s ecosystems” (Last and Stevens 1994). The decline of large predatory sharks reduces natural mortality in a range of prey, contributing to changes in abundance, distribution, and behaviour of small elasmobranchs, marine mammals, and sea turtles that have few other predators (Ferretti et al., 2010).
The roles of Cetorhinus maximus and Rhincodon typus (large plankton feeders) within their ecosystems are unknown, but it is presumed to be similar to small plankton-feeding whales.
Minimising habitat loss: Signatories to the CMS MoU should “ensure the extent practicable the protection of critical habitats and migratory corridors and critical life stages of sharks”. It is unclear what efforts have been made to protect habitat as a result of the adoption of the MoU in 2010.
Sustainable use: CITES and CMS have urged Parties to develop voluntary IPOA-Sharks, which aim to ensure sustainable use of sharks through shark plans, and this has probably resulted in increased management and conservation benefits for sharks. Parties were requested to provide implantation on NPOAs under notification 2010/27; responses were received from the EU, Canada, Zew Zealand, Peru, and the United States of America (AC24 Doc 17).
Coverage of shark species under CITES remain underrepresented. Recent proposals to list shark species have been unsuccessful as some Parties do not support CITES as a tool for
49
shark management. EU proposals to list Squalus acanthias and Lamna nasus on Appendix II at CITES CoP14 (2007) and CoP15 (2010) to address the unsustainable trade in meat and fins failed to achieve the required two thirds majority vote. Political interests have dominated scientific evidence in such discussions. As unsustainable shark trade continues, listing commercially important marine fish species remains a challenge for CITES.
CITES Parties which indicate that they will not be bound by the provisions of the Convention relating to trade in particular species can enter a “reservation”, and a number are in force for shark species. For C. maximus, there are 5 reservations (Iceland, Indonesia, Japan Norway and Republic of Korea); there are 4 for C. carcharias (Iceland, Japan, Norway, Palau) and for R. typus, there are 6 (Iceland, Indonesia, Japan, Norway, Palau, Republic of Korea).
Maintenance of genetic resources: Not cultivated – but has been associated with medicinal properties, so genetic resources may be important.
50
Swietenia macrophylla (Big leaf mahogany)
1. Species overview
Swietenia macrophylla is a large, canopy-emergent, deciduous tree up to 40(-60) m tall with a diameter at breast height (dbh) up to 1.5 (-2) m, with an umbrella-shaped crown and an often buttressed bole (Lamb, 1966; Soerianegara and Lemmens, 1994; Gullison et al., 1996; Mayhew and Newton, 1998).The natural distribution of S. macrophylla was reported to extend from southern Mexico through southern Central America into South America and from there in an arc from Venezuela through the Amazon basin to Bolivia and Brazil (Lamb, 1966). Occurrence was reported in seasonal primary forests, often clustered together in groups along watercourses or in highly disturbed transition zones between forest types (Lamb, 1966; Grogan et al., 2002). The species has been planted extensively outside of its historical range.
The species is considered globally Vulnerable in the IUCN Red List (WCMC, 1998). The classification is annotated to indicate that it requires updating. S. macrophylla was considered to be decreasing globally (Mejía et al., 2008). Unsustainable exploitation was considered to be the main threat to the species (UNEP-WCMC, 2000; e.g. Calvo, 2000; Blundell, 2004; Verwer et al., 2008; Newton, 2008; Grogan et al., 2009; CoP12 Inf. 33; MWG2 Doc. 6). Rodan and Campbell (1996) summarised the available scientific information on S. macrophylla as follows: “(1) the species is being overexploited virtually throughout its range; (2) illegal logging is widespread; (3) populations are being reduced, including those in ostensibly protected areas; (4) genetic resources are threatened; (5) the prospects of sustainable harvesting to supply the trade are constrained by economic and biological difficulties; and (6) there are considerable adverse impacts from current extraction practices on associated tropical forests and the indigenous populations dwelling in them”.
2. MEA management and targeted actions
S. macrophylla was included in CITES Appendix III (populations in the Americas) in 1995. In 1998, Bolivia, Brazil and Mexico listed their populations in Appendix III, as did Colombia and Peru in 2001. The listing of Neotropical populations of of S. macrophylla in Appendix II, covering only logs, sawn timber, veneer and plywood came into effect on 15 November 2003.
There have been two key targeted actions for the species under CITES; the formation of the Bigleaf Mahogany Working Group (BMWG) in 2002 (CoP12 Doc. 47) and the inclusion of the species within the Review of Significant Trade at PC15 in 2005 and PC17 in 2008.
The BMWG comprised the range States and importing countries. It was established in 2000 (CoP11) to review effectiveness of current and potential CITES listings for the species, analyse legal and illegal trade, review studies of the species, and encourage information exchange, amongst others. At CoP12 in 2002, a mandate was given to the BMWG to discuss capacities needed for implementation of the listing relating to sustainable harvest and scientifically based non-detriment findings (NDFs).
The BMWG has held a number of workshops since establishment. It produced recommendations adopted by the Plants Committee to promote sustainability of the trade, which included for example, that only wood originating under management plans should be
51
accepted for export (with plans having minimum components of forest plans, commercial census at minimum area before annual entry, mapping of commercial trees, identification of seed-producing trees, minimum felling diameter, verified post logging monitoring, promotion of regeneration). It also identified priority actions for the species, which were adopted in CoP Decision 13.58, to: a) prepare and officially adopt, as a priority, mahogany management plans at national and subregional level; b) promote the conduct of forest inventories, as well as progress and promote programmes to determine and monitor the distribution, population size and conservation status of mahogany; c) develop capacity-building programmes in monitoring and management relating to CITES procedures and documents. To this end, if considered appropriate, it may request assistance from the Plants Committee and the Secretariat; e) establish, if considered necessary, working groups to implement the present Decision
Terms of reference for the group to support these actions were adopted by the Plants Committee. The work of the BMWG currently has three main strategic objectives, namely implementation (adoption of standard NDF guidelines), institutional strengthening (including promotion of national synergies; implementation of an electronic system to control the chain of custody; raise awareness on forestry regulations; share experiences at the regional level; involve all stakeholders; and capacity building activities), and funding (PC 18 Doc. 13.1.2). Parties must report on progress on the implementation of the strategy.
Populations of countries that had not demonstrated that they had sufficient information to make non-detriment findings, in compliance with the convention were included in the RST process, and included Belize, Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Venezuela.
3. CITES contribution to consequential benefits from protection of Swietenia macrophylla
Ecosystem services: As a large tree species, S. macrophylla provides wood for local and international use, provides habitat, stores terrestrial carbon, has a role in global carbon cycling and regulation of hydrology. Decaying wood plays a role in habitat diversity, acts as a nutrient sink or source, and plays a role in soil formation (Zalamea, 2007). Properties of the soil can be influenced by the species, with decaying S. macrophylla producing more water- extractable organic matter than Tabonuco (Dacryodes excela). S. macrophyllia was among the species which exhibited optimal carbon sequestration capabilities of 88 woody tree species considered in plantation in Taiwan (Wang, 2011). Carbon storage in aboveground biomass and soil were found to be higher for S. macrophylla in secondary forest stands than in plantation (Han et al., 2010).
Improved management through CITES does infer that these regulatory services have been to some extent, maintained.
52
Minimising habitat loss: Through management through CITES, it can be inferred that S. macrophylla habitats which may have been substantially degraded, fragmented or even lost, have been maintained.
Sustainable use: Overexploitation is one of the principal threats to tropical forests and CITES has addressed this principal threat for bigleaf mahogany (timber extraction). Parties have made significant efforts to promote conservation and sustainable use of bigleaf mahogany since listing in 1995. Whilst better management of forests containing S. macrophylla through the actions of CITES, its BMWG and RST process may have resulted in improved conservation for the species itself and others within its ecosystem, the Plants Committee have conceded that significant progress remains to be made. Ongoing activities will be reported on at CoP16 (2013).
Maintenance of genetic resources: Cultivated in plantations extensively outside of range.
53
Birdwing butterflies (Family Papilionidae)
1. Overview of the genera
Birdwing butteflies are regarded as those belonging to the genera Ornithoptera, Trogonoptera and Triodes. The distribution of Ornithoptera spp. was considered to reach from the Indonesian Maluku Islands (Moluccas) in the west across New Guinea to the Solomon Islands in the east (D'Abrera, 1975). Distribution of Troides spp. was reported to be significantly wider, reaching “over the entire Oriental (Indo-Sino-Malayan) region and the northern part of the Australian region with the easternmost representative occurring in New Guinea” (D'Abrera, 1975). The range of Trogonoptera spp. was reported to include Burma, Thailand, Malaya, Palawan, Borneo/Kalimantan and Sumatra (Nagypal, 2011).
Eight Ornithoptera species were evaluated by the IUCN, three of which were categorised as Endangered (O. alexandrae, O. croesus and O. rothschildi) and two Vulnerable (O. aesacus and O. rothschildi) (IUCN, 2011). O. chimaera was categorised as Lower Risk/near threatened and O. paradisea Lower risk/least concern, whereas O. tithonus was categorised as Data Deficient (IUCN, 2011). Three Troides spp. were evaluated by the IUCN: T. dohertyi and T. prattorum were categorised as Vulnerable, whereas T. andromache was categorised as Lower Risk/near threatened (IUCN, 2011). The status of all evaluated Ornithoptera spp. and Troides spp. was considered to need updating (IUCN, 2011). The genus Trogonoptera is yet to be assessed by the IUCN. Habitat destruction was considered to be the main threat to birdwing butterflies (Collins and Morris, 1985; New, 1997; Capinera, 2008), although commercial collection was considered an additional threat (Collins and Morris, 1985). According to Parsons (1995), butterflies were traded for three main purposes: 1) high value dead specimens for the specialist collector trade, 2) low value dead specimens for the decorative trade, and 3) live individuals, mainly aimed at live displays in greenhouses.
2. MEA management and targeted actions
The genera Ornithoptera spp., Trogonoptera spp and Triodes spp. were all listed in CITES Appendix II in 1979. Some species of Ornithoptera were already listed on Appendix II in 1977, including the Queen Alexandra birdwing (Ornithoptera alexandrae), which was uplisted to Appendix I in 1987.
Seven Ornithoptera spp. (O. aesacus, O. caelestis, O. croesus, O. priamus, O. tithonus, O. urvillianus and O. victoriae) were selected for the 1993 CITES Review of Significant Trade based on a review conducted in 1991 (WCMC et al., 1993). It was noted in those reviews that trade may not be a threat where it involved ranched specimens. For some countries, such as Papua New Guinea the trade of ranched specimens from the Insect Farming and Trading Agency was recommended “to be encouraged”, and was not considered a cause of concern. Trade in wild specimens from the Solomon Islands (O. urvillianus and O. victoriae) was regarded of potential concern and a suspension of trade in those species has been in place since 1995.
3. MEA contribution to consequential benefits
54
Birdwing ranching controlled through CITES contributes to ecosystem services, minimising habitat loss, sustainable use and maintenance of genetic resources. Ranching was defined by Slone et al. (1997) as the “planting of butterfly larval food plants in or near natural habitat to attract butterflies from nearby forests”. This has the effect of increasing the number of individuals in adjacent forests. Host vines are normally planted on land already cleared next to forests including national parks, with larvae collected and reared to adults for the trade.
Ecosystem services: Birdwing butterflies are important long-range pollinators of nectar- bearing flowers of the forest canopy and therefore play a role in gene flow in plant populations. Maintaining habitat (as described below) sustains all other ecosystem services provided by the forests in which the species occur.
Minimising habitat loss: Ranching of birdwings in South East Asia has brought economic benefits to rural communities and in some cases, butterfly ranching had reportedly helped to reduce the conversion of forests to agriculture (Wells et al., 1999). Local people recognize importance of maintaining intact forest as a source of parental stock for the ranched specimens (Cranston, 2010). Sustainable use: Ranching and sustainable trade of birdwing butterflies has been considered a potential means of both conserving birdwing butterflies by reducing pressure on wild populations, producing undamaged specimens for the trade and preventing habitat destruction through creating alternative incomes to local inhabitants (Collins and Morris, 1985; Parsons, 1995; Cranston, 2010). There are over ranches in 800 in Papua New Guinea producing over $US 500,000 of butterflies annually, and over 1000 ranches around the Arfak Mountains National Park in Irian Jaya, Indonesia, which also protects many endemic birds of paradise and marsupials (Mercer, 1997).
Maintenance of genetic resources: Ranching can have the effect of sustaining or even increasing wild populations by increasing availability of food sources.
55
Gorilla spp.
1. Overview Gorilla spp.
There are two species of Gorilla; Gorilla beringei (Eastern Gorilla) and G. gorilla (Lowland Gorilla). Eastern Gorillas are found in Rwanda, Uganda, and eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (Robbins and Williamson, 2008). Lowland gorillas occur in Cameroon, Central African Republic, mainland Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Nigeria, Republic of Congo, Angola, and possibly in the DRC (Walsh et al., 2008).
Gorilla beringei (Eastern Gorilla) is listed as Endangered in the IUCN Red List (Robbins and Williamson, 2008), whilst G. gorilla (Lowland Gorilla) is Critically Endangered (Walsh et al., 2008). Populations of both species are declining. Population estimates for gorilla subspecies are summarised below from Robbins and Williamson (2008) and Walsh et al. (2008).
Subspecies Population estimates Range G. beringei. Virunga population estimated at Virunga Volcanoes region (area of 440 km² beringei (Mountain 380 individuals in 2003, but straddling the border between Uganda gorilla) current rate of growth is slow. (Mgahinga Gorilla National Park), Rwanda Estimated to be around 300 in (Volcanoes National Park), and DRC Bwindi. Total population size of (Virunga National Park). Bwindi 680 animals in isolated Impenetrable National Park in populations. southwestern Uganda (330 km².) G. beringei graueri Many populations disappeared in Endemic to eastern DRC in fragmented and (Eastern lowland last 30 years. Data lacking and declining habitat gorilla) population figures only available for Kahuzi-Biega National Park (estimated 170 animals in 2000). G. gorilla gorilla No rigourous estimate of range- Small outlying populations remain on the (Western wide gorilla abundance possible Nigeria-Cameroon border at the Lowland Gorilla) as calculating figures from nest headwaters of the Cross River and in the densities problematic. Previous Ebo/Ndokbou forest in Cameroon, just estimates of 95,000 in 1996 were north of t lower Sanaga River. May also overestimates based on densities persist in the Maiombe region of in Gabon extrapolated to suitable Democratic Republic of Congo contiguous habitat in W. Equatorial Africa. with Cabinda (Angola). However much of that habitat now lost. G. gorilla diehli Population of approximately 250- Occurs in a small area on the Nigeria- (Cross River 300 in a forested area of roughly Cameroon border, extending a short Gorilla) 8,000 km². Estimate of uncertain distance on either side of the border in the accuracy and based primarily on forests on the upper drainage of the Cross nest counts and estimated range River. Found in at least 10 localities. size.
Threats to G. beringei include hunting (particularly in war-torn eastern DRC), habitat destruction, and degradation by mining and agriculture. Populations are estimated to have experienced a significant reduction in the past 20-30 years. It is suspected that this reduction will continue for the next 30-40 years as the causes of the reduction, although largely understood, have certainly not ceased and are not easily reversible. There are two primary drivers of rapid decline in western lowland gorilla (G. gorilla): commercial hunting, even in protected areas, and the Ebola virus. Indicatons are that these threats are accelerating.
56
2. MEA management and targeted actions
Gorilla gorilla was listed on CITES Appendix I since the convention came into force on 1/7/1975. G. gorilla and G. beringei (formerly listed as G. gorilla) are listed in Appendix I of CMS. Under CITES Appendix I listing, no commercial trade of Gorilla can take place. CITES Resolution 13.4 addreses great ape conservation and particularly illegal trade, by urging Parties to prohibit trade, implement deterrent penalties, strengthen enforcement controls, as well as promote habitat protection. Resolution 13.11 on Bushmeat, advises range State Parties to prohibit offtake of Appendix I species for comsumption. Through its Bushmeat Working Group, CITES also collaborates with CBD and FAO on issues relating to bushmeat.
Both CITES and CMS provide support to GRASP (Great Ape Survival Partnership) a partnership between governments, international institutions (notably UNEP and UNESCO), NGOs and the private sector whose objective is great ape conservation.
CMS has facilitated a regional agreement between 10 range States (CMS Agreement on the Conservation of Gorillas and Their Habitats), and an Action Plan to support Gorilla conservation. The text, which was agreed in 2007, provides the Gorilla range states, as well as the other governments and organisations involved, with a legal framework that will reinforce and integrate conservation efforts. CMS Action plans to promote conservation have been developed for all four of the gorilla subspecies.
Priority actions for range States are identified in the action plans, and include for example, reinforcement of regional, national and international awareness of Gorilla heritage value, transborder collaboration within protected areas, reinforcement of the special protected areas network, inter-state and inter-organisational cooperation, establishment of a data collection and surveillance network, use and exchange of scientific and technical information on gorilla conservation, illegal trade control measures, development of Gorilla eco-tourism, involvement of local communities to gain their engagement in conservation and community development goals. CMS, GRASP and the range State coordinate implementation.
CMS, GRASP and the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums jointly declared 2009 as the “Year of the Gorilla” – a campaign to raise the profile of gorilla conservation and raise funds for projects.
3. MEA contribution to consequential benefits
Ecosystem services: The role of forest primates in seed dispersal is well documented. Rogers et al. (1999) reported that lowland gorillas are the only important dispersers of Cola lizae, an endemic tree with a limited geographical distribution in Gabon. Voysey et al. (1999a, 1999b) also reported that G. g. gorilla in Gabon provided potentially high quality dispersal compared to other consumers for Ganophyllum giganteum, Cola lizae and Uapaca guineensis because they were reliable visitors to trees of thee species, they swallowed and dispersed a large numbers of seeds, and they often deposited them in sites favourable for enhanced survival and growth of seedlings, such as nest sites.
Hunting of gorillas in Cameroon was reported to result in reduced seed removal, loss of dispersal and disruption of the seed dispersal cycle (Wang et al., 2007). Ruggiero and Eves (1998) reported that African jacanas (tropical wading birds) had higher foraging rate when associated with gorillas in natural forest openings, as the large mammals flushed their prey.
57
Gorillas contribute significantly to cultural services through ecotourism. Tourism is the leading export sector in Rwanda, which is famous for the Parc National des Volcans, and benefits (including non-financial benefits) accrue to people living around the Park (Spenceley et al., 2010). Tourism and encounters with gorillas generated revenue and other benefits for local participants in Central African Republic (Remis and Hardin, 2009). CMS action has contributed to better management and conservation of gorilla, thereby maintaining these ecosystem services, although quantifying that is difficult.
Minimising habitat loss: It is difficult to assess the importance of CMS in driving establishment of gorilla protected areas, either before or after the Action Plan was established. However, CMS priority actions for the network of protected areas are included in the Action Plans. It is clear that international cooperation is required to conserve the species over large home ranges. Large protected areas do exist, such as the Virunga National Park in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), which is contiguous with protected areas in Uganda and Rwanda (Plumpre, 2007). Gorillas can therefore act as a flagship species for protecting Central African rainforests. Plumpre (2007) reported that since 1994, the International Gorilla Conservation Programme had worked in the Virunga Volcanoes and Bwindi Impenetrable National Park to foster transboundary collaboration, which had led to improved conservation. Rainey (2010) reported that additional protected areas are required; populations of Critically Endangered western lowland gorilla (G. g. gorilla) found in Raphia swamp forests in northern Republic of Congo in the periphery of the Lac Tele Community Reserve remained unprotected. Sustainable use: Ecotourism as described above.
Maintenance of genetic resources: Not a cultivated species.
References
Berger, J., Murray Berger, K., Bergen, S., Buuveibaatar, B., Fine, A. Lkhagvasuren, B, Young, J.K., and Zahler, P. 2008. Migration Bottlenecks, Climate, and the Conservation of Pleistocene Relicts in Central Asia. The Open Conservation Biology Journal. 2: 9-10. Bekenov, A. B., Grachev, I. A., and Milner-Gulland, E. J. 1998. The ecology and management of the Saiga antelope in Kazakhstan. Mammal Review, 28 (1): 1-52. Blundell, A. G. 2004. A review of the CITES listing of big-leaf mahogany. Oryx, 38 (1): 84-90. Calvo, J. C. 2000. Diagnóstico de la caoba (Swietenia macrophylla king) en Mesoamérica. Visión general. Centro Científico Tropical. Capinera, J. L. 2008. Encyclopedia of entomology. 2nd Edition edn. Springer. Collins, M. and Morris, M. G. 1985. Threatened Swallowtail butterflies of the world. The IUCN Red Data Book. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. CMS. 2009. Memorandum of Understanding concerning conservation, restoration and sustainable use of the saiga antelope (Saiga tatarica tatarica) URL: http://www.cms.int/species/saiga/saiga_text.htm Accessed: 1-03-2012. CMS. 2006. Report of the first meeting of the signatory states, Annex 9: medium term international work programme for the saiga antelope (2007-2011) URL: http://www.cms.int/species/saiga/report_mtg1/Annex_09_MediumTerm_Int_WrkProgm_E.pd f CMS 2011. www.cms.int/publications/Bulletin/2011_01_02_jan_feb_e.pdf Accessed 8/3/2012 Cranston, P.S. 2010. Insect Biodiversity and Conservation in Australasia. Annual Review of Entomology, 55:55-75. D'Abrera, B. 1975. Birdwing butterflies of the world. Lansdowne Press, Melbourne, Australia.
58
Ferretti, F , Worm, B, Britten, G.L., Heithaus, M.R., Lotze, HK,. 2010. Patterns and ecosystem consequences of shark declines in the ocean. Ecology letters, 13(8): 1055-1071.
Grogan, J., Barreto, P., Veri, and Verissimo, A. 2002. Mahogany in the Brazilian Amazon: Ecology and perspectives on management. Imazon, Belém, Brazil. Gullison, R. E., Panfil, S. N., Strouse, J. J., and Hubbell, S. P. 1996. Ecology and management of mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla King) in the Chimanes Forest, Beni, Bolivia. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 122 (1): 9-34. Han, S.R, Woo, S.Y, Lee, DK. 2010. Carbon storage and flux in aboveground vegetation and soil of sixty-year old secondary natural forest and large leafed mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla King) plantation in Mt. Makiling, Philippines. Asia Life Science, 19(2): 357-372. IUCN 2008. Status of the World’s Marine Species. IUCN 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.2 URL: www.iucnredlist.org Accessed: 10-2-2012. IUCN Shark Specialist Group. 2012. http://www.iucnssg.org/ Accessed: 10-2-2012. Lachmann, L. 2005. The lapwing and the saiga: a domino effect / Steppenkiebitz und Saiga: ein Domino-Effekt. ZGAP Mitteilungen, 21(2): 11-12 Lamb, F. B. 1966. Mahogany of tropical America: Its ecology and management. University of Michigan Press, Ann ARbor, Michigan, USA. Last, P.R. and Stevens, J.D. (1994). Sharks and Rays of Australia. CSIRO Division of Fisheries. Lushchekina, A.A.; Neronov, V.M.; Badmaev, V.S.; Khludnev, A.V. 2005. Povolzhskii Ekologicheskii Zhurnal, 1: 80-85. Mallon, D. P. 2008. Saiga tatarica. In: IUCN 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011. URL: www.iucnredlist.org Mayhew, J. E. and Newton, A. C. 1998. The silviculture of mahogany. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK. Mejía, E., Buitrón, X., Peña-Claros, M., and Grogan, J. 2008. Big-leaf mahogany (Swietenia macrophylla) in Peru, Bolivia and Brazil. Mexico 2008 NDF Workshop Case Studies. WG 1 Trees - Case Study 4. 34 pp. Mercer, C. W. L. 1997. Sustainable production of insects for food and income by New Guinea villagers. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 36 (2-4): 151-157. Milner-Gulland, E. 2009. Summary report on progress towards the CMS MOU in the period November 2008-June 2009. Saiga News, 9: 24. Nagypal, T. 2011. An introduction to the world of birdwing butterflies URL: http://www.nagypal.net/ Accessed: 20-1-2012. New, T. R. 1997. Exploitation and conservation of butterflies in the Indo-Australian region, in Bolton, M., (ed.), Conservation and the use of wildlife resources. Chapman & Hall, London, UK. 97-110. Newton, A. C. 2008. Conservation of tree species through sustainable use: how can it be achieved in practice? Oryx, 42 (2): 195-205. Parsons, M. J. 1995. Butterfly farming and trading in the Indo-Australian region and its benefits in the conservation of Swallowtails and their tropical forest habitats, in Scriber, J. M., Tsubaki, Y., & Lederhouse, R. C., (eds.), Swallowtail butterflies: Their ecology and evolutionary biology. Scientific Publishers, Gainesville, USA. 371-391 Plumptre, A.J., Kujirakwinja, D., Treves, A, Owiunji, I., Rainer, H. 2007. Transboundary conservation in the greater Virunga landscape: Its importance for landscape species. Biological Conservation, 134(2): 279-287 Rainey, H.J., Iyenguet, F.C. Malanda, GAF., Madzoke, B., Dos Santos, D., Stokes, EJ., Maisels, F., Strindberg, S. 2010. Survey of Raphia swamp forest, Republic of Congo, indicates high densities of Critically Endangered western lowland gorillas Gorilla gorilla gorilla. Oryx, 44 (1) : 124-132 Remis, M.J. & Hardin, R. 2009. Transvalued Species in an African Forest. Conservation Biology 23(6):1588-1596 . Robbins, M. & Williamson, 2008. Gorilla beringei. In: IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011. URL: www.iucnredlist.org Accessed: 8/03/12 Rodan, B. D. and Campbell, F. T. 1996. CITES and the sustainable management of Swietenia macrophylla King. Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society, 122: 83-87.
59
Rogers, M.E., Voysey, BC., McDonald, KE., Parnell, RJ., Tutin, CEG. 1998. Lowland gorillas and seed dispersal: The importance of nest sites. American Journal of Primatology, 45 (1): 45-68. Ruggiero, RG., & Eves, HE. 1998. Bird-mammal associations in forest openings of northern Congo (Brazzaville). African Journal of Ecology, 36(2): 183-193 Slone, T. H., Orsak, L. J., and Malver, O. 1997. A comparison of price, rarity and cost of butterfly specimens: Implications for the insect trade and for habitat conservation. Ecological Economics, 21: 77-85. Singh, NJ, Milner-Gulland, EJ. 2011. Conserving a moving target: planning protection for a migratory species as its distribution changes. Journal of Applied Ecology, 48 (1): 35-46. Soerianegara, I. and Lemmens, R. H. M. J. 1994. Plant resources of South-East Asia - Timber trees: major commercial timbers. Prosea, Bogor, Indonesia. Spenceley, A. Habyalimana, S., Tusabe, R., Mariza, D. 2010. Benefits to the poor from gorilla tourism in Rwanda. Development Southern Africa, 27(5): 647-662. Stevens, J.D., R. Bonfil, N. Dulvy & P. Walker. 2000. The effects of fishing on sharks, rays, and chimaeras (chondrichthyans), and the implications for marine ecosystems. ICES Journal of Marine Science 57: 476-494. UNEP-WCMC. 2000. Contribution to an evaluation of tree species using the new CITES Listing Criteria. Compiled on behalf of the CITES Management Authority of the Netherlands. Verwer, C., Peña-Claros, M., van der Staak, D., Ohlson-Kiehn, K., and Sterck, F. J. 2008. Silviculture enhances the recovery of overexploited mahogany Swietenia macrophylla. Voysey, BC., McDonald, KE., Rogers, ME., Tutin, CEG., Parnell, RJ. 1999a. Gorillas and seed dispersal in the Lope Reserve, Gabon. I: Gorilla acquisition by trees. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 15: 23-38. Voysey, BC., McDonald, KE., Rogers, ME., Tutin, CEG., Parnell, RJ. 1999b. Gorillas and seed dispersal in the Lope Reserve, Gabon. II: Survival and growth of seedlings. Journal of Tropical Ecology, 15:39-60. Walsh, P.D., Tutin, C.E.G., Oates, J.F., Baillie, J. E.M., Maisels, F., Stokes, E.J., Gatti, S., Bergi, R.A., Sunderland-Groves, J, & Dunn, A. 2008. Gorilla gorilla. In: IUCN 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011. URL: www.iucnredlist.org Wang, BC., Sork, VL., Leong, MT. Smith, TB. 2007. Hunting of mammals reduces seed removal and dispersal of the afrotropical tree Antrocaryon klaineanum (Anacardiaceae). Biotropica 39(3): 340-347. Wang, YC. 2011. Carbon sequestration and foliar dust retention by woody plants in the greenbelts along two major Taiwan highways. Annals of Applied Ecology 159(2): 244-251. WCMC, IUCN/SSC Trade Specialist Group, and TRAFFIC International. 1993. Significant trade in wildlife: a review of select animal species in CITES Appendix II. Draft report to the CITES Animals Committee, June 1993. Cambridge, UK. Wells, M., Guggenheim, S., Khan, A., Wardojo, W., and Jepson, P. 1999. Investing in biodiversity - A review of Indonesia's integrated conservation and development projects. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/ The World Bank. Washington, D.C. Zalamea, M., Gonzalez, G. Ping, CL., Michaelson, G. 2007. Soil organic matter dynamics under decaying wood in a subtropical wet forest: effect of tree species and decay stage. Plant and Soil, 296 (1): 173-185.
60