Tiger Re-Establishment Potential to Former Caspian Tiger (Panthera Tigris Virgata) Range in Central Asia
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Biological Conservation 205 (2017) 42–51 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Biological Conservation journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/bioc Tiger re-establishment potential to former Caspian tiger (Panthera tigris virgata) range in Central Asia Igor E. Chestin a, Mikhail Yu. Paltsyn b,⁎,OlgaB.Pereladovaa, Liza V. Iegorova b, James P. Gibbs b a World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF-Russia), Moscow, Russia b Department of Environmental and Forest Biology, State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Syracuse, NY, USA article info abstract Article history: Caspian tigers (Panthera tigris virgata), a now extinct subspecies genetically similar to the Amur tiger (P. t. Received 1 August 2016 altaica), occurred until the mid-1900s from modern day Turkey and Iran east through Central Asia into northwest Received in revised form 6 October 2016 China. A literature analysis we conducted revealed that Caspian tigers occupied ca. 800,000–900,000 km2 histor- Accepted 14 November 2016 ically, mostly within isolated patches of tugay- and reed-dominated riparian ecosystems at densities up to 2–3 Available online xxxx tigers/100 km2. Herein we explored options to restore tigers to Central Asia using Amur tiger as an “analog” Keywords: form. Spatial analyses based on remote sensing data indicated that options for Amur tiger introduction are lim- Caspian tiger ited in Central Asia but at least two habitat patches remain potentially suitable for tiger re-establishment, both in 2 Panthera tigris virgata Kazakhstan, with a total area of b20,000 km . The most promising site—the Ili river delta and adjacent southern Introduction coast of Balkhash Lake—hosts ca. 7000 km2 of suitable habitat that our tiger-prey population models suggest Tugay ecosystem could support a population of 64–98 tigers within 50 years if 40–55 tigers are translocated and current Ili river Central Asia flow regimes are maintained. Re-establishment of tigers in Central Asia may yet be tenable if concerns of local communities in the Ili-Balkhash region are carefully addressed, prey population restoration precedes tiger intro- duction, Ili river water supplies remain stable, and the Amur tiger's phenotype proves adaptable to the arid con- ditions of the introduction site. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction mainly through poisoning and trapping promoted by bounties paid in the former Soviet Union until the 1930s (Geptner and Sludskiy, 1972). An estimated 100,000 tigers belonging to nine subspecies roamed Numerous irrigation and agriculture projects in Central Asia during the Earth in the early 1900s (Jackson, 1993) but by 2000 only 3200– the Soviet era destroyed the tugay woodlands (a riparian and coastal 3600 remained, with four subspecies extinct (Global Tiger Recovery ecosystem comprised of trees, shrubs, and wetlands) and reed thickets Program, 2010; Seidensticker, 2010). One extinct subspecies – the earlier found alongside all major rivers and lakes that were critical Caspian tiger (Panthera tigris virgata) – once populated the largest geo- tiger habitats. The tiger's main prey, wild boar (Sus scrofa) and Bukhara graphical range of any tiger subspecies: from modern day Turkey deer (Cervus elaphus bactrianus), also disappeared along with riparian through much of Central Asia to northwestern China (Geptner and habitats (Sludskiy, 1953; Geptner and Sludskiy, 1972). In the former So- Sludskiy, 1972). By the late 1800′s Caspian tigers still inhabited modern viet Union a complete ban on tiger hunting was introduced in 1947; day Afghanistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, northwest China, Georgia, Iran, however, occasional killings led to complete disappearance of tigers Iraq, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, and Uz- from Central Asia by 1950s (Geptner and Sludskiy, 1972; Sludskiy, bekistan (Geptner and Sludskiy, 1972) but had completely disappeared 1973). by the 1940s–1960s leading to the subspecies' current designation Despite the grim history of extinction of the Caspian tiger, two fac- under Category 1 “Extinct” on the IUCN Red List (Nowell and Jackson, tors have combined to raise the possibility of tiger restoration to Central 1996). Considering that by the early 2000s only 13 countries still sup- Asia. First, the breakup of the Soviet Union and introduction of market ported tigers, the extinction of Caspian tiger reduced aggregate tiger economies in newly established states lead to the recovery of tiger hab- range countries almost by half. itats in some areas as many state-sponsored agricultural programs Several factors led to the extinction of Caspian tigers. In the first half along the rivers have been abandoned (WWF, 2014). Second, tiger phy- of 1900s widespread extermination of Caspian tigers was accomplished logenetics (Driscoll et al., 2009) recently revealed that Caspian tigers were extremely close relatives to the still extant Amur tiger (P. t. altaica) ⁎ Corresponding author. which might therefore serve as suitable “analog” form for restoration of E-mail address: [email protected] (M.Y. Paltsyn). tigers to Central Asia. Modest recovery of Caspian tiger habitats along http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.11.014 0006-3207/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. I.E. Chestin et al. / Biological Conservation 205 (2017) 42–51 43 with new perspectives on tiger phylogenetics triggered wider discus- August 2014 (source: USGS Earth Explorer http://earthexplorer.usgs. sions about possible tiger introduction to Central Asia (Driscoll et al., gov/) to identify current land use. We supplemented these analyses 2011, 2012; WWF, 2014). Herein we explore the biological feasibility with reports from ungulate field surveys (Jungius, 2010; Lukarevskiy of bringing tigers back to Central Asia based on: (1) detailed analysis and Baidavletov, 2010) to evaluate current population density of ungu- of historical Caspian tiger distribution and biology, (2) exploration of lates in the sites selected. habitat suitability for the tiger restoration in the region, and (3) model- ing of tiger and prey relationships to evaluate options for restoration. 2.3. Modeling of tiger and tiger prey habitat and population dynamics at a We conclude that although options for tiger restoration remain ex- high priority introduction site tremely limited in Central Asia, successful introduction of Amur subspe- cies to the Ili-Balkhash region of Kazakhstan is biologically tenable. We modeled habitat dynamics for ungulate prey (wild boar, Bukhara deer, and roe deer) and for tigers as well as prey and predator popula- 2. Materials and methods tion growth for the priority area highlighted in our critical habitat anal- ysis (see Results) and also previously suggested (Lukarevskiy and 2.1. Analysis of historic Caspian tiger distribution in Central Asia Baidavletov, 2010; Institute of Geography of Kazakhstan Academy of Sciences, 2013; WWF, 2014): the Ili River delta and adjacent southern An assessment of former geographic range of Caspian tigers was im- coast of Balkhash Lake. Our modeling explored over the next 50 years plemented via analysis of scientific publications and technical reports the time required for restoration of the tigers' prey base, number and in- containing historical records from the 1800s and 1900s on tiger distri- troduction timing of tigers required for their successful restoration, and bution, sightings, habitat, prey populations, and years since extinction overall tiger population carrying capacity. Habitat modeling for all spe- in Central Asia and adjacent countries: Flerov (1935), Sludskiy (1953, cies was based on Landsat 5 TM images for July–August 1989 (period of 1966, 1973), Chernyshev (1958), Shukurov (1958), Vereshchagin thelowestwaterlevelinBalkhashLakein1950–2015) and July–August (1959), Stroganov (1961), Burchak Abramovich and Mamedov (1965), 2010 (current high water level) (source: USGS Earth Explorer http:// Niethammer (1966), Mambetzhumaev and Palvanijazov (1968), earthexplorer.usgs.gov/) classified into four general habitat classes: Geptner (1969), Geptner and Sludskiy (1972), Baytop (1974), Kock water; desert and semi-desert; dry bush, meadow and steppe;andtugay (1990), Nowell and Jackson (1996), Hajiyev (2000), Can (2004), woodlands and reed thickets using the ArcMap 10.2.2's (ESRI, 2014) Abdukadir and Breitenmoser (2008), Jackson and Nowell (2011). All re- Image Classification function. Resulting habitat maps were used to cords collected on tiger sightings were mapped as point data and com- model three management scenarios of tiger introduction program in bined maps of tiger distribution in Central Asia published by Geptner the area: No Fire Management (area of high quality tiger habitat constant and Sludskiy (1972) to extrapolate historic range. Integrating the map- over next 50 years), Fire Management (area of high quality tiger habitat ping exercise with the literature analysis enabled identification of pre- gradually increasing by 25–27% over next 50 years under fire and graz- ferred habitats of Caspian tigers in Central Asia as well as estimation ing control), and Water Scarcity (area of high quality tiger habitat grad- of population density where tigers occurred. ually decreasing by 70% over next 50 years as a result of increased water consumption from Ili river and decreasing level of Balkhash Lake) 2.2. Evaluation of site suitability for tiger restoration (Paltsyn et al., 2015). Based on our historical analysis we assumed that only tugay wood- We performed a spatial analysis to identify sites for