important considerations for intensive management of endangered species
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Important Considerations for Intensive Management of Endangered Species

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 36

Important Considerations for Intensive Management of Endangered Species - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 337 Views
  • Uploaded on

Important Considerations for Intensive Management of Endangered Species. Often managers rush into intensive management for a quick, high profile fix of a declining species

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Important Considerations for Intensive Management of Endangered Species' - arleen


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
important considerations for intensive management of endangered species
Important Considerations for Intensive Management of Endangered Species
  • Often managers rush into intensive management for a quick, high profile fix of a declining species
  • Before captive propagation, reintroduction, and translocation are considered four general areas should be addressed (Kleiman et al. 1994)
    • Condition of the Species
    • Environmental Conditions
    • Biopolitical Considerations
    • Biological Knowledge
removing the cause of decline
Removing the Cause of Decline
  • This is really the crux of endangered species conservation
  • Requires detailed observation and likely experimentation to fully understand reason for decline
    • Brown tree snake was not immediately recognized
    • Condor limiting factors required telemetry to ID
      • not 1080, not disturbance at nest, not shooting, likely lead poison because Condors need open habitat to find food and hunters/ranchers common there
facing the evil quartet
Facing the Evil Quartet
  • Typically we are up against
    • habitat destruction/degradation
    • exotics
    • trophic cascades
    • overharvest
    • contaminants
  • Contaminants and overharvest are easiest to remove or reduce
recovery after agent of decline removed
Recovery after Agent of Decline Removed
  • Stop Over harvest
    • whales, alligator
  • Remove Pesticides
    • Peregrine, Bald Eagle, Brown Pelican
  • Remove Pesticides and Modify Habitat Needs
    • Mauritius Kestrel (Jones et al. 1991)
      • 1974-----4 birds
      • 1991-----127-145 birds
exotics are very difficult to control
Exotics are Very Difficult to Control
  • Disease, Snakes
    • Technology not adequate to control
    • Buy time by “marooning” (Williams 1977)
      • release small numbers of species with poor dispersal ability in isolated habitat (typically islands)
      • 700 islands off New Zealand
        • Saddleback, Kakapo (flightless parrot), Takahe (Rail)
      • Buys time until feral introduced mammals can be removed
      • Guam Rail released on Rota
are we treating the symptom or the cause of the problem
Are We Treating the Symptom or the Cause of the Problem?
  • Often rush into captive propagation without addressing limiting factor
    • “Headstarting” Sea Turtles (Tate 1990)
      • rear until old enough to avoid predation on nesting grounds
      • Better to protect nesting ground
    • Hatcheries and barges for Salmon
      • damns, habitat loss, fishing, etc are cause
    • May be justified to learn about propagation and control
      • Mariana Crow
a complex example of addressing limiting factors
A Complex Example of Addressing Limiting Factors
  • Rhinos in Africa http://gurukul.ucc.american.edu/Ted/RHINOBLK.HTM
  • Destruction of habitat, hunting, illegal trade in products (folk medicine, dagger handles)
    • reduction in numbers from 65,000-100,000 in 1960s to ~3,000 today
      • regulations (CITES)
      • scientific study of medicinal effects
      • Leader of Yehman using agate handle dagger
      • shoot to kill poacher policy
      • De-horning
      • Ranching to flood market
little progress with rhinos
Little Progress with Rhinos
  • Can’t change old beliefs quickly
    • medicinal effects of horn
  • Value of horn in poor countries makes risk of death worth it
  • De-horning not very effective(Berger 1998, Rachlow and Berger 1997)
    • grow back (possible sustainable harvest?)
    • killed out of spite
    • even small portion of horn near skull valuable
    • dehorned mothers less able to defend calfs from hyenas
  • Need to work at both ends of trade routes
hope with one horned rhinos dinerstein 2003
Hope with One-horned Rhinos (Dinerstein 2003)
  • Rhinos in India-Nepal are increasing with creation of Royal Chitwan National Park
    • Community pride, ecotourism, natural resource benefits to residents, Royal family of Nepal leadership
  • General approach
    • Design landscapes with large, protected cores
    • Introduce powerful economic incentives, legislation, awareness
    • Identify bold leadership to rally political will
      • Translocation
      • Redistribution of park revenue to locals
      • Resettlement or land transfer
how do we protect or restore enough habitat
How Do We Protect or Restore Enough Habitat?
  • Biopolitical Considerations (Kleiman et al. 1994)
    • No negative impact for locals
    • Community support exists
    • GOs and NGOs supportive/involved
  • But what about when there is an obvious Economic Cost?
    • Especially when habitat is already being used by humans
      • Salmon
captive breeding and reintroduction
Captive Breeding and Reintroduction
  • Once the limiting factors have been addressed it might be time for intensive management
    • last resort
    • expensive
    • difficult to make succeed
      • Beck et al. 1994-- 11% successful
      • Griffith et al. 1989-- 19% successful
    • requires large, long-term effort in captivity and the wild
typical questions about captive propagation
Typical Questions About Captive Propagation
  • Is it necessary?
  • Is it successful and worth it?
  • How do you do it?
    • Technical questions about breeding, rearing, and release
intensive management programs are complex
Intensive Management Programs are Complex
  • Example from Mariana
  • Crow program on Guam
  • landowner coordination
  • monitoring
  • pull eggs
  • rear nestlings
    • translocate
    • hack to the wild
  • control predators
why captive breed
Why Captive Breed?
  • Produce stock for reintroduction (Wilson and Stanley Price 1994)
  • Preserve genetic variability
  • Produce stock for research
  • Produce animals for public education
  • Provide insurance against extinction
    • alala pva
what are we breeding in captivity
What are We Breeding in Captivity?
  • (Ginsberg 1994, Canids)
  • Reviewed species bred in captivity (N = 32) from 1971-1990.
  • Most are common species
  • Increase in vulnerable and endangered species in late 1980s

3 endangered species account

for 95% of litters for V&E

species (Maned Wolf, Af. Wild

Dog, and Bush Dog)

75% of all captive breeding is

done on 3 species (grey wolf,

red fox, dingo)

criteria to meet prior to reintroduction kleiman et al 1994
Criteria to Meet Prior to Reintroduction (Kleiman et al. 1994)
  • Already discussed environmental and political considerations
  • Condition of the species
    • Is there a need to increase numbers, populations, or genetic diversity of the species?
    • Is appropriate stock available?
    • Will introduction jeopardize wild population?
criteria to meet prior to reintroduction kleiman et al 199417
Criteria to Meet Prior to Reintroduction (Kleiman et al. 1994)
  • Biological and Other Resources
    • Do we know how to rear and reintroduce the species?
    • Do we know enough about the biology of the species to determine if we have been successful?
    • Is funding for the long term available
      • includes monitoring success of reintroduction
assessment of reintroduction projects beck et al 1994
Assessment of Reintroduction Projects (Beck et al. 1994)

% of Projects

  • Reviewed projects from 1900 to 1993
    • N=145 projects, 13 million animals of 126 species
    • acclimate = hard vs. soft release
what made project successful
What Made Project Successful?
  • Successful if N=500 w/o human intervention or PVA looks good
  • 16 (11%) successful
  • Training, local involvement, education, and duration are consistently important
criteria for success from griffith et al 1989
Criteria for Success from Griffith et al. (1989)
  • Type of species (game more successful than threatened)
  • Habitat quality (better success into good habitat)
  • Location of release (better in core of historic range)
  • Source of stock (Wild caught better than hand-reared)
  • Food habits (herbivore better than carnivore or omnivore)
  • Duration of study (longer and more animals released increased success)
size and persistence of release matters ginsberg 1994
Size and Persistence of Release Matters (Ginsberg 1994)
  • PVA model results (Kit Foxes)
  • N=Starting pop size
  • SP=successive releases of 20 indiv/yr for 10 years
  • Huge increase in viability with little increase in per year release effort.

N=50

N=100

N=500

Successive Releases

N=50SP; N=100SP

major drawbacks to success snyder et al 1996
Major Drawbacks to Success (Snyder et al. 1996)
  • Need to maintain a self sustaining captive population
  • Need to successfully reintroduce
  • May get domestication and disease in captivity
  • Need considerable funds and facilities
  • Diverts attention from long-term solution in the field (easy to do quick fix)
  • Need consistent administration(Clark et al. 1994)
the biology of captive propagation and reintroduction
The Biology of Captive Propagation and Reintroduction
  • Captive Breeding
    • zoo biology and husbandry
  • Manipulating Wild Pairs
    • pull clutch
  • Captive Rearing
    • considerations of diet, disease, training
  • Reintroduction
    • translocation, fostering, hacking (soft release), hard release
a general captive propagation program
A General Captive Propagation Program
  • Aplomado falcons (Cade et al. 1991)
      • bring birds in from captivity
        • acclimate so they breed in captivity
        • increase productivity by food supplementation and clutch manipulation
        • hand rear young, experiment with parent rearing
      • manipulate wild pairs
        • clutch manipulation
      • hack out captive-reared birds
    • meet recovery goal for species
        • 30-50 young released for 10-15 years
        • require 15 pairs (35 individuals)
how to incubate eggs
How to Incubate Eggs?
  • An example of figuring out one aspect of captive propagation
  • Use of surrogate species
  • Need controlled experiments
effects of manipulating wild pairs
Effects of Manipulating Wild Pairs
  • Bald Eagles (Wood and Collopy 1993)
    • 78% renested within 1 month
    • subsequent reproduction within the year may be reduced
      • this was modeled with RAMAS age model and was estimated not to affect viability of “donor” population
  • Corvids (Marzluff et al. 1994)
    • 69% renested
    • reduced clutch size on renesting and slightly lower number of fledglings
    • occupancy and productivity at manipulated sites was same as controls next year
hand rearing may produce undersized young for release
Hand-rearing May Produce Undersized Young for Release
  • Growth is usually faster in nature and may produce light-weight young (magpies)
  • Growth in captivity may be compensatory (crows)
  • If dominance is related to size, then survival or breeding may be reduced
    • Whitmore and Marzluff 1998
raising mammals in captivity
Raising Mammals in Captivity
  • Hand-rearing diets for wild ungulate neonates
    • used ad lib feeding of evaporated milk
    • easy and growth similar to wild
      • Wild et al. 1994.

Elk

Big-horn

Pronghorn

practice makes more perfect
Practice Makes More Perfect
  • Mortality of pups is reduced with increasing number of litters produced for a species
    • 3 outliers were removed from analysis??)
    • Ginsberg 1994
ferret predatory behavior is influenced by rearing
Ferret Predatory Behavior Is Influenced by Rearing
  • Vargas 1994
    • % of ferrets that killed PDs at 16.5 weeks
    • Group I
      • cage-raised, no exposure to live prey
    • Group II
      • Cage-raised, exposed to live hamsters--went for back of neck, not throat
    • Group III
      • Cage-raised, exposed to live Prairie Dogs
    • Group IV
      • Outdoor raised, exposed to PDs
survival of released foxes is affected by method of release
Survival of Released Foxes is Affected by Method of Release
  • Kit Foxes (in Ginsberg 1994)
  • Wild caught translocated (hard release) did best in short term
  • Hard versus Soft Release were similar after 2 years

Wild Caught,

Hard-release

All Soft Releases

All Hard

Releases

Captive Reared, Hard-release

sometimes younger is better valutis 1997
Sometimes Younger is Better! (Valutis 1997)
  • Post-release survival of American Crows was better if we released them young
    • less dispersal
    • gradual integration into wild flocks may be better
    • wild birds may be more receptive to new birds during breeding season

Assume missing

birds were alive

Assume missing

birds were dead

references
References
  • Vargas, A. 1994. Ontogeny of the endangered black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes) and effects of rearing conditions on predatory behavior and post-release survival. PhD. Diss. U. Wyoming
  • Ginsberg, JR. 1994. Captive breeding, reintroduction and the conservation of canids. PP. 365-383. In. Olney et al. (eds.). Creative Conservation. Chapman and Hall, London.
  • Valutis, LL. 1997. Reintroduction of captive-reared birds. MSc. BSU. Boise, ID.
  • Wild, MA. Et al. 1994. Comparing growth rates of dam- and hand-raised Bighorn sheep, pronghorn, and elk neonates. J W M 58:340-347.
  • Whitmore, KD and JM Marzluff. 1998. Hand-rearing corvids for reintroduction: importance of feeding regime, nestling growth, and dominance. JWM 62:1460-1479.
more references
More References
  • Wilson, AC and MR Stanley Price. 1994. Reintroduction as a reason for captive breeding. PP 243-264. In. Olney et al. (eds.). Creative Conservation. Chapman and Hall, London.
  • Kleiman, DG et al. 1994. Criteria for reintroductions. PP 287-303. In. Olney et al. (eds.). Creative Conservation. Chapman and Hall, London.
  • Beck, B.B., et al. 1994. Reintroduction of captive-born animals. PP 265-286. In. Olney et al. (eds.). Creative Conservation. Chapman and Hall, London.
  • Griffith, B. Et al. 1989. Translocation as a species conservation tool: status and strategy. Science 245:477-480.
  • Cade, TJ et al. 1991. Efforts to restore the northern aplomado falcon by captive breeding and reintroduction. Dodo 27:71-81.
  • Williams, GR. 1977. Marooning--a technique for saving threatened species from extinction. International Zoo Yearbook 17:102-106.
yet more references
Yet More References
  • Jones, CG. Et al. 1991. A summary of the conservation management of the mauritius kestrel Falco punctatus 1973-1991. Dodo 27:81-99.
  • Rachlow, JL. And J. Berger. 1997. Conservation implications of patterns of horn regeneration in dehorned white rhinos. Conservation Biology 11:84-91.
  • Berger, J. 1996. Animal behaviour and plundered mammals: Is the study of mating systems a scientific luxury or a conservation necessity? Oikos 77:207-216.
  • Wood, PB. And MW Collopy. 1993. Effects of egg removal on bald eagle productivity in northern Florida. JWM 57:1-9.
  • Marzluff, JM et al. 1994.Captive propagation and reintroduction of social birds. Annual Report. Sustainable Ecosystems Institute, Meridian, ID.
ad