Transcript No Slide Title

Tools for assessing and
prioritizing species for
intensive management
®
The Amphibian Ark
AArk’s mission:
• Ensuring the global survival of amphibians,
focusing on those that cannot currently be
safeguarded in nature
®
The Amphibian Ark
• AArk utilizes short-term ex situ management
to ensure long-term survival in nature of
amphibians for which protection in the wild is
not currently possible
• Our first emphasis is on programs within the
range countries of the species, and coupling
the ex situ work with efforts to secure species
in situ
• AArk Taxon Officers assist amphibian experts
on a national basis to assess local amphibian
species for their specific conservation needs
®
Species Assessment
Developing ex situ conservation programs
•
•
•
•
•
®
Which species are our priorities
Range state approval to work with species
Ex situ management expertise and resources
Collaborating with our partners
Other conservation
actions
Species Assessment
Species selection and prioritization
• CBSG/WAZA held an Amphibian Ex Situ
Conservation Planning workshop, Panama,
2006
• A taxon selection and prioritization working
group developed a decision tree to select and
prioritize which taxa are most in need of ex situ
assistance
• The decision tree was expanded and developed
into a standardized electronic data entry tool for
prioritizing amphibians for ex situ programs
®
Species Assessment
Species conservation needs
• The prioritization process was then further
refined and developed into a conservation
needs assessment process
• Additional buy-in from field biologists
• Coupling ex situ rescues with in situ and other
actions
• Guide for development or revision of national
conservation action plans
®
Species Assessment
Overlap with IUCN Red List Assessments?
• Created to fill a void in the Red List
Assessment process
• Lack of consistency and objectivity in
Conservation Needs section of Red List
assessment accounts
• Current process assesses threat status, but
does not provide guidance
• Identifies broad categories of conservation
action
®
Species Assessment
Overlap with IUCN Red List Assessments?
• Conservation needs assessment
complements Red List process
• Hope to eventually incorporate process and
results with the Red List process
• Same field expertise required
®
Species Assessment
The conservation needs assessment tool
contains three main sections
1. Taxon assessment
2. Ex situ program authorization / Availability of
animals
3. Ex situ program implementation
®
Species Assessment
1. Taxon assessment
– Assesses and prioritizes the conservation
needs of all species
– Is a series of 15 questions and other existing
data, with weighted scores
– The total score indicates how important the
species is in relation to others
®
Species Assessment
1. Taxon assessment
– Includes information about extinction risk,
phylogenetic significance, threat mitigation,
habitat protection, cultural and socioeconomic significance
– Usually answered in a workshop attended by
a group of field biologists with expertise in the
species being considered
®
Species Assessment
Species Assessment
Species Assessment
Species Assessment
2. Ex situ program authorization / Availability
of animals
– Is there an existing conservation mandate that
recommends an ex situ program?
– Is the proposed ex situ program supported by
the range State?
– Are sufficient founder animals available to
initiate an ex situ program?
®
Species Assessment
The responses in Section 1 and 2 generate
reports containing prioritized lists of species
that are in need of various conservation
actions:
•
•
•
•
•
•
®
Ark
Rescue
Supplementation
In situ conservation
In situ research
Ex situ research
• Mass production in
captivity
• Conservation
education
• Cryopreservation
Species Assessment
Ark
• A species that is extinct in the wild (locally or
globally) and which would become completely
extinct without ex situ management
Rescue
• A species that is in imminent danger of
extinction (locally or globally) and requires ex
situ management, as part of an integrated
program, to ensure its survival
®
Species Assessment
Supplementation
• A species for which ex situ management will
benefit the wild population through breeding for
release as part of the recommended
conservation action
®
Species Assessment
In situ conservation
• A species for which mitigation of threats in the
wild may still bring about its’ successful
conservation
In situ research
• A species that requires further in situ research
to be carried out as part of the conservation
action for the species. One or more critical
pieces of information is not known at this time
®
Species Assessment
Ex situ research
• A species undergoing
specific applied research
that directly contributes
to the conservation of
that species, or a related
species, in the wild
®
Species Assessment
Mass production in captivity
• A species threatened through wild collection
(e.g. as a food resource), which could be, or is
currently being bred in captivity to replace a
demand for wild harvested specimens.
®
Species Assessment
Conservation education
• A species that is specifically selected for
management – primarily in zoos and aquariums
- to inspire and increase knowledge in visitors,
in order to promote positive behavioural change.
®
Species Assessment
Cryopreservation
• A species for which the
long-term storage of sperm
or cells to perpetuate their
genetic variation is urgently
recommended, due the
serious threat of extinction
of the species
®
Species Assessment
• Reports are generated by the data
compiled during the workshop, and
provide prioritized lists for further
conservation action
• They are produced during the workshop
and are provided to all workshop
participants and published online
• Used as a guide to develop or revise
national action plans
®
Species Assessment
Species Assessment
3. Ex situ program implementation
– Considers the practical feasibility of initiating
and maintaining an ex situ program
– Includes a series of questions with yes/no
answers about husbandry, number of founder
animals, facilities, expertise, food supply etc.
– Identifies species for which ex situ programs
are likely to be successful
®
Species Assessment
3. Ex situ program implementation
– Usually answered by institutions prior to
establishing ex situ conservation programs
– Available as an online tool
®
Species Assessment
Raising awareness
2012 wall calendar
€ 11 during CBSG meeting !!
®
Species Assessment
The conservation needs assessment tool
• Provides prioritized lists of species for various
conservation actions, with an indication of the
appropriateness, and practicality of
establishing ex situ programs
• Should be used as a guide to further develop
local conservation activities
• Quantifies the appropriateness for a given
species to be included in an ex situ
conservation program
®
Species Assessment
The conservation needs assessment tool
• Has already been used in 22 workshops in
Europe, Africa, Asia, Australasia, North,
Central and South America and South-East
Asia
• Has been used to assess 2,407(38%) of the
world’s amphibian species
®
Species Assessment
Future use of the process and tool
• Process is completely generic and can be
used with any group of taxa
• The process has been modified slightly for
use with assessing trees in Costa Rica
• Planning to use the tool with corals, bats,
freshwater fish and felids
®
Species Assessment
Problems with the conservation needs
assessment tool
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
®
Not all questions can be answered quantitatively
Not all questions can be answered objectively
Inconsistent interpretation
Language misunderstandings
Insufficient expertise/knowledge
Disagreement between participants
Information rapidly becomes out of date
Species Assessment
Some answers
• Incomplete knowledge of species, a problem
in itself, necessitates subjective and
qualitative answers
• Priority lists are NOT intended to be globally
comparable.
• Workshops are generally run by an
experienced facilitator who is familiar with the
process and competent in the language of the
workshop
®
Species Assessment
Some answers
• Workshops should aim to assemble a broad
range of relevant expertise, of varied affiliation,
and have access to the internet - but accept data
deficiencies
• Agree to disagree. Qualitative and subjective
perspectives guarantee disagreement - a good
facilitator will resolve disputes
• Spreadsheets can be updated quickly and easily
and reports republished
®
Species Assessment
What the process does
• Provide a logical, repeatable, and most
importantly, transparent process for guiding
conservation activities within a country or
region
• Help to develop new and strengthen existing
partnerships between conservation
organizations
• Demonstrate a measured and responsible
approach to the amphibian extinction crisis by
the ex situ community
®
Species Assessment
What the process doesn’t do
• Generate global priority lists
Each set of regional/ national lists are
generated independently and are therefore
incomparable with others
®
Species Assessment
What the process doesn’t do
• Pretend to be perfect
If answers are subjective or qualitative in
nature they may also be inaccurate or
change.
Priority lists should therefore be viewed in the
broad sense of identifying clear trends and
obvious urgent cases
®
Species Assessment
Integration with Red List assessments
• Aim to have the process incorporated into the
Red List Assessment process
• The same expertise is required for both
assessments
• Information could be consolidated within one
central conservation database
®
Species Assessment
Amphibian assessment results:
www.amphibianark.org/AssessmentResults.htm
®
Species Assessment
amphibian ark
®
www.amphibianark.org