Biodiversity Conservation in India: The Lack of Interdisciplinary Approach

Rakesh Soud, Academic Adviser & South Asia Chapter Coordinator of the Ecoblogs

India is the seventh largest country in the world and Asia’s second largest nation with an area of 3,287,263 square km. She has a land frontier of some 15,200 km and a coastline of 7,516 km. Northern frontiers are with Xizang, Tibet in the Peoples Republic of China, Nepal and Bhutan. In the northwest Pakistan; in the northeast China and Burma; and in the east Bangladesh and Burma. The southern peninsula extends into the tropical waters of the Indian Ocean with the Bay of Bengal lying to the south Sea to the south-west. The natural environment of the country is quite unique in its own sense. It also affects the human and their social attachments with nature. I presume that human had a firsthand relation with nature and wildlife as hunter. It’s a skill that human developed through its socio-evolutionary trend. The Northeast India is also home to around 145 tribal communities who practice ‘shifting cultivation’ and are dependent on forest resources mainly non timber products (NTP). Hunting is common and widespread practice in this region.

Author examining a rescued Leopard Cat from nearby village. Image Credit: Rakesh Soud

I had written for an editorial column in regional news papers focusing the impact of extensive clearance of forests correlates the advancement of agricultural and pastoral societies in subsequent years but an awareness of the need for ecological prudence emerged and many so-called pagan nature conservation practices were retained. As more and more land became settled or cultivated, pockets of restricted hunting reserves increasingly became refuges for wildlife. Many of these reserves were subsequently declared as national parks or wildlife sanctuaries, mostly after Indian independence from Anglo persecution in 1947. India participates with many international agreements and programs concerned with aspects of nature conservation and sustainable development. These range from legal instruments such as the diversity, which place obligations on those nations which become UN conference of parties commonly known as COP, to scientific programs such as the Man and the Biosphere Program, a global program of international scientific cooperation and so forth. However, hunting by local communities sometimes becomes the most widespread threats to these wildlife and the understanding of its nature, extent, and impacts on wildlife has been poor. Commercial hunting or poaching contributed heavily to extensive population declines for most species, and subsistence hunting’s in tribal areas were locally significant for some small carnivores, monkeys, deer and some birds.

There were various studies which sociologically and scientifically demonstrate that the tribal population living in close proximity to forests and their relationship to forests show stronger positive linkage with forest spirits. It boils down to the accountability, stewardship and administrative responsibilities and ‘ethic bound’ obligations of the local sanctuary managers to increase communication, initiating monitoring and patrolling, and establishing wildlife recovery zones. Using local knowledge has limitations, but the process of engaging local people promotes collaborative action that wildlife in India needs. The best example can cite from Manas National Park, once demoted in status to a World Heritage Site in Danger, has been resurrected, due to the continuous conservation efforts of former poachers. One must acknowledge the formidably surmountable tasks and challenges undertaken against the backdrop of prevailing and preponderance bureaucratic corruption by local conservation legends Kampa Borgoyari, deputy chief of Bodoland Territorial Council and community leader late Rajen Islari along with other concern nature groups including Maozigendri Ecotourism Society (MMES) for bringing about significant societal and conservation changes in India. I can remember an articles of Ramchandra Guha titled ‘Socio-Ecological Research in India: a ‘Status’ Report’, published in Economic and Political Weekly, where he tangibly articulated that more and more ecologists and wildlife researchers are becoming conservationists, it is questionable whether they have the skills and knowledge to deal with social issues when it comes to community based biodiversity conservation. The gap between ecologists and social scientists is wide and there is a clear need for interdisciplinary approaches to environmental conservation in India.

A rare charismatic bird called Himalayan Monal that author rescued from hunting trap. Image Credit: Rakesh Soud

Author rescued a Red Panda, a critically endangered species in India. Image Credit: Rakesh Soud

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rakesh Soud is the academic adviser and the South Asia correspondence of the Ecoblogs. Rakesh is a Ph.D. candidate of Indian Institute of Technology (IIT). He is working on the environmental history and contemporary issues related to socio-ecological aspects and conservation of Asian elephants of northeastern part of India. Readers can follow Ecoblogs at our twitter @Ecosysblogs

White-Nose Syndrome : A Brief Summary of What We Know – And What We Don’t

Stephanie McMahon, Academic Adviser of the Ecoblogs

Little brown bat with white-nose syndrome in Greeley Mine, Vermont, March 26, 2009. Photo credit: Marvin Moriarty/USFWS

If you live in North America, you’ve probably heard of a disease affecting bats that’s been pretty hard to ignore in the last few years. The disease is called White-Nose Syndrome (WNS) and it’s caused by a fungus that grows on hibernating bats. The fungus causes white “fuzz” to grow on the bat’s nose, ears, and wings. The fungus is called Geomyces destructans and, as implied by its name, it’s been quite destructive to North American bat populations with death tolls of 90 to nearly 100 percent in some areas.

The pest control and pollination service provided by bats to agriculture has been estimated to be worth between 3.7 and 53 billion dollars per year^a. Unlike most small mammals, bats have a slow reproduction rate. This means that the bat populations that have suffered serious declines from WNS won’t recover anytime soon. With droughts and climate change and everything else, we really can’t afford to lose bats and the services they provide.

Thankfully, the mainstream media has caught on to the importance of bats, the significance of their loss, and the destructiveness of WNS. Here’s a screenshot of my Google news search for “White Nose Syndrome 2013”.

Screenshot of WNS in Media. Image Credit: Stephanie McMahon

Here’s a Bit of What We Know:

WNS affects bats during hibernation and about 5.7-6.7 million bats have died of White Nose Syndrome^b

As of April 2013, WNS was found in at least 22 states in the U.S and in 5 Canadian provinces^c. Here’s the breakdown:

U.S. States	Date	Canadian Provinces	Date
1. Alabama	March 2012	1. New Brunswick	March 2011
2. Connecticut	March 2008	2. Nova Scotia	April 2011
3. Delaware	April 2010	3. Ontario	March 2010
4. Georgia	March 2013	4. Prince Edward Island	February 2013
5. Illinois	February 2013	5. Quebec	April 2010
6. Indiana	January 2011
7. Kentucky	April 2011
8. Maine	May 2011
9. Maryland	March 2010
10. Massachusetts	February 2008
11. Missouri	April 2010
12. New Hampshire	February 2009
13. New Jersey	February 2009
14. New York	February 2006
15. North Carolina	February 2011
16. Ohio	March 2011
17. Pennsylvania	December 2008
18. South Carolina	March 2013
19. Tennessee	March 2010
20. Vermont	February 2008
21. Virginia	February 2009
22. West Virginia	February 2009

In addition to these, Geomyces destructans has been detected in:
23. Iowa (June, 2012)

24. Oklahoma (single bat, 2010)

Geomyces destructans has also been found in Europe. However, European bats seem more resistant to the fungus since there hasn’t been widespread mortality reported in European bat populations.

Geomyces destructans is a psychrophilic (cold-loving) fungus that grows in moist environments. It has been reported to grow exceptionally well between 12.5 degree C and 15.8 degree C. ¹ Species in this genus are also keratinophilic (keratin-loving). ²

…and What We Don’t:

How long can Geomyces destructans live in the environment? We don’t know how long Geomyces destructans can survive without a host, but studies have shown that it can survive in caves at least until the end of summer (months after the bats have left hibernation).

Can Geomyces destructans live on other hosts? While WNS has only been reported on bats, it is unclear whether Geomyces destructans can survive on other cave-frequenting species such as raccoons or bears. Raccoons have been known to feed on dead WNS infected bats. McAlpine et al. (2011) estimated that raccoons had ingested 62-74.9% of the total dead and dying bats at a site in New Brunswick (they also mentioned that Raccoons were an unlikely vector for Geomyces destructans)³. If Geomyces destructans can survive on other species, these species may serve as a reservoir or even a vector for the fungus.

How does Geomyces destructans kill bats? While we know that the fungus is causing high rates of mortality in bats due to frequent arousal during hibernation, the exact physiological processes leading to death are not yet known. This has been a particularly hard area to study due to a lack of information on normal physiological values of hibernating bats.

Why isn’t mass mortality seen in European bats? The European and North American Geomyces destructans fungus has been found to be almost identical. In addition, North American bats exhibit the same symptoms when infected with European Geomyces destructans as they do with North American Geomyces destructans.⁴ This indicates that the fungus is likely new to North America. The difference in mortality rates could be due to a number of reasons. First, it is possible that European bats have co-evolved with Geomyces. destructans and have therefore greater immunity to WNS than bats in North America. Bats are sometimes able to recover from the fungus when they awake from hibernation and their body temperature increases. It is thought that shorter winters may play a role in determining the rate of mortality. In addition, European bat hibernation colonies are often much smaller than those in North America. This could mean less chance for the fungus to spread via direct contact between infected and non-infected bats. Any number or combination of environmental and behavioral factors (and even additional factors) could play a role in disease transmission and mortality rates.

Is there a treatment or cure? Not yet. While some scientists are focused on direct treatments such as the effectiveness of Terbinafine and “Agent C” (which has successfully treated WNS in a lab setting) other scientists are attempting to slow the spread of the disease by using war bunkers as artificial hibernation sites. Unlike caves, bunkers can be scrubbed clean after the bats leave in the spring. It has also been found that with warmth, food, and water (supportive therapy) bats are capable of recovering from WNS. The problem is that the resources necessary to provide enough care for all affected hibernacula to recover from WNS makes providing supportive therapy to all infected bats unfeasible. There has also been a model that predicted an increase in bat survival if heat is provided to localized areas within hibernacula⁵; although I’m not aware of any attempts to test this. Currently, the best practice for treatment of WNS infected bats is supportive therapy by an experienced licensed wildlife rehabilitator.

Literature Cited:

^a Boyles JG, Cryan PM, McCracken GF, Kunz TH (2011) Economic importance of bats in agriculture. Science 332(6025) 41-42.

bU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

c http://whitenosesyndrome.org/about/where-is-it-now

1^ Verant ML, Boyles JG, Waldrep W Jr, Wibbelt G, Blehert DS (2012) Temperature-Dependent Growth of Geomyces destructans, the Fungus That Causes Bat White-Nose Syndrome. PLoS ONE 7(9): e46280. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0046280

2^ Hayes MA (2012) The Geomyces Fungi: Ecology and Distribution BioScience 2012 62 (9), 819-823

3^ McAlpine DF, Vanderwolf KJ, Forbes GJ, Malloch D (2011) Consumption of bats (Myotis spp.) by Raccoons (Procyon lotor) during an outbreak of White-Nose Syndrome in New Brunswick, Canada: implications for estimates of bat mortality. The Canadian Field-Naturalist. 125(3) 257-260.

4^ Warnecke L, Turner JM, Bollinger TK, Lorch JM, Misra V, Cryan PM, Wibbelt G, Blehert DS, Willis CKR (2012) Inoculation of bats with European Geomyces destructans supports the novel pathogen hypothesis for the origin of white-nose syndrome. PNAS. 109(18). 6999-7003. doi:10.1073/pnas.1200374109.

5^ Boyles JG, Willis CKR (2009) Could localized warm areas inside cold caves reduce mortality of hibernating bats affected by white-nose syndrome? Ecol. Environ. doi: 10.1890/080187.

Stephanie McMahon is a wildlife biologist who serves as an Academic Adviser and North America Chapter Coordinator of the Ecoblogs. Our readers can follow Ecoblogs’ twitter updates at @Ecosysblogs

Green Munia: Protection by locals

Prakash Mehra, South Asia Chapter Coordinator of the Ecoblogs

Green Munia. Imaged Credit: Prakash Mehra

“Chalat musafir moh liya re, pinjare wali munia” (eye catching cage bird, Munia, attracts any travelers) a melodious song of Hindi movie “Teesri Kasam” is well known to most of the Indians especially elderly group. The essence of this song is lesser known among the modern generation. But the real fact is that how many people have seen the bird which has been described in the song and praised for its attractiveness? A small group of researchers and youngsters used the song and revived the age-old Indian practices of folklore to touch the sentiments of people.

This is a beautiful tiny little bird – Munia or Avadavat. It is popular as member of “Finch” family among global community. Interestingly, one of the species of small finches seen by Europeans in Ahmadabad was termed as “Ahmadabad Birds” which later on misspelled and gave origin to its existing name – “avadavat”.  Seven species of munias are found in the Indian subcontinent. All of these species are beautiful but the beauty of Green Munia is something which strikes a thought in mind of lyricist to write a song or a painter to prepare a painting.

Green Munia in Pairs. Image Credit: Prakash Mehra

Small, slim passerine with a short, stout, conical beak, a bird of about 10-11 cm, olive green in coloration camouflaging with the green vegetation, too difficult to detect in wild but could be seen easily in the cages in bird trade market at several places in India. The pale yellow throat, breast and center of belly along with the Zebra-like lining on flanks and red bill magnetize the sight of any human to look towards this wonderful fascinating bird -Green Munia, also known as Green Avadavat. Scientifically, the name was changed several times viz., Stictospiza formosa to Estrilda formosa but now it is Amandava formosa. Green Munia is endemic to India where it is distributed locally from Sirohi (Rajasthan) to Hazaribagh (Bihar) in the east form the northern line and western limits of Khandesh (Maharastra) to Visakhapatnam (Andhra Pradesh) form the southern line.

Habitats of Green Munia interspesed in Aravallis. Image Credit: Prakash Mehra

How painful it is that the bird which was once abundant in India is no more to see commonly anymore. It blows the mind of average Indian when they come to know that the bird is endemic to India. Nowhere else this species could be seen in the world. The eye catching beauty of this bird has created a major cause of caging this bird. Some literature state that during trapping large proportion (it may be more then 90%) of the individuals die due the psychological shock. Besides trapping, loss of habitats preferred by the bird is another factor causing decline in their population.

Green Munia is listed as globally threatened bird categorized as “Vulnerable” in the C1 and C2a categories (C1 = continuing decline in population, C2a = severe fragmentation) by BirdLife International classification. The Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 lists this species in Schedule IV, whereby hunting and trapping of this species is totally prohibited.

Green Munia in small flocks. Image Credit; Prakash Mehra

To know more about this bird: The bird lives in flocks in which the number of individual varies. While feeding on the ground, the large flock get dispersed forming smaller flocks. The broad range of regenerating and open habitats is utilized by this species. But the habitat structure of bird mainly comprises of the tall grasses with the agricultural fields and dense bushes. The food preferred by the species is the soft herbage, seeds and other types of soft parts of plants. Song is weak, high-pitched warble whereas calls include a weak, twittering ‘seee’ or ‘swee swee’ as well as ‘cheep’ and ‘chirp’. They generally produce calls during flights and when separated from the flock or its partner. The breeding records of the species are from May to January but breeding and nesting ecology of the birds are yet to be study in detail. The cup shaped nest could be seen in between the tall grasses or sugarcane. Clutch size is usually 5-6 eggs at a time. Green Munia does not shows long distanced migration. Local movement from open land to dense bushy area in the winters was observed.

Green Munia Conservation Team. Image Credit: Prakash Mehra

Protection by community: In the southern tracts of Aravalli hills (Rajasthan, India), once Green Munia was abundant and commonly sighted bird which is now a rarity. Only a few of the pockets of this area harbor this little beauty. A team of researchers conducted surveys to assess the status and distribution along with the causes for its local extinction. Emphasis was being laid on the protection of the habitats with the community conservation program. A team of interested youth was identified. Local youngsters were trained and engaged in birding. With the pace of time, the local team could able to convince the local habitation to step ahead in providing safeguard to the feeding grounds. The commitment of the researchers and the local team brought a great change in the mindsets of the people. Moreover, realizing the importance of the species, the local population stepped ahead with informal conservation programs. When the author and his team started the work, the number of individuals was under four hundred (2004-05). The last hope of its survival was depending on the protection of the breeding and feeding grounds. The involvement of the local people, brought a great change and today (2012-13), the number accounted over thousand. This solved a purpose in two ways; the local youth got engaged in conservation programs along with their livelihood.

Prakash Mehra is the blog coordinator for the South Asia chapter of the Ecoblogs. He is a biologist who holds a PhD in environmental science from India. Readers can follow Ecoblogs at our twitter @Ecosysblogs.

The Arabian Oryx-A Conservation Success Story

Nour Habjoka, Academic Adviser & Middle East Correspondence of the Ecoblogs

Arabian Oryx. Image Credit: Josh More

The Arabian Oryx is a success story in the history of wildlife conservation, one that deserves to be told. This species has traveled from a status of “extinct in the wild” to “vulnerable”, three full extinction risk categories, a first according to the World Conservation Union (IUCN).Thanks to conservation efforts, the Arabian Oryx has made a comeback to the wild.

The Arabian Oryx (Oryx leucoryx), the smallest of four species belonging to the genus Oryx. It is native to the desert regions of the Arabian peninsula, namely Egypt (Sinai), Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Syria, United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Yemen. Uncontrolled poaching has led to its extinction in the wild, and the last wild Arabian Oryx was believed to have been hunted in Oman in 1972.

Abū aṭ-Ṭayyib al-Mutanabbī‎ (915 – 965 AD) who praised his loved ones’ eyes by comparing them to those of Al-Maha. Arabic Script Credit: Nour Habjoka

These antelopes are known in the Arab world as Al-Maha, and are culturally synonymous with beauty and grace. For the longest time, these animals have been the object and focus of many verses of poetry of love-struck poets. Their grace and striking appearance has inspired many famous poets like the notable Abbasid poet, Abū aṭ-Ṭayyib al-Mutanabbī‎  (915 – 965 AD) who praised his loved ones’ eyes by comparing them to those of Al-Maha.

The Arabian Oryx had existed naturally in large numbers in the wild, and bedouins used to hunt them as a source of good and for their hide. The advent of modern technology and the development of weapons and hunting equipment, poaching has overtaken the ability of this beautiful animal to reproduce and its numbers dropped until its extinction. Alongside poaching, many animals were  trapped and sold for display, i.e. to display them stuffed, or display their horns, locally and all over the world.

Adaptation to a harsh environment
Apart from its distinctive looks and particular markings, the Arabian oryx is an example of great ability to survive the harsh desert environment. For instance, their wide hooves enable them of walking  across shifting sand. Also, they are able to find water that is miles away thanks to their acute sense of smell. It has also been said that the black markings on their faces act like sunglasses and protecting their eyes from the bright sunlight.

History of conservation

Herd of Oryx in Arabian desert. Image Credit: Danny McL

After having been extinct in its original habitat, efforts were made to conserve and re-introduce the species back into the wild. One might wonder, if the wild populations had extinct, then where did the reintroduced animals come from? Private collections played a major role in saving this species, and were utilized for breeding and reintrocuing fresh stock into the wild. The first Maha were introduced in Oman in 1982. More re-introduction followed in Saudi Arabia, Israel, the United Arab Emirates, and very recently in Jordan. Re-introductions were later on proposed for Kuwait, Iraq, and Syria. Arabian Oryx populations are estimated at about 1,100 individuals in the wild and 6,000-7,000 individuals are kept worldwide in zoos, preserves, and private collections. The UAE’s Environment Agency of Abu Dhabi is a regional pioneer in the domain of the Arabian Oryx conservation. It established with a wildlife reserve for the the species in Dubai (Al-Maha Resort) and Abu Dhabi. The agency is also championing regional re-introduction efforts of the Arabian Oryx, such as those in Jordan.

Concluding words

Arabian Oryx. Image Credit: Danny McL

Tremendous efforts have been made towards the conservation of the Arabian Oryx, rendering it an example that brings hope for other species in the future. The danger that faces animals in the wild can never be eliminated and the populations require regular monitoring and follow up. To conserve the populations of antelope in the wild, it is vital that the different efforts are concerted and sustainable. Among the recommendations that were mentioned in the Antelopes Global Survey and Action Plans (2001) are the following; developing a national and regional preservation or a biodiversity strategy; fostering intergovernmental co-operation is equally important where ecosystems (particularly for animals that travel across boarders); building public acceptance and appreciation of wildlife through awareness and outreach programmes; establishing protected areas with a full range of ecosystems; conducting field surveys and research to inform regarding the distribution, numbers, and status of species; and last but not least continuing activities pertaining to the reintroduction and translocation of species into their natural habitats.

Nour Habjoka is an agriculture and plant biologist with professional work focused on water resource management in Middle East Asia context. She serves as an academic adviser and  Middle East Asia correspondence of the Ecoblogs. Readers can follow Ecoblogs at our twitter @Ecosysblogs

A Message from Jessica Omukuti-Academic Adviser of the Ecoblogs

Jessica Omukuti-Academic Adviser of the Ecoblogs

When Stephanie McMahon, our academic adviser and North America correspondence mentioned about  science in her message statement, what immediately came to my mind was basic science- the floating of objects, the circulation system and how to separate mixture. It then evolves into more complex subjects like the buoyancy theory, the red blood cells and platelets, the theory of evolution and atoms, elements and molecular compounds and so forth. In Kenya, we were ‘forced’ to study all the sciences (I say force because if it had been my call, I would have dropped the course on ‘chemistry’ and anything associated to it during my undergraduate, but luckily, in this case the freedom of choice was taken away from us).

Today, I realize that the four disciplines- Mathematics, Physics, Biology and Chemistry are the major academic thrust in my life. I have tried to imagine a world without science, and all I see was ambiguity and lack of purpose. Science existed long before the modern inventions. The difference is its depth and understanding became crystallized and refined over many centuries. Apart from imagining a world without science, I have also attempted to gauge a light on world without one of the four disciplines and I came to the conclusion that it simply wouldn’t be a world without these four areas of the science as stated above. We use mathematics and chemistry to explain biology, we use mathematics and physics principles to explain ecology to economy, climate change to sustainable development and anything in between. Am sure most of us will agree on this.

I believe Ecoblogs is microscopically magnifying and positively reenforcing these core areas of the disciplines through adopting a holistic and inter-disciplinary approaches. It has brought scientists from different backgrounds on board, starting from world class legendary conservation biologist (Alfredo Quarto) to Stanford University scholar (Veronica Famira), to internationally acclaimed award winning poet and great great granddaughter of Charles Darwin (Ruth Padel) to Fulbright Scholar and visiting fellow of Columbia University (Luna Khirfan) and many other notable scholars. This prestigious, highly authentic and sophistical diverse scientific backgrounds made Ecoblogs not only unique as a blog site but also molded it to one of the most authoritative source of information for anyone reading its contents as a blog article. The strong group of academic advisers in Ecoblogs is just another way of ensuring that every aspects of the ecosystem, from the social sciences, to the physical, biological and chemical science of our biosphere and beyond are receiving fair share of scientifically valid commentaries and I believe it is through dialogues, communications, networking and knowledge-sharing that we would be better equipped to understand real issues of global concern be it climate change, sustainable development, poverty, deforestation and species extinction.

I firmly believe that through Ecoblogs a new social and academic revolution has already taken place. This is due to the fact that our scientists and members comes from all corners covering almost all the global continents hence our readers will be informed about true global ecological crisis and environmental issues and will be encouraged to take a step towards a sustainable future. Through Ecoblogs, we will add our voice to that of many others who are advocating for ecologically sound environment coupled with natural resource economics, environmental philosophy, conservation biology, wildlife science, socio-political ecology and beyond.

Salud to a conserve our biosphere and many Kudos to Ecoblogs!

Small Mammal Ecology: The Martes Genus as Case Study

Mohammed Ashraf and Stephanie McMahon

Mega vertebrates from mammalian guild often receive wholesale package of conservation attention both from socio-political and ecological spectrum. This is largely due to the human perspective based on our ecological and conservation prejudice stem from ‘ramshackle and ill-conceived’ mindset that large species are worth putting effort to preserve. Considerable funding and ecological research have been carried out focusing mega-mammalian fauna across the globe. For example, the most ambitious conservation project focusing tigers of India is a testimony to our efforts to conserve the charismatic mega carnivore. Similar examples come from mountain lion conservation in North America and jaguar conservation in South America. Carnivores are often the epicenter of ecological study by many wildlife biologists due to their conservation significance that encompass heterogeneous mosaic of broad landscapes including protected areas, reserve forests, biological hotspots and world heritage sites. The mammalian order carnivores show varying degree of ecological resiliency due to their diversity across terrestrial, semi-aquatic, aquatic and marine ecosystems across the planet. There are roughly 300 species of carnivores (including their sub species that are frequently subject to taxonomical and phylogenetic debate) and the family Mustelidae is the largest. Mustelidae comprises over 67 species (including the subspecies) representing 22% of the total carnivores. Despite their sheer proportion and species diversity across the bio-geographical realm much-needed study to understand their demographic and ecological parameters remain punishingly catholic.

Nilgiri Marten. Image Credit-IUCN

Martes is one of the neglected genus that hosts 13 species comprising roughly 20% of the total Mustelids. However, basic ecological and conservation information regarding this relatively miniature carnivores are sketchy and ‘anecdotal’. Species under Martes genus plays key role in maintaining ecological services including pollination of tropical and semi-tropical trees, plants, and shrubs that are in fact a cornucopia of invertebrates, arboreal mammals, reptilian fauna of high conservation importance and avian species including charismatic birds of paradise. If the numbers of Martes species decimate due to various subtle anthropogenic causes, these large diversity of other vertebrates and invertebrates that depends on martes will also diminish over time before we have the chance to study their vital role on sustaining healthy ecosystems and for providing intangible ecosystem services that we relies on for our own existence. Considering their importance on maintaining both temperate and tropical ecosystems across the globe there is a grave need to scientifically understand little over half a dozen of these species under Martes genus. This article expects to fill this ‘empty niche’ by providing statistically valid, ecologically sound and scientifically authoritative basic information about species under Martes genus in a brief generic form so that it can serve as a ‘first-ecological-notebook-to-pick-up’ for resource managers, carnivore biologists, students focusing their work on small mammal conservation, field staffs and forest officials working on protected area design in temperate and tropical landscapes.

Image 1: Taxonomical hierarchy of Mustelidae. Image Credit: Stephanie McMahon (Modified from IUCN Database)

The Martes genus is included in the Mustelidae family of the order Carnivora (Image 1). This genus includes a number of small carnivorous species and subspecies. Some of the notable species are Nilgiri Marten, European Pine Marten, Sable, American Marten and Japanese Marten. They live in a wide variety of habitats including forest, shrubland, grassland, rocky areas, and artificial landscapes (Image 2). They are classified as carnivores because their diet consists primarily of small terrestrial vertebrates; however, they are predatory hunters capable of taking on prey the same size – or larger – than themselves.  While a large part of their diet consists of small mammals such as mice and squirrels, some species have been known to eat birds, eggs, fish, and fruit. They are opportunistic feeders but will cache or store food for periods of poor weather conditions and low food availability. They are generally agile tree climbers as well as good swimmers. They are solitary animals although they can sometimes be seen in mating pairs or as small family units (mother and kits).  Their biggest threats are hunting/trapping by humans for their pelts and habitat loss; although they do have a number of natural predators such as predatory birds, wolves, foxes, lynx, and bobcats. However, even with these threats, their numbers are relatively healthy. They are all listed as species of Least Concern, with the exception of Martes gwatkinsii, the Nilgiri marten which is listed as Vulnerable by the IUCN.

Image 2: Categorical sketch of Martes biomes. Image Credit: Stephanie McMahon (Modified from IUCN Database)

We have carried out a simple ecological enumeration based on World Conservation Union (IUCN) species database (Version 1.0). We ran the database systematically under the following criterion index to gather qualitative data that we can suitably convert into mathematically viable data set in order to develop a quantitative framework. Our aims were to address rudimentary ecological questions that are often faced by wildlife biologists: 1. What is the proportional richness and or diversity (notice we are not addressing the question of species evenness) of the species that are ecologically, taxonomically and phylogenetically represented under the genus Martes across its ecological biomes? 2. What is the proportional diversity and or richness of the Martes species across the broad geo-political landscapes? We believe answering these two questions are criticall if carnivore ecologists ought to advance Mustelid study in general but Martes study in particular under the chronic funding deficit and prevalent administrative and bureaucratic setbacks.

Six criteria that we pull together from IUCN database version 1.0 in order to construct our data framework:

1. Taxonomical
2. Phylogenetic
3. Ecological
4. Habitat Suitability
5. Conservation Status
6. Demographic Parameter

Proportional richness and or diversity of the species under Martes genus across its biomes. Image Credit: Mohammed Ashraf

Our results suggest that over one third of the species under the genus Martes inhabits and prefer temperate coniferous forest ecosystems. Despite the broad landscape of temperate ecosystems that we find in North America and Europe, our data suggest that 27% of the species are in fact living in North and Far East Asian coniferous ecosystems. 29% of the species lives in temperate broad-leaved and we found that majority of these species are associated with Europe representing 23% of the Martes diversity. 14% of the species under Martes prefers shrubland (also known as scrubland) and interestingly they are closely associated with South and South East Asian and North American shrublands comprising 15% each of these geo-political boundary across the continents. This has conservation implications and it challenges the average stereotype that ‘majority of the Martes species lives in North American and European temperate coniferous forests’. Our data clearly indicates that only 15% of the species are in fact associated with North American forest whereas collectively, 50% of the species lives in North/Far East Asia and Europe in temperate coniferous and temperate broad-leaved ecosystems respectively. We found 12% of the martes species are close associated with Russian temperate ecosystems of both broad-leaved, boreal taiga and coniferous in nature. Although 4% of the species lives in Africa and considering there is no Martes species in South America, our data statistically assumes that 11% of the species are living in tropical broad-leaved in which 80% are associated with South and South East Asian tropical forests where mammalian diversity is high. The remaining 20% may be linked with the 4% of the African tropics. Only small number of species are living in aquatic, boreal taiga and flooded grasslands representing 4% of the each biomes. Finally our data reveals that 4% of the species under Martes genus inhabits Middle East and Western Asia possibly associated with shrubland habitats.

Martes diversity across its broad geo-political landscapes. Image Credit: Mohammed Ashraf

We conclude from our result that conservation priority focusing large heterogeneous landscapes that harbors multitude species including Martes should be classes as keystone habitats to bring about over all biodiversity conservation. In this remit we feel conservation priority and statistically valid ecological research must focus on two of these large landscapes:

1. Temperate coniferous forest ecosystems of North and Far East Asia.
2.  Temperate broad-leaved semi-natural woodlands of Europe.

Ecological Mangrove Restoration (EMR): Re-establishing a more biodiverse and resilient coastal ecosystem with community participation

Alfredo Quarto, Honorary Adviser of the Ecoblogs & Executive Director of the Mangrove Action Project

Importance of Mangroves and Need for Restoration
Mangrove forests are vital for healthy coastal ecosystems in many regions of the world. They support an immense variety of sea life, and are prime nesting and feeding sites for hundreds of migratory bird species. Healthy mangrove forests play an important role in carbon sequestration—their ecosystems and corresponding wetlands account for nearly a third of the world’s terrestrial carbon stores and sequester more carbon per hectare than tropical rainforest. Mangroves also form a natural coastline protection shield against floods, storms or other natural disasters such as hurricanes and tsunamis. Healthy mangrove forests purify water flowing through them to the sea, and form a natural coastline protection shield against floods, storms or other natural disasters such as hurricanes and tsunamis.  Beyond these irreplaceable ecosystem services, mangroves provide important socio-economic benefits to coastal communities. In regions where the forest has been destroyed, local coastal communities face serious problems of diminished wild fisheries and threatened traditional livelihoods.

In spite of those important functions, more than 50% of the global mangrove forests have been destroyed over the last 100 years, mainly caused by human development . According to the Food and Agricultural Organizations’ (FAO’s) statistics, mangroves are being lost now at the rate of around 1% per year. That means nearly 150,000 ha of mangroves are still being lost each year. In addition, mangrove ecosystems and salt marshes are vulnerable to negative effects caused by climate change such as rising sea levels, higher temperatures and natural disasters. Reforestation programs where the mangroves have been lost would therefore rebuild mangrove forest protection and restore the potential for sustainable development. The improvement of mangrove ecosystems will enhance their function as a natural water treatment system and spawning grounds for fish, improving health and livelihood possibilities thus benefiting marginalized local communities, and the vital carbon sequestration powers of mangroves would be restored.

However, there are relatively few examples of successful, long-term mangrove rehabilitation, partly because most attempts have not corrected the problem(s) which caused the mangrove loss in the first place. Moreover, the great majority of mangrove restoration attempts are merely hand planting of a single species- Rhizophora, or red mangrove -forming monoculture plantations rather than truly restoring vibrant and biodiverse multi-species mangrove wetlands. Many plantings are not restoration, but rather attempts of ecosystem conversion of natural mudflats to mangroves.

In search of a compromise between assigned economic worth and biodiversity, Mangrove Action Project (MAP) promotes the concept and practice of Community-based Ecological Mangrove Restoration (CBEMR). This holistic approach to mangrove restoration views the proposed plant and animal communities to be restored as part of a larger ecosystem, connected with other ecological communities that also have functions to be protected or restored. Mangrove forests can self-repair, or successfully undergo secondary succession, if the normal tidal hydrology is restored and if there is a ready source of mangrove seedlings or propagules from nearby stands that are accessible to reseed an area. CBEMR focuses on re-establishing the hydrology which will facilitate this natural regeneration process. CBEMR also engages local communities in the restoration process, empowering them to be stewards of their environment, and enabling them to regain the livelihoods destroyed when the mangroves were destroyed. Three-day intensive workshops train local people to do CBEMR, and community management plans ensure project sustainability.

Working with local communities and NGOs, MAP has been piloting small successful CBEMR projects in Thailand, Indonesia, and El Salvador. However, many challenges remain, such as the need for more a robust monitoring and evaluation model with internationally recognized outcome indicators; issues of land tenancy and site availability; restrictions imposed by funders; carbon offset plantings encouraging ecosystem conversion rather than true mangrove restoration; and securing government permits and approvals. MAP plans to continue its CBEMR work with new projects in SE Asia and Latin America, gradually brought to greater scale, and in the process learn to overcome current challenges and further refine the CBEMR model.

Failure of usual mangrove restoration methods
However, very few organizations so far have dealt effectively with mangrove restoration and relatively few examples exist of successful, long-term mangrove rehabilitation, partly because most restoration attempts have not corrected the problem(s) causing the mangrove loss in the first place. The great majority of mangrove restoration attempts are merely hand planting of a single species- usually the Rhizophora, or red mangrove -forming monoculture plantations rather than truly restoring a vibrant and biodiverse mangrove wetland. These attempts have largely failed, either leaving dead seedlings and much disappointment in their wake, or establishing mangrove plantations or monocultures with very limited potential in biodiversity.

This practice of hand planting propagules and seedlings is aptly described by EMR pioneer Dr. Robin Lewis as “the gardening method,” whereby monoculture plantations of usually one or two varieties of mangrove are established. These plantations are less resilient to natural disasters, diseases or insect infestations. In tropical areas where there may be two or more dozen mangrove species, it makes little sense to label this “gardening” approach as “restoration” because the natural biodiversity and productivity of the original healthy mangrove forest is not an outcome produced under this simplified technique. Most often, these “gardening” efforts fail to establish any significant lasting mangrove cover.

This “mangrove plantation” was cited as an example of how planting mangroves can also protect coastlines against storm surges and rising sea level yet clearly is an example of habitat conversion from mud/sand flat to mangrove forest and is not supported by MAP. Photogragh by: O. Jonsson

Following the December 2004 tsunami, there was an urgent, but ill-conceived, reaction to establish protective mangrove greenbelts. A wide call was issued and supported by many governments, inter-governmental agencies, and NGOs. The majority of these rather hastily planned mangrove “restoration” attempts failed because of badly chosen siting or wrongly selected species for the plantings. Many red mangrove seedlings or propagules were hand-planted in disturbed former mangrove sites, as well as mud flats and salt flats. However, few of these survived because the necessary conditions for seedling survival were not clearly evaluated in advance.

The failures were due to many factors: poor site selection, lack of understanding mangrove ecology and hydrology, short project period and desire for quick results from donors, lack of community consultation and participation, relief agencies with no previous experience with mangroves, lack of follow-up and monitoring, and planting mainly Rhizophora sp. Seedlings and propagules regardless if this was appropriate for the selected site or not- too often planting the wrong species in the wrong place at the wrong time. One reason for this monoculture approach is that the specific species planted can produce desirable wood products that can be sold on local markets and therefore improves the livelihood of the people living in the surrounding communities. However, these plantations are often established in mud flats, salt flats and even sea grass beds, thus attempting to convert one viable and important ecosystem into another. This is not a wise solution when attempting to “restore” ecosystem functions, even if these projects do successfully establish some mangroves. Most often, these “gardening” efforts fail to establish any significant mangrove cover.

The CBEMR Alternative
In search of a compromise between economic value and biodiversity, Mangrove Action Project (MAP) promotes the concept and practice of Community-based Ecological Mangrove Restoration (CBEMR). CBEMR is based upon a set of basic ecological principles and is capable of restoring a much more naturally functional and biodiverse mangrove ecosystem when compared to other more capital and labor intensive methods such as monoculture hand-planting.

CBEMR in action. Assessing hydrology of site. Image Credit: MAP

MAP saw the opportunity and need to introduce the EMR methodology first developed by Dr. Robin Lewis in the US into Asia to improve the success of mangrove restoration. The challenge was to adopt and introduce EMR which was only described previously in scientific journals, to the socio-economic and cultural situation of mangrove communities, NGOs and governments of developing countries in Asia. In the process, MAP has developed a sustainable model that engages and integrates the local communities, and which we are calling Community-based Ecological Mangrove Restoration (CBEMR).

To ensure success, long term monitoring and evaluation must be built into any restoration framework. Too often, little follow-up in monitoring and evaluation occurs, and thus little is gained in terms of lessons that could be learned from past mistakes or successes. Success is often judged by percent of surviving seedlings at often 3-6 months and sometimes one or two years after the attempt at restoration, but we need at least five years to better understand the nuances that determine success or failure at each unique restoration site. And we need to better define exactly what constitutes the outcome indicators we look for in determining that success. Is it restored biodiversity, forest density and height, or other factors we are looking for?

According to Robin Lewis, determination of success is likely time specific. He suggests preparing a “time zero,” or baseline, report by setting up test quadrants to compare statistically with similar size quadrants within the control areas (from personal correspondence). According to Dr. Norm Duke of Mangrove Watch, for tidal wetlands, “…there has been no suitable assessment methodology that managers can readily use. So these valuable wetland ecosystems have largely been neglected by managing agencies and monitoring programs – a factor that arguably may have contributed to some declines”.

Going Forward

EMR Training Workshop in Thailand. Image Credit: MAP

MAP is currently engaged in a CBEMR project on the Andaman coast of Thailand and is actively seeking both project partners and funders for new CBEMR projects in such locations as the Gulf of Fonseca (El Salvador, Honduras, and Nicaragua); the Choco Coast of Colombia; the Sundarbans of India; Lake Maracaibo in Venezuela, and additional sites in Thailand. The sites will be strategically selected in order to:
1) Further perfect the CBEMR methodology
2) Systematize the resolution of the challenges presented above
3) Demonstrate CBEMR feasibility on a larger scale
4) Explore the integration of CBEMR into national and international eco-initiatives, such as national coastal ecosystem plans, carbon off-sets, payments for ecosystem services (PES), and REDD+.

To disseminate the knowledge on CBEMR and to allow its wider application in different countries, a series of CBEMR workshops are being implemented with the aim of teaching stakeholders from different backgrounds the CBEMR methods. Plans are to establish regional core groups of restoration practitioners trained in CBEMR. These core groups will share information and experiences on how best to implement EMR projects taking into consideration local conditions.

Alfredo Quarto, Executive Director and Co-founder of the Mangrove Action Project (http://mangroveactionproject.org/), is a veteran campaigner with over 28 years of experience in organizing and writing on the environment and human rights issues.Alfredo has published numerous popular articles, book chapters, and conference papers on mangrove forest ecology, community-managed sustainable development, and shrimp aquaculture. Alfredo serves as an honorary adviser at the Ecoblogs. Readers can follow Ecoblogs at our twitter @Ecosysblogs

The fully copy of this report is placed as reference citation at our publication page and can be sent to our members upon request.