Panamanian Golden Frog

(Atelopus zeteki)

Now possibly Extinct in the Wild

(Photo by Brian Gratwicke, Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, Virginia, USA)

.

The Panamanian Golden Frog (Atelopus zeteki) is considered ‘Critically Endangered‘ by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). Only three animals of this species have been seen in the wild since late 2007 and it is now quite possibly ‘Extinct in the Wild‘.

Fortunately for the species though, approximately 1,500 animals still exist aboard the AArk, thanks to the work of Project Golden Frog (www.ProjectGoldenFrog.org) and the El Valle Amphibian Conservation Center (EVACC) (www.houstonzoo.org/amphibians/) in central Panama.

The Amphibian Ark is currently trying to help create a dedicated facility in Panama, at the EVACC, to house an expanding population of golden frogs that will hopefully someday be used for reintroduction back into the wild.

[Source:  ^http://frogmatters.wordpress.com/2010/02/27/help-save-the-panamanian-golden-frog/]

.

(Click image to enlarge)

.

Chytridiomycosis Disease

.

‘Chytridiomycosis‘, a devastating amphibian disease, has spread to Panama’s Darien region, the last protected area in Central America.    ‘Chytridiomycosis‘ is highly contagious across amphibians like frogs and is caused by a ‘chytrid fungus‘ (pronounced ‘kit-rid‘).  The fungus is implicated in the decline or rapid extinction of at least 200 species of frogs and other amphibians worldwide, including twenty critically endangered frog species throughout Central America such as the Panamanian Golden Frog.

Smithsonian researchers found the disease in 2% of the 93 frogs tested.   Yet the highly contagious disease has decimated numerous frog species worldwide, although some populations in Australia and the US appear to be making a comeback by evolving greater resistance. Within a span of five months, the fungus eradicated half of the frog species and 80% of individuals at the El Cope Nature Reserve in western Panama.

.

Nearly one-third of the world’s amphibians face extinction due to habitat loss, pollution and climate change with chytridiomycosis contributing to the extinction of 94 frog species since 1980.

.

The Panama Amphibian Rescue and Conservation Project has established captive colonies of two harlequin frog species endemic to Darien should they vanish from the wild.

[Source: ‘Fungus invades ‘frog paradise’ in Central America’, 14 June 2011, by Caitlin Stier, New Scientist (magazine) ^http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2011/06/chytrid-fungus-spreads-to-last.html]

.

‘The Hidden Plague’

Mountain Yellow-legged Frog (Rana muscosa) corpses lie belly-up

(Photo by Joel Sartore)

Highly Commended photo in Environment Wildlife Photographer of the Year (2010)

Natural History Museum (London)

.

‘This is a crime scene in a remote corner of California, high in the Sixty Lakes Basin area of the Sierra Nevada: mountain yellow-legged frog corpses lie belly-up.  The ‘chytridiomycosis‘ was first detected in dying frogs in the Sierra Nevada in 2004.  It has since reduced the population of the Mountain Yellow-legged Frogs from tens of thousands to under a hundred.

The death of the frogs is emblematic of a global amphibian decline. It’s believed that the fungus is being spread in part by the international trade in amphibians for display, food and laboratory use, its effects enhanced by global warming.

.

Its impact on frogs has resulted in the biggest loss of vertebrate life due to disease ever recorded.

.

[Source:  ‘2010 One Earth Award – Highly Commended’, Natural History Museum, ^http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-on/temporary-exhibitions/wpy/prevPhoto.do?photo=2575&year=2010&category=52]

.

Green Tree Frog

(Litoria caerulea)

(Northern Tropical Australia)

[Source: ^http://www.portdouglas-australia.com/tour-green-tree-frog.html]

.

2003:  Chytridiomycosis listed as a Key Threatening Process across Australia

.

In Australia, in 2003 Chytridiomycosis was acknowledged as a global epidemic impacting Australian frogs and amphibians and listed as a Key Threatening Process infecting and wiping out native frogs on Schedule 3 of the New South Wales (NSW) Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 (22 August 2003).

The Chytridiomycosis disease is caused by the chytrid (fungus) ‘Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis‘ (Longcore et al. 1999), potentially fatal to all native species of amphibian.

As such, all frog species that are listed under the schedules of the Act may be affected by the disease. Fifty species of Australian frogs have been found infected with the chytrid fungus.

.

In NSW, 22 species, more than one quarter of the total NSW amphibian fauna, have been diagnosed with the disease.

.

High altitude (>400m) populations are more severely affected by Chytridiomycosis. Such population declines have been reported from the NSW uplands (Gillespie and Hines 1999, Hines et al. 1999). Stream-associated frog species are more likely to be infected because the pathogen is waterborne. The following are stream-breeding species of the NSW coast and ranges and may be threatened by chytridiomycosis (Gillespie and Hines 1999).

.

Southern Corroboree Frog

  (Pseudophryne corroboree)

[Source: ^http://www.abc.net.au/science/scribblygum/june2004/closeup.htm]

.

Chytridiomycosis has been reported from the following frog species and populations:

.

Endangered Frogs:

.

• Green and Golden Bell Frog
• Spotted Frog
• Fleay’s Barred Frog
• Giant Barred Frog
• Stuttering Barred Frog
• Booroolong Frog
• Southern Corroboree Frog
• Tusked Frog Population (Nandewar and New England Tablelands Bioregions)

.

Green and Golden Bell Frog

(Litoria aurea)

[Source: ^http://www.saveourwaterwaysnow.com.au/01_cms/details.asp?ID=515]

.

Vulnerable Frogs:

.

• Northern Corroboree Frog
• Giant Burrowing Frog
• Peppered Frog
• Glandular Frog

.

[Source:  Australian Government, Department of Environment and Heritage, ^http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/threatenedSpeciesApp/profile.aspx?id=20009]

.

Glandular Frog    (New England Tree Frog)

(Litoria subglandulosa)

[Source: ^http://www.ournaturalplanet.com/descriptions/amphibians/frogs.asp]

.

All amphibians are facing global extinction.   It is that serious!

.

It is not just the world’s frogs that are at risk of extinction.  All amphibian species are facing a current global extinction crisis of unprecedented magnitude.

The major factors causing their decline are the emerging disease Chytridiomycosis and Habitat Destruction.

Chytridiomycosis is caused by the aquatic fungus Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis and has been linked to species extinctions and population declines in montane regions including Australia, Panama, North America, and Spain. Currently, it is debated whether the recent emergence of the pathogen is largely the result of environmental factors triggering an outbreak of an endemic pathogen or if the epidemic has been caused by widespread introduction of the pathogen into naïve host populations (‘pathogen pollution‘).

We studied the population genetics of chytridiomycosis using DNA sequences from a global panel of strains. These data showed evidence of a strong genetic bottleneck in the history of the pathogen, and the epidemic appears traceable to the widespread dispersal of a single genotype. Populations were not structured by host-origin, and the same lineage was detected in populations of both resistant and highly sensitive species. The data suggest that the chytridiomycosis epidemic is caused by the emergence of a novel pathogen but that disease outcome is contingent on host resistance and environmental factors.

[Source:  ‘Rapid Global Expansion of the Fungal Disease Chytridiomycosis into Declining and Healthy Amphibian Populations‘, by Timothy Y. James(1,2), Anastasia P. Litvintseva (3), Rytas Vilgalys (1), Jess A. T. Morgan (4), John W. Taylor (5), Matthew C. Fisher (6), Lee Berger (7), Ché Weldon (8), Louis du Preez (8), Joyce E. Longcore (9), ^http://www.plospathogens.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.ppat.1000458 –

.

Academic References:  

.

1. Department of Biology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America
2. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America
3. Department of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America
4. Department of Primary Industries & Fisheries, Animal Research Institute, Yeerongpilly, Queensland, Australia
5. Department of Plant and Microbial Biology, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, California, United States of America
6. Imperial College Faculty of Medicine, Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, St. Mary’s Campus, London, United Kingdom
7. School of Public Health, Tropical Medicine and Rehabilitation Sciences, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland, Australia
8. School of Environmental Sciences and Development, North-West University, Potchefstroom, South Africa
9. School of Biology & Ecology, University of Maine, Orono, Maine, United States of America]

.

The Global Amphibian Crisis

[Source: ^http://johncarlosbaez.wordpress.com/2011/12/08/the-global-amphibian-crisis/]

.

Frog Decline not just due to Disease

.

Upwards of 40% of amphibian species are in decline worldwide, owing to several factors:

.

1. Habitat Loss
2. Environmental Degradation
3. Pollutants
4. Disease
5. Trade in Amphibians

.

The fungal pathogen Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis has emerged as a major threat to amphibians, which leads to the fatal chytridiomycosis in susceptible species.

The first documented outbreaks of chytrid fungus occurred in the late 1990s simultaneously in Australia and Central America. Since then the pathogen has been detected in over 100 amphibian species and has been associated with severe population declines or extinctions in several regions throughout the world. A great deal is still unknown about the biology of this pathogen, therefore it remains an active area of research for disease ecologists and conservation biologists.

.

(Click image to enlarge)

.

Chytrid Fungus on Frogs:

.

B. dendrobatidis is an external pathogen that attaches to keratinized portions of amphibians, including the mouthparts of tadpoles and the skin of adults. The fungus reproduces via sporangia, and may be spread by movement of flagellated zoospores, direct contact between hosts, or between host stages. Growth of the fungus leads to degradation of the keratin layer, which eventually causes sloughing of skin, lethargy, weight loss, and potentially death. The physiological mechanism for chytrid-induced mortality is not known, but it appears to stem from disruption of skin function – such as fluid transport or gas exchange.

The chytrid fungus is known to infect over 100 species, but susceptibility to disease is highly life stage and species specific. For example, in mountain yellow legged frog (Rana muscosa) tadpoles suffer generally mild sublethal effects, with most mortality occurring at metamorphosis when there is a rapid production of newly keratinized skin tissue. Conversely, several other amphibian species appear to be relatively tolerant to B. dendrobatidis – including some widespread exotic or invasive species, such as the Marine Toad (Bufo marinus), American Bullfrog (Rana catesbeiana), and African Clawed Frog (Xenopus laevis).

.

Chytridiomycosis infection cycle

[Source:  ^http://theworldofrogs.weebly.com/chytrid-fungus.html]

.

At the population level, chytrid fungus outbreaks have been associated with local and possible species extinctions in Australia, Central America, and the United States.

For example, in 2004 chytrid fungus prevalence in parts of Panama increased from zero to nearly 60% over approximately 4 months, with concomitant declines in amphibian density and diversity of over 80% and 60%, respectively. B. dendrobatidis is thought to thrive in cool, moist habitats. This has been used to argue that cooling trends observed in parts of Central America are driving chytrid-induced amphibian extinctions in these regions.

.

Distribution:

.

One explanation for the recent emergence of chytridiomycosis in amphibians, the “novel pathogen hypothesis”, is that B. dendrobatidis existed historically as a locally distributed pathogen that only recently was spread to new regions. Alternatively, the “endemic pathogen hypothesis” posits that the chytrid fungus was historically widespread but that recent environmental change (e.g., climate change, pollutants, habitat degradation) altered its pathogenicity. The relative importance of these two mechanisms is currently a source of  debate. Low genetic diversity among geographically distant B. dendrobatidis strains is consistent with the first hypothesis, but synchronicity of chytrid fungus outbreaks in disparate, intact habitats supports the latter hypothesis.

The first described outbreaks of chytrid fungus occurred in 1998 in both Australia and Central America. Since then B. dendrobatidis infections have been documented throughout the Americas, including Mexico and the U.S., Europe, and most recently in Southeast Asia.

The oldest known chytrid fungus infections are from museum specimens of African clawed frogs (Xenopus laevis) collected in 1938. These specimens have been used to argue for an African origin for B. dendrobatidis.

African Clawed Frog

(Xenopus laevis)

[Source: ^http://www.sacredheartofodin.org/tag/african-clawed-frog/]

.

It is believed that the chytrid was then spread to other continents in the 1960s and 70s through commercial trade of these African frogs.    (Ed: i.e. poaching)

.

Research:

.

The link between chytridiomycosis and amphibian decline is an active area of research worldwide. The genome of B. dendrobatidis has been sequenced, which should prove useful for identifying the origin, mechanisms of virulence, and potential control methods for this pathogen. University of California researchers have been studying this pathogen for several years, especially the impacts of chytrid fungus on populations of the mountain yellow legged frog (Rana muscosa) in the Sierra Nevada Mountains in California.

This once abundant alpine frog has undergone severe declines in recent years, with numerous local die-offs. Research is being conducted on the spatial epidemiology of disease in R. muscosa, to understand why some local populations persist whereas others go extinct. Projects include identifying the modes of pathogen spread, impacts of outbreaks on alpine food webs, and the population genetic consequences of outbreaks for frogs.

With regard to frog population and disease management, experiments include evaluating the efficacy of anti-fungal treatments and the feasibility of reintroducing frogs into previous outbreak areas.

.

[Source:  ‘Chytrid Fungus (Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis)’, Center for Invasive Species Research, University of California, Riverside, USA, ^http://cisr.ucr.edu/chytrid_fungus.html]

.

(Click image to enlarge)

.

Chytrid fungus killing off Tasmanian Frogs

.

Healthy Tasmanian Tree Frog

(Litoria burrowsae – endemic to Western Tasmania)

(Photo by Iain Stych)

.

What is chytrid fungus?

.

‘Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis‘ causes the disease known as chytridiomycosis or chytrid infection which currently threatens Tasmania’s native amphibians.

The fungus infects the skin of frogs destroying its structure and function, and can ultimately cause death. Sporadic deaths occur in some frog populations, and 100 per cent mortality occurs in other populations.

Chytrid infection has been devastating to frog species causing extinctions worldwide. The international trade of frogs probably brought the fungus to Australia from Africa. The disease has now been recorded in four regions in Australia – the east coast, southwest Western Australia, Adelaide, and more recently Tasmania. In mainland Australia chytrid has caused the extinction of one frog species, and has been associated with the extinction of three other species. In addition, the threatened species status of others frogs has worsened through severe declines in numbers.

.

What is the threat to Tasmanian frogs?

.

Tasmania supports 11 frog species with three of these species, the Tasmanian Tree Frog, the Tasmanian Froglet and the Moss Froglet, found nowhere else in the world. These precious species are at risk from the disease. In addition, two other frog species, the Green and Golden Frog and the Striped Marsh Frog, are already threatened in Tasmania. Chytrid infection has the potential to devastate these, and other frog populations.

Chytrid-infected Queensland Great Barred Frog

(Mixophyes fasciolatus)

(Photo Lee Berger)

.

What does an infected frog look like?

•     Abnormal posture and behaviour. Frogs may sit with their hind legs out, wobble or show difficulty moving or fleeing, or may even have a seizure.
•     Skin changes. The skin may be discoloured, peel, or possibly ulcerated. The body may swell.
•     Sudden death.
•     Tadpoles may demonstrate abnormal mouthparts. These abnormalities are difficult to detect and require expertise.

.

How is it spread?

.

The movement of infected frogs, tadpoles and water are the known key agents of spread. The fungus (or infected frogs or tadpoles) can be spread by people in water and mud on boots, camping equipment and vehicle tyres, and in water used for drinking, or spraying on gravel roads or fighting fires.

.

Where is chytrid in Tasmania?

.

In Tasmania, chytrid infection has spread widely in habitats associated with human disturbance and will continue to spread unless we act quickly. Once established, it is extremely difficult to eradicate chytrid fungus from the natural environment.

.

Remote areas in Tasmania, particularly the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area, are still largely free of disease and it is our challenge to keep it out.

.

What is being done?

.

The distribution of chytrid fungus in Tasmania has been mapped by DPIPWE and the Central North Field Naturalists. Ongoing monitoring of important areas is being conducted by DPIPWE. Our increasing knowledge of this important disease is crucial if we are to effectively reduce fungal spread to uninfected frog habitat.

The National Chytrid Threat Abatement PlanYou are now leaving our site. DPIPWE is not responsible for the content of the web site to which you are going. The link does not constitute any form of endorsement aims to prevent further spread of chytrid fungus in Australia, and to decrease the impact of the fungus on currently infected populations.

DPIPWE supports the national threat abatement plan in the recently produced strategy for managing wildlife disease in the Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area. Chytrid fungal disease is the top priority in the Strategy and a number of management actions are being undertaken. In addition, the Wildlife Health in Tasmania Manual describes chytrid infection in more detail.

Land management agencies are reviewing their practices to determine activities that have potential to spread chytrid fungus and ways to minimise the spread.

.

Is there any effective treatment?

.

To date there is no effective way to effectively treat wild infected frog populations. The main aim of management is to prevent further spread of chytrid fungus from infected to uninfected sites.   Chytrid fungus is killed by effective cleaning and drying. In addition, a number of disinfectants are effective.

.

What to consider when collecting and reporting tadpoles and frogs?

.

• If it is necessary to collect tadpoles or frogs, always return them to the collection site. Contact DPIPWE for information relating to frog collection and permits. Never move frogs or tadpoles to new locations.
• Remember it is an offence to take or disturb frogs and tadpoles in Tasmania’s national parks and other reserves without a permit. It is also an offence to bring frogs or tadpoles into reserves.
• Never release frogs found in imported fresh produce (usually banana boxes) and nursery products. Report non-Tasmanian frogs for collection to Wildlife Enquiries, DPIPWE.
• Report sightings of sick or dead frogs to Wildlife Enquiries, DPIPWE.

.

What you can do to stop the spread of chytrid?

.

• Keep your gear clean – clean boots and camping equipment of soil and allow to dry completely before visiting remote areas.
• Plan to wash and dry vehicles (including tyres) and equipment before entering dirt roads within areas that are reserved or largely free of human disturbance.
• Think about water disposal – when disposing of small or large volumes of water within a natural environment, ensure you are as far as possible from creeks, rivers, ponds and lakes. A dry stony disposal site is far preferable to a moist muddy one.
• Avoid transferring aquatic plants, water, soils and animals between frog habitats (for example, nursery plants, wet land fill and fish).
• Hygiene protocols for biologists and field workers visiting freshwater environments are outlined at the James Cook University web site on amphibian diseasesYou are now leaving our site. DPIPWE is not responsible for the content of the web site to which you are going. The link does not constitute any form of endorsement.
• Education in relation to disease management is critical if we are to stop the spread of this important disease.  Spread the word!’

[Source:  Tasmanian Government, Department of Primary Industries Parks Water and Environment (DPIPWE), ^http://www.dpiw.tas.gov.au/inter.nsf/webpages/ljem-673v89?open]

.

[Ed: This is why we wrote this article, but also, when we attended a photographic exhibition of  The Environment Wildlife Photographer of the Year (2010)  and saw Joel Sartore’s photo ‘The Hidden Plague’, it disturbed us]

.

.

2012:   Disease is getting worse – it’s now killing off previously tolerant species

.

‘There is no point sending healthy animals out into the world if they’re just going to catch a deadly disease.

Pacific tree frogs that can survive a normally lethal fungus infection are spreading it to species that cannot. Such “reservoir” species could threaten frogs released from captive breeding programmes.

Between 2003 and 2010, the deadly chytrid fungus slashed the populations of two frog species in the Sierra Nevada, while populations of a third species – the Pacific tree frog (Pseudacris regilla) – held steady.   That isn’t because the Pacific tree frogs avoided infection: two-thirds of the Sierra Nevada population carry the fungus, Vance Vredenburg of San Francisco State University has now found. That suggests they can tolerate infection and so could spread the pathogen to new areas.

Conservationists are breeding threatened amphibians in captivity in the hope of eventually re-establishing them in the wild. But reintroductions will fail if there is a reservoir species nearby, Vredenburg warns.

The solution may be to breed from frog populations already decimated by the chytrid fungus, says Matthew Fisher of Imperial College London. There is evidence that some frogs are evolving tolerance, and survivors from an affected population are more likely to have the vital genes. These frogs could be cross-bred with susceptible individuals, accelerating the spread of tolerance – although Fisher admits the approach will be expensive.’

[Source:  ‘Deadly frog disease spreads through tolerant species’, 20120313, by Michael Marshall, New Scientist (magazine issue 2856), ^http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21583-deadly-frog-disease-spreads-through-tolerant-species.html]

.

.(Click image to enlarge)

.

Further Reading:

.

[1]   Queensland Frog Society, Australia, ^http://www.qldfrogs.asn.au/

.

[2]  Frog Disease, Frogs Australia Network, Australia,  ^http://www.frogsaustralia.net.au/conservation/disease.cfm

.

[3]  Amphibian Diseases, James Cook University, Australia, ^http://www.jcu.edu.au/school/phtm/PHTM/frogs/ampdis.htm

.

[4]  Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis Project, Herpetofauna Foundation, Holland, ^http://www.stichtingherpetofauna.com/uk/projecten/batrachochytrium_dendrobatidis.html

.

[5]  Boreal Toad Conservation, Colorada Parks and Wildlife, United States, ^http://wildlife.state.co.us/Research/Aquatic/BorealToad/Pages/BorealToad.aspx

.

 

Limosa Harlequin Frog

(Atelopus limosus)

…endemic to Panama, this frog has died from Chytridiomycosis.

Notice the reddening of the skin and the lesions on its belly.

[Source: ‘Frog-killing fungus is a skin-loving hybrid’, 20111123, by Lucas Brouwers, Scientific American,

^http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/thoughtomics/2011/11/23/frog-killing-fungus-is-a-skin-loving-hybrid-killer/]

 

[Source: Xπr, Dublin, c.2007]

.

In February 2010, at the advent of the Chinese Year of the Tiger, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) reported that tigers were in crisis around the world.  With as few as 3,200 left of this endangered species compared to 100,000 a century ago, it was clear that this would be the vital tipping point for tigers.

Two key causes of the tiger’s plight are (1) poaching to feed consumer demand for tiger body parts, mostly for use in traditional Asian medicines (TCM) and folk remedies, and (2) deforestation as more and more forests are cleared for paper and palm oil, tiger habitat disappears daily.

.

‘New Study shows Bengal Tiger’s Habitat in Danger’
.

[Source: ‘New Study shows Bengal Tiger’s Habitat in Danger’, World Wildlife Fund, 20100119, ^http://www.worldwildlife.org/who/media/press/2010/WWFPresitem14914.html]

..
A new study by WWF scientists and partner organizations has found global climate change could shrink Bangladesh’s Sundarbans tiger habitat by 96 %, potentially reducing the tiger population to fewer than 20 breeding individuals!

An estimated sea level rise of 11.2 inches above 2000 levels by 2070 means this unique mangrove ecosystem could disappear within half a century.

Bengal Tiger  (Panthera tigris tigris)

© naturepl.com/Francois Sevigny / WWF

.

Sundarbans Delta

.

The Sundarbans delta is the largest mangrove forest in the world.

This UNESCO World Heritage Site is shared by India and Bangladesh and sits at the mouth of the Ganges River. It is home to an estimated 254-432 Bengal tigers, the only tiger population adapted to live in mangroves. The tigers here regularly swim between islands and are the only tigers to have crabs and other seafood as an important part of their diet.

The area is an amazing ecosystem that houses a plethora of species including the spotted deer (the tiger’s prey), water birds, many kinds of fish, marine mammals, crocodiles, and snakes. The landscape naturally protects the area from natural disasters such as cyclones, storm surges, and wind damage. The mangroves are home not only to endangered fauna like tigers, but also to several million people who depend on the Sundarbans for their livelihoods.

The Bengal tiger population has already been under threat from poaching and habitat destruction and loss, and research suggests that the seas may be rising faster than originally thought.

Worldwide, tigers occupy only 7 percent of their historic range with as few as 3,200 left in the wild. The study encourages local governments to take immediate action to conserve and expand mangroves while cracking down on poaching. It suggests that globally, countries should work strongly on reducing greenhouse gas emissions in order to save the Sundarbans.

.

The Siberian (Amur) Tiger – Conservation Threats

.

[Source: ^http://www.wcsrussia.org/Wildlife/AmurTigers/ConservationThreats/tabid/1468/language/en-US/Default.aspx]

.

The Siberian tiger is a tiger subspecies inhabiting mainly the Sikhote Alin mountain region with a small subpopulation in southwest Primorye province in the Russian Far East. In 2005, there were 331–393 adult-subadult Amur tigers in this region, with a breeding adult population of about 250 individuals.

The main threats to the survival of the Siberian Tiger are (1) poaching, (2) habitat loss, and (3) illegal hunting of ungulates, which are tigers’ main prey (Ed: looks similar to a lama). Because they increase access for poachers, roads are another important threat to the Siberian tiger. Intrinsic factors such as inbreeding depression and disease are also potential threats to this big cat, but are less understood.

The Siberian tiger (Panthera tigris altaica), also known as the Amur tiger

.

Poaching

.
Roads in Amur tiger habitat, Russian Far East Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) research has demonstrated that human-caused mortality accounts for 75-85% of all Amur tiger deaths. Current estimates indicate that 20-30 tigers are poached in the Russian Far East each year, although actual numbers may be higher.

Population modeling based on Siberian Tiger Project field data suggests that poaching rates exceeding 15% of the adult female population could have dangerous repercussions, especially as tigers have fairly low population growth rates compared to other big cats. Analysis of mortality data in Sikhote-Alin Biosphere Reserve indicates that poaching rates may be at least this high in a significant area of Russian tiger range.

Tigers are most commonly poached for their fur and for their body parts, such as bones, that are used in Traditional Chinese Medicine. The opening of the border between China and Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union has now made it possible to easily transport goods to Chinese markets and beyond. Although tigers are a protected species in Russia, enforcement agencies have very limited ability to catch convict poachers, and, even when this happens, fines are relatively small and disincentives insufficient. Poaching problems are further exacerbated by low incomes in many rural areas of the Russian Far East – sale of a tiger skin and bones represents a substantial source of income for poor people in remote villages.

It is also common for hunters to poach tigers to eliminate competition for ungulates and for locals to kill tigers in retaliation for depredations on domestic animals such as dogs and cows.

.

Habitat Loss

.

In Russia, human population growth does not threaten habitat as it does in many other tiger-range countries. However, activities such as logging, grazing, various development projects and uncontrolled fires are all resulting in direct habitat loss in the Russian Far East. Habitat is increasingly being divided into isolated patches, particularly at the southern edge of Amur tiger range.

Logging takes place in most of Amur tiger habitat. Although existing guidelines for timber harvest are actually quite sufficient, significant illegal logging and overharvest still occur. Selective logging, rather than clear cutting, is most common in tiger habitat, and does not seriously impact the quality of the habitat, if access to the extensive road system is controlled (thereby limiting poaching).

Fires are another important form of habitat loss. Many local residents consider fires to be the main cause of loss of forest habitat in parts of Primorsky Krai, and Amur tigers avoid areas that have burned, as they provide neither adequate cover for hunting, nor the habitat needed for prey.

.

Illegal Hunting of Ungulates

.

Illegal hunting of ungulates such as deer and wild boar significantly reduce prey availability for tigers. While official estimates continue to report stable numbers of ungulates, many hunters and wildlife biologists believe that abundance of ungulates in the Russian Far East has decreased considerably over past 15 years. Analyses from WCS’s Amur Tiger Monitoring Program clearly demonstrate that ungulate numbers are often 2-3 times higher inside protected areas, which are nonetheless impacted by poaching, though to a lesser extent.

Low ungulate numbers also foster a sense of competition between hunters and tigers. When ungulates numbers are low, it is easy to blame tigers, even when the root cause of population declines is over-harvest by humans. When there is little prey available in the forest, tigers sometimes enter villages and prey on domestic animals, including dogs and livestock, which creates tiger-human conflict situations.

.

Roads

.

The number of roads in Amur tiger habitat is increasing steadily as logging activities and development push into even the most remote regions. Besides allowing greater access for poachers, roads increase tiger mortality from vehicle collision, and increase the probability of accidental encounters between tigers and people, leading to tigers being shot out of fear or opportunity.

Roads also provide poachers greater access to ungulate habitat, which reduces tiger prey abundance.  Roads can be divided into two categories: primary roads, which are maintained year-round and provide access between villages and towns; and secondary roads, which are not regularly maintained but nonetheless allow access.

From 1992 to 2000 the Wildlife Conservation Society studied the fates of radio-collared Siberian tigers living in areas with no roads, secondary roads and primary roads. Our findings:

• 100% survival rate for adult tigers living in areas with no roads
• 89% survival rate for adult tigers living in areas with secondary roads
• 55% survival rate for adult tigers living in areas with primary roads

.

These results clearly demonstrate that the presence of both secondary and primary roads both greatly increase the odds of tigers being poached, and indicate the need for road closures and access control.  (Ed. Main roads contribute to tiger road kill reducing tiger populations by about a half).

.

‘World tiger population shrinking fast’

.
..
[Source: ‘World tiger population shrinking fast‘, IOL, 20080312, ^http://www.iol.co.za/scitech/technology/world-tiger-population-shrinking-fast-1.392813]

.

The number of tigers in the world has diminished at an alarming speed in recent years, global conservation group WWF cautioned on Wednesday, blaming poaching for much of the decline. “We are left with roughly 3,500 tigers (2008) all around the world now,” Bivash Pandav, a tiger specialist at the World Wildlife Fund, said, pointing out that “five years back, the estimate was around 5,500 to 6,000.”  [Ed: In 2010 total world population was 3,200, and in 2011?, 2012?]

.

In India, which is home to nearly half of the world’s tigers, or 1,400 animals,

the number of the big cats has shrunk by 60% over the past three to four years!

…Pandav said during a visit to Sweden.

A century ago, some 40,000 tigers roamed the Indian subcontinent, according to the WWF, which singles out poaching, widespread destruction of the tigers’ natural habitat and human hunting of their prey as the main causes of today’s dire situation.

“Poaching is primarily to meet the demand for tiger bones in Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM)… That’s the immediate reason behind the decline of tigers,” Pandav explained.

“The situation is pretty bad in the sense that they (the tigers) are rapidly being wiped out from many parts of their range,” he added.

.

According to the WWF:

• On the Chinese market, a dead tiger can be worth “tens of thousands of dollars”
• The United States is the world’s second largest market for tiger products.

.

Despite the daunting challenge of preserving tiger populations, Pandav insisted that “there is definitely hope,” pointing out that big cats “are prolific breeders (and) produce large numbers of offspring.”

“Despite all the problems, there are a couple of places in India (where tigers) are doing pretty well,” he said.

To rectify the overall situation however, the animals need access to forests, food and undisturbed habitats, Pandav said, insisting that the main priority was to protect the tigers from poachers and put “pressure on China to stop the farming of tigers.”

“The Chinese government is actively planning to legalise the trade (of tiger products) and if they legalise this trade then the demand for wild tigers is going to increase many fold,” he said, pointing out that people preferred products from wild tigers over farmed animals.  That is going to be the death blow for the tigers in the wild,” he said.

.

‘Plight Tiger’

.

[Source: ‘Plight Tiger‘, by Neha Sinha, India Express, 20090101, ^http://www.indianexpress.com/news/plight-tiger/405197/]

..
‘At the beginning of this year, a ground-breaking, new, and scientific tiger census, which took two years to complete, announced that there were 1,411 wild tigers left in India. By November, the Government had admitted that of that number, 14 tigers had been poached this year. The figure actually may be nearly double.

The poaching cases registered and seizures of body parts of tigers this year show that around 27 of the big cats have been killed in 2008, making the number of wild tigers in India less than even 1,400, and showing that government efforts have failed so far to deter poachers.

“On an average, 25 tigers are poached every year”

.

…says an official from the NTCA. Data compiled by the WPSI shows an equal number, 27 tigers, were killed in 2007.

In January, a tiger survey commissioned by the Government indicated that there were only five-seven tigers left in Panna. Now, tiger experts fear the number may actually be just two. Kanha, also in Madhya Pradesh, lost a tiger to poaching by electrocution, using an 11,000-volt current, this November.

According to data compiled by the Wildlife Protection Society of India (WPSI), there have been 27 instances of tiger skins and parts being found in different parts of the country in 2008. The Wildlife Crime Control Bureau (WCCB), which came into existence this year, recovered a tiger skeleton from Gurgaon and two tiger skins from Himachal Pradesh, a case that involved a Tibetan national.

“Tiger killing may be higher than what recorded numbers tell us,” admits National Tiger Conservation Authority Member Secretary Rajesh Gopal. “Poachers are very clandestine and at times even a tiger carcass may not be found.”

A WCCB official said their main problem was that the trade in tiger parts was trans-country and inter-state, necessitating strong intervention from the Centre.

“Day before, we managed to get a case registered in Bihar for Dariya, a tiger poacher, who was arrested in December in Katni, Madhya Pradesh. A case had to be registered in Bihar where he is suspected to have poached tigers from the Valmiki tiger reserve. We have to expedite history-sheeting quickly to facilitate arrest of poachers who travel and escape extensively,” he added.

“The fact that tiger numbers are going down but poaching remains constant is a huge cause for concern. The number of tigers as per the Census is very low. If we don’t improve protection, India may well lose its tigers,” says Belinda Wright, Executive Director, WPSI.

The tiger census also shows another trend: that India’s tigers are now found only in areas with a high degree of protection, which is sanctuaries or existing tiger reserves. Recognising this, the NTCA has given approval to as many as 12 new tiger reserves this year, of which four — Pilibhit (Uttar Pradesh), Sunabeda (Orissa), Rapa Pani (MP) and Sahyadri (Madhya Pradesh) — have got in-principle approval.’

.

 

Videos on the plight of the Bengal Tiger

.

Videos in 2010 on the Bengal Tiger by big cat expert Dr. Alan Rabinowitz i, hosted by the BBC on its Lost Land of the Tiger series.

Click the following link then scroll down to watch the four episode extracts:

• Episode 1:   ‘Fragmented Isolation‘
• Episode 1:    ‘Tantalizing Tigers‘
• Episode 2:   ‘Nowhere To Go‘
• Episode 2:   ‘Population Patterns‘

.

^http://www.panthera.org/lost-land-tiger

.

---

.

What if tigers did become extinct?

.

[Source:  ‘What if tigers did become extinct?’, World Wildlife Fund, ^http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/tigers/last_of_the_tigers/what_if_tigers_did_become_extinct_/]
.

.

Coextinction of other species

.

The tiger is at the top of the food chain in all the ecosystems it lives in.   If one species in a food chain becomes extinct there is a knock-on effect on other species. The loss of a main predator can actually cause the extinction of a prey species as greater competition presents a threat to a species. 

When the Bali and Javan tigers became extinct in the 20th century, poachers turned their attention to the Sumatran tiger. Which animal will be exploited into extinction once all the tigers are gone?  

If tigers were to go, the forests which are currently protected as key habitat would be more likely to fall victim to illegal logging, conversion to agriculture and development. This leads to greater CO2 emissions and climate change. Deforestation currently accounts for 15% of global greenhouse gas emissions.
Which species live alongside the tiger?
Many of the species which could be affected by the disappearance of tigers are also endangered and already fighting for their own survival.  The 5 sub-species of tigers live in some of the most spectacular parts of the world which provide a home for some other amazing species, including:

 

• Brown bear
• Sloth bear
• Sun bear
• Dhole
• Elephant
• Clouded leopard
• Amur leopard
• Lion tailed macaque
• Musk deer
• Orangutan
• Rhino
• Saola

.

 

Tiger Reserves

.

Huangnihe River Nature Reserve
^http://www.ancientsites.com/aw/Places/District/1138640
.
India’s Panna Tiger Reserve
^http://www.pannatigerreserve.in/
.
Sundarbans Tiger Project
^http://www.sunderbansnationalpark.com/
.
Palamau Tiger Reserve
^http://projecttiger.nic.in/palamau.htm
.
Kanha Tiger Reserve
^http://projecttiger.nic.in/kanha.htm
.
Tadoba-Andhari Tiger Reserve
^http://www.tadobatiger.com/
.
Hukawng Valley Wildlife Sanctuary
^http://www.wcs.org/news-and-features-main/a-valley-of-tigers.aspx

.

---

.

Read More About the Campaigns to Save Tigers from Extinction

.
^http://www.panthera.org/species/tiger/subspecies

.

^http://www.savetigersnow.org/

.

^http://www.internatyearofthetiger.org/plight.htm

.

^http://www.forevertigers.com/plight.htm

.

^http://www.bbc.co.uk/nature/life/Tiger

 

.

Chinese unethical handing of Tigers…

.
A herd of Siberian tigers chased and devoured live chicken flung at them from a tourist safari bus at the Siberian Tiger Forest Park in Harbin, north-west China, on Tuesday.

Siberian Tigers Grab at Live Chickens Tossed at Them to Tourists’ Delight in China

20111227 (two days ago)

Photo by Sheng Li

.

[Source: ‘Siberian Tigers Grab at Live Chickens Tossed at Them to Tourists’ Delight in China‘, by By Sanskrity Sinha, IBTimes, 20111228, ^http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/273353/20111228/siberian-tigers-grab-live-chickens-tossed-tourists.htm]

.

Tiger Parts used in backward TCM Wine

.

In China, only about 20 tigers are thought to be left in the wild!

.

“The existence of tiger ‘farms’ and increasing illegal trade in tiger products is seriously threatening this precious species.”

~ Ge Rui, Asian Regional Director of the International Fund for Animal Welfare.

.

[Source: ‘Thirst is building for tiger bone wine’, by Yang Wanli (China Daily), 20100301, ^http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/metro/2010-03/01/content_9516414.htm]

.