WWF -

Ivory traffickers held in Central African Republic

2009-10-06

The arrests were the first of their kind in the African nation since it passed a wildlife protection law in the 1980s, said Ofir Drori, director of the Cameroon-based group The Last Great Ape which announced the arrests with WWF.

One woman had 157 ivory objects weighing more than 200 kilogrammes in her home in Bangui, the groups said in a statement.

The other trafficker was detained in a Bangui hotel Friday as he was "trying to sell 14 ivory objects, hippopotamus teeth and a panther skin," said the statement.

The two could face up to a year in jail if found guilty.

"They had several decades of experience between them and were said to be at the centre of an international ivory trafficking network," the statement said.

Illegal poaching threatens the elephant with extinction, animal protection groups say, despite the ivory trade being banned by a 1989 international agreement.

Experts say some 38,000 African elephants are killed each year for their tusks.

Protected Areas Benefits Assessment Tool

2009-09-18

The Protected Areas Benefits Assessment Tool (PA-BAT) is designed to fill an important gap in the toolbox of protected area agencies and conservation institutions, by providing a methodology to collate and build information about the overall benefits from protected areas.

As pressures on protected areas continue to develop over time, and demand for land and water, and for management resources, is increasingly stretched, park managers need to have arguments for protection in place and backed by a solid body of data collected over time.

This need is recognized explicitly in the CBD Programme of Work on Protected Areas, for example in paragraph 3.1.2: "Conduct national-level assessments of the contributions of protected areas, considering as appropriate environmental services, to the countrys economy and culture, and to the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals at the national level; and integrate the use of economic valuation and natural resource accounting tools into national planning processes in order to identify the hidden and non-hidden economic benefits provided by protected areas and who appropriates these benefits. "

The PA-BAT aims to help collate information on the full range of current and potential benefits of individual protected areas. It is a contributory methodology for the overall Arguments for Protection series, but is also hopefully a stand-alone tool that will be of wider use to the protected areas community.

Although developed primarily for use in protected areas, the tool could have wider application, for example in assessing wider benefits of forest management units, agricultural landscapes or areas set aside for recreation.

The main audience for this report is protected area managers and authorities, but it should also be useful for anyone interested in finding out about the range of benefits that protected areas provide.

Banking on Cod

2009-06-16

Defining and estimating global marine fisheries bycatch

2009-04-15

Abstract

Unselective fishing catches non-target organisms as ‘bycatch’—an issue of critical ocean conservation and resource management concern. However, the situation is confused because perceptions of target and non target catch vary widely, impeding efforts to estimate bycatch globally. To remedy this, the term needs to be redefined as a consistent definition that establishes what should be considered bycatch. A new definition is put forward as: ‘bycatch is catch that is either unused or unmanaged’. Applying this definition to global marine fisheries data conservatively indicates that bycatch represents 40.4 percent of global marine catches, exposing systemic gaps in fisheries policy and management.

Reference: DAVIES RWD, et al. Defining and estimating global marine fisheries bycatch. Marine Policy (2009), doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2009.01.003.

New scientific paper reveals the impact of climate change on whales dolphins and porpoises

2009-04-02

In the week when 4000 towns and cities across 88 countries turned off their lights to call for stronger action to combat climate change, a new scientific paper published in the Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the UK takes a collective look at what is currently known about how climate change may affect or is already affecting whales, dolphins and porpoises (collectively know as cetaceans) and how this issue may be best addressed. The paper was written by WWF and the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS).

There is unequivocal evidence that climate change is affecting the oceans but just how it impacts cetaceans and what conservationists, scientists and governments should do about it remain critical questions.

What we know
Climate change could have an impact on several factors that cetaceans depend upon for survival including:

• Ocean temperature
• Habitat availability
• Changes in sea-ice distribution
• Prey availability

These factors in turn can be expected to impact feeding and breeding and survivorship.

Some cetacean species and populations are likely to be especially vulnerable to these predicted climate related changes, including those with a limited habitat range, or those for which sea ice provides an important habitat for the cetacean and/or that of their prey.

Other factors impacting cetaceans such as bycatch, unsustainable hunting, chemical and noise pollution and oil and gas development are even further compounded by the different threats posed by climate change, which adds undue pressure to already vulnerable species. At least a quarter of the world’s cetaceans were recently confirmed as endangered and the situation may be worse as the status of many others remains unclear.

What can be done?
If conservation programs for cetaceans are to succeed in the face of climate change, decision makers must be swift to react to emerging developments that are a result of climate change; focus on reducing other pressures on populations where possible; and, be more responsive as new information becomes available. For example, if cetaceans change their distributions and establish new critical habitat areas, conservation and management efforts will have to move with them.

Conservation programs should also shift to not only focus all work on critically endangered species, but also pay attention to ensuring that other species and populations remain robust and resilient to the changes that are predicted.

There is a need for large scale and long-term work to better understand the impending risks posed to cetaceans by climate change and leadership from appropriate international bodies will be crucial. However, such bodies will need to prioritize these endeavors and allocate adequate funding.

The paper was written by WWF and the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS).

For the full paper click here: http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayIssue?jid=MBI&volumeId=89&issueId=01&iid=4249964

WWFolio Bolivia Nº 15

2008-10-27

Le presentamos nuestra edición informativa de octubre de 2008. En este número usted podrá leer sobre:

EDITORIAL VIVO:

La conservación es una disciplina de emergencia

PANTANAL VIVO:

Un enfoque ecor-regional transfronterizo para el Cerrado-Pantanal
Chichi Grillo y Rosa la Mariposa nos llevan a conocer y valorar la vida en el Pantanal boliviano
El trabajo de las artesanas del Pantanal boliviano

AMAZONIA VIVA:

Contaminación por mercurio en el Iténez
Problemática del mercurio
NUESTROS SOCIOS: El Instituto de Investigación para el Desarrollo (IRD) en Bolivia
Comunidades del Área Protegida Iténez hacia un futuro más sostenible
La Fuerza Naval de Bolivia y el Proyecto Centinela Ambiental
PUBLICACIONES VIVAS: Visión de Conservación de la Biodiversidad del Corredor Amboró-Madidi

VIDA FORESTAL:

Las instituciones públicas y su compromiso con la conservación de los bosques
La FTN Bolivia y la promoción de la oferta forestal certificada de Bolivia

MÁS VIDA:

4 de septiembre: Día Nacional de las Áreas Protegidas en Bolivia
Becas Príncipe Bernhard
Generando resultados de conservación a gran escala

Lifting the lid on Italy’s bluefin tuna fishery

2008-10-07

This WWF-commissioned report, researched and compiled by independent consultancy ATRT, contains the first in-depth analysis of the role of Italy in the bluefin tuna fishery in the Mediterranean. Its findings confirm the widely held view that Italy is among the main culprits in the region for overfishing and violation of the fishery’s management rules.

In April 2008 WWF released a report quantifying for the first time the fishing overcapacity of industrial fleets targeting the stock in the Mediterranean . That study identified Italy as the leader in overcapacity among EU member states, with an estimated catch capacity for the industrial purse seine fleet twice the national quota allocated to it. The study pointed to the likely underreporting of real catches in the last years, coupled with a systematic violation of international management rules and the overshoot of national quotas.

To ascertain the performance of the Italian bluefin tuna fishing industry during the crucial 2008 fishing season, the authors of this report have combined a thorough analysis of trade information with extensive field work. The latter has included the monitoring of Italy’s fleet at sea in real time, as well as the field analysis (through aerial surveys) of bluefin tuna biomass caged in every farm based in Italy, Croatia and Malta. This colossal undertaking has generated the most comprehensive picture yet of the role played by Italian interests in the Mediterranean bluefin tuna fishery, including the extent of compliance (or lack thereof) with international management rules agreed by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT, the body tasked with sustainably managing the fishery) and the EU.

This WWF study is all the more relevant now, when the Italian government holds the view that the EU’s decision to close the purse seine fishery two weeks early (15 June 2008) resulted in the Italian purse seine fleet falling short of fulfilling its quota for the year (which even led Italian interests to the extreme step of taking the European Commission to the European Court of Justice).

The current report reviews data for 2007 and demonstrates that Italy’s overshoot of the bluefin tuna national quota for 2007 amounted to a minimum of 1,653 tonnes, more than five times as much as the officially recognized overshoot of 327 tonnes. It also highlights the serious inconsistencies in the register of the fleet targeting bluefin tuna, with a broad mismatch of records between ICCAT, the EU and national fleet registers. Up to 163 purse seine vessels would have been active in the Mediterranean bluefin tuna fishery in 2008, according to the crosscheck between the relevant official registers. A total of 15 purse seine flotillas, or fishing groupings, were identified to be operating during the 2008 fishing season, including in partnership with other Libyan, Turkish and possibly Algerian vessels. The latter were identified as having been involved in an illegal operation of paper-quota transfer between Algerian and Turkish vessels during the 2008 fishing season.

The report includes extensive field information proving that Italian airports have played a key role during 2008 as a hub for illegal aerial spotting activities in central Mediterranean waters. Additionally, Italian spotter planes have operated (with others, such as US, French and Swiss) in support of the illegal activities of Italian purse seiners.

A total of 5 farms based in Italy were identified as active in 2008, containing an estimated biomass of 2,410 tonnes of live tuna (equivalent to an estimated weight at input of 2,241 tonnes). This tuna was caught exclusively by Italian purse seiners operating during the 2008 fishing season.

Additionally, a conservative 1,321 tonnes of bluefin tuna is estimated to have been caught by Italian purse seiners in the early spring fishery inside the Adriatic Sea, including an estimate of 853 tonnes that would have been caged in Croatian farms.

Finally, a further 1,159 tonnes of tuna are estimated to have been caught by Italian seiners and transferred to farms in Malta and Tunisia during 2008.

The estimate of the total bluefin tuna catch by Italian fleets during the 2008 fishing season contained in WWF’s report thus amounts to 4,887 tonnes at the very minimum. This highly conservative figure does not account for any estimate of catches by long line fleets outside of the Adriatic Sea, due to the impossibility of obtaining this information, and yet, entails a minimum quota overshoot by Italy of 724 tonnes. One wonders what the final catch of Italy’s bluefin tuna fleet might have been, had the EU not closed the purse seine fishery 15 days earlier than initially scheduled this year. Additionally, the report highlights that several relevant fishing ports for bluefin tuna in Italy, such as Pozzuoli, Vibo Valentia, Portopalo and Cetraro, are duly registered with ICCAT as landing ports for the species, but do not report any single bluefin tuna.

In WWF’s opinion, the disturbing findings of this report (concerning a significant EU member state) reinforce the conclusions contained in the recent independent verdict on ICCAT’s performance elaborated by an international panel of experts , released in September 2008. The report commissioned by ICCAT describes mismanagement in the East Atlantic and Mediterranean bluefin tuna fishery as an “international disgrace” and recommends that ICCAT immediately suspend fishing – until conditions for sustainable fisheries management exist.

WWF continues to advocate a moratorium of the fishery – and in parallel encourages retailers, chefs, restaurants and consumers to join the growing boycott of the species – until Mediterranean bluefin tuna has been pulled safely back from the brink.

Exploratory co-management interventions in Kuiburi National Park, Central Thailand, including human-elephant conflict mitigation

2008-09-03

John W.K. Parr (Corresponding Author)
Supol Jitvijak, Saowanee Saranet and Songsak Buathong

Co-management is a developing field of protected area management. Increasingly, the practice is to involve local communities and other stakeholders in protected area planning and management. In many countries,
management boards, co-management structures and other participatory mechanisms are being created.

This paper reports on promoting co-management involving participatory management planning at Kuiburi National Park, Central Thailand, through the establishment of two working groups, namely a core management planning team comprising park personnel (charged with plan implementation), operating in parallel with a park management board working group (local people and other stakeholders).

These institutional bodies participated in a park management planning process, which was fuelled by socio-economic data focusing on the high profile human-elephant conflict in the buffer zone. The initiative led to a major rethink on participatory management planning by the Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation. The process also led to some valuable recommendations for elephant-wildlife mitigation, both at Kuiburi and the international context.

Common Ground - Reducing human wildlife conflict

2008-05-13

The WWF report ‘Common Ground’ (PDF - 3.74MB) assesses cases of Human Wildlife Conflict (HWC), focusing on elephants as a flagship of these conflicts. Often the scale of the damage that can be caused by them, and the fact that they can injure or even kill humans, makes them the species that communities most fear.

Although the dynamics and drivers of HWC can be very different wherever it occurs, there are themes in the studies that can be used to compose a 'Common Ground' or a basic list of solutions available and tested. Here are some of them:

Scale of the problem
Common Ground found the most serious conflict and harm to both human communities and elephants resulted from unplanned and unregulated development. In Namibia, elephant related conflict costs communal farmers around $US 1 million a year, while in some Nepalese communities it can be up to around a quarter of the household incomes of poor farming families.

The most significant consequence of the conflict was loss of human life, but other considerable, costs of human wildlife conflict go largely uncounted – for instance, in Nepal, men in elephant-ravaged villages faced difficulties in marrying as women as scared to move to villages where elephants are a problem. In some areas, retaliatory killing of elephants was a major threat to already vulnerable elephant populations.

Effective land use planning can reduce HWC
In Nepal, the study compared communities with high levels of wild elephant damage with an area where the conflict costs were at half those levels, and found that the less damaged area had more forest cover in edge areas and less fragmented forests overall. Further analysis revealed that the level of habitat fragmentation was actually more influential in determining the amount of crop loss than the amount of forest coverage itself - although there are many other factors which play a part.

In Namibia levels of crop damage were closely related to the distance of farms from wildlife areas, with farms immediately adjacent to unfenced wildlife habitat being “a drain on the national economy”. Human wildlife conflict in just one region of Namibia was estimated as causing annual losses of US$700,000 to the national economy. Therefore effective structures and planning process that ensure new agricultural developments are places as far away from wildlife habitat as possible will reduce HWC and ensure greater profitability for the agricultural enterprise.

Community Based Natural Resource Management
The report also found that an effective way to manage HWC was to give rights over wildlife to local communities, thus enabling local communities to benefit from neighbouring wildlife. Economic analysis in Namibia demonstrated that these communities were able to generate more income from wildlife than they suffered from wildlife losses. In Nepal, communities which received benefits from wildlife and wildlife habitat showed a much greater tolerance towards elephants than communities receiving no benefits.

A united effort
In order to be truly effective, prevention of Human Wildlife Conflict has to involve the full scope of society: international organizations, governments, NGOs, communities, consumers and individuals. Drivers of the problem are not just local, but can be regional or even international. In Namibia for example, international agreements between Europe and Africa artificially enhance the economic viability of the livestock sector compared to other land-uses and add to wildlife conflict pressures.

Innovative financial solutions
In many cases, innovative financial solutions are required. These range from compenstation and insurance, to Payments for Environmental Services and the development of ‘Wildlife Friendly Products’. These solutions are available, but need development, backing and support.

Field based solutions
There are a number of practical field based solutions that can limit the damage done both to humans and human property, and to wildlife. These are solutions that aim to prevent wildlife entering crops or villages. But this is something on a case-by-case basis. What people see as solution in one place, they may resist in another. What works in one place, may have the opposite effect somewhere else.

Livestock Insurance Scheme

2008-02-14

The latest document on the theme sustainable livelihoods, focuses on the compensation mechanism for wildlife induced vulnerability. It is based on the study carried out in Kanchenjunga Conservation Area, one of the project sites of Sacred Himalaya Landscape in eastern Nepal. The document targets the local audience vulnerable to livestock depredation (especially yak) by wild animals (especially snow leopard). To reduce the vulnerability, build local people’s coping capacity and reduce the retaliatory killings of snow leopards by victimized people, the concept community based livestock insurance scheme was started five years ago.

The recent publication is a practical field based assessment using different triangulation methods to explore the perceptions, benefits, use and management of Livestock Insurance Schemes and its other induced livelihoods opportunity.

Update after 5 years of Marine Turtle monitoring in Gamba, Gabon (2002-2007)

2008-01-22

Considering the environmental concerns on global level, and following other countries in the Congo
Basin, Gabon has been endowed with a network of 13 National Parks, representing the countries
ecological and biological wealth. One of the characteristics of the country’s recognized biological
diversity is the presence of nesting sites for several marine turtle species of the cheloniidae family and
one of the dérmochelyidae family.

The presence of four species of marine turtles in Gabon, of which some estimates go as far as 30% of
the worlds nesting leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea) population (see 2006 report) and their
endangered status, make them flagship ship species for conservation and scientific research.

The beaches near Gamba town situated in the Gamba Complex of Protected Areas (GCPA) are part of
these privileged nesting sites for marine turtles. The 200 km of coastline of the Complex receives an
average of 2000 turtles every year (see 2006 report). Since 2002, the NGO Ibonga-ACPE in
collaboration with WWF and his partners (PROTOMAC) contributes every nesting season to the
monitoring and daily research on 5.75 km of beach near Gamba.

For the 2006-2007 nesting season, the activities of Ibonga’s monitoring team started at the 5th of
November 2006 till the 31st of April 2007 (including one week preparing the camp), thanks to financial
support from the RAPAC (Réseau des Aires Protégées d’Afrique Centrale) and the UICN (the World
Conservation Union).

This report will firstly present the geographical context, the different conservation activities, before
showing the final results and analysing these results, to end with suggestions for future activities and
the conclusion.

Technical Report:
Update after 5 years of Marine Turtle monitoring in Gamba, Gabon (2002-2007)
By: Gil-Avery Mounguéngui Mounguéngui
Technical Coordinator IBONGA-ACPE
Translated by Bas Verhage (Conservation Advisor WWF, Gabon)

Polar Bear Factsheet

2008-01-11

In some areas of their Arctic home, polar bears are in decline. Their drop in population can be traced to another decline: that of sea ice, reduced by global warming. Sea ice is the polar bears’ primary habitat and they rely on it for survival. Unless major actions to reduce global warming are taken, two-thirds of the world’s polar bears are likely to be gone by 2050.

Antarctic Penguins and Climate Change

2007-12-11

A WWF overview, Antarctic Penguins and Climate Change, shows that the four populations of penguins that breed on the Antarctic continent — Adélie, Emperor, Chinstrap and Gentoo — are under escalating pressure. For some, global warming is taking away precious ground on which penguins raise their young. For others, food has become increasingly scarce because of warming in conjunction with overfishing.

Captive Breeding - WWF Policy Statement 2007

2007-05-29

What is captive breeding?
Captive breeding is the process of breeding animals outside of their natural environment in restricted conditions in farms, zoos or other closed facilities. The choice of individual animals that are to be part of a captive breeding population, and the mating partners within that population, are controlled by humans.

Captive breeding is generally carried out for one of these main purposes:

To produce animals for commercial purposes (pets, food, fibre, medicine, and other human uses).
To produce animals for zoos, aquaria, research institutions, and other public facilities.
To increase captive population numbers of threatened or endangered species. In some cases, these individuals are part of a management programme aimed at eventually reintroducing captive-bred animals into wild habitats and populations. In other cases, captive facilities claim to be breeding animals for such purposes -but the animals may not be suitable - or they are not part of a legitimate conservation and management programme.

This position statement considers the risks/values of captive breeding programmes to conservation efforts to boost threatened species numbers in the wild. The focus of this position statement is on rare, threatened, and endangered species. There are many important and valid concerns related to the welfare and husbandry of animals in captivity, but these are not the subject of this statement, nor are they the focus of WWF’s work.

Is captive breeding a useful conservation tool?
WWF considers captive breeding of rare, threatened, or endangered species, with the aim of eventual reintroduction to the wild, to be a “last resort” strategy. It is exceedingly difficult and must be part of a scientifically-based management plan for the species, working closely with the range country government authorities. It is also expensive, and should not be seen as a substitute for in-situ efforts, except in rare circumstances. Captive situations may interfere with the behavioural development of animals by removing them from natural predators and prey. Furthermore, having captive populations of animals does not solve underlying problems of habitat destruction, which are often one of the key causes of the species’ decline.

Captive breeding programmes should never be seen as a substitute for in-situ conservation of a species, and can only provide positive benefits for species conservation if designed and applied as part of a science-based conservation management plan for the species.

This means ensuring that maintenance and possible introduction of captive animals is an appropriate long-term strategy for the species, that there is appropriate habitat for reintroduction, and managing this habitat to ensure that threats such as poaching, building damaging infrastructures such as roads or dams, or conflicts with local communities are mitigated. Without such management plans, any introduction of captive animals will be undermined, as these threats will lead to high levels of mortality of the reintroduced animals.

Captive breeding programmes may act as a research platform for zoologists, veterinarians and others to conduct research designed to enhance understanding of the biology of the species. In these cases, such research may yield invaluable information to inform conservation efforts. However, removal of animals from the wild for captive breeding must not endanger the survival of already vulnerable wild populations. Maintenance of zoo and aquarium populations may be appropriate for research and public education, but should not be seen as a panacea for the hard work of conservation in the field.

What are the risks associated with captive breeding?
The greatest conservation risks associated with captive breeding are when threatened or endangered species are bred for commercial purposes—for financial profit. This is particularly risky when individual animals or their parts and products are of high value, while at the same time the animals are highly endangered in the wild. This is yet again riskier if there is a high risk of poaching and illegal trade in wild individuals of the same species. For example, one of the greatest conservation risks today is the breeding in Asia in commercial farms of captive tigers, for use in traditional medicine. This puts wild tigers, of which there may be only 3,000-5,000 or fewer remaining in the wild, at an unacceptable risk (by promoting a market, stimulating consumption, and risking increased illegal trade).

Only when threatened species are bred for commercial purposes but the market is controlled, poaching and illegal trade are under control, wild animals are worth less than captive ones (e.g., pets), and the commercial value is low enough not to stimulate further illegal trade and removals from the wild—only then can we say that commercial captive breeding presents a lower risk to wild populations.

In the case of zoos, the lack of international standards for zoos and captive breeding operations has been a contributing factor to the proliferation of captive breeding facilities for commercial purposes, including commercial breeding programmes for threatened and endangered species such as tigers. Though claiming to be conservation driven, there are a number of risks which may completely negate, or seriously undermine, the appropriateness and conservation contribution (if any) of such captive breeding programmes:

Many captive breeding programmes take place in facilities that call themselves “zoos”, but that are really farms, circuses or entertainment parks, without any contribution to conservation. The lack of international standards for zoos makes this distinction difficult, and undermines the contributions of legitimate zoos to conservation. WWF urges the international zoo community to consider the development and adoption of such international standards.
Species that are popular as pets such as reptiles or birds have sometimes been labelled as “captive bred” but have since been discovered to have been laundered and removed from the wild unsustainably, thus damaging wild populations.
Captive breeding for conservation purposes necessarily must include a viable plan for reintroduction of species to the wild. Although IUCN–the World Conservation Union lists over 200 reintroduction projects currently under way around the world, re-establishing animals in their original habitat is more than a matter of simply setting them loose and hoping they will go forth and multiply. It is a complex, long-term effort that poses a raft of difficult economic, social, and environmental challenges.
Disease spread, social disruption and the introduction of alien genes which will may ultimately cause mortality is a risk for animals reintroduced into natural habitats. Although most reintroductions take place in areas where no remnant population exists and where possible, reintroduction candidates are of the same subspecies or race as the original, (since they are more likely to possess genetic traits adapted to the habitat), there is still a high level of risk which must be assessed and managed if reintroduced stock are to survive. If sufficient wild stock exists, and studies show that moving some will not be detrimental to the existing population, it may be easier and less expensive to catch and relocate animals than to captive breed them, since they already have the skills needed to survive in the wild.

What is the role of zoos in captive breeding and conservation?
WWF has long supported the legitimate role of zoos in conservation, education, and research. Captive breeding programmes managed by zoos can provide positive benefits for species conservation if designed and used appropriately, and if they are part of a science-based conservation management plan for the species. Such programmes may act as a platform for zoologists, veterinarians and others to conduct research designed to enhance understanding of the biology of the species.

Additionally, some zoos are involved in captive breeding and reintroduction programmes that may help to secure the future of threatened species. A few zoos are also involved in conservation projects in the field, either through the donation of funds or involvement of their own staff scientists in field programmes. Unfortunately, the proliferation of captive breeding facilities for commercial purposes, including commercial breeding programmes for threatened and endangered species such as tigers, requires that we carefully distinguish these facilities – some of which may call themselves “zoos” – from legitimate zoo operations.
WWF can support zoo conservation breeding programmes that:

are beneficial to the species in the wild, and enhance their conservation, using carefully monitored science-based programmes for removal of wild specimens only when necessary for controlled breeding, research, or educational purposes;
are open to the public for purposes of education about the species, its habitat, and conservation threats, and are used to increase support for the actions necessary to save the species in the wild;
provide funds, technical expertise, or other support to range states of the species concerned, to benefit the conservation of the species in the wild.

When does WWF Support Captive Breeding?
In accordance with IUCN—the World Conservation Union, WWF believes that in greatly reduced, highly fragmented, and disturbed habitats, captive breeding programmes for endangered species may be necessary to ensure that population numbers overall remain high enough to prevent local or global extinctions. This is in rare, exceptional circumstances only. However , where the rate of decline indicates this possibility, captive breeding programmes need to be established before species are reduced to critically low numbers, and need to be coordinated internationally according to sound biological principles, with a view to the maintaining or re-establishment of viable populations in the wild.

For which species has captive breeding been successful in terms of conservation?
There are only a few strong examples, including the large blue butterfly (reintroduced into SW England); wolves in Yellowstone Park, USA; the Peregrine Falcon in the USA; and the golden-lion tamarin, which are slowly rebounding in Brazil.

WWF also supports captive breeding of the Iberian lynx, the world’s most endangered cat species as an emergency measure, but notes that the Spanish government must first mitigate large scale threats to Iberian lynx habitat which is crisscrossed with legal and illegal roads, currently causing high levels of mortality.

Factsheet: Tigers

2007-05-23

The largest cat of all, the tiger is a powerful symbol among the different cultures that share its home. But this magnificent animal is being persecuted across its range. Tigers are poisoned, shot, trapped, and snared, largely as a result of conflicts with people and to meet the demands of a continuing illegal trade in tiger derivatives and parts. On top of this, both their habitat and natural prey continue to disappear. Over the past 100 years, tiger numbers have declined by 95 per cent and three sub-species have become extinct - with a fourth not seen in the wild for over 25 years.

Tigers are ‘flagship’ species for their habitats - that is, charismatic representatives of the biodiversity within the complex ecosystems they inhabit. Because these animals need a lot of space to survive, their conservation will help maintain biological diversity over extensive areas and so help many other species.

WWF has been working to conserve tigers for over four decades. In 2002, WWF developed a new and far-reaching strategy in partnership with other conservationists and authorities. The cornerstone of this Tiger Conservation Programme is a landscape-based approach to conservation supported by a strong programme to address illegal trade wherever it occurs.

Factsheet: African Great Apes

2007-05-22

Africa’s great apes are faced with a deadly combination of threats: destruction and degradation of their habitats, commercial hunting for bushmeat and live animal trade, and disease — all largely resulting from conflicts with humans who live alongside them. All African great apes — gorillas, chimpanzees, and Bonobos — have suffered population declines, and many experts predict they might well become extinct in the wild within the next half century. A huge effort is needed to ensure that African great apes continue to survive.

African great apes are ‘flagship’ species for their habitats - that is, charismatic representatives of the biodiversity within the complex ecosystems they inhabit. Because these animals need a lot of space to survive, their conservation will help maintain biological diversity and ecological integrity over extensive areas and so help many other species.

In 2002 WWF launched the African Great Apes Programme. Drawing on over 40 years of experience in great ape conservation, the programme's long-term aim is to conserve viable populations of all species and sub-species of African great apes, through improving protection and management, increasing public support, establishing conservation policies and laws to protect apes and their habitat, and reducing illegal trade in great apes and their body parts.

Brochure: WWF Global Species Programme - for biodiversity and people

2007-04-23

Life. This more than anything sets Planet Earth apart. Millions of unique species interacting to create complex and beautiful ecosystems - coral reefs, tropical rainforests, savannahs, alpine meadows, wetlands, and arctic tundra, to name just a very few.

A world without this wondrous biodiversity is impossible to imagine. But this is the direction we are headed. Thanks to destructive human activities, the current rate of species extinction is at least 100-1,000 times higher than the expected natural rate. This biodiversity loss is damaging ecosystems and the essential services they provide, causing people, especially the poor, to suffer.

Species conservation is vital - and it does work. Already, conservation efforts have brought many animals back from the brink of extinction. Such efforts have also helped conserve these species’ wider ecosystems, and often demonstrably brought great benefits to local people through new livelihood opportunities, sustainable development, and ongoing ecosystem services.

But not enough is being done
WWF challenges governments, scientists, industry, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and local communities to embrace both the complexities and the opportunities of species conservation, and deliver integrated conservation and development outcomes. Doing so will help save both species and poor communities - and ultimately help us all by providing a sustainable future in which people live in harmony with nature.

Download the brochure to find out more about why species conservation is so vital, and more about the work of WWF's Global Species programme.

Towards an ecosystem approach to longline fisheries in the Benguela: An assessment of impacts on seabirds, sea turtles and sharks

2007-04-16

Over the past decade there has been global concern regarding the bycatch of seabirds, sea turtles and sharks in fishing operations. The incidental mortality of these species due to longline fisheries has been widely held responsible for the declining populations and threatened conservation status of several species.

For seabirds and to a lesser extent for sea turtles, effective and relatively inexpensive methods of reducing the number of animals killed in these fishing operations have been developed. Although effective solutions to reduce shark bycatch have not yet been identified we are equally concerned about their capture, given their vulnerable life history characteristics.

Furthermore, governments of many nations and several international organizations (e.g. Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO)) have demonstrated strong resolve to reduce these unnecessary deaths (FAO 1999). Despite this, accurate information and assessment of the scale of the threat and the use of known mitigation measures is still low in many fisheries.

The Benguela Current Large Marine Ecosystem (BCLME) is one of the most productive systems in our global oceans and attracts millions of top predators such as seabirds, sea turtles and sharks. Many of these species travel thousands of kilometers, sometimes across entire oceans, to feed in its nutrient rich waters. Not surprisingly, the BCLME is also a focus of large commercial fishing operations within the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of South Africa, Namibia and Angola, as well as on the high seas. The spatial overlap of large numbers of top predators and large commercial fisheries in a confined area has the potential of unsustainable catch levels of many of these threatened species.

This situation prompted the WWF Responsible Fisheries Programme in partnership with the BirdLife Marine Programme and the Benguela Current Large Marine Ecosystem (BCLME) Programme, to embark on a project aimed at reducing the bycatch of seabirds, sea turtles and sharks in the region. The project was built around three major objectives:
1. To conduct an assessment of the scale and nature of the mortality of seabirds, sea turtles and sharks in longline fishing operations in the BCLME.
2. To conduct sea trials of technical measures for reducing the bycatch of these species.
3. To raise the level of awareness and facilitate continued collaboration with the fishing industry.

Although, this report mainly synthesizes the findings of the assessment component of the project, it should be noted that major successes have been achieved under all three objectives. At-sea trials of mitigation measures have resulted in the technical refinement of bird-scaring lines, and an improved understanding o line sink rates. These findings have resulted in the modification of fishing permit conditions in the South African longline fisheries.

The project has also been very successful in raising the level of awareness within the fishing industry, fisheries observers and compliance officers. Several multi-stakeholder meetings have been held with the different longline fisheries in both South Africa and Namibia. These have generated very constructive dialogue on the practical issues surrounding the development of mitigation measures. These meetings have been characterized by commitment from the industry to become involved in finding solutions.

The progress of this project as described in this report should also be seen in the light of a global move from single species fisheries management towards an Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries (EAF) management. An EAF recognises the need to adopt a holistic ecological approach which considers impacts on both the target and non-target species, as well as direct or indirect ecosystem effects of fishing operations. Only by maintaining the integrity of the ecosystem can we ensure the sustainability of our fisheries and the survival of our vulnerable marine life. Separate to this project, the three nations of the Benguela region were also engaged in a project, under the leadership of the BCLME and FAO, to assess the feasibility of implementing an EAF in the region. All three countries have committed, under the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) (UN 2002), to implementing an EAF by 2010. It is hoped that the findings and recommendations of this report, not only provide a platform for reducing the wasteful killing of these vulnerable species in longline fishing operations but that this report also provides an important stepping stone for the implementation of a comprehensive EAF in the Benguela Current Large Marine Ecosystem.

Confronting Shark Conservation Head On!

2007-04-13

Sharks are targeted and taken as by-catch in many fisheries under the jurisdiction of coastal States and regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs). Sharks are widely recognized as being vulnerable to overfishing because they grow slowly, are late to mature and produce relatively few young. These characteristics are particularly prominent in deep-water sharks which are, therefore, relatively more vulnerable.

Most sharks also play an important role as top predators in the ecosystem and significant reductions in their numbers are likely to have impacts on other elements of those ecosystems. The extent and nature of those impacts are largely unknown. These features, together with a lack of information about many shark species and their exploitation, should elicit a precautionary management response. However, despite repeated calls for improved conservation and management, the response has been slow and piecemeal.

Concern for the status of shark stocks worldwide has been increasing since the early 1990s. Since that time, the Conference of the Parties (CoP) to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), members of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) have called for increased monitoring, research and management of shark stocks.

The development of the International Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (IPOA-Sharks) (FAO, 2000a) reflected the concern of the international community for the vulnerability and deteriorating status of shark stocks. However, implementation of the Plan by States and RFMOs is voluntary and its adoption has been patchy, with relatively few States and no RFMOs making concerted attempts to implement its provisions fully.

By and large, the repeated calls, and the guidance provided, for improved conservation and management of sharks have been ignored. By 2006, 3 shark species (Basking Shark (Cetorhinus maximus), Whale Shark (Rhincodon typus) and Great White Shark (Carcharodon carcharias)) were listed in Appendix II of CITES. IUCN considered that 20% of the 547 species of sharks on its Red List were threatened with extinction (IUCN, 2006).

In recent years there has been vocal support for the implementation of the IPOA-Sharks and an apparent flurry of activity with respect to the introduction of controls on shark finning. However, there is little evidence of a concerted attempt to implement the provisions of the IPOA-Sharks and concern is mounting that shark stocks will continue to deteriorate. There is now an urgent need for action by national and regional management authorities to address this problem.

This paper identifies the main players in the catch and trade of shark products, examines the progress of these States/entities and RFMOs in implementing the IPOA-Sharks and makes recommendations for the adoption of best practice approaches to shark conservation and management.

Factsheet: African Elephant

2007-04-13

African elephants are the largest living land animals. Once numbering millions across the African continent, their populations had been decimated by the mid-1980s by systematic poaching. The status of the species now varies greatly across Africa. Some populations remain endangered due to poaching for meat and ivory, habitat loss, and conflict with humans, while others are secure and expanding.

African elephants are 'flagship' species for their habitats - that is, charismatic representatives of the biodiversity within the complex ecosystems they inhabit. Because these large animals need a lot of space to survive, their conservation will help maintain biological diversity and ecological integrity over extensive areas and so help many other species.

WWF's work
In 2000, WWF launched a new African Elephant Programme. With 40 years of experience in elephant conservation, WWF’s current programme aims to:

increase protection and management of elephants in Africa
build capacity within elephant range countries to manage and protect mitigate conflict between humans and elephants
control the illegal trade in elephant products.