Content uploaded by Michael Knight
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Michael Knight on Nov 10, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Environment and Protected Areas Authority [LOGO]
Proceedings of the
15th Annual Conservation Workshop
for the Biodiversity of Arabia
Wildlife Reintroductions, Small Mammal Survey Techniques and
Captive Carnivore Care
15th Annual Conservation Workshop
for the Biodiversity of Arabia
Wildlife Reintroductions, Small Mammal Survey
Techniques and Captive Carnivore Care
3-6 February 2014
Compiled by Philip Seddon1, Mike Knight2, David Mallon3, Ara Monadjem4,
Gerhard Steenkamp5, Jane Budd6, Kevin Budd6 and Sarah May7
Organised by
Environment and Protected Areas Authority (EPAA)
Government of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
1Department of Zoology, University of Otago
PO Box 56, Dunedin, New Zealand
Email: philip.seddon@otago.ac.nz
2Park Planning and Development, South African National Parks
Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Summerstrand Campus
PO Box 7700, Port Elizabeth 6031, South Africa
Email: M.Knight@nmmu.ac.za
3IUCN/SSC Species Conservation Planning Sub-committee
Email: d.mallon@zoo.co.uk
4Department of Biological Sciences, University of Swaziland
Private Bag 4, Kwaluseni, Swaziland
Email: aramonadjem@gmail.com
5Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria
Private Bag X04, Onderstepoort 0110, South Africa
Email: Gerhard.Steenkamp@up.ac.za
6Breeding Centre for Endangered Arabian Wildlife
PO Box 29922, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates
Email: bceaw@bceaw.ae
7Qatar Museums
PO Box 2777, Doha, Qatar
Email: smay@qm.org.com
Executive Summary
The Fifteenth Annual Conservation Workshop for the Biodiversity of Arabia was held at the Breeding
Centre for Endangered Arabian Wildlife (BCEAW) in Sharjah, UAE, from the 3-6 February 2014.
This year’s workshop included three themes: wildlife reintroductions, small mammal survey techniques,
and a new veterinary strand that focused on captive carnivore care.
The overarching theme of Wildlife Reintroductions was a natural follow-on from the previous year’s
workshop theme: Species Conservation Planning. The recently completed and fully revised IUCN
Guidelines for Reintroduction and Other Conservation Translocations was introduced at the workshop
and delegates practiced applying the guidelines, including project definitions, goal setting, feasibility and
risk assessment, release site selection, release strategies, post-release monitoring programme design, to
five regionally important species: the Nubian ibex, Arabian wolf, Arabian tahr, wonder gecko and Arabian
oryx.
The technical component of the workshop was in direct response to one of the recommendations from
13th Conservation Workshop for the Biodiversity of Arabia in 2012 where training in small mammal survey
techniques was identified as a regionally important topic requiring attention. Further, it was recognised
that small mammals are ideal focal species for attempts to understand the biogeography of the region
due to their size, ubiquitous distribution and relative ease in surveying. This theme focused on a variety of
interconnected topics related to the study of small mammals, including: capture and handling;
preparation of specimens; identification; and biodiversity and ecological surveys.
This was the first year to have a veterinarian theme as part of the workshop. This component was
included in response to the realisation that there are an increasing number of wild and exotic animals in
captivity and in the care of veterinarians. Some of these animals will be used in reintroduction
programmes: building closer ties and relationships between veterinarians and other wildlife professionals
will be important in any reintroduction attempts. In addition, it exposes veterinarians to the ‘bigger picture’
of wildlife conservation and helps wildlife professionals to understand the contribution of veterinarians to
wildlife conservation.
Captive carnivores were the focus for this theme as carnivores present unique challenges in the field of
veterinary science and captive care. Future workshops will address other taxa and their associated
challenges.
The captive carnivore theme covered relevant legislation, the composition and application of F10
disinfectant; facility planning; biosecurity, nutrition; primary healthcare; medical husbandry training;
behavioural enrichment; dental health care; pathogens and other diseases; and pain control and
anaesthesia. A practical session on remote injection techniques was included.
i
Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I!
PLANNING FOR WILDLIFE REINTRODUCTIONS AND OTHER CONSERVATION TRANSLOCATIONS 1!
Introduction 1!
Aims of the Workshop 5!
Conservation Translocation Cycle 5!
Conservation Translocation Goal Statements 6!
Conservation Translocation Feasibility and Risk Assessment 7!
Conservation Translocation Non-translocation Alternatives Assessment 10!
Conservation Translocation Release Site Selection 11!
Conservation Translocation Release Strategy 12!
Post-release Monitoring 14!
On-going Management 15!
Exit Strategies 15!
Information Dissemination 15!
Literature Cited and Key Papers 16!
Useful Websites 17!
SMALL MAMMAL SURVEY TECHNIQUES 18!
Introduction 18!
Aims of the Workshop 18!
What are Small Mammals? 18!
Capture and Handling 19!
Preparation of Specimens 22!
Identification 23!
Biodiversity Surveys 24!
Ecological Surveys 25!
Small Mammals in the Arabian Peninsula 31!
Literature Cited and Key Papers 33!
CAPTIVE CARNIVORE CARE 35!
Introduction 35!
Overview of Legal Regulations 35!
The Composition and Application of F10 Disinfectant 36!
Facility Planning 36!
Biosecurity 36!
Nutrition (including enrichment) 36!
ii
Primary Healthcare 37!
Medical Husbandry Training 37!
Behavioural Enrichment (including stress and welfare) 37!
Dental Health Care 37!
Viral and Bacterial Diseases 37!
Fungi and Parasites of Captive Carnivores 37!
Metabolic Diseases 38!
Neoplasia 38!
Pain Control 38!
Anaesthesia in Captive Carnivores 38!
Practical Session – Remote Injection Techniques 38!
Conclusion 38!
PARTICIPANT LIST 40!
Figures
Figure 1. Increasing numbers of animal species that have been translocated in population restoration
projects. 2!
Figure 2. Increasing numbers of publications relating to wildlife reintroductions worldwide. 2
Figure 3. Logo of the IUCN/SSC Reintroduction Specialist Group. 3
Figure 4. Genealogy and influence of the 1998 Reintroduction Guidelines. 3!
Figure 5. The Translocation Spectrum. 4!
Figure 6. The Conservation Translocation Cycle. 6!
Figure 7. Hypothetical conservation translocation risk landscape. 9!
Figure 8. Hypothetical example of an evaluation of translocation and non-translocation alternatives. 10!
Figure 9. Conservation translocation release site (dot) and release area (green shape). 11!
Figure 10. Distribution of typical dispersal away from a release site. 11
Figure 11. Illustration of extreme clumping at a release site. 12
Figure 12. Illustration of extreme dispersal from a release site. 12
Figure 13. Illustration of natural recolonisation of suitable areas, barriers to dispersal, attraction to
ecological traps, and avoidance of perceptual traps. 13!
Figure 14. An example of an Adaptive Management cycle. 13!
Figure 15. Example of a live trap. 20
Figure 16. Example of a Victor (kill) trap used for capturing terrestrial small mammals. 20!
Figure 17. Bucket pit-fall traps connected by drift fence. 21!
Figure 18. Mist net. !21
Figure 19. Harp trap. 21!
Figure 20. Standard measurements for small mammals. 22!
iii
Figure 21. Examples of specimen preservation. 23!
Figure 22. A species accumulation curve for a biodiversity survey of bats at Mt Nimba, West Africa. 25!
Figure 23. The difference between a trap line and trap grid. 26!
Figure 24. Small mammal ear tags and applicators. 27!
Figure 25. A bat with a band on its right forearm. 27!
Figure 26. Collection of bat faeces for dietary analysis. 28
Figure 27. Bats use echolocation to perceive their environment. 30
Figure 28. The SD II Anabat bat detector. 30
Figure 29. Sonogram. 29!
Figure 30. Fluorescent powders. 30!
Figure 31. Rhodamine B. 31!
1
Planning for Wildlife Reintroductions and
Other Conservation Translocations
Introduction
The 15th Annual Conservation Workshop addressed the overarching theme of Wildlife Reintroductions,
introducing the recently completed and fully revised IUCN Guidelines for Reintroduction and Other
Conservation Translocations, and applying the process of reintroduction planning to selected species of
regional importance. Regionally there has been significant activity around the transport and release of
wildlife to establish new populations, and reintroduction practitioners in the Arabian Peninsula have been
early adopters of IUCN reintroduction guidelines. Many projects in Arabia have been examples of best
practice, but there is always room to enhance translocation planning in order to improve project success.
The arrival in 2013 of the fully revised IUCN Reintroduction Guidelines marked an advance in
translocation planning. The 15th Annual Conservation Workshop in Sharjah provided a timely opportunity
to present the new guidelines to participants and to apply them to some regionally relevant case study
species.
A brief history of conservation translocations
The first conservation translocations in the world took place over 120 years ago. In New Zealand during
the 1880s, large numbers of flightless birds, kakapo (Strigops habroptilus) and kiwi (Apteryx australis),
were moved to an offshore island by the naturalist Richard Henry, marking the first attempt to protect
New Zealand’s native species from the impacts of exotic mammalian predators (Hill and Hill 1987). About
the same time, on the other side of the world, the Tobasco sauce manufacturer, Edward (Ned)
McIlhenny, translocated captive-bred snowy egrets (Egretta thula) from declining populations along the
southern US Gulf Coast to into Bird City, a private bird refuge McIlhenny established in 1895 on Avery
Island, Louisiana (Furmansky 2009).
Reintroduction really only came of age in 1907 when 15 American bison (Bison bison) were sent from
Bronx Zoo and released into the Wichita Mountains Wildlife Preserve in Oklahoma (reviewed in Beck
2001). This was an initiative of the American Bison Society (ABS) in response to population declines from
over 40 million to only ~1,000 animals by 1884.
In the decades following the successes of bison reintroductions in the US there were few reintroduction
attempts, but several high profile success stories in the 1960s to 1980s helped raise the profile of
reintroduction as a population restoration tool. These included projects on Golden Lion tamarin
(Leontopithecus rosalia) in Brazil (Kleiman and Mallison 1998), Black-footed ferret (Mustela nigripes) in the
USA (Dobson and Lyles 2000), Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) in North America (Cade and Burnham
2003) and Arabian oryx (Oryx leucoryx) in Oman (Stanley Price 1989).
In contrast to these well-planned, well-monitored and well-documented reintroduction successes, there
were many poorly planned releases of animals into unsuitable areas where their inevitable failure to
establish a population was undocumented. The lack of post-release monitoring makes it impossible to
learn anything from these undocumented failures.
The lack of documentation may reflect the fact that many reintroductions were viewed as pure
management exercises, involving manipulations to achieve management objectives without attempting to
learn about how the systems under management work (McNab 1983). Pure management manipulations
typically lack adequate monitoring: without post-release monitoring nothing can be learned about what
variables were important in a successful translocation, and even less knowledge is gained from
undocumented failures.
By the 2000s there had been a marked increase in the number of species that had been translocated in
population restoration project globally (Figure 1), and an explosion in the number of reintroduction-related
publications (Figure 2), the latter driven by the improved generation of data from post-release monitoring
of an increasing number of projects. This growing source of information about reintroduction outcomes
2
was being used in reviews seeking general principles of translocation success (e.g. Fisher and
Lindenmayer 2000).
Today there is a recognised discipline of Reintroduction Biology encompassing the science around all
forms of conservation translocation (Ewen et. al., 2012). Improved translocation procedures, detailed
post-release monitoring, and the framing of releases as explicit experimental tests of prediction is
generating a growing literature that informs reintroduction attempts for a broadening range of species
globally (Seddon et. al., 2014).
Figure 1. Increasing numbers of animal species that have been translocated in population restoration projects;
numbers are minimums only (After Seddon et. al., 2005).
Figure 2. Increasing numbers of publications relating to wildlife reintroductions worldwide (Seddon et. al., 2007).
Role of the IUCN Reintroduction Specialist Group
In the early years, many reintroduction projects were not only viewed purely as management
manipulations, but were doomed to failure due to poor planning, inappropriate founder animals, low
founder population sizes, and a lack of resources. Post-release monitoring was negligible so that causes
or timing of failures were unknown, as were the processes by which reintroduced populations may have
become established.
It was largely in response to rising numbers of ill-conceived reintroduction attempts that Dr Mark Stanley
Price, the architect of the Arabian oryx reintroduction to Oman (Stanley Price 1989), formed the
IUCN/SSC Reintroduction Specialist Group (RSG) (Figure 3) in 1988 with the aim of promoting
responsible reintroductions (Stanley Price and Soorae 2003). After 2000, Dr Fred Launay (Environment
Growth'in'numbers'of'reintroduc2on'papers'
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
1942
1945
1948
1951
1954
1957
1960
1963
1966
1969
1972
1975
1978
1981
1984
1987
1990
1993
1996
1999
2002
2005
Year
Number of papers
''
3
Agency - Abu Dhabi (EAD), United Arab Emirates) took over as Chair of the RSG, and in 2013 passed
this role on to Dr Axel Moehrenschlagar (Head of the Center for Conservation and Research, Calgary
Zoological Society, Canada). The RSG’s first strategic planning output was the Reintroduction Guidelines
(IUCN 1998). By 2006 the RSG consisted of a volunteer network of over 300 practitioners and
maintained a database of nearly 700 reintroduction projects. The 1998 Reintroduction Guidelines were
designed to encourage reintroduction practitioners to consider the various aspects of proposed projects,
including biological, social, legislative and economic variables. They recognized that any reintroduction
project is more than just a manipulation of a wildlife population, and success requires the support of
stakeholders and a long-term commitment of resources. The 1998 Guidelines were informed by the first
examinations of translocation outcomes (Griffith et. al., 1989; Wolf et. al., 1996, 1998), and in turn
influenced a number of taxon specific guidelines.
2013 Reintroduction Guidelines
Although the 1998 Reintroduction Guidelines provided a basic framework for reintroduction planning, by
2010 it was evident they were not sufficiently comprehensive. A task force was formed under the
auspices of the SSC, and because the new guidelines needed to deal with
translocations outside the indigenous range, the task force core
membership was drawn from both the RSG and the Invasive Species
Specialist groups. The fully revised and much more comprehensive
Guidelines became official IUCN policy in 2013 (Figure 4), and includes
detailed policies on conservation introductions, the movement and release
of an organism outside its indigenous range (IUCN 2013). The 2013 IUCN
Guidelines place great emphasis on feasibility and risk analysis being an
essential component of any conservation translocation. Given the
uncertainties involved in moving species outside their ranges, assisted
colonization is inherently more risky than “traditional” translocations such as
reintroductions. Where protection from threats in the indigenous range is
unfeasible, and where appropriate habitat can be identified elsewhere,
application of carefully planned assisted colonization might be appropriate
(Hoegh-Guldberg et. al., 2008).
Figure 4. Genealogy and influence of the 1998 Reintroduction Guidelines.
IUCN%Posi*on%Statement%on%
Transloca*on%of%Living%
Organisms%(1987)%
IUCN%Guidelines%for%
ReDintroduc*ons%(1998)%
IUCN%Guidelines%for%the%
Placement%of%Confiscated%
Animals%(2002)%
IUCN%Technical%Guidelines%for%the%
Management%of%Ex#situ#Popula*ons%
for%Conserva*on%(2002)%
Best%Prac*ce%Guidelines%for%
the%ReDintroduc*on%of%
Great%Apes%(2007)%
Guidelines%for%the%in#situ#
Transloca*on%of%the%African%
Elephant%for%Conserva*on%
Purposes%(2003)%
Guidelines%for%the%in#situ#ReD
introduc*on%and%Transloca*on%of%
African%and%Asian%Rhinoceros%(2009)%
Guidelines%for%the%ReD
introduc*on%of%Galliformes%for%
Conserva*on%Purposes%(2009)%
IUCN/SSC%Guidelines%for%
ReDintroduc*ons%(1995)%
Guidelines%for%Nonhuman%
Primate%Reintroduc*ons%
(2002)%
!"#"$%&'()&*)+",-#./&0123&#)
!1-0"%-#"4)
56789,:;;7<) =%derived%from%
=%acknowledges%
Figure 3 . Logo of the
IUCN/SSC Reintroduction
Specialist Group.
4
The Conservation Translocation Spectrum
The 2013 Guidelines recognize a spectrum of conservation translocation options (Figure 5). The following
definitions are taken directly from Section 2 of the 2013 Reintroduction Guidelines and should be read in
conjunction with Figure 5. Bolded terms are defined at first use.
Translocation is the human-mediated movement of living organisms from one area, with release in
another. Translocation is therefore the overarching term. Translocations may move living organisms from
the wild or from captive origins.
Translocations can be accidental (e.g. stowaways) or intentional. Intentional translocations can address a
variety of motivations, including reducing population size for welfare, political, commercial or recreational
interests, or for the purpose of conservation.
Conservation translocation is the intentional movement and release of a living organism where the
primary objective is a conservation benefit: this will usually comprise improving the conservation status of
the focal species locally or globally, and/or restoring natural ecosystem functions or processes.
A translocation involves releasing organisms. Release here specifically excludes the act of placing
organisms into conditions that, for management purposes, differ significantly from those experienced by
these organisms in their natural habitats.
Conservation translocations can entail releases either within or outside the species’ indigenous range.
The indigenous range of a species is the known or inferred distribution generated from historical
(written or verbal) records, or physical evidence of the species’ occurrence. Where direct evidence is
inadequate to confirm previous occupancy, the existence of suitable habitat within ecologically
appropriate proximity to proven range may be taken as adequate evidence of previous occupation.
Figure 5. The Translocation Spectrum (after Seddon 2010 and Seddon et. al., 2012).
Population restoration is any conservation translocation to within a species indigenous range and
comprises two activities: reintroduction and reinforcement.
Reinforcement is the intentional movement and release of an organism into an existing population of
conspecifics. Reinforcement aims to enhance population viability, for instance by increasing
population size, increasing genetic diversity, or increasing the representation of specific demographic
groups or stages.
The Translocation Spectrum
Is release intentional?
Is the primary objective of the release to:
• Improve status (of the focal species), or
• Restore natural ecosystem functions or processes
Conservation translocation
Is the release within the
indigenous range?
Population restoration
Are conspecifics present in the
release area?
Accidental translocations
• Non-lethal control
• Rehabilitation release
• Commercial/recreational
• Biological control
• Religious
• Animal rights liberation
• Aesthetic
• Other
If the aim of the release is to:
1. Avoid population extinction of focal
species at any scale
= Assisted colonization
Conservation Introduction
Reinforcement Reintroduction
2. Perform an ecological function lost
by extinction of an original form
= Ecological replacement
Yes$
Yes$
Yes$
Yes$ No$
No$
No$
No$
and/or$
5
Reintroduction is the intentional movement and release of an organism inside its indigenous range
from which it has disappeared. Reintroduction aims to re-establish a viable population of the focal
species within its indigenous range.
Conservation introduction is the intentional movement and release of an organism outside its
indigenous range. Two types of conservation introduction are recognized: assisted colonization and
ecological replacement.
Assisted colonisation is the intentional movement and release of an organism outside its
indigenous range to avoid extinction of populations of the focal species. This is carried out primarily
where protection from current or likely future threats in current range is deemed less feasible than at
alternative sites. The term includes a wide spectrum of operations, from those involving the movement
of organisms into areas that are both far from current range and separated by non-habitat areas, to
those involving small range extensions into contiguous areas.
Ecological replacement is the intentional movement and release of an organism outside its
indigenous range to perform a specific ecological function. This is used to re-establish an ecological
function lost through extinction, and will often involve the most suitable existing sub-species, or a
close relative of the extinct species within the same genus.
Aims of the Workshop
The aim of this part of the workshop was to apply the 2013 IUCN Reintroduction Guidelines to planning
for the conservation translocation of a range of regionally important species. It was not necessary that
actual projects were involved as this was considered a demonstration of the ways in which the guidelines
could be applied using hypothetical examples. For this reason outputs from the case study working
groups are not reproduced here, but the process by which the different components of the Guidelines
were applied is set out in detail below.
Case study working groups
As usual, during the Workshop, delegates had the opportunity to share their own regionally relevant
experiences and approaches: working groups used selected examples to apply aspects of the new
Reintroduction Guidelines, including project definitions, goal setting, feasibility and risk assessment,
release site selection, release strategies, post-release monitoring programme design. Delegates were
asked to bring along information relating to ongoing or proposed translocations in their area.
In the first session delegates were asked to identify five suitable case study species that fulfilled the
following criteria: regional species; range of taxa (mammals, birds, reptiles); have a particular release site
in mind for a given species; have a possible, planned, preliminary or even hypothetical translocation in
mind; and have good knowledge of species ecology, status and distribution.
Five case study species and projects were selected as a basis for working groups:
1. Nubian Ibex Reinforcement Jordan/Saudi Arabia
2. Arabian Wolf Reintroduction United Arab Emirates (UAE)
3. Arabian Tahr Reinforcement UAE
4. Wonder Gecko Assisted Colonisation UAE
5. Arabian Oryx Reintroduction Yemen
Conservation Translocation Cycle
The Conservation Translocation Cycle (Figure 6) sets out a framework for planning that indicates the key
components to be addressed at different stages in the project planning cycle. This formed the basis of
the workshop structure and process.
Groups proceeded from a real conservation situation and started by framing a Goal statement for a
proposed or hypothetical conservation translocation of each case study species. Initial Feasibility and
6
Risk was then assessed and Non-translocation alternatives to achieve the same goal were
considered. Whatever the outcome of these assessments it was assumed, for the purposes of the
planning exercise, that a Decision to translocate was made, so that groups could proceed to
consider the Design and Monitoring for each project.
Figure 6. The Conservation Translocation Cycle (after IUCN 2013, p34).
Conservation Translocation Goal Statements
A Goal is a statement of the intended result of the conservation translocation.
It should articulate the intended conservation benefit, and will often be expressed in terms of the desired
size and number of populations that will achieve the required conservation benefit either locally or
globally, all within an overall time frame.
Source: IUCN Guidelines (2013) Section 4.1
Process
The examples below were used as a guide by the case study working groups to frame translocation goal
statements for their focal species.
Bad Example
To develop a successful project to reintroduce (the species) back to the wild.
Good Examples
Black Stilt (Kaki), New Zealand
To improve the status of kaki from critically endangered by increasing the wild population to >250
breeding individuals, with a mean annual recruitment rate exceeding mean annual adult mortality rate.
African wild dog, South Africa
To create a viable population of wild dogs to supplement the one in Kruger National Park, through
establishment of a “managed metapopulation” with a minimum 9 packs of wild dogs over a 10-year
period.
Eastern-barred bandicoot, Victoria, Australia
To minimise the probability of eastern barred bandicoot by establishing at least two self-sustaining
populations which total a minimum of 2,500 individuals.
!"#$%&'()"#*+,-.()"#*
/01%2)'%$*
32)"#$*
/.-2"4%*($$%$$4%#-*5,$$%4,#()"#*"6*&%$.7-$*
8'(7.()"#*"6*(7-%&#()'%$9*
-&(#$7"2()"#*"&**
#"#:-&(#$7"2()"#*
5%$,;#*
<,$=*
($$%$$4%#-*
>%($,0,7,-?*
($$%$$4%#-*
>%($,0,7,-?*
($$%$$4%#-*
@"(7*
5%2,$,"#*-"*-&(#$7"2(-%*
A4B7%4%#-()"#*
C"#,-"&,#;*
<,$=*
($$%$$4%#-*
*
3D(B)'%*
4(#(;%4%#-*
2?27%*
*
7
Brown bear, Central Alps, Italy
To avoid extinction of brown bear by the re-establishment of a minimum viable population of 40-60 bears
in the central Alps in 20-40 years.
Greater One-horned Rhino, Assam, India
To expand the range of rhino into suitable habitats within Assam through wild-to-wild translocation to
increase the rhino population to ~3,000 individuals in Assam by 2020.
Conservation Translocation Feasibility and Risk Assessment
Primary planning focus is on the desired performance of the focal species after release, in terms of
population performance, or ecological roles. Translocation design is subject to constraints and
opportunities, so the broad feasibility of translocation must first be assessed. Any translocation bears a
risk it will fail and/or cause unintended damage, so the full range of hazards must first be assessed. Any
proposed translocation has high cost and considerable risk, so alternative solutions should be considered
also. Conclusions from feasibility and risk assessments should determine whether a translocation should
proceed or not.
Feasibility Assessment
Translocation design will be subject to opportunities and constraints; the broad feasibility of translocation
must first be assessed.
Source: IUCN Guidelines (2013) Section 5
Process
Case study groups worked through each feasibility component, addressing specific issues and questions
for each, and make a determination of the feasibility of each and of the proposed translocation overall.
Some components required only a Yes/No answer; others required a short written explanation.
Detailed information concerning each of the feasibility components was taken from the following sections
of the 2013 IUCN Guidelines:
1. Basic biological knowledge Source: IUCN (2013) Section 5.1.1
2. Habitat Source: IUCN (2013) Section 5.1.2
3. Founders Source: IUCN (2013) Section 5.1.4
4. Disease and parasites Source: IUCN (2013) Section 5.1.6
5. Social feasibility Source: IUCN (2013) Section 5.2
6. Regulatory compliance Source: IUCN (2013) Section 5.3
7. Resource availability Source: IUCN (2013) Section 5.4
1. Basic biological knowledge
Working groups were asked to collate information on the biology and ecology of wild populations,
including: reproduction; mating systems; social structure and behavior; parental care; diet and growth;
biotic and abiotic habitat requirements; seasonality; dispersal; and interspecific relationships (including
feeding, predation and disease).
2. Habitat
Matching habitat suitability and availability to the needs of the species is central to feasibility and design.
Working groups undertook to complete the following:
! Characterise the habitat requirements of the species.
! Characterise the ecological role of the species.
8
! Determine the indigenous range of the species.
! Determine the current distribution of the species.
! Assess the status of habitat in the indigenous range.
! Is there sufficient area of suitable habitat for releases?
! Determine the cause(s) of declines or local extinctions.
! Assess future threats, and address the question: Can/have past and potential future threats be
addressed?
3. Founders
! Is there a source of founders: from wild or captive populations?
! Will available founders have adequate genetic diversity?
! Will available founders be suited genetically to the release area?
! Can sufficient founders be obtained without impact on the source?
4. Disease and parasites
! What are the known diseases of the species?
! What are the known parasites of the species?
! Is it feasible to screen for disease and treat founder animals?
5. Social feasibility
! What human communities are in or around the likely release area?
! What is the relationship between local communities and the focal species?
! What are the possible impacts, positive and negative, of proposed releases on local communities?
! What mechanisms/bodies are in place to engage with local communities?
6. Regulatory compliance
! What type of movement is required: international, cross-border, outside indigenous range, national,
regional?
! What are the relevant international, national, or regional/sub-regional regulations?
! Which organization/body/authority will manage the proposed releases?
! What other regulatory groups would need to be involved?
! Will the proposed translocation be able to meet regulatory requirements?
7. Resource availability
! What is the likelihood of sufficient funding and other resourcing being available and from where?
Risk Assessment
Risk is the probability of an identified factor occurring + the severity of its impact. The range of possible
risks comprises a “risk landscape”. Risk assessment may be quantitative or qualitative. Lack of data does
not indicate absence of risk.
Seven risk factors were considered:
1 Risk to source populations
! What is the possible impact of removal of individuals for a translocation?
2 Ecological risk
! What is the impact of release animals on other species or ecosystem functions?
9
3 Disease risk
! What is the risk spread disease/contract disease after release?
4 Associated invasion risk
! What is the risk of the accidental release of invasive species?
5 Gene escape risk
! What is the risk of genetic mixing with extant populations?
6 Socio-economic risk
! What is the risk of direct, harmful impacts on people and income?
7 Financial risk
! What are the risks of discontinuation of support/funding?
Process
Case study groups were asked to identify the full range of possible risks and estimate two scores, impact
and probability.
Impact (severity) score
For each risk factor groups discussed and assigned a likely severity of impact using a relative scale of 0-
100, where: 0 = no measurable impact, and 100 = catastrophic impact, then discussed and agreed on
upper and lower levels to account for uncertainty.
Probability score
For each risk factor groups discussed and assigned an estimated probability of occurrence using the
scale of 0-100, where: 0 = no chance, and 100 = will always occur, then discussed and agreed on upper
and lower levels to account for uncertainty, e.g. 0, range 0-30.
Groups then plotted severity (along x-axis) against probability (y axis) for each factor (Figure 7), and
discussed each factor, adjusting these in relation to the others. They then categorised all factors into
three groups based on their possible impact: A = least risk; B = moderate but acceptable risk; C = major
risk (Figure 7). Groups decided whether any factors in Category C warrant a decision to abandon plans
for the translocation.
Figure 7. Hypothetical conservation translocation risk landscape.
!"#$%&'()*+",)"'-'*+&.)
/00)
1$2"&3)
/00)0
0)
14'%"&3)
!"#$%&'()*+",)
5*26%6+4+&.)
7.52&8'#9%4):2;"'*-%#2;)<*%;"429%#2;)=+",)>%;("9%5')
?)
@)
:)
10
Conservation Translocation Non-translocation Alternatives
Assessment
Any proposed translocation must be justified through comparison with alternative solutions to achieve the
same conservation benefit.
Source: IUCN Guidelines (2013) Annex 3.3
Process
Case study working groups were asked to consider the costs and benefits of translocation and non-
translocation options. First, each group listed all non-translocation alternatives to achieve the desired
conservation benefit. For each alternative, groups estimated the relative cost on a scale 0-100, where: 0
= no cost, and 100 = maximum cost.
Next, for each alternative, groups estimated the likelihood that this option alone would achieve the
desired conservation benefit, on a scale 0-100, where: 0 = no chance of success, and 100 = will
succeed under any conditions.
For the translocation option groups also estimated the relative costs and the likelihood of success.
Groups plotted relative cost (along bottom, x-axis) against probability of success (y axis) for each option,
translocation and non-translocation on the same graph (e.g. Figure 8), then discussed each factor and
adjust in relation to the others in order to answer the following question:
Compared with the non-translocation alternatives, is translocation a viable option?
The non-translocation alternatives that were considered are:
1 Area-based solutions
! Increase habitat availability through restoration, connectivity, or protection
2 Species-based solutions
! Improve the viability of existing populations, e.g. predator control, supplementary food
3 Social/indirect solutions
! Change in legislation, public education, financial incentives or compensation
4 Doing nothing
! Taking no action might have lower risks of extinction compared to alternatives
Figure 8. Hypothetical example of an evaluation of translocation and non-translocation alternatives.
!"#$%&'()*'+%#,')-."&)
/00)
1$."&2)
/00)0
0)
1+'%"&2)
!"#$%&'()
+34'+35..()
.6)%-53',378)
('"3*'()
-.7"'*,%#.7)
9'7':&)
!,%+;%#.7).6)<*%7"+.-%#.7)%7()7.7=<*%7"+.-%#.7)>+&'*7%#,'")
?7%-#.7)
@;9+3-)
%A%*'7'"")
BC'-3'"=9%"'()
".+;#.7)
>*'%=9%"'()
".+;#.7)
<*%7"+.-%#.7)
11
Conservation Translocation Release Site Selection
Source: IUCN Guidelines (2013) Section 7.1
Process
Considering the information used in the earlier Feasibility Assessment, the groups identified a suitable
release site within a wider release area, located these on a map, and provided a rationale for their
selection taking into account: habitat suitability and species biology; size; protection status; mitigation of
possible future threats; and ease of access for release and monitoring.
A release site is the specific point of release.
A release site should meet all the practical needs for effective release with the least stress; enable the
release animals to exploit the surrounding release area; and be suitable for media and public awareness
needs.
A release area is the wider area around the release site into which the released animals are expected to
disperse and settle.
A release area should meet all the species’ biotic and abiotic requirements: be appropriate habitat for the
life stage released and all life stages of the species; be adequate for all seasonal habitat needs; and be
large enough to meet the required conservation benefit.
We can consider a release site that sits inside a reintroduction area presumably selected because it is
inside the historic range and it has suitable habitat.
Ideally founders disperse from the release site and move into reintroduction area (Figure 9).
Figure 9. Conservation translocation release site (dot) and release area (green shape).
The arrow indicates dispersal from the release site into the release area.
Typically a few animals will move very small distances, most will move intermediate distances, and there
is a long tailed distribution (Figure 10) of so-called Long Distance Dispersers.
Figure 10. Distribution of typical dispersal away from a release site.
Release&
site&
Release&area&
Dispersal&
!"#$%&'()*+,-)+(.(%#()#"$()/)0-()
12-3(+),*)
%&"-%.#)
))4,&5)!"#$%&'()!"#6(+#%.)74!!8)
9+%:;$(&3+,$)($)%.<)72005)%Diversity%%&=)!"#$+"320,&#)
12
Figure 11. Illustration of extreme clumping
at a release site (see Figure 10 for symbols).
Founders and offspring may all remain close to the release site
(Figure 11). With this comes increased density and higher
mortality risks due to disease and social competition.
Therefore, some movement away from release site is
necessary – but how much will depend on the site and the
species.
Causes of extreme clumping include social aggregation, focal
supplementary food/water, and innate fear response of naïve
animals.
Figure 12. Illustration of extreme
dispersal from a release site.
If all or most animals move away from the reintroduction site
(Figure 12) the population will never establish and mortality
may be high. This might mean animals move away from
selected suitable habitat, habitat management (e.g. predator
control), and supplementary care. It might also take animals
out of range of post-release monitoring; therefore it would not
be known if they were dead or alive elsewhere. Extreme
dispersal might be facilitated in highly connected landscapes.
Loss of a large proportion of founders may necessitate follow-
up translocations to reinforce a reduced local population. This
may have negative public relations consequences.
Causes of extreme dispersal include social competition;
translocation stress/disorientation; homing behavior; lack of resources in release area; and habitat
selection mismatch.
Ultimately some animals may move out of reintroduction site and settle in suitable habitat elsewhere
(Figure 13). Natural recolonisation avoids the need for further translocations. Barriers could prevent
natural recolonisation to dispersal (Figure 13). The short-term aim is to keep founders in the focal area.
Too much dispersal will result in a low founder population, whereas too little dispersal leads to clumping
and reduced fitness. Dispersal will be influenced by perceived habitat quality and might be driven by
selection of outside areas in highly connected landscapers; a mismatch between selection cues and
habitat quality; selection of poor quality area (ecological traps); and avoidance of suitable areas
(perceptual traps) (Figure 13).
Conservation Translocation Release Strategy
Source: IUCN Guidelines (2013) Section 7.2
The life stage and season of release should be optimised with respect to the species’ natural dispersal
age or season, considering whether dispersal after release is to be encouraged or discouraged. The
age/size, sex composition and social relationships of founders may be optimised for establishment and
the population growth rate stated in the objectives. Translocation success increases with the numbers of
individuals released, but this needs to be balanced against impacts on source populations. Releases,
either simultaneously or sequentially, at multiple sites may serve to spread out the released animals.
Minimising stress during capture, handling, transport and pre-release management will enhance post-
release performance. Various management interventions and support before and after release can
enhance performance.
A release strategy will relate directly to a specific management objective, which in turn will be dictated by
the overall goal of the project. Ideally there will be integration of goals, release strategy and post-release
monitoring, possibly within an adaptive management framework (Figure 14).
13
Figure 13. Illustration of natural recolonisation of suitable areas, barriers to dispersal, attraction to ecological traps,
and avoidance of perceptual traps.
Figure 14. An example of an Adaptive Management cycle.
Ecological(Trap(
Perceptual(Trap(
Natural(Recolonisa4on(
Define%the%Problem%
!
Make!explicit!statement!of!
management!objec4ves!
!
e.g.$Do$we$maximize$popula0on$
growth$through$the$release$of$
cap0ve$or$wild$founders?$
Model%and%Predict%
!
Use!literature!and!models!to!predict!
performance!of!alterna4ves!
!
e.g.$Wild$founders$will$have$higher$post<
release$survival$and$lower$dispersal$
leading$to$popula0on$growth$
Monitor%Outcomes%
!
e.g.$Compare$survival,$dispersal$
and$breeding$between$groups$or$
against$expecta0ons$
Update%
!
Focus!on!the!best<
performing!op4on!
Decide%and%Design%
!
Set!the!management!ac4on!and!the!
monitoring!required!
!
Ac0ve$AM$e.g.$release$of$both$cap0ve$
and$wild$founders$and$compare$
performance$
Passive$AM$e.g.$release$wild$founders$
only$and$assess$against$expecta0ons$
Implement%
!
e.g.$Release$chosen$founders$
Adap;ve%
Management%
14
Process
Working groups were asked to design a release strategy for each case study species, adopting either a
Passive or/and Active Adaptive Management strategy for at least one aspect of the release.
Example: Will the re-established population grow more rapidly with the release of wild-caught founder
animals, or captive-bred founders?
Passive Adaptive Management = release what you think best and assess that assumption.
Example: Wild-caught founders will be better than captive bred founders, so release only wild-caught
animals and assess their survival and breeding.
Active Adaptive Management = conduct release of both options and compare performance.
Example: Release both wild-caught and captive bred animals and assess whether wild-caught animals
really have higher survival and breeding rates.
Groups considered the following aspects, as appropriate, for each release strategy:
1. Where will animals come from: captive or wild?
2. What age/life stage will be released?
3. What number of animal will be released?
4. How will animals be caught?
5. How will animals be transported?
6. How will animals be released: soft or hard release?
Post-release Monitoring
Source: IUCN Guidelines (2013) Section 8
Monitoring is essential to measure the performance of released animals. The type, intensity and duration
of monitoring will be determined by the specific information that is needed to evaluate outcomes.
Four types of monitoring were considered:
1 Demographic monitoring
Typically “vital rates” of survival, reproduction and dispersal are key parameters to measure, and/or
population size.
2 Ecological monitoring
Used to record ecological changes associated with the translocation; where restoration of an ecological
function is the primary goal then ‘ecological monitoring’ should seek to detect a return of this function.
3 Genetic monitoring
Tissues samples can be used to assess changes in genetic diversity.
4 Disease/health monitoring
Identifying causes of death can be critical in assessing progress.
The type of data to be collected will determine the necessary type of animal marking, e.g. cohort
marking, individual tags, radio/GPS tracking.
Process
Working groups were asked to design a monitoring plan for their translocated species, taking into
account the Passive or Adaptive Management strategy adopted in their release strategy.
15
Groups considered the following:
1 How will animals be marked?
Individual or cohort?; temporary or permanent?; visible or hidden (transponders)?; radio tags or GPS
tags?
2 How will animals be observed and/or recaptured?
Visual observation of free-ranging animals by eye or camera crap; observation of animal sign (footprints
etc); live capture in trap, net, snare, leg hold …etc.
3 What specific data is required and how will this be obtained?
For example: survival rates through mark-recapture analysis?
4 How frequently will monitoring take place?
Daily, weekly, monthly annually?
5 For how long will monitoring take place?
This could be expressed as a time period, e.g. 1 year, or the time required to obtain certain information,
or to make an evaluation of a change).
Groups also considered behavioural, genetic, health and socio-economic monitoring.
On-going Management
Source: IUCN Guidelines (2013) Annex 8
Information from monitoring allows adjustment of ongoing management. Decisions about management
adjustment or change should be based current understanding of the population’s dynamics and impacts.
Long-term management of re-established populations may be necessary for persistence.
Exit Strategies
Source: IUCN Guidelines (2013) Section 4.3
Not all translocations go according to plan and there may be a point where investing further resources is
not justified. A decision to discontinue will be based on the result of monitoring and the assessment of
progress towards the Goal. If undesired or unacceptable effects have occurred all free-ranging animals
may need to be removed (caught/killed). An Exit Strategy needs to be part of translocation planning.
Information Dissemination
Source: IUCN Guidelines (2013) Section 9
Regular reporting should start in the planning stages. This serves to: create awareness and gain support;
meet statutory requirements; contribute to the body of knowledge.
16
Literature Cited and Key Papers
Beck, B.B. 2001. A vision for reintroduction. Communiqué September 2001: 20-21. American Zoo and
Aquarium Association, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA.
Cade, T.J. and Burnham, W. 2003. Return of the Peregrine. The Peregrine Fund, Boise, Idaho.
Dobson, A. and Lyles, A. 2000. Black-footed ferret recovery. Science 288: 985-988.
Ewen, J.G., Armstrong, D.P., Parker, K.A. and Seddon P.J. (Eds). 2012. Reintroduction biology:
integrating science and management. Conservation Science and Practice 9: 73-104. Wiley-
Blackwell, Chichester.
Fischer, J. and Lindenmayer, D.B. 2000. An assessment of the published results of animal relocations.
Biological Conservation 96: 1-11.
Furmansky, D.Z. 2009. Rosalie Edge, Hawk of Mercy: The activist who saved nature from the
conservationists. University of Georgia Press, Athens GA, USA
Griffith, B., Scott, J.M., Carpenter, J.W. and Reed, C. 1989. Translocation as a species conservation tool:
status and strategy. Science 245: 477-480.
Hill, S. and Hill, J. 1987. Richard Henry of Resolution Island. John McIndoe Press, Dunedin, New
Zealand.
Hoegh-Guldberg, O., Hughes, L., McIntyre, S., Lindenmayer, D.B., Parmesan, C., Possingham, H.P. and
Thomas, C.D. 2008. Assisted colonization and rapid climate change. Science 321: 345-346.
IUCN (World Conservation Union). 1998. Guidelines for re-introductions. IUCN/SSC Re-introduction
Specialist Group, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge United Kingdom.
IUCN/SSC. 2013. Guidelines for Reintroductions and Other Conservation Translocations. Version 1.0.
Gland, Switzerland: IUCN Species Survival Commission, viiii + 57 pp.
Kleiman, D.G. and Mallinson, J.J.C. 1998. Recovery and management committees for lion tamarins:
partnerships in conservation planning and implementation. Conservation Biology 12: 27-38.
McNab, J. 1983. Wildlife management as scientific experimentation. Wildlife Society Bulletin 11: 397-
401.
Seddon, P.J., Soorae, P.S.A and Launay, F. 2005. Taxonomic bias in reintroduction projects. Animal
Conservation 8: 51-58.
Seddon, P.J. 2010. From re-introduction to assisted colonization: Moving along the conservation
translocation spectrum. Restoration Ecology 18(6): 796-802.
Seddon, P.J., Armstrong, D.P. and Maloney, R.F. 2007. Developing the science of reintroduction biology.
Conservation Biology 21: 303-312.
Seddon, P.J., Strauss, W.M. and Innes, J. 2012. Animal Translocations: what are they and why do we do
them? Pp. 1-32 In: Ewen, J.G., Armstrong, D.P., Parker, K.A., and Seddon, P.J. (Eds).
Reintroduction Biology: Integrating science and management. Conservation Science and
Practice Series. Blackwell Publishing Ltd, John Wiley and Sons, UK.
Seddon, P.J., Griffiths, C.J., Soorae, P.S. and Armstrong, D.P. 2014. Reversing defaunation: Restoring
species in a changing world. Science 345 (6195): 406-412.
Stanley Price, M.R. 1989. Animal re-introductions: the Arabian oryx in Oman. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Stanley Price, M.R. and Soorae, P. 2003. Re-introductions: whence and wither? International Zoo
Yearbook 38: 61-75.
Wolf C.M, Garland, T. Jnr. and Griffith, B. 1998. Predictors of avian and mammalian translocation
success: reanalysis with phylogenetically independent contrasts. Biological Conservation 86:
243-255
Wolf, C.M., Griffith, B., Reed, C. and Temple, S.A. 1996. Avian and mammalian translocations: update
and reanalysis of 1987 survey data. Conservation Biology 10: 1142-1154.
17
Useful Websites
IUCN/SSC Reintroduction Specialist Group
website
http://www.iucnsscrsg.org
Avian Translocation database
http://www.lpzoo.org/conservation5
science/projects/avian5reintroduction5and5
translocation5database
Oceania (Australia and New Zealand) Section of the
RSG
http://rsg5oceania.squarespace.com
IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group;
http://www.cbsg.org
IUCN/SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group;
http://www.issg.org
Center for Conservation and Research;
http://www.calgaryzoo.com/about5us/centre5
conservation5research
18
Small Mammal Survey Techniques
Introduction
Continuing the theme set at the 13th Annual Conservation Workshop (Seddon et. al., 2012) of including a
technical-focused component, small mammal survey techniques were identified as a regionally important
topic requiring attention. Given ‘small mammals’ size, largely ubiquitous distribution in the Arabian
Peninsula, and ease in working on, they are ideal focal species for attempts to understand the
biogeography of the region.
This section deals with a variety of different, but connected, topics related to the study of small mammals.
The information presented here has been drawn from diverse sources including published papers, books
and the personal experience of Ara Monadjem studying small mammals in Africa. The most important
references have been cited in the relevant sections of text (see below).
Aims of the Workshop
This was to train the delegates in how to set up small mammal surveys, the do’s and don’ts associated
with handling animals, and what can be achieved through such surveys. In addition, it was hoped to
stimulate coordinated regional surveys of small mammals to broaden our understanding of species
diversity, distribution and change in response to shifting environmental circumstances.
Discussion groups deliberated how to get greater coordination with regards small mammal studies and
collections in the Arabian Peninsula.
What are Small Mammals?
The term “small mammal” does not refer to a taxonomic unit and therefore there are no clear boundaries
defining this group. In fact, small mammals have been defined in numerous different ways by different
authors. One popular definition is any mammal weighing less than 5 kg. Another definition is less defined
and refers to any mammal smaller than, e.g., a fox. Depending on one’s objectives, such definitions may
be fine but they fail to clearly define the group (for example, what if the male weighs 5.3 kg and the
female 4.5 kg?). For the purposes of biodiversity surveys, a more useful definition would be to define
small mammals along taxonomic lines. For example, many mammalogists consider the following orders
to constitute small mammals: rodents, bats and “insectivores”. This definition will be used here.
Rodents
The order Rodentia constitutes the largest group of mammals with over 2,200 species recognized to date
(approximately 40% of all mammals). New species are continuing to be described and the final figure may
well exceed 3,000 within the next decade or two. This group includes the familiar rats and mice, but also
includes squirrels, procupines, canerats, gundis, hamsters, anomalurids, dormice, springhares, gerboas
and many other less known groups. A total of 49 species of rodents are recorded in “The Mammals of
Arabia” (Harrison and Bates, 1991), although undoubtedly this figure has since increased by the
discovery of new populations within Arabia and the description of new species. Rodents are perhaps the
most important group of wild mammals from a human perspective because of their economic, ecological
and health impacts. For example, some of the most virulent diseases are spread by rodents, such as
plaque and Lassa fever (Lalis et. al., 2012). Many species are recognized as major crop pests, affecting
pre- and post-harvest losses, and under certain conditions these losses may be up to 100%, but more
typically around 10-20%. Numerically, rodents constitute the largest populations of any terrestrial
vertebrate and as a result are the main prey of many carnivores including mammals, birds and reptiles.
Hence, rodents play an important role in the food chain.
19
Bats
Bats (order: Chiroptera) are the second most diverse group of mammals with > 1,100 species recorded
to date. Harrison and Bates (1991) record 48 species for the Arabian Peninsula but several new species
have been described from the region (e.g. Benda et al., 2009, 2011), taking the total to well over 50
species. Due to their nocturnal behaviour and powers of flight, bats are more difficult to study and hence
have received less attention than rodents. However, like rodents, bats impact humans directly by carrying
diseases such as the dreaded Ebola fever (Groseth et. al., 2007; Towner et. al., 2008), or may be
beneficial by being the primary predator of crop pests, pollinating tropical and subtropical trees and
distributing fruits (Jones et. al., 2009). For example, Boyles et. al., (2011) estimated that bats save
farmers more than US$3.7 billion/year in North America alone through the control of pest insects. The
role of bats has certainly been underestimated in the past.
“Insectivores”
This group of mammals was previously placed in the order Insectivora and included shrews, hedgehogs,
moles, golden moles, elephant shrews (sengis) and various other small insect-eating mammals. However,
recent molecular studies have clearly shown that this group is not natural and that these small mammals
were lumped together based only on convergent morphological features. In fact, elephant shrews and
golden moles are more closely related to elephants and hyraxes than they are to shrews and moles!
Within the context of Arabia, the only “insectivores” present are shrews and hedgehogs which are
currently placed in the order Soricomorpha but will be referred to as insectivores for the rest of this
section (due to familiarity with this term). In general, insectivores are far less diverse than either rodents or
bats, and are typically encountered less frequently as well. Their ecological roles and impacts on humans
are less clearly understood. Hence, increased effort in studying this group is suggested.
The remainder of this section on small mammals has been divided into six topics:
1. Capture and handling;
2. Preparation of specimens;
3. Identification;
4. Biodiversity surveys; and
5. Ecological surveys.
Capture and Handling
Before commencing this topic, it is important to bear in mind that small mammals carry a variety of
zoonoses - diseases that can be transmitted between species, inclusive of humans. In fact, some of the
worse diseases known to humans are carried or spread by small mammals, including plague, Ebola and
Lassa fever, and rabies (to mention just a few). Rabies has a 100% mortality rate, with Ebola close behind
(mortalities for this disease range between 50-90%). Therefore care needs to be taken when handling
small mammals. This is not the appropriate forum to discuss the health risks, therefore medical advice
should be sought if there is any doubt. However, one (simple) precaution that should be mandatory for all
small mammal biologists is rabies vaccination, which can be obtained from most hospitals or clinics.
Remember that follow up boosters are required (and may be given every 2-4 years depending on the titer
levels of the researcher). Note that transmission of diseases may not only be through a bite, but also
through coming in contact with saliva, urine, faeces or blood. Hence wearing latex gloves is also
recommended. Thicker gloves may be required when working with bats which can easily bite through the
latex gloves. Normal standard hygiene practices such as washing of hands after handling small mammals
is highly advised.
Standard capture techniques for small mammals include the use of a variety of specialized equipment,
but some may be captured by hand (such as bats in a hibernating roost; note that hibernating roosts
should not be visited unless an exceptional reason is forthcoming because such disturbance could result
in significant impacts, including mass mortality of the bats). The aim of this section is not to provide an
exhaustive list of capture techniques; instead it is to familiarize the reader with the most commonly used
techniques, including those that are most likely to be successful in the Arabian Peninsula.
20
Terrestrial small mammals
Rodents, especially the smaller rats and mice, are most commonly captured in one of two ways: live-
traps or break-back (kill) traps. There are numerous live-traps available on the market, but the fold-up
Sherman traps are probably the most widely used (Figure 15).
Kill traps (Figure 16), as the name suggests, capture the animal by killing it. It is generally preferable to
capture the animal alive, however some species are “trap shy” and do not enter Sherman (or other live)
traps. For such small mammals, the kill trap may be the only option available to the researcher. For
biodiversity surveys, where specimens should be collected (see Biodiversity Surveys section), the use of
kill traps might be appropriate. Kill traps are also useful for diet analysis of stomach contents (the
stomach contents of live-trapped animals invariably are filled with whatever bait was used to lure them
into the trap).
Figure 15. Example of a live trap. Figure 16. Example of a Victor (kill) trap used for capturing
terrestrial small mammals.
The use of appropriate bait is critical. Inappropriate bait may result in poor captures or no captures at all.
The right bait will vary geographically and from habitat to habitat. Furthermore, different species have
different dietary preferences. However, the combination of rolled oats and peanut butter (oats, sunflower
oil and raisins can also be used, especially for vegetarian species) usually works well in many savanna
and desert regions of the world. It may be worthwhile trying different baits in a preliminary study so as to
be sure of the efficacy of the bait that is finally selected for the study.
Insectivores, unlike rodents, rarely enter live-traps and are best captured using a pit-fall trap. The easiest
way to set up such a trap is to dig a normal bucket into the ground, ensuring that the lip of the bucket
does not protrude above the surface. Shrews, in particular, are easily captured in such bucket pit-fall
traps, especially if a drift fence connects two or more buckets (typically 10 buckets connected by drift
fences give good results in many habitats) (Figure 17).
21
Figure 17. Bucket pit-fall traps connected by drift fence.
The buckets do not need to be baited and the shrews typically fall in accidentally. Occasionally juvenile rodents are also captured in
these pitfall traps, but rarely are adult rodents captured in this way.
Volant (flying) small mammals
Small mammals that fly (typically bats, but also some rodents such as anomalures and flying squirrels)
can be captured with the use of mist nets, and bats can also be captured in harp traps. Mist nets are
effective for many species of bats, but it is important to purchase special bat nets. Avian (bird) mist nets
are usually coarser (due to thicker strands) which are easily detected by the bats through echolocation.
As a result, bird nets are efficient at catching only non-echolocating bats (such as fruit bats in the family
Pteropodidae). Even with the use of special bat mists, however, many bat species have the capability to
detect and avoid them. Hence, it is always preferable to survey bats using both mist nets and harp traps
(Figure 18 and 19). Both the mist net and harp trap catch the bats alive. A mist net should be checked
regularly (5-20 min intervals), both for the sake of the captured bat and the net (bats have sharp teeth!). In
contrast, a harp trap can be set and left overnight, although it is good practice to check the harp trap
several times between sunset and midnight before leaving it till dawn. Mist nets should be taken down as
soon as the trapping session is over and should never be left overnight.
Capture rates for bats are generally low, especially if nets and harp traps are placed randomly. However,
if the capture site is carefully selected (by determining possible flight paths or placing nets near
drinking/feeding sites or roosts, etc) capture rates can be greatly increased. Capturing bats in the roost
(using a hand net) is also a commonly used and effective technique.
Figure 18. Mist net. Figure 19. Harp trap.
Harp trap set in a natural pathway used by foraging bats within
a forest; the bats can be seen as black dots in the white
collecting bag. A harp trap can be left overnight without any
damage to the trap or to the captured bat.
Mist net erected between metal or wooden poles and held
tight by guy ropes. A mist net needs to be attended to
continuously whilst it is erect.
22
Handling of small mammals
Once an animal has been captured, it will usually need to be handled (at the very least to determine sex
and age, and to measure the animal before releasing it). If the animal is alive, handling will stress it and
might compromise health and survival after release. It is therefore critical to try to reduce this stress as
much as possible by handling the animal gently (to prevent internal injuries) and to “process” it as quickly
as possible. Do not take unnecessary measurements if they are unlikely ever to be used. Rather take a
few standard measurements, unless you have special reasons to take more. For terrestrial small
mammals, mass and hindfoot length are useful measurements (Figure 20). If possible also take body
length (tip of snout to anus) and tail length (anus to tip of tail), but these measurements require two
people. For bats, take mass and forearm length (Figure 20). It is also good practice to photograph your
study animals, especially when you are starting out your study and you are not always 100% sure of
species identification.
Figure 20. Standard measurements for small mammals.
Adapted from Hoffmann et al 2010; http://www.bio.bris.ac.uk/research/bats/britishbats/batpages.
Remember that small mammals feel pain in a similar way to humans: do not inflict unnecessary pain and
suffering. There is no reason to cause physical pain if the animal is handled carefully. Another way to
reduce suffering is to check your traps regularly. Traps are typically set and baited in the late afternoon
and checked early in the morning. In hot climates (as in much of Arabia), ensure that you have checked
all your traps before the sun has become too hot (start checking at first light before sunrise). In cold
climates, such as on top of mountains, place cotton wool inside the trap for the animal to curl up in.
Even when the animal needs to be sacrificed, ensure that the animal is killed humanely, and preferably kill
it as soon as possible. If the animal needs to be kept alive for a few hours (e.g. for behavioural
observations), make sure that it has a comfortable cage with water and food provided.
Live rodents are typically held by the scruff of the neck. Make sure you have a tight grip otherwise the
rodent may be able to turn around and bite your finger. The skin here is tough in most rodents however in
some species (such as the tropical African genus Lophuromys) it tears easily and such species cannot be
held in this way. Bats and shrews can be held by the scruff of the neck, but because they are predators
and have sharp teeth it is advisable to rather handle them with a strong (thick) glove into which they can
bite without harming you.
Once you have processed your animal, release it gently. Do not throw a rodent onto the ground; rather
release it by placing it gently on the ground. Similarly, do not throw a bat into the air; instead allow the bat
to decide when to fly off.
Preparation of Specimens
Occasionally specimens are needed as vouchers (to provide direct evidence that a particular species
occurs at a particular locality) or for verification of species identity (see section on Identification). These
specimens need to be killed. Chloroform has been a standard method for killing small mammals for
decades, but is now considered unethical. Perhaps the most humane method for killing the smaller small
mammals (around 5-25 g) is by cervical dislocation, which is a fancy way of saying “breaking the neck”.
23
Thoracic compression is also used for rodents, although it takes longer (and therefore might be more
painful for the animal) than cervical dislocation. Euthanasia by the appropriate drug is also ethically
acceptable. If you are unsure of which method to use, first speak to a trained veterinarian who should be
able to advise you.
Identification
Small mammals are notoriously difficult to identify. Not only is this group incredibly diverse, new species
are continuously being described. For example, within a 12 month period, six new species of bats were
described by the same researchers in tropical Africa (Taylor et. al., 2012; Monadjem et. al., 2013a, b).
Even experts rarely are willing to give definitive identifications without careful examination of a specimen
(which usually includes examination of the skull and teeth; something not yet possible on a living animal).
Some species of small mammals are morphologically indistinguishable, but are genetically highly
divergent to the extent that they cannot interbreed. These species can only be identified with certainty
using karyological or molecular techniques. Hence, tissue samples should always be collected when
sacrificing a specimen. All tissue within an animal has the same DNA so it should not make a difference
where the tissue comes from, but a small piece of muscle is generally recommended. In bats, the
pectoral muscles (that power the wings) are easily sampled in a specimen. In rodents and insectivores,
muscles from around the forearm or chest are also fine. If the animal is being released alive, then tissue
sampling must have minimal impact. In bats, a small piece of the wing membrane can be taken with a
biopsy punch; ensuring that no veins or arteries are punctured in the process. In rodents and
insectivores, the very tip of the tail can be snipped off (the tail is often damaged or broken off in older
individuals anyway). It is vitally important that all tissue samples are collected off the fresh specimen (i.e.
before it has been placed in formalin) and put into separate vials of 96% ethanol, and labelled accurately.
The specimen can then be placed in formalin to be fixed or skinned and stuffed before it is sent to an
appropriate institution.
It is highly advisable to deposit all your specimens in internationally recognized public institutions such as
national museums. In this way, the curator of the mammals section of the museum can verify your
identifications, and the specimens will be available to any researcher who would like to examine them in
the future. Small mammals in museum collections are typically either as “dry” (i.e. stuffed skins) or “wet”
(i.e. in formalin/alcohol) specimens (Figure 21). It is good practice to communicate with the museum
before you start your survey work since the museum may provide useful practical information regarding
the collection of specimens.
Figure 21. Examples of specimen preservation.
Dry specimen of skin (left), and skull (middle). Wet specimens are typically either in formalin or ethanol and kept in bottles (right).
24
Biodiversity Surveys
Biodiversity surveys function to provide basic and baseline information on the presence of plant and
animal species at a specific location. Such surveys may be organized by an institution (such as a
museum) or an individual researcher. However, increasingly biodiversity surveys are becoming an integral
component of Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and are often funded by the private sector.
Finally, governments (and large global conservation NGOs) may commission such surveys particularly in
poorly known areas suspected to have high biodiversity value. Small mammals are often a specific target
for such biodiversity surveys, or they may fall under the broad remit of “mammals”.
The goals of such surveys are typically to find out what species occur in the study site, and perhaps
habitat requirements and threats facing their populations might be secondary goals. Therefore, the aim is
more about finding out what is there, rather than ecological details such as population dynamics, etc.
Hence your survey design should be geared towards this. For example, when trapping using live- or kill-
traps, set them out in trap lines (as opposed to grids; see Ecological Surveys). Basically, put your traps in
a single line (usually with 20-50 traps per line) 5-10 m apart and crossing through as many habitats as
possible. For example, if there is a swamp at your site, set your traps to cross through the swamp and
into the grassland or woodland on the other side. This maximizes your chances of trapping different
species. Use both types of traps at each trap location so that you also capture trap shy species.
Make sure that you have all the necessary equipment with you before you travel. Essential equipment will
include all your traps (see Capture and Handling), a dissecting kit (which should at least include sharp
scissors, scalpels, and a biopsy punch), 96% (or stronger) ethanol, formalin, collecting jars/bottles (to
place specimens in), vials (for tissue samples), cloth holding bags (for live animals before they are
processed), labels (each specimen must have a label attached with at least a specimen number, the date
and location on it), scales for weighing, calipers and ruler for measuring, camera (for photographing
specimens and habitats), field guides and keys to identification. The best guide currently available for
Arabian mammals is the book “The Mammals of Arabia” by Harrison and Bates (1991), but it is somewhat
out of date and does not include recent additions or descriptions of new species. However, it is still an
excellent starting point for any work on Arabian mammals.
A question that is often asked regarding biodiversity surveys is whether the survey was complete. This is
an incredibly important question. How do we know whether a survey was effective in recording all (or
most) of the species present in an area? Without known the “level of completeness”, the value of a survey
is brought into question. There is no easy answer to this question. However, there is a simple statistical
tool that can assist us to shed light on this; it is called a species accumulation curve (Figure 22). When a
survey starts (e.g. on the first day), all the species captured will be new to the study. On the second day,
there may be some repeat captures of species recorded on the first day, along with other species new to
the study. After a certain amount of time (i.e. effort), the number of new species being added to the list
starts to diminish until eventually all the species have been captured. This is what the species
accumulation curve shows. Based on these data, it is possible to estimate the “true” species richness at
a site. A useful program that allows such analyses is EstimateS (http://viceroy.eeb.uconn.edu/estimates/)
can be downloaded freely from the internet.
Another useful tool for biodiversity surveys is the IUCN Red Data List website (www.iucnredlist.org). This
site provides the latest IUCN global assessments for most vertebrates (including all mammals and birds),
as well as many invertebrates and plants. Knowing that you have threatened species present in your site
may provide additional justification for protecting the site, or at least mitigating for those threatened
species.
25
Figure 22. A species accumulation curve for a biodiversity survey of bats at Mt Nimba, West Africa.
The central (blue) line shows the accumulation curve (based on the Mao Tau method), the lines above and below it are the 95%
confidence intervals. The slope of the curve is slowly flattening off but the asymptote has not yet been reached and therefore we
can conclude that not all the bat species of this site were captured during this study (and furthermore, we can predict exactly how
many species were overlooked).
Ecological Surveys
Biodiversity surveys are useful for determining which species are present at a particular site. By
combining data from multiple surveys, it is possible to plot the distribution of species across a larger
geographic area (such as the Arabian Peninsula). Such maps are critical for effective conservation
planning.
However, sometimes more detailed ecological information might be needed. In such situations, we need
to employ other techniques. The field of ecological methods is enormous and new techniques are being
introduced every year. The purpose of this next section is not to provide a summary of all the available
techniques. Rather, it is to introduce the reader to some of the new (or relatively new) techniques that are
being used on small mammals.
Before we discuss these new techniques it is worthwhile comparing trapping methods for biodiversity
surveys (trap lines) with those commonly used in ecological studies (trap grids). As mentioned earlier, trap
lines are very effective at capturing a greater diversity of different species, but they are of limited use in
providing other types of ecological information such as population estimates. However, placing traps in a
grid (Figure 23) allows such analyses.
Number'of'species'
Number'of'individuals'
Sobs!(Mao!Tau)!
Sobs!95%!CI!Lower!
Bound!
26
Figure 23. The difference between a trap line and trap grid.
A trap line consists of traps (shown in white dots) set out in a straight line: a trap grid is when traps are set out in a square
formation. Trap lines cover more habitat (for the same number of traps), but grids allow the estimation of population size and other
ecological analyses.
The five techniques that will be discussed here are:
1. Tagging;
2. Molecular analysis of diet;
3. Acoustic surveys (bats);
4. Fluorescent tracking; and
5. Rhodamine B.
There are numerous other relevant techniques that will not be covered here. Perhaps the most useful of
these are: radio-tracking which was covered in detail in the Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conservation
Workshop for the Biodiversity of Arabia (Seddon et. al., 2013); camera trapping which was covered in
detail in the Proceedings of the 13th Annual Conservation Workshop for the Biodiversity of Arabia (Seddon
et. al., 2012); spot-light surveys; hair trapping; and spoor tunnels/tracking tiles.
Tagging
Tagging of small mammals is not a novel technique, but is included here because it is so commonly used
and is critical to most ecological studies and analyses. For certain ecological analyses, it is essential to be
able to identify and separate individual small mammals from each other. This is only possible if the
animals carry some unique marking (such as stripes on a zebra) or they are given such a mark. Rodents
and insectivores were, in the past, marked by toe-clipping. This technique is currently considered
unethical and should not be used to mark terrestrial small mammals. An alternative, ethically acceptable,
method is ear tagging. Metal ear tags, with unique numbers engraved on them, are punched through the
ear using a special applicator (Figure 24).
27
Figure 24. Small mammal ear tags and applicators.
A rat with an ear tag (left). The ear tags (right, above) and the ear tag applicator (right, bottom).
Figure 25. A bat with a band on its right forearm.
Bats can be fitted with specially designed and
manufactured bat bands that are fitted over the
forearm (Figure 25). These bands also have a
unique number engraved on them. It is
important to note that these are not the same
as bird rings (or bands). A bird ring fitted over
the forearm of a bat will cut through the wing
membrane and cause injury. Bat bands are
specifically designed to avoid this. Use only
proper bat bands on bats.
Uniquely identified individuals can be used in a
variety of different ecological studies including
the estimation of survival, population dynamics
and individual movements.
Molecular analysis of diet
Diet studies have been conducted on small mammals for decades. The traditional method was stomach
content analysis, which involves sacrificing the animal and then examining its stomach contents under a
microscope. Faecal pellet analysis, by comparison, is non-destructive and can be conducted without
harming (or even capturing) the animal. Both these methods suffer from the problem of not being able to
identify digested (or partly digested) remains. Hence, many dietary studies of small mammals only refer to
very broad food categories such as “insects”, “herbage” or “seeds”. Some studies have managed to go
further and identify insects down to order level (e.g. beetles, flies and moths).
28
Figure 26. Collection of bat faeces for dietary analysis.
To overcome this problem, and identify
prey remains down to species level, one
can take advantage of molecular
techniques that are becoming cheaper
and quicker by the year. The molecular
analysis of diet in small mammals was
only very recently development (Clare et.
al., 2009; Bohmann et. al., 2011), but is
now becoming routine. It still requires the
use of a highly specialized laboratory
with skilled technicians and expensive
reagents. However, these obstacles can
usually be overcome by partnering with
an appropriate institution (many
European and North American
universities and laboratories are eager to
collaborate with researchers from
species-rich but under-surveyed African
and Asian environments).
As far as the field-work is concerned, all that needs to be done is to collect uncontaminated (i.e. not
touched by human tissue) faecal material and place them in vials (Figure 26). Reagents added to the
faecal material will depend on the molecular technique to be employed. Some techniques only require
that you add dehydrating salts to the vial and seal it, and send it off to the laboratory for analysis.
Acoustic surveys and bat detectors
Most bats navigate using sonar; referred to as “echolocation”. This allows the bat to perceive its
environment through its ears rather than its eyes (Figure 27). Echolocation calls tend to be species
specific. By recording these echolocation calls using bat detectors, it is possible to identify species
present in an area without having to capture them. However, due to significant variation within species
and overlap between species this is not as easy as it sounds. In areas or habitats that support fewer bat
species (such as temperate or desert zones) it may be possible to conduct relatively comprehensive
acoustic surveys. The two essential items are: 1) a suitable bat detector such as Anabat (a discussion of
the pros and cons of the various bat detectors will not be attempted here); and 2) a complete
echolocation call library of the bats present (or expected) in the region. A recent review of echolocation in
bats, with a focus on African bats is provided in Monadjem et. al., (2010).
A bat detector, such as Anabat (Figure 28), is designed to recognize and record echolocation calls of
bats, which are typically at frequencies well above the audible range in humans (ca. 18 kHz is the highest
that humans can hear).
The calls recorded by bat detectors can be graphically presented as sonograms or spectrograms (Figure
29). Different species often have different sonograms, hence allowing species identification through
acoustic monitoring.
Bat faeces (the dark spots on the white board on the left of the
photograph) were collected beneath a large roost of free-tailed bats by
placing out a white board covered with cling-film. Individual pellets were
then collected and stored in a vial with dehydrating salts (being done by
the person in the photograph).
29
Figure 27. Bats use echolocation to perceive their environment. Figure 28. The SD II Anabat bat
detector.
Figure 29. Sonogram.
The situation throughout most of the
Arabian Peninsula is probably similar
to that of Sub-Saharan Africa where
acoustic surveys are realistically
possible at only a handful of localities,
mostly due to the lack of
comprehensive call libraries (which
are essential as a comparative
reference resource). Hence, at this
stage, the focus in the Arabian
Peninsula should probably be
towards developing local call libraries.
A sound is emitted from the bat that bounces off any obstruction (such as
prey or vegetation) in its path. The returning echo is received by the ears and
analysed by the brain to create a “picture” of its environment (much in the
same way that we see with our yes, bats “see” with their ears). Not all bats
are capable of echolocation, such as most fruit bats (Family Pteropodidae).
The SD II Anabat bat detector is a
“frequency division” device that is popular
with bat ecologists wishing to survey bat
activity. It can also be used to cond uct
acoustic surveys, but this is only po ssible in
regions wher e a co mplete bat call library is
available (to be used as a reference to
compare the recorded calls against and
hence allowing identification of the calls).
Calls recorded by bat detectors can be viewed as sonograms (or
alternatively called spectrograms). This is a special kind of graph that
showing frequency of the call on the vertical axis and time on the
horizontal axis. The calls of 4 different species of bats are shown in the
above sonogram, illustrating the distinctness of each species.
30
Fluorescent tracking
Fluorescent powders can be purchased commercially and then used to dust a captured animal that will
then glow in the dark (but which is only visible under UV light) (Figure 30). The powder tends to drop off
the animal as it moves about, also illuminating the path that the animal has moved on. This is a useful
technique for following animals that are too small to be fitted with radio-transmitters or the resources are
not available for radio-tracking. Alternatively, it is very useful for tracking the exact path moved by an
animal (as opposed to getting fixes that may be many minutes or hours apart when radio-tracking). But a
constraint of this method is that the dust usually falls off within the first night (or day) of release, so an
animal cannot be followed for long. It has been successfully used to quantify the microhabitat use of
certain species such as the African pygmy mouse (Mus minutoides) (Long et. al., 2013).
Figure 30. Fluorescent powders.
Fluorescent powders can be purchased commercially and need UV light in order to be detected in the dark (left). The tracks of a
mouse (right) that had been dusted as seen through UV light.
Rhodamine B biomarker
Rhodamine B is a non-toxic dye that has been used as biomarker. It can be fed to an animal (without
having to capture it) and then used to identify that animal if it is trapped in the future. Rhodamine B can
be purchased commercially (Figure 31) and mixed with foods normally used as bait (such as rolled oats
and peanut butter). It can then be left out at a specific location where rodents are predicted to be visiting
(such as a storeroom). Trapping at different distances from this storeroom about 5-7 days after placing of
the Rhodamine B bait may result in the capture of some of the rodents that visited the storeroom. By
plucking two whiskers from each animal (which can then be released unharmed), it is possible to detect
whether the animal had ingested Rhodamine B (and therefore, whether it had entered the storeroom) by
examining the whiskers under a fluorescent microscope. Rhodamine B was successfully used to
characterize the interaction between alien invasive rats (Rattus spp.) and indigenous mice (Mastomys
spp.) with respect to homes in rural Swaziland, without having to capture mice within homes (Monadjem
et. al., 2011).
31
Figure 31. Rhodamine B.
Small Mammals in the Arabian Peninsula
Distribution maps (particularly of threatened species) play a key role in the development of conservation
action plans and the identification of protected area networks. However, in order for such maps to be
useful, they need to accurately portray the actual distribution of the species considered in the analysis. At
the end of the day, the better surveyed a region is, the more accurate will be the maps that are derived
from those surveys.
The status of mammals in the Arabian Peninsula was last reviewed by Harrison and Bates (1991). In this
book, the authors present distribution maps for each species. However, the authors themselves admit
that their maps are incomplete and called for further surveys. Almost a quarter of a century has passed
since the publication of that book, and several new species have been described since then. Also, some
species may have contracted or expanded their range (perhaps due to climate change). As a result, it
may be worth considering the development of a small mammal survey for the Arabian Peninsula. Perhaps
the survey should not be restricted to just small mammals, and should include all mammals? This
purpose of this section is to highlight some of the challenges associated with conducting such a survey,
and to provide some initial guidance and pointers. Recommendations from the workshop are noted as
bullets in the sections below.
1 Set the objectives
Clearly define what the objectives of such a survey are to be at the outset. This will largely answer many
of the other considerations listed below and will be an essential requirement in any funding application.
! Suggested an initial focus on small carnivores as a priority although ideally all small mammals should
be covered.
! Aim to collate the information for a full Red List assessment of the small mammals in 2-3 years.
! Collate all information per site to update the Harrison and Bates, 1991 publication/distribution maps.
2 Identify the survey area
The first consideration would be to define the geographical scope of the study. What exactly is meant by
the “Arabian Peninsula”? This is important because it focuses attention on the study at hand, and
prevents wasting energy and resources. However, by defining the boundaries of your geographical area,
you are not restricting yourself to that area; the boundaries can be shifted in the future as needs be.
! Need a standard recording grid for the Arabian Peninsula such as that used by the Arabian Breeding
Bird Atlas (ABBA).
Rhodamine B can be purchased commercially (left). Once it has been ingested by an animal,
Rhodamine B, which is completely non-toxic, will work its way into the hair of the animal where it can
be viewed using a fluorescent microscope (right).
32
3 Who drives this process?
Will it be by a committee (which has the advantage of transparency, but the disadvantage of bureaucratic
inertia)? Or an institution or an individual? Projects driven by committed and credible individuals are often
the most successful ones.
! The need for an institutional base for this regional information was identified as a priority.
! Dr. Eitimad Hashim Abdel Rahman Ahmed, Department of Biology, Hail University, Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia (Mobile: +966 564127766; Email: e.hashim2006@gmail.com) volunteered to start a small
mammal network – see http://networkarabianmammals.blogspot.com/. The objective was to
understand who was working on small mammals in the region, what they were doing, share any
interesting information, upcoming events, and any comments.
4 Select species/groups to survey
Is it to be a subset of mammals (e.g. rodents, small carnivores) or all mammals? If a subset, then what
specific groups are being included?
! Suggested an initial focus on small carnivores as a priority worth investigating.
5 Methods to use
Will the survey methods be standardized and all participants will be expected to conform to these? Or will
you allow different individuals/institutions to survey with independent methods, but simply coordinate the
locations that will be surveyed (to avoid duplicating effort)? Allowing for researchers to act independently
usually is more acceptable and may result in better buy-in.
! Use a standard recording grid for the Arabian Peninsula. Suggested use the Arabian Breeding Bird
Atlas (ABBA) that uses half-degree grid squares (i.e. about 1, 142 squares).
! Through a combination of presence only information and species distribution modeling (using the
MAXTENT software) one would be able to identify gaps for focused surveys. Area selection would be
further stratified using the AEGEDI habitat map overlay for the Arabian Peninsula.
! As a start it was suggested that all working on mammals or who have knowledge of their distribution
and status should be called together at one of the Sharjah meetings to get the process running of
collating the information. As a start it may be worth-while to commence with an updated checklist and
map for the different species building on the Harrison and Bates, 1991.
6 Data storage
For effective and efficient use of the data, it will need to be entered into a central database. Where will this
database be housed? Who will be responsible for its upkeep and maintenance? How will different
researchers and organizations access this database (either to enter data or retrieve data)?
! Building on the initiative already started by Dr. Eitimad Ahmed, identify a potential site or sites for
storage of such information. This database should ideally start small and simple format (Excel) and
grow progressively as required.
! Suggested this could be linked via the planned Sharjah website.
7 Storage and curation of specimens
Where will the voucher specimens be deposited? Choose an institution (preferably a museum or
museums) that is within the Arabian Peninsula and that is interested to collaborate on this project. These
specimens will form the source of the distribution maps that are eventually produced, and therefore must
be accessible to all researchers (both for verification of identifications and for comparative material).
! This should logically flow from knowledge of whose studying small mammals and where specimens
are stored. Developing the network first, then an assessment of what’s in the collections and their
state can be done and shared.
8 Collaborator’s list
Compile a list of interested collaborators. Who within and beyond the Arabian Peninsula is interested in
contributing to this project? Make this group as inclusive as possible; some people on the list may never
33
contribute anything but it is better to have them included as one never knows what will happen in the
future. Some people may take several years to find funding or enthusiasm!
! See comments made in Section 3 above.
9 Advisors
It might be worth having one or more independent advisors that are not directly involved in the day-to-
day workings of the project, but that have the experience to provide advice and guidance on broader
issues.
10 Publish the results
It is critically important to publish the information, ideally in a peer reviewed journal, as it facilitates the
distribution of the information, enhances the status of the project and the region in the international
scientific community.
! As part of the small mammal network – recent papers could be shared.
Literature Cited and Key Papers
Benda, P., Reiter, A., Al-Jumaily, M.M., Nasher, A.K. and Hulva, P. 2009. A new species of mouse-tailed
bat (Chiroptera: Rhinopomatidae: Rhinopoma) from Yemen. Journal of the National Museum
(Prague), Natural History Series 177: 53-68.
Benda, P., Al-Jumaily, M.M., Reiter, A. and Nasher, A.K. 2011. Noteworthy records of bats from Yemen
with description of new species from Socotra. Hystrix Italian Journal of Mammalogy 22: 23-56.
Bohmann, K., Monadjem, A., Noer, C.L., Rasmussen, M., Zeale, M.R.K., Clare, E., Jones, G., Willerslev,
E. and Gilbert, M.T.P. 2011. Molecular diet analysis of two African free-tailed bats (Molossidae)
using high throughput sequencing. PlosONE 6(6): e21441.
Boyles, J.G., Cryan, P.M., McCracken, G.F. and Kunz, T.H. 2011. Economic importance of bats in
agriculture. Science 322: 41-42.
Clare, E.L., Fraser, E.E., Braid, H.E., Fenton, B.M. and Hebert, P.D.N. 2009. Species on the menu of a
generalist predator, the eastern red bat (Lasiurus borealis): using a molecular approach to detect
arthropod prey. Molecular Ecology 18: 2532–2542.
Groseth, A., Feldmann, H. and Strong, J. E. 2007. The ecology of Ebola virus. Trends in Microbioolgy 15
(9): 408–416
Harrison, D.L. and Bates, P.J.J. 1991. The Mammals of Arabia. Harrison Zoological Museum, Sevenoaks,
UK.
Hoffmann, A, Decher, J., Rovero, F., Schaer, J., and Voight, C. 2010. Chapter 19: Field Methods and
Techniques for Monitoring Mammals. In Volume 8 - Manual on Field Recording Techniques and
Protocols for All Taxa Biodiversity Inventories (Ed.) Eymann J., Degreef, J., Häuser, C., Monje,
J.C., Samyn, Y. and Spiegel, D.V., part 1: i-iv, 1-330; part 2: i-iv: 331-653.
Jones, G., Jacobs, D., Kunz, T.H., Willig, M.R. and Racey, P.A. 2009. Carpe noctem: the importance of
bats as bioindicators. Endangered Species Research 8: 93-115.
Lalis, A., Leblois, R., Lecompte, E., Denys, C., ter Meulen, J. and Wirth, T. 2012. The impact of human
conflict on the genetics of Mastomys natalensis and Lassa virus in West Africa. PlosONE 7(5):
e37068.
Long, A.K., Bailey, K., Greene, D.U., Tye, C., Parr, C., Lepage, H.K., Gielow, K.H., Monadjem, A. and
McCleery, R.A. 2013. Multi-scale habitat selection of Mus minutoides in the Lowveld of
Swaziland. African Journal of Ecology 51: 493-500.
Monadjem, A. Taylor, P.J., Schoeman, M.C. and Cotterill, F.P.D. 2010. The bats of southern and central
Africa: a biogeographic and taxonomic synthesis. Wits University Press, Johannesburg.
34
Monadjem, A., Mahlaba, T.A., Dlamini, N., Eiseb, S.J., Belmain, S.R., Mulungu, L.S., Massawe, A.W.,
Makundi, R.H., Mohr, K. and Taylor, P.J. 2011. Impact of crop cycle on movement patterns of
pest rodent species between fields and houses in Africa. Wildlife Research 38: 603-609.
Monadjem, A., Goodman, S.M., Stanley, W.T. and Appleton, B. 2013a. A cryptic new species of
Miniopterus from south-eastern Africa based on molecular and morphological characters.
Zootaxa 3746: 123-142.
Monadjem, A., Richards, L., Taylor, P.J. and Stoffberg, S. 2013b. High diversity of pipistrelloid bats
(Vespertilionidae: Hypsugo, Neoromicia and Pipistrellus) in a West African rainforest with the
description of a new species. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 167: 191-207.
Seddon, P.J., Knight, M. H. and Budd, K. 2012. 13th Annual Conservation Workshop for the Biodiversity
of Arabia: Engaging Local Communities and Protected Area Zonation. Environment and
Protected Areas Authority (EPAA). Government of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. 49pp
Seddon, P.J., Knight, M. H. and Budd, K. 2013. 14th Annual Conservation Workshop for the Biodiversity
of Arabia: Bioregional Planning, Species Action Planning and Wildlife Tracking. Environment and
Protected Areas Authority (EPAA). Government of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates. 38pp.
Taylor, P.J., Stoffberg, S., Monadjem, A., Schoeman, M.C., Bayliss, J. and Cotterill, F.P.D. 2012. Four
new bat species (Rhinolophus hildebrandtii complex) reflect Plio-Pleistocene divergence of
dwarfs and giants across an Afromontane archipelago. PlosONE 7(9): e41744
Towner, J., Sealy, T., Khristova, M.L., Albariño, C.G., Conlan, S., Reeder, S.A., Quan, P.L., Lipkin, W.I.,
Downing, R., Tappero, J.W., Okware, S., Lutwama J., Bakamutumaho B., Kayiwa J., Comer,
J.A., Rollin, P.E., Ksiazek, T.G. and Nichol, S.T. 2008. Newly discovered Ebola virus associated
with hemorrhagic fever outbreak in Uganda. PlosPATHOGENS 4(11): e1000212
35
Captive Carnivore Care
Introduction
This was the first year where a veterinary theme was added to the usual biodiversity themes presented
annually. The reason for this is the increasing number of wild and exotic animals in the care of
veterinarians with different needs to the regular animal populations serviced by them. We decided to
focus on carnivores as these present some unique challenges in the field of veterinary science and
captive care, with a view to expanding the themes to cover all taxa and their associated challenges.
Secondly we feel it is important that there must be a closer working relationship between veterinarians
and other wildlife professionals. This closer working relationship is needed not only to expose
veterinarians to the bigger picture of conservation, but also to help the other wildlife professionals to
understand the value a veterinarian may add to such a team.
It is our hope that there may well be several interactive sessions in the future to strengthen this
relationship.
This workshop was mainly conducted through formal lectures. There was one session that was more
interactive in the lecture room and lastly a remote injection practical was held where everyone had the
opportunity to use a variety of tele-injection systems.
Overview of Legal Regulations
Since the majority of these predators are exotic to the region, we asked the Ministry of Environment and
Water (MOEW) to give us an overview of the laws and regulations governing the keeping of carnivores,
especially large carnivores in captivity.
We were shown that the UAE has several laws and ministerial resolutions on a Federal level in place to
deal with animal and wildlife matters. These are:
A Legislation dealing with import and export of animals
Federal Law no. 6/1979 and its amendments concerning veterinary Quarantine.
Ministerial resolution no. 460/2001 concerning the by –law of Veterinary Quarantine of GCC
Countries.
Several Ministerial resolutions regulate the import and export on Live animals and animals
products.
B Legislations regulate Animal Health
Federal Law no. 10/2002 concerning practicing the Veterinary medicine Profession
Federal Law no. 8/2013 concerning the protection of Animal diseases
Ministerial resolution no. 170/2003 concerning the By –law of practicing the Veterinary medicine
Profession
Several Ministerial resolutions regulate the import and export on Live animals and animals
products
C Legislations regulate Animal welfare
Federal Law no. 16/2007 concerning Animal Welfare
Ministerial resolution no. 384/2008 concerning the By –law of Animal Welfare
Several Ministerial resolutions regulate the Animal Welfare
36
D Legislations regulate Wild life
Federal Law no. 11/2002 concerning the regulation and monitoring of international trade for
endangered species.
Ministerial council resolution no. 22/2003 concerning the By –law of Federal Law no. 11/2002
concerning the regulation and monitoring of international trade for endangered species.
Federal Law no. 24/1999 concerning Environment protection and development and its
amendment.
Ministerial resolution No. 346/2012 concerning the importation of wild animals and its
amendment.
Several Ministerial resolutions and instructions regulate the import and export on Live animals
and animals products.
From the meeting there was a feeling that most of these laws/ministerial resolutions were not visible in
everyday practice and that the implementation of them may not be as effective as they could be.
Some discussion took place regarding similar laws in the rest of the region, however very little information
is available. We would propose that a specific meeting in future should be convened with stakeholders of
the region participating in a discussion to ultimately bring fruition to the mission of the MOEW:
We strive towards integrated management For Environment Ecosystem and Natural resources to realize
Green Economy for the present and future generations
The Composition and Application of F10 Disinfectant
This talk focused on the need for biosecurity and specifically all the factors that make F10 (new age
quaternary ammonium compound) a valuable partner for any practice/facility.
Facility Planning
The main principles of planning a facility were dealt with. These are not restricted to the facility/cage
where the animal will be kept, but the entire facility. During this planning the flow of traffic in and out of the
facility should be considered as well as the flow of people within the facility. Enrichment within the
displays was touched on as this is a very important aspect of modern facilities.
Perimeter fences/walls were emphasized as a secure barrier to protect these collections from free
ranging animals.
Biosecurity
Following on from the F10 talk, practical implementation of biosecurity measures within facilities were
discussed. A variety of products to disinfect cages, utensils, vehicles etc was discussed. Hand washing
and hand sanitisation as an important measure to control human to animal transmission of diseases and
vice versa was emphasized.
Nutrition (including enrichment)
Wild and exotic carnivores have unique nutritional requirements that are often poorly understood by both
veterinarians and the general public. Nutritional needs in various exotic carnivore groups were discussed,
and some of the more common metabolic derangements due to nutritional deficiencies were highlighted.
The importance of enrichment in the lives of captive housed wild animals is well known yet poorly
implemented. Enrichment techniques using diet as the enrichment source were explained and easy to
use examples were presented to the delegates to implement in their collections.
37
Primary Healthcare
Captive populations are at risk of infectious diseases and parasites. This can be due to intensification
and/or the close proximity to domestic animals and humans.
Carnivores like lions especially are at risk of contracting canine distemper virus and the difficulty in finding
an appropriate vaccination protocol was discussed. These complications re-iterated the need for
appropriate biosecurity measures to be in place at facilities as well as enforced.
Medical Husbandry Training
This is a growing science within zoological collections around the world. Medical husbandry training is a
great tool in enrichment programs and also provides safer, stress-free alternatives to common veterinary
diagnostic procedures in the management of wildlife diseases. The ability to interact with animals in a
stress free manner, without customary immobilization, during sample collection reduces the risk of losses
due to anesthesia, saves time and expense and reduces stress to both animal and the veterinary team.
Successful medical training also provides improved diagnostic ability in patients that are poor anaesthetic
risk or that require ongoing monitoring. Not to be overlooked are the positive benefits gained in accurately
administering medications in a trained and accessible animal.
Behavioural Enrichment (including stress and welfare)
As with medical husbandry training, the importance of behavioural enrichment in the health and well
being of all animals housed in captivity and the field has become an integral part of managing captive
collections of all species. This talk focused specifically on enrichment on carnivore species and compared
the positive impact that enrichment has with some of the negative consequences that are encountered
where inadequate enrichment is offered. In addition to introducing the science behind enrichment
research, practical methods of recognizing stress indicators in the animals were discussed along with
simple and inexpensive techniques that can be implemented in any collection. The presentations were re-
enforced with a practical session giving participants an opportunity to implement and discuss some the
concepts covered.
Dental Health Care
Captive predators do suffer from dental disease. These are mainly tooth fractures and as these conditions
are painful should be addressed when seen. Apart from dental disease some other oral disorders like
periodontitis and oral tumours were also discussed.
Viral and Bacterial Diseases
Various viral and bacterial diseases can be devastating for any captive collections. Discussions around
them took place and especially in cheetahs, feline infectious peritonitis seems to be of concern in the
region. This disease is caused by a coronavirus and it is very difficult to diagnose the condition, with
confidence, without a post mortem.
Biosecurity measures and quarantine of new animals into a facility was emphasized.
Fungi and Parasites of Captive Carnivores
Very little is known of the viruses and parasites that affect carnivores in the region. Some common fungi
and parasites were discussed but the need for an epidemiological study to determine these species for
the region was emphasized.
38
Metabolic Diseases
This presentation examined metabolic diseases due to nutritional deficiencies in more detail and
explained the pathological processes occurring in various metabolic diseases as well as basic treatment
approaches.
Neoplasia
Wild animals like domestic animals suffer from a variety of neoplasia. The presentation was based on
published information on tumours in captive carnivores. Very little information is available regionally and
discussions took place on how to diagnose tumours and which samples to take. A concern was
expressed that the support from the laboratories are not as reliable as what it could be throughout the
region.
Pain Control
Analgesia in carnivores needs to look at a more balanced approach, incorporating not only the systemic
but also local routes. Drugs available differ within the region and this may impact on animal welfare when
specific drugs are not available. Standardised regulations regarding the use of for instance opioids should
be drafted within the region, but it also appears as if within the Emirates the availability of these drugs is
differently regulated.
The veterinary fraternity should approach the regulatory bodies and clearly discuss the need for these
kinds of drugs and work with government to incorporate a reliable and safe record keeping mechanism.
Anaesthesia in Captive Carnivores
A very practical approach to anaesthetizing wild and captive carnivores was presented. The audience
was shown that the final induction of anaesthesia can be as safe as the planning that went into the
procedure if well considered. The type of cage and structures within the cage should be properly
evaluated and all risk factors assessed before an animal is actually anaesthetized.
Specific drug combinations were not discussed at great length, however as for analgesia, it was obvious
that drug availability in the region is varied. In order to safely immobilize/anaesthetise animals
recommended drug combinations and doses should be adhered to.
Practical Session – Remote Injection Techniques
As an introduction to this session, participants were shown the basic safety measures when dealing with
powered tele-injection systems. The types of dart systems was explained and they were given the
opportunity to, under guidance prepare darts with water. These darts were then used to remotely inject
carcass legs that were provided for the purpose.
For many participants this was the first time they had this kind of exposure and training and all enjoyed
the opportunity.
Conclusion
This was the first workshop of its kind in the region and all participants found value in it. Although the
lectures were quite formal, there was ample time for discussions and even though the language (English)
was sometimes a barrier it did not deter from the discussions.
The interactive sessions and practical session on the last day did attract many comments and views from
participants, and through its interactive nature people walked away with experiences that they were
comfortable to go and implement in their own spheres of operation.
39
Appreciation was expressed to the Sharjah government for taking the lead on this and the hope that in
future these lectures would continue.
Areas identified for further discussions and hopefully future action:
! Understanding all the specific laws and regulations (decrees) present within the region dealing with the
capture, care, movement and welfare of wild animals.
! Understanding the jurisdiction of the various governments, agencies and municipalities in
implementing and enforcing these laws.
! Epidemiology of diseases and their vectors in the region.
! A limiting factor to obtain the epidemiological data is access to appropriate diagnostic laboratories
within, if not throughout the region.
! Access to drugs needed for the capture and care of wild animals that are not freely available within the
region.
40
Participant List
BAHRAIN
AbdulQader Saeed Khamis
Supreme Council for Environment
akhamis@sce.gov.bh
GERMANY
Christiana Hebel
christiana_hebel@yahoo.com
JORDAN
Ehab Eid
The Royal Marine Conservation Society of
Jordan
eha_jo@yahoo.com
Nashat Hamidan
The Royal Society for the Conservation of
Nature
nashat@rscn.org.jo
Thabit Al Share
The Royal Society for the Conservation of
Nature
thabit.alshare@rscn.org.jo
KUWAIT
Menandro Eguilos
The Scientific Centre, Kuwait
meynard@tsck.org.kw
;
Mijbil Almutawa
The Scientific Centre, Kuwait
mijbil@tsck.org.kw
;
Salah Behbehani
The Scientific Centre, Kuwait
salah@tsck.org.kw
NAMIBIA
Dr Anne Schmidt-Kuntzel
Cheetah Conservation Fund
genetics@cheetah.org
;
Dr Laurie Marker
Cheetah Conservation Fund
cheetah@iway.na
;
Ryan Sucaet
Cheetah Conservation Fund
NEW ZEALAND
Prof. Philip Seddon
University of Otago
philip.seddon@otago.ac.nz
OMAN
Ahmed Alamairi
Ministry of Environment and Climate Affairs
alamairi2020@gmail.com
;
Ahmed Jashool
Office for Conservation of the Environment,
Diwan of the Royal Court
najahlagoon@gmail.com
;
Azzan Alkalbani
National Field Research Centre for
Environmental Conservation
al-kalbani@hotmail.com
;
Hadi Al Hikmani
Office for Conservation of the Environment,
Diwan of the Royal Court
hadidofar@gmail.com
;
Haitham Alrawahi
Office for Conservation of the Environment,
Diwan of the Royal Court
haitham.alr88@gmail.com
;
Hani Alsadi
Office for Conservation of the Environment,
Diwan of the Royal Court
;
Hussein Al Qasmi
National Field Research Centre for
Environmental Conservation
hussein_hope@hotmail.com
;
Khaled Al Rasbi
Oman Mammal Breeding Centre
tayamooo@hotmail.com
;
Khawla Al-Azrea
Ministry of Environment and Climate Affairs
kssalazri@gmail.com
;
Mahmood Alabri
Veterinary Services, Royal Court Affairs
mbsabri@rca.gov.om
;
41
Qais Al Rawahi
Office for Conservation of the Environment,
Diwan of the Royal Court
qalrawahi@hotmail.com
Rahma Alkalbaniya
Ministry of Environment and Climate Affairs
r.alkalbani@gmail.com
;
Sami Alrahbi
Office for Conservation of the Environment,
Diwan of the Royal Court
;
Zahran Al Abdul Salam
Office for Conservation of the Environment,
Diwan of the Royal Court
PORTUGAL
Walter Tavares
Animal Trainer
walter.animaltrainer@gmail.com
QATAR
Abdulla Al-Nuaimi
Ministry of Environment
;
Hassan Alhaddad
Ministry of Environment
;
Dr Sarah May
Qatar Museum of Nature and Science
smay@qma.org.qa
SAUDI ARABIA
Bander Al Bogami
Taif University
bandar_054@hotmail.com
;
Dr Eitimad Ahmed
Hail University
eitimadahmed@yahoo.com
;
Dr Khalid Abdulrahman Al Aqeel
Saudi Wildlife Authority
khalid-alageel@hotmail.com
;
Dr Mohammed Shobrak
Taif University
mshobrak@gmail.com
;
Dr Saud Anagariyah
National Wildlife Research Centre
anagariyah@nwrc-sa.org
;
Dr. Naif Al Hannoush
Saudi Wildlife Authority
Hamad Al Qahthani
Saudi Wildlife Authority
hhmf20@hotmail.com
;
Mukhlid Awad Al Jaeid
National Wildlife Research Centre
;
Qais Saud Al Hazzai
Saudi Wildlife Authority
SOUTH AFRICA
Dr Gerhard Steenkamp
University of Pretoria
Gerhard.Steenkamp@up.ac.za
;
Dr Mike Knight
South African National Parks
M.Knight@nmmu.ac.za
SWAZILAND
Dr Ara Monadjem
University of Swaziland
aramonadjem@gmail.com
UAE
Khalifa Abdullah Alsuwaidi
Environment & Protected Areas Authority
;
Abdulaziz Salem Alsuwaidi
Environment & Protected Areas Authority
;
Abdullah Mubarak Mohammed
Environment & Protected Areas Authority
;
Abdulrahim Ibrahim Al Ali
Environment & Protected Areas Authority
;
Abdulrhman Al Haseri
Council Member - Council of Sharjah
;
Adneus Hamad
Council Member - Council of Sharjah
;
Ahmad AlJakwen
Council Member - Council of Sharjah
;
Ahmed Al Ali
Environment & Protected Areas Authority
ahmedalali@epaashj.ae
;
Ahmed Al Dhaheri
Environment Agency - Abu Dhabi
aaldhaheri@ead.ae
42
Ahmed Al Hashmi
Ministry of Environment and Water
aealhashmi@moew.gov.ae
;
Ahmed Ali Aldhmani
Environment & Protected Areas Authority
;
Ahmed Mohammed Abdullah
Environment & Protected Areas Authority
;
Ahmed Zahran
Ministry of Environment and Water
amzahran@moew.gov.ae
;
Alan Stephenson
HE Sheikh Butti Al Maktoum's Wildlife Centre
alanuae2008@gmail.com
;
Ali Al-Egaidy
Saint Vincent Group
;
Anas Idris
Management of Nature Conservation
aidris@ewbcc.ae
;
Anniek Boshoven
anniekboshoven@hotmail.com
Awad AlKetbi
Council Member - Council of Sharjah
;
Ayman Abdullah Alnaqbi
Environment & Protected Areas Authority
;
Barbara Arca
Al Aseefa Falcons
;
Bénédicte Madon
RENECO Wildlife Consultants LLC.
bmadon@reneco-hq.org
;
Carlos Rojo-Solis
Al Mayya Reserve
vetfujairah@gmail.com
;
Declan O'Donovan
Wadi Al Safa Wildlife Centre
declan@shp.ae
;
Donovan De Boer
Al Bustan Zoological Centre
don@albustanzoo.ae
;
Dr Ana Perez de Vargas
Al Ain Zoo
ana.perez@alainzoo.ae
;
Dr Anne-Lise Chaber
Wildlife Consultant and Veterinary Services
alchaber@hotmail.com
;
Dr Chris Lloyd
Nad Al Sheba Veterinary Clinic
chris@nadvethosp.com
;
Dr Coner Kilgallon
Dubai Falcon Hospital
;
Dr Csaba Geczy
Office of His Highness Sheikh Mohammed Bin
Zayed Al Nahayan
Csaba.Geczy@mbzo.ae
;
Dr Ellen Kruijning
Al Barsha Veterinary Clinic
ellen@abvc.ae
;
Dr Fatin Samara
American University of Sharjah
fsamara@aus.edu
;
Dr Johan Forsman
Al Aseefa Falcons
;
Dr Judit Nagy
Wildlife Veterinarian
virgoncka@gmail.com
;
Dr Loida Bargamento-Jopia
Saint Vincent Group
;
Dr Mohamed Abouleish
American University of Sharjah
mabouleish@aus.edu
;
Dr Peter McKinney
Wildlife Veterinarian
;
Dr Rachael Middleton
Al Wasl Veterinary Clinic
rm4375@googlemail.com
;
Dr Rachel Ballantyne
Saint Vincent Group
rachel@saintvincentgroup.com
;
Dr Salem Abdulla
Sharjah University
sabdulla@sharjah.ac.ae
;
Dr Sujatha Varadharajulu
Enviroment Protection and Development
Authority
drsujatha@epda.rak.ae
43
Dr Tadeusz Wieckowski
Government of Dubai, Nad Al Shiba Palace
ted2210@eiw.ae
;
Dr Tatiana Cavero Aponte
Al Ain Zoo
tatiana.aponte@alainzoo.ae
;
Dr Tuleen Jundi
Eurovets
tuleen@eurovetsworld.com
;
Dr Valentina Caliendo
Al Wasl Veterinary Clinic
valentina@awvetclinic.ae
;
Dr Violaine Colon
Nad Al Sheba Veterinary Clinic
violaine@nadvethosp.com
;
Esmat Elfaki
Dubai Municipality, Environment Department
;
Gary Feulner
Dubai Natural History Group
grfeulner@gmail.com
;
Gerard Whitehouse-Tedd
Kalba Bird of Prey Centre
kalba.birdofpreycentre@gmail.com
;
Ghaleb Alkarbi
Batayah Municipality
;
Grant Furniss
Management of Nature Conservation
grantfurniss@gmail.com
;
Greg Simkins
Dubai Desert Conservation Reserve
greg.simkins@emirates.com
;
Gustau Calabuig
RENECO Wildlife Consultants LLC.
gcalabuig@reneco-hq.org
;
Haemish Melville
Office of His Highness Sheikh Mohammed Bin
Zayed Al Nahayan
Haemish.Melville@mbzo.ae
;
Hakim Khambati
Almas Agriculture
;
Hana Shaheen Alsuwaidi
Department of Heritage and Cultural Affairs
;
Hashem Alawadi
Dubai Municipality
;
Hassan Zain Al Sharif
Dubai Municipality, Environment Department
;
Hessa Al Qahtani
Al Ain Zoo
hessa.alqahtani@alainzoo.ae
;
Husam El Alqamy
Environment Agency - Abu Dhabi
alqamy@gmail.com
Ibrahim Bin Masoud
Environment & Protected Areas Authority
;
Ismail Al Blooshi
Sharjah Aquarium
;
Jacky Judas
EWS-WWF
jackyjudas@gmail.com
;
Jeruel Aguhob
Dubai Municipality, Environment Department
jcaguhob@dm.gov.ae
;
John Pereira
Environment & Protected Areas Authority
oppisand@gmail.com
;
Joseph Azar
RENECO Wildlife Consultants LLC.
jazar@narc-ae.org
;
Jude Howlett
Al Ain Zoo
judith.howlett@alainzoo.ae
;
Kate Burns
Al Bustan Zoological Centre
kate@albustanzoo.ae
;
Khalid Al Midfa
Director General
;
Koltera Zueb
Almas Agriculture
;
Lezelle Janse van Rensburg
Eurovets
lezelle@eurovetsworld.com
;
Lisa Banfield
Al Ain Zoo
lisa.banfield@alainzoo.ae
44
Lisa Hebbelmann
Environment & Protected Areas Authority
lisahebbelmann@gmail.com
;
Maral Khaled Shuriqi
EWS-WWF
mchreiki@ewswwf.ae
;
Mariam Saeed Yamani
Environment & Protected Areas Authority
maryamani@live.com
;
Mark Craig
Al Ain Zoo
mark.craig@alainzoo.ae
Marwa Al Mahmoud
Sharjah Aquarium
Meera Hamad Haqoul
shj.791@hotmail.com
Meyer de Kock
Al Bustan Zoological Centre
meyer@albustanzoo.ae
Moaz Sawaf
EWS-WWF
msawaf@ewswwf.ae
;
Mohammed Abdul Rahman Hassan
Dubai Municipality, Environment Department
marabdulla@dm.gove.ae
;
Mohammed Alshaikh Alhammadi
Dubai Municipality
myhammadi@dm.gov.ae
Mohammed Haran Al Ktbi
Environment & Protected Areas Authority
;
Mohammed Rashid Bin Tamim
Environment & Protected Areas Authority
Muna Al Dhaheri
Al Ain Zoo
muna.aldhaheri@alainzoo.ae
Muna Omran Alshamsi
Ministry of Environment and Water
moalshamisi@moew.gov.ae
;
Myyas Al Qarqaz
Al Ain Zoo
myyas.alqarqaz@alainzoo.ae
Oliver Combreau
EWS-WWF
ocombreau@ewswwf.ae
;
Peter Arras
Management of Nature Conservation
peterarras@arcor.de
;
Peter Dickinson
Ski Dubai
elvinhow@gmail.com
;
Peter Roosenschoon
Dubai Desert Conservation Reserve
peter.ddcr@emirates.com
;
Pritpal Soorae
Environment Agency - Abu Dhabi
psoorae@ead.ae
;
R’afat Naef
Al Dhaid Municipality
;
Rashed Al Zaabi
Environment Agency - Abu Dhabi
rashed.alzaabi@ead.ae
;
Rashid Hasan
Environment & Protected Areas Authority
;
Rashid Mohammed Al Kabi
Environment & Protected Areas Authority
;
Reza Khan
Dubai Municipality, Parks & Horticulture Dept.
MAKHAN@dm.gov.ae
;
Robert Dodd
Saint Vincent Group
robert@saintvincentgroup.com
;
Rozaan de Kock
Al Bustan Zoological Centre
rozaan@albustanzoo.ae
;
Saeed Almadhani
Al Dhaid Municipality
;
Saeed AlSuwaidi
Council Member - Council of Sharjah
;
Saeed Dalmouk
Al Dhaid Municipality
;
Saleh Ahmad Al-Najjar
Dubai Municipality, Parks & Horticulture Dept.
SANAJJAR@dm.gov.ae
45
Stephen Bell
Dubai Desert Conservation Reserve
stephen.bell@emirates.com
;
Steven Wright
Eurovets
;
Taitus Varghese
Nine Grains LLC
taitus@butchuae.com
;
Tamer Khafaga
Dubai Desert Conservation Reserve
tamer.khafaga@emirates.com
;
Toni Chalah
RENECO Wildlife Consultants LLC.
tchalah@reneco-hq.org
;
Vladimir Korshunov
Russian Science Academy
korshunvead@mail.ru
;
Yousif Abdullah Alzaabi
Environment & Protected Areas Authority
Yves Hingrat
RENECO Wildlife Consultants LLC.
yhingrat@reneco-hq.org
UNITED KINGDOM
Dr David Mallon
IUCN/SSC Antelope Specialist Group
d.mallon@zoo.co.uk
Dr John Lewis
International Zoo Veterinary Group
j.lewis@izvg.co.uk
Dr Samantha Bremner-Harrison
Nottingham Trent University
samantha.bremnerharrison@ntu.ac.uk
USA
David Salmon
Mazuri
YEMEN
Abdullah Abu Alfotooh
Environment Protection Authority
alfotooh.abdullah@gmail.com
;
Abdulrahman AlMualami
Amran Governorate
;
Dr Abdul Karim Nasher
Sana'a University
Karimnasher@yahoo.com
;
Dr Ali Al Najjar
Sana'a Zoo
ali.alnajjar@alsana'azoo.ae
;
Dr Mohammed Al-Duais
Foundation for the Protection of the Arabian
Leopard
dassssan@yahoo.com
;
Masa'a Mahdi Al Jumaily
Sana'a University
dr.masaa@hotmail.com
;
Mufed Al-Halmi
Ministry of Water & Environment
m_alhalmi@yahoo.com
;
Sadiq Al Halrithi
Ministry of Internal Administration
sadiq77739@gmail.com
ZAMBIA
Cornelie van der Feen
Wildlife Consultant
cvanderfeen@gmail.c
