There is a big international meeting (the 55th meeting of the Standing Committee to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, CITES) currently underway in The Hauge, Netherlands, and China is hoping for support, in particular from India, for an amendment to the 14-year-old ban on trading in tiger parts.
That's right, China and others want to legalize trade in bits of dead tiger.
Its been Indian policy that the tiger can be best protected through traditional conservation while China and others want to explore market-based tools including incentives for insitu conservation and also captive breeding.
Its a contentious but important issue, particularly given so far the Indian tiger populion has about halved over the last 5 years. There are many more tigers in captivity in China than in the wild in India.
You can read more at Brendan Moyles blog: http://my.opera.com/chthoniid/blog/2007/06/05/china-tiger-and-cites
Hi Ann
a couple more points. In terms of rhinos, I note that the black rhino population was 60,000 in 1960, had fallen to 3,500 by 1988- and this in mostly Southern African countries that allowed use. It's nice that rhino numbers are increasing, but they're not exactly the poster-species for the efficacy of bans.
There are only a few species for which we have a demonstrated success at restoring abundance *and* driving out the poachers. These include the saltwater crocodile in Australia and Papua New Guinea, and the American alligator. And the key element here was the resumption of legalised trade. Yes, you have to have good monitoring, you have to have good enforcement measures. But if you really want the poachers out, you then need to pressure their profits and that's why trade worked for the crocodilians.
The Chinese have micro-chipped every tiger they have. They have invested in forensic facilities that can identify exactly where a tiger-part came from. They have harsh penalties for tiger-smugglers. Tigers receive the highest legal protection possible- you're flirting with the death penalty if you trade or possess tiger parts.
So what more they should be doing to improve monitoring and enforcement?
It reminds me of the nursery rhyme 'there was an old woman who swallowed a fly', only I guess in China it can end with them swallowing a tiger.
Aah Travis
I prefer whisky (neat) personally as a general cure-all and aid for 'whatever ails me'. It's helped me through many an expedition overseas.
The abc link also perhaps, hints at the difficulty of being a vegetarian in China...
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200706/s1943485.htm
My points are simply to highlight how we are only now learning the intricacies of what is involved with an individual species when captive breeding for reintroduction. Many problems are unforseen. We still have a lot to learn, and for some animals, perhaps it is better to manage them in-situ in 'cordoned off' areas than taking them totally off-site. An example here would have been the baiji river dolphin.
We seem to be jumping aorund a few issues here, some a few comments.
One aspect I find interesting with China, is that the rural areas are losing people (urban migration) and this is opening up sites for ecological restoration.
If we want to see South China tigers back in the wild (and I do) then reintroductions will be necessary- but territorial conflicts is probably not going to be the initial hinderance. At the moment, the Chinese and South Africans are trying rewilding of tigers. So, I don't believe that tigers will be released into restored areas (in China) until they have acquired the necessary survival skills. I would also expect such tigers to be from the purified lines, and not one of the many inexcerable hybrids.
Genetic issues are attendant to any conservation strategy also. Many reserves in Asia have far too few tigers left to sustain genetic diversity. Genetics is a problem to be rrecognised and managed- it is not an insurmountable obstacle to successful ecological restoration work.
Ann,
My comment is in regards to both species having limited survival chances in-situ, and instead surviving ex-situ in captive institutions. The panda was released into a large reserve in the hope that a 're-introduction' program could be established, but it failed, at the expense of the panda and the program.
There was apparently a similar case in India where (a colleague writes) a captive-bred male Bengal tiger was 'placed (well meaningly) in situ. In this polygynous and highly territorial species, the resultant territorial disputes were ferocious. Sadly, it is believed that the introduced male never reproduced. Even worse, reproduction was suspended for (from memory) two years while the resident males reestablished their territorial dominance.'
As you point out, captive breeding can actually breed out survival prospects for coping with the big wide world. Reintroduction of captive bred animals can also have impacts on the in-situ populations with undetected disease and poor genetics, as well as what you and I have mentioned here.
As far as I am concerned, Copenhagen has failed in its animal management if they let the tigers breed knowing that the only option for the offspring is euthanasia. Most large and reputable zoos have species management plans which are tied in with plans of other institutions around the world. It is a science in itself, and should be where zoos are at in this day and age.
" So, is being a giant panda in China better than being a tiger?!" -Travis.
I dunno if I understand your point correctly, but wasn't the panda released into a big nature park??
Re the tiger cubs in Denmark that were euthanised, it was asked if they couldn't be released into the wild.
One answer was there were no safe , protected areas for the tigers...there are as well questions about survival in the wild of captivity bred animals...
Some species loose many of their " instincts" after some generations in captivity breeding programs...
I know for example storks that loose their migration instinct after being bred in captivity...
I read today that the Copenhagen Zoo euthanised two tiger cubs " because there ain't space for them in the zoo, and the other zoos globally have an abundance of tigers as well".
Brendan. IMO, the best way to curb Chinese trade in endangered wildlife , is still better law enforcement and protection measures.
China is home to global trade in wildlife mainly due to their demand for traditional medicine. It's not wise IMO to support medicine in enadangered animals. They could stick to herbs.
Re rhino horns that are an after sought product in China as well, Swaziland and Namibia have cracked down on poaching and shot down illicit trade routes to China and Asia and rhino populations overall in Africa are rising, according to a Traffic statement in CITES.
On a slightly different note, well tangent, the first captive-born and released giant panda in China has died. It appears he fell out of a tree. Nothing to do with not preparing him adequately for release (as in tree-climbing skills) but rather that he was a male released into a wild that has other territorial males. The issue of releasing captive-born animals into a shrinking wild brings up many more avenues to explore (however they are dark and dingy and prone to unsavoury types).
So, is being a giant panda in China better than being a tiger?!