Plants and Animals

I went dolphin watching on Friday not far from Hong Kong in the South China Sea and saw perhaps 30 pink dolphins. That’s right they were really pink – as pink as a pig!

When they came up for a breath and jumped out of the water it wasn’t for long and I didn’t manage to get any good photographs but this is what they looked like:

Photo scanned (with permission) from a Hong Kong Dolphinwatch Ltd. postcard, visit http://www.hkdolphinwatch.com.

On Friday the water didn’t look so blue. It was a murky green and our guide told us full of pollution from the Pearl River. I didn’t have any equipment for testing water quality, but the air quality was poor. This trawler emerged like a ghost ship from the smog-haze hanging over us at 11am in the morning:

The pink dolphins belong to the species Sousa chinensis also known as Indo-Pacific Humpback dolphins with a range extending throughout south east Asia and also northern Australia. Through most of its range the species is the more usual grey colour.

These Hong Kong dolphins are born grey, but mature to the pretty pink colour. Here’s a picture of a mother with its greyish baby:

Photo scanned (with permission) from a Hong Kong Dolphinwatch Ltd. postcard, visit http://www.hkdolphinwatch.com.

The dolphins suckle their young for about 3 years.

Our guide suggested there were about 1,000 of these pink dolphins off Hong Kong when they were last surveyed in 1997. She indicated that there had been no survey since but that she feared numbers were declining her biggest concern water pollution from mainland China.

The dolphins first became a conservation issue with the construction of the new airport and associated dynamiting and land reclamation at Chek Lap Kok. According to Hong Kong Dolphinwatch Ltd the next big project is a proposed 42 kilometre mega bridge linking Hong Kong, Macau and Zhuhai.

I can’t image the bridge and associated traffic will do anything but exacerbate the already poor air quality.

Photo scanned (with permission) from a Hong Kong Dolphinwatch Ltd. postcard, visit http://www.hkdolphinwatch.com.

Thanks to Hong Kong Dolphinwatch Ltd for a great day out.

Many people thought Steve Irwin knew more about snakes than anyone else in Australia. But according to ABC TV Science program Catalyst Professor Rick Shine knows more about them than anyone else and like Steve he’s been passionate about snakes since he was a small boy.

Right now Shine is on a campaign to save the endangered Broad-headed Snake in south eastern New South Wales. It is thought there are only about 700 remaining in the wild with their habitat reduced by vegetation encroachment.

That’s right too many trees!

According to a paper published last year in research journal Copeia*, over the last two centuries European fire suppression practices have produced increases in vegetation density and canopy cover in many landscapes.

The researchers Jonathan Webb, Richard Shine and Robert Pringle hypothesized that this was negatively affecting populations of nocturnal reptiles that use sun-exposed shelters for diurnal thermoregulation including the Broad-headed Snake (Hoplocephalus bungaroides).

They undertook a field study in Morton National Park near Sydney and their findings supported the hypothesis. What they described as “modest canopy removal” restored habitat quality with rocks at the sites were the canopy was removed being 10C hotter and attracting more reptiles.

The paper concludes with the recommendation that until effective fire management measures are in place, manual sapling removal could help protect small populations of endangered reptiles including the Broad-headed Snake.

———————-
This blog post remembers Steve Irwin who as Libby Eyre commented at an earlier thread: Steve will be saddly missed in the Australian wildlife community, as well as by the general public both here and overseas. He did a lot of good work for education, ex-situ breeding programs, in-situ conservation, animal husbandry and highlighting the animals many Ausralians couldn’t give a rat’s about. For all his larrikinism and sometimes over the top antics, he was a great spokesman for Australian wildlife. My thoughts are with his family, his friends and his staff at Australia Zoo.

———————–
* Canopy Removal Restores Habitat Quality for an Endangered Snake in a Fire Suppressed Landscape. Copeia 2005 (4) pp. 894-900

Thanks to Ian Beale for sending me the Copeia paper.

According to Mike Archer, Dean of Science at the University of NSW, if we are to save the Australian environment we must “think ourselves into the country” and change our ideas about farming, urbanisation and conservation. Professor Archer believes in giving wildlife a commercial value and has written that:

“We must learn how to raise gum trees alongside sheep, graze kangaroos amid our cattle, grow finger licken’ bustard as well as chicken, and plant mallee trees alongside our wheat.”

So is it OK to farm tigers in China?

There was an article advocating the application of these “free-market principles” for the survival of endangered species in the New York Times earlier this week titled ‘Sell the Tiger to Save it’. The author, Barun Mitra, wrote:

“China joined the international effort to protect the tiger in 1993. But today there is a growing recognition among many Chinese officials that a policy of prohibition and trade restrictions has not benefited the tiger as much as it has helped poachers and smugglers of tigers and tiger parts.

Conservationists say the worldwide illegal trade in forest products and wildlife is between $10 billion and $12 billion, with more than half of that coming from Asia.

…But like forests, animals are renewable resources. If you think of tigers as products, it becomes clear that demand provides opportunity, rather than posing a threat. For instance, there are perhaps 1.5 billion head of cattle and buffalo and 2 billion goats and sheep in the world today. These are among the most exploited of animals, yet they are not in danger of dying out; there is incentive, in these instances, for humans to conserve.

So it can be for the tiger. In pragmatic terms, this is an extremely valuable animal. Given the growing popularity of traditional Chinese medicines, which make use of everything from tiger claws (to treat insomnia) to tiger fat (leprosy and rheumatism), and the prices this kind of harvesting can bring (as much as $20 for claws, and $20,000 for a skin), the tiger can in effect pay for its own survival. A single farmed specimen might fetch as much as $40,000; the retail value of all the tiger products might be three to five times that amount.”

I have an aversion to the idea of caging a wild animal and so the idea revolts me. But how do I justify my aversion? Is it cultural? Is it rational? Is it helpful?

A couple of weeks ago Libby Eyre sent me some links to article about the bushmeat trade in Africa*. Over-hunting to supply the increasing demand for this meat is apparently seriously threatening the survival of many species of forest animal including chimpanzees and gorillas. Bushmeat is even finding its way to downtown markets in New York and Paris. Libby commented:

“It is interesting to look at the bushmeat consumption in the west and compare to say the taste for whale or dog meat that some countries have. For example, in Australia we may not relish the thought of chowing down on a chow or chimp or minke (damn, doesn’t fit the alliteration), but some think it is OK to do so and perhaps even hip to eat something off the IUCN red list.

My comment here is more about how we perceive wildlife, social trends and conservation, rather than pointing a finger at any certain culture. There are the inevitable discussions about sustainability and wildlife management that spring from this too, but I was intrigued by the thought of a wealthy, well-educated Parisian woman serruptitiously purchasing a bushbuck burger because it was the next big thing that one has to have.”

If the bushmeat trade was legalized and regulated, would it really make a difference? Could it really help save chimpanzees and gorillas? Surely there is a better way!

———————
*The email from Libby came with these links:
http://www.wildsingapore.com/news/20060708/060705-6.htm
http://www.bushmeat.org/index.htm
http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20050226/bob9.asp
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/11/1111_041111_bushmeat_fishing
.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4003859.stm
http://www.seaaroundus.org/OtherWebsites/2004/AfricanBushMeattrade.pdfhttp://news.mongabay.com/2006/0706-bushmeat.html

Have you ever wondered how scientists count whales and how accurate their population estimates are?

The June issue of ‘Significance’ a journal focused on statistics has an article by Philip Hammond, a former Chairman of the Scientific Committee of the International Whaling Committee (IWC), explaining some of the techniques for estimating population numbers and it includes comment that:

“The minke whale is the most abundant species of baleen whale, with a world population of hundreds of thousands, maybe as much as a million. In recent years most whales killed for commercial purposes have been minkes. In the North Atlantic about 600 a year have been taken by Norway under objection to the moratorium and about 30 to 40 by Iceland under special permit. Japan annually takes about 450 minke whales in the Southern Ocean and about 150 in the North Pacific under special permit. These catches are small relative to the estimated numbers of whales and are unlikely to have an adverse impact on populations.

The number of blue whales in the world, however, is only a few thousand. In the Southern Ocean an estimated 400 to 1400 remain from a population that probably once numbered about 750 000. Blue whales have been protected since the 1960s but they have very low rates of increase and it will be a long time before we know whether or not they will recover from the devastating exploitation of the 20th century.”

So what is limiting the recovery of blue whale numbers?

I’ve been told that minke whales compete with blue whales and that high minke whale population numbers could be impacting on the recovery of blue whales?[1] If this is the case, could harvesting of minke whales by the Japanese in the Antarctic help recovery of the depressed blue whale population?

After posting this note, I received an email from a reader with comment that: If blue whales are failing to recover it may be because of the various problems associated with small population size. …The contention that Blue Whale recovery in the Antarctic is being inhibited by prey competition from Minke Whales has little basis in existing data. …although the Blue Whale’s dependence upon a single food source (krill) is somewhat offset by the latter’s great abundance, this stenophagy would make the species more vulnerable in the event of a major decline in prey. [2]

Ann Novek recently sent me a note explaining that: “There are no direct actions against Norwegian whaling anymore from Greenpeace’s side, the new tactic is dialogue. Norwegian whaling has silenced a lot since the turbulent 90’s.”[3]

According to Norwegian Greenpeace activist Truls Gulowsen speaking three years ago, last year’s a quota of 600 minke whales posed no threat to minke whales in the north east Atlantic. He has also suggested that campaigns against whaling can distract from the real threats to the coast, including overfishing and the risk of oil industry pollution.

What are the most significant threats to the world’s whales? Which whale species really need ‘saving’ and how can they be best ‘saved’?

—————-
[1] I’ve not seen the supporting studies/literature. If you have links/references please post as a comment or send to jennifermarohasy@jennifermarohasy.com
[2] From Clapham, P.J., Young, S.B. & Brownell, R.L. Jr. 1999. Baleen whales: conservation issues and the status of the most endangered populations. Mammal Review 29: 35-60. http://whale.wheelock.edu/archives/ask01/att-0020/01-blue.rtf
[3] Thanks to Ann for sending the note with information and links including: ‘Norway’s Disputed Whaling Season Opens’ Monday April 18, 2005, By DOUG MELLGREN, Associated Press Writer, OSLO, Norway, &
‘Redde verdenshavene’ (Save the Oceans) and ‘Hvalfangst’ ( Whaling) at http://www.greenpeace.org/norway/campaigns/hav/hvalfangst (Only in Norwegian), & Truls Gulowsen’s statement “that a quota of 600 minke whales poses no threat to the minke whale population” from the magasine Folkevett at
http://www.folkevett.no/index.php?back=1&artikkelid=1079 ( only in Norwegian).

“To those counting extinctions, watch the impact of the deliberate introduction of foxes (Vulpes vulpes) and subsequent failures to control them in Tasmania for a species extinction or two over the next couple of human generations.

This was the last significant safety zone for Australia’s unique small mammals and will surely allow some wonderful peer reviwed papers that describe the decline as we sit back and watch it happen. We are about to see the final stages of the march to extinction of a vast array of unique animals,” wrote Linton Staples* at an earlier blog post on mammalian extinctions.

According to the Tasmanian Parks and Wildlife Service:

“The European red fox (Vulpes vulpes) was introduced to mainland Australia as early as the 1850’s. Since that time the fox has inflicted enormous impacts on the native wildlife of Australia, being implicated in the extinction of many native animals. Indeed, Australia’s apalling record of mammal extinctions in the last 200 years – the worst in the world – is in no small part due to the fox.

…The fox represents the single most devastating threat to Tasmania’s native mammals and birds. This island State is recognised as a national and international fauna haven due to the lack of foxes, but should the species become established here all of Tasmania’s native land animals would be at risk.

Threatened and high conservation significance species at risk [if the fox establishes in Tasmania] would include:

eastern barred bandicoot
Tasmanian bettong
long nosed potoroo
eastern quoll
southern brown bandicoot
long tailed mouse
velvet furred rat
New Holland mouse
hooded plover
little tern
fairy tern
ground parrot
ground thrush
painted button quail
great crested grebe
green and gold bell frog
tussock skink
glossy grass skink.

The Tasmanian pademelon and Tasmanian bettong, both of which thrive in Tasmania, are now extinct on the mainland because of the fox. The mainland eastern barred bandicoot has been reduced to a mere 200 surviving individuals because of the fox. The young of unique species such as the Tasmanian devil, spotted tail quoll that are left unattended in dens are highly vulnerable to fox predation.

More widespread species like ducks, shorebirds, ground nesting birds, blue tongue lizards, mountain dragons, skinks and frogs are all highly at risk.”

———————————-
* Linton is the Managing Director of Animal Control Technologies which sells FOXOFF® fox bait.