(Moved) Why is the Leopard on Cites 1 index?





Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oral
    Age
    61
    Posts
    1,810

    Default (Moved) Why is the Leopard on Cites 1 index?

    Hi Doug,

    I would appreciate it if you could enlighten us to a couple of matters that I struggle to understand.

    I notice that the Leopard (Panthera Pardus) is listed as an appendix I species on Cites, the definition of Appendix I species being:

    The CITES Appendices

    Appendix I lists species that are the most endangered among CITES-listed animals and plants (see Article II, paragraph 1 of the Convention). They are threatened with extinction........


    Why would the Leopard be listed under this appendix? A study about 5 years ago concluded that there are in the region of 700 000 leopards surviving in Africa and that the leopard is one of the most robust populations of carnivores on the African continent.


    Not trying to stir, just trying to comprehend. It seems to me that the Cites classification has nothing to do with the species' status regarding its survival, but has been created mostly based on the animal rightists emotional cries that the poor leopard needs to be protected from exploitation.


    C

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Benoni
    Posts
    3,468

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C Africa View Post
    Hi Doug,

    I would appreciate it if you could enlighten us to a couple of matters that I struggle to understand.

    I notice that the Leopard (Panthera Pardus) is listed as an appendix I species on Cites, the definition of Appendix I species being:

    The CITES Appendices

    Appendix I lists species that are the most endangered among CITES-listed animals and plants (see Article II, paragraph 1 of the Convention). They are threatened with extinction........


    Why would the Leopard be listed under this appendix? A study about 5 years ago concluded that there are in the region of 700 000 leopards surviving in Africa and that the leopard is one of the most robust populations of carnivores on the African continent.


    Not trying to stir, just trying to comprehend. It seems to me that the Cites classification has nothing to do with the species' status regarding its survival, but has been created mostly based on the animal rightists emotional cries that the poor leopard needs to be protected from exploitation.


    C
    Hi,

    Firstly, I am not qualified to give you any real answers but from the info i have and can find by simply browsing the same sites you appear to have looked at I can tell you that you either didn't read enough or ignored some of the info.

    CITES aims to ensure that international trade in wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival and further contribute to the current extinction crisis. It is really a commercial lististing.

    here is a link to an article describing who and what CITES is and how it works.

    http://www.iucn.org/knowledge/news/f...e_trade/about/

    The Leopard is on the cites 1 list as they are listed in the IUCN redbook as near threatened.

    They have this status as in many areas that they are found, habitat degradation and continued hunting and "pest control" is putting severe pressures on their numbers. (I am told that in RSA we are killing around 1000 leopard per year).

    here are some quotes from the IUCN site
    Regionally extinct:
    Hong Kong; Kuwait; Libyan Arab Jamahiriya; Singapore; Syrian Arab Republic; Tunisia

    Presence uncertain:
    Iraq; Kazakhstan; Korea, Republic of; Lebanon; Lesotho; Mauritania
    Here is a link to the redlist page for the leopard:
    http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/15954/0

    and here is a link to a document that explains the how the various statuses work.

    http://www.iucnredlist.org/documents...ts_crit_en.pdf

    As to protecting the animal from explotation, if it is regionally extinct in 6 countries and it's presence is uncertain in another 6 or 7, surely it deserves some form of protection or should we wait until there are only 7000 left


  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oral
    Age
    61
    Posts
    1,810

    Default

    Maybe my understanding is also at fault, I believe that if a particular species is threatened in a CERTAIN AREA, then it gets listed as such with regard to THAT COUNTRY only.

    My point was simply that although the species may well be extinct and threatened in CERTAIN areas, the species as a whole is not, and is not nearly a threatened species. So therefore my question remains, why is it listed as an appendix I animal?

    Your point that 1000 have been killed for instance, sounds like a lot, but it is almost like the media hype that says that because over 100 rhino have been poached this year, this now poses a threat to their survival. The fact is that there are 17 000 white rhino's in the country and the poaching of 200, although it is an absolutely reprehensible action, does NOT pose any direct threat to the population. 1000 leopards killed is not even a dent in the annual progeny of the existing population.

    I know that a similar situation exists with regard to Cheetah, in certain areas of Namibia the populations have exploded to such an extent that they have become a major problem. There are so many that when the farmers call to report a "caught" animal, the authorities actually tell them to please have the animal "disappear quietly" as they are unable to assist.

    On many farms, Cheetahs are now shot like vermin on a regular basis.

    C

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Benoni
    Posts
    3,468

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C Africa View Post
    Maybe my understanding is also at fault, I believe that if a particular species is threatened in a CERTAIN AREA, then it gets listed as such with regard to THAT COUNTRY only.

    My point was simply that although the species may well be extinct and threatened in CERTAIN areas, the species as a whole is not, and is not nearly a threatened species. So therefore my question remains, why is it listed as an appendix I animal?

    Your point that 1000 have been killed for instance, sounds like a lot, but it is almost like the media hype that says that because over 100 rhino have been poached this year, this now poses a threat to their survival. The fact is that there are 17 000 white rhino's in the country and the poaching of 200, although it is an absolutely reprehensible action, does NOT pose any direct threat to the population. 1000 leopards killed is not even a dent in the annual progeny of the existing population.

    I know that a similar situation exists with regard to Cheetah, in certain areas of Namibia the populations have exploded to such an extent that they have become a major problem. There are so many that when the farmers call to report a "caught" animal, the authorities actually tell them to please have the animal "disappear quietly" as they are unable to assist.

    On many farms, Cheetahs are now shot like vermin on a regular basis.

    C
    Don't know enough about the Cheetah to comment so I'll leave that one alone for now.

    With regards the white rhino, it is not 17000 is RSA, it is just over 16000 in total, this makes a difference.

    I tend to agree with you about the media hype but for different reasons, I believe that the view of the big picture has been lost, there is so much hype about the Elephant (listed as vunerable but with an increasing population), the rhino (general term used and combines the black rhino which is seriously endangered and the white rhino which is not), lion, Wild dogs, cheetah etc but there is NOTHING said about the top 10 endangered mammals of which the black rhino features right at the end of the list and the elephant, leopard, cheetah, lion etc do not feature at all.

    We should be looking at conservation efforts at the biodiversity level, soils, wetlands etc as they are the base of everything else.

    In terms of your comments about a species being extinct in one area but thriving over all, I disagrre there, the simple fact that a species is extinct or endangered in a single area , is enough in my book to warrant attention and restrictions, the whole charter of the IUCN's conservation charter is about maintaing, genetics, biodiversity and sustainable use of resources which is why although I disagree with some issues with regards game farming, I support hunting operations to some degree.


  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Cape Town
    Age
    48
    Posts
    11,488

    Default

    I believe you are partially missing the point of CITES

    Appendix 1 not only deals with an organism's (I refrain for the use of "animals" because plants are also included) status as vulnerable, threatened etc but is fundamentally about TRADE in those organisms. i.e trade in leopard and leopard parts is controlled.

    So the leopard might be abundant in certain parts and locally extinct in others, but it's also about HOW the leopard is protected. Just look at elephants... they are abundant and a huge pest in places... but trade in elephant parts (specifically ivory) is prohibited, much to the chagrin of many environmental bodies.

    Also you cannot equate two organisms appearing on the same list.
    Last edited by SimonB; 2010/10/18 at 02:20 PM.
    2015 Pajero Sport 4x4
    1996 3.5v6 Pajero (For Sale)

    Carpe Diem Scrotum
    Give a man a beer, waste an hour. Teach a man to brew, and waste a lifetime!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Benoni
    Posts
    3,468

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SimonB View Post
    I believe you are partially missing the point of CITES

    Appendix 1 not only deals with the an organism's (I refrain for the use of "animals" because plants are also included) status as vulnerable, threatened etc but is fundamentally about TRADE in those organisms. i.e trade in leopard and leopard parts is controlled.

    So the leopard might be abundant in certain parts and locally extinct in others, but it's also about HOW the leopard is protected. Just look at elephants... they are abundant and a huge pest in places... but trade in elephant parts (specifically ivory) is prohibited, much to the chagrin of many environmental bodies.

    Also you cannot equate two organisms appearing on the same list.
    Thanks Simon, you said that much better than I did.


  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Oral
    Age
    61
    Posts
    1,810

    Default

    I think now that the Elephant has been mentioned, we can make some comments about it. CITES actually broke their own rules when they placed the Elephant on the appendix I list. They should have adopted a "split listing" which is what their constitution called for, but the animal rights people made such a hooh haah and emotional thing of it, that they got their way.

    Doug, your comment: "In terms of your comments about a species being extinct in one area but thriving over all, I disagrre there, the simple fact that a species is extinct or endangered in a single area , is enough in my book to warrant attention and restrictions,"

    I think this is where we need to define what "Endangered" or "Extinct" means. Lets be ridiculous, but every species of wild animal is extinct in Pretoria. So does that place them all on the endangered list?

    The major human activities which threaten wildlife are in order of importance:
    * Crop farming
    * Domestic livestock farming
    * Urban Sprawl (population growth).

    So in any area where these activities become large, there will be no significant wild animals (cities or agricultural areas, say as example the "swartland" wheat areas, or the Western Transvaal maize areas). Now just because the Impala is "extinct" in these areas, does not make the animal an "endangered species".


    But let us return to the Leopard. You named several countries where the Leopard is either extinct or seriously threatened. Now to me, that spells an opportunity. If the farmers who killed those 1000 Leopards, were able to catch them and sell them to some-one wishing to re-introduce them into these areas, wouldn't that have been much to the advantage of both the Leopard and the farmer (and those countries)? But becaiuse trade is now "prohibited", they end up being killed as "problem animals".

    You mention yourself that the most important consideration is the preservation of biodiversity. With that I agree 100%. But that also means that there is no sense in "protecting" the Leopard in an area where its numbers are out of kilter with the "balance" required for that area. The numbers shpould be controled at a "sustainable" level in any Biome.

    Let me get off my soap box now.

    C

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Richwood, Cape Town
    Age
    64
    Posts
    638

    Default

    The elephants were placed on the list, as my understanding goes, for exactly the reason Simon and Doug mention. It is about the trade in elephant parts that the issue revolves as far as the ellies are concerned. I also recollect, on the issue of the number of leopards, that the latest studies in the Cedarberg indicate that there may be far fewer leopards in the Cedarberg than was always estimated. Our knowledge and understanding of most wild animals and their real numbers is not as accurate as we sometimes think it is.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Gordon's Bay
    Age
    49
    Posts
    28,881

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by C Africa View Post
    I think now that the Elephant has been mentioned, we can make some comments about it. CITES actually broke their own rules when they placed the Elephant on the appendix I list. They should have adopted a "split listing" which is what their constitution called for, but the animal rights people made such a hooh haah and emotional thing of it, that they got their way.
    Doug, your comment: "In terms of your comments about a species being extinct in one area but thriving over all, I disagrre there, the simple fact that a species is extinct or endangered in a single area , is enough in my book to warrant attention and restrictions,"
    I think this is where we need to define what "Endangered" or "Extinct" means. Lets be ridiculous, but every species of wild animal is extinct in Pretoria. So does that place them all on the endangered list?
    The major human activities which threaten wildlife are in order of importance:
    * Crop farming
    * Domestic livestock farming
    * Urban Sprawl (population growth).
    So in any area where these activities become large, there will be no significant wild animals (cities or agricultural areas, say as example the "swartland" wheat areas, or the Western Transvaal maize areas). Now just because the Impala is "extinct" in these areas, does not make the animal an "endangered species".
    But let us return to the Leopard. You named several countries where the Leopard is either extinct or seriously threatened. Now to me, that spells an opportunity. If the farmers who killed those 1000 Leopards, were able to catch them and sell them to some-one wishing to re-introduce them into these areas, wouldn't that have been much to the advantage of both the Leopard and the farmer (and those countries)? But becaiuse trade is now "prohibited", they end up being killed as "problem animals".
    You mention yourself that the most important consideration is the preservation of biodiversity. With that I agree 100%. But that also means that there is no sense in "protecting" the Leopard in an area where its numbers are out of kilter with the "balance" required for that area. The numbers shpould be controled at a "sustainable" level in any Biome.
    Let me get off my soap box now.
    C

    you are kidding!!! have you been to a match at Loftus?

    Plenty of Wild Animals there

Similar Threads

  1. Leopard Conservation Project
    By DouglasN in forum Environmental & Conservation
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 2010/11/12, 03:49 PM
  2. Moved threads
    By Francois Theron in forum Mitsubishi
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 2008/08/12, 09:04 AM
  3. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 2008/07/21, 12:04 PM
  4. 2006 Customer Satisfaction Index
    By Dirk in forum Vehicle & Technical Chat - General
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 2007/01/08, 12:43 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •