Identifying rare and endangered species

Measures aimed at studying the populations of rare animal species are necessary to develop a strategy for their conservation. It is not only about determining numbers – scientists must have the fullest possible understanding of habitat characteristics, adaptation to environmental factors, fecundity and mortality, principles of migration and other components of the natural life of animals.

Creating Red Books

The first IUCN International Red Data Book appeared in 1963, before that there was no such a thing as a “rare species”. And not because there was not such a problem, just because people were only beginning to notice the consequences of their own irresponsibility. In addition to the international one, there are national and regional analogues. The Red Book is an official state document, in which an animal is automatically protected by law.

Conservation of species numbers

There is no universal plan for the solution of this problem, since each species is unique and has its own biological features. But one of the main directions can be considered artificial breeding of rare animals in nurseries, reserves and zoos. In recent decades, scientists have developed breeding programs for almost all species – this is how many representatives of the fauna, such as bison and lynx, were saved from extinction.

Creating gene banks

Cryopreservation makes it possible to freeze the biological material, to ensure the preservation of the gene pool of the endangered animals as a resource of the planet’s biodiversity. True, the mechanism is rather complicated: for each animal species it is necessary to develop its own method of genome conservation. To date, there are 22 gene banks around the world, which are located at museums, research institutes and other institutions. Cryopreservation of the germ cells of endangered wild animals is proceeding very slowly due to the difficulty of studying the details of the reproductive process of these species and their difficult accessibility.

Advocacy for the protection of flora and fauna

This method involves informing the public about the state of fauna, and it is also aimed at forming a careful attitude towards natural resources in general and animals in particular. The organization of various exhibitions, excursions, environmental trails and other events serves this purpose.

Development of rules and norms of human behavior in nature

Even if in ordinary life people rarely encounter endangered species, it doesn’t mean that they can’t contribute to the reduction of their population. As we’ve said before, everything is interconnected. Litter left in the woods, an unextinguished fire, dirty water or gasoline dumped in a river, all pose a danger to natural ecosystems.

Creating different ecological programs

Measures to conserve rare wildlife species are taken at the state, regional, or local level. Various programs involve controlling the release of poisonous substances into the environment, allocating land for protected areas, creating environmental watchdogs, and so on.

Facilitating the reacclimatization and acclimatization of animals

Resettlement of bred animal populations is not an easy task. When it comes to acclimatization, i.e. the development of a new territory by an animal, it is not often successful. It is difficult for humans to foresee all the peculiarities of biocenosis and its interaction with a species. Reaclimatization, i.e. restoration of population in former habitat, is much more successful. If the territory has not had time to change greatly, such measures are successful.

All these measures imply large-scale actions, but each of them is based on the will of individuals ensuring the movement of the whole mechanism.

The post Conservation Measures for Rare Animals: The Global Level appeared first on Coal-is-Dirty.

The lion has always been the king of beasts; even in ancient times this animal was worshipped. For the ancient Egyptians, the lion acted as a guardian creature, guarding the entrance to the other world. For the ancient Egyptians, the fertility god Aker was depicted with a lion’s mane. In today’s world, many coats of arms of states depicts the king of beasts. The coats of arms of Armenia, Belgium, Great Britain, Gambia, Senegal, Finland, Georgia, India, Canada, Congo, Luxembourg, Malawi, Morocco, Swaziland and many others depict the militant king of beasts. The African lion, according to the International Convention, was included in the Red Book as an endangered species.

All of us know since childhood what a lion looks like, because a small child can recognize the king of beasts by his mane alone. So we decided to give a brief description of this mighty beast. A lion is a mighty animal, but it is little more than two meters in length. For example, the Ussuri tiger is much longer than a lion, reaching 3.8 meters in length. The usual weight of a male is one hundred and eighty kilograms, rarely do they have two hundred.

The head and body of lions are dense and powerful. Skin color varies, depending on the subspecies. However, the main coloring for the beast kings is cream, ochre, or yellow-sand. Asian lions are all white-gray in color.

Older lions have stiff hair covering the head, shoulders, and down to the bottom of the belly. Adults have a black, thick mane or a mane of a dark, brown hue. But one of the subspecies of the African lion, the Maasai, does not have such a lush mane. Its hair does not descend to the shoulders, and there is no hair on its forehead.

All lions have rounded ears with a yellow spot in the middle. The spotted pattern remains on the skin of young lions until female lions give birth to cubs and male lions reach sexual maturity. All lions have a tassel on the tip of their tail. That is where their vertebral spine ends.

Habitat
A long – long time ago, lions lived in completely different territories than in the modern world. The subspecies of African lion, the Asiatic lion, lived mostly in southern Europe, India or inhabited the lands of the Middle East. The ancient lion lived everywhere in Africa, but never settled in the Sahara. The American subspecies of lion is therefore called the American lion because it lived in North American lands. Asian lions gradually became extinct or exterminated by man, which is why they were included in the Red Book. And African lions in small flocks remained to exist only in the African tropics.

Today, the African lion and its subspecies are found only on two continents – the Asian and African. The Asian kings of beasts live peacefully in Gujarat, India, where there is a dry, sandy climate, savannah and bush forests. According to the latest data, all five hundred and twenty-three Asiatic lions have been recorded to date.

Real, African lions will be more numerous in the western countries of the African continent. In the country with the best climate for lions, Burkina Faso, there are over a thousand lions. In addition, a lot of them live in the Congo, there are over eight hundred lions.

The wildlife no longer counts as many lions as there were in the seventies of the last century. Today there are only thirty thousand of them left, and this is according to unofficial data. African lions have taken up the savannahs of their beloved continent, but even there they cannot be protected from hunters scurrying around in search of easy prey.

The post African lion appeared first on Coal-is-Dirty.

That, at least, is the conclusion of two researchers from the animal advocacy group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA). They recently presented a study at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science showing that Americans’ moral support for using animals in medical testing has declined by 12 percent since 2001.

Most significant, they say, their study points to a huge drop in support for such testing among people ages 18 to 29. A whopping 54 percent of them told pollsters in 2013 that animal testing was morally wrong, versus only 31 percent in 2001.

“That’s just an unprecedented increase,” says Justin Goodman, a director at PETA and one of the researchers. “And we think it’s linked to Internet use. It’s the source for news and information, especially for young people.”

Hal Herzog, an anthrozoologist at Western Carolina University in Cullowhee, North Carolina, is skeptical about PETA’s claims that the Internet is fueling a change in attitudes toward medical testing with animals or that there’s been a pronounced drop in young people’s support for such testing.

“While there has been a general trend toward less support of animal research…it has been slow and steady—not what would be predicted if anti-animal-research beliefs were ‘going viral’ among young people,” Herzog says.

He suspects the data actually show that people in a particular age group are in general concerned about this issue but become less opposed as they age and have children (who may get ill and require medical treatments developed through animal research).

“The overall percentage of Americans opposed [to medical testing with animals] is 40 percent, the same as it was five or six years ago,” he says.

Although Justin Goodman can’t prove his hunch, he’s not alone in noticing the public’s love affair with animal advocacy organizations—and simply animals—on the Internet.

In 2011 a team from craigconnects, a kind of Internet-promo site started by Craig Newmark of craigslist.org, looked at which nonprofit groups used social media most effectively, in a study titled “Who Rules Social Media?”

Online Power

It was no contest: Animal-minded groups beat out every other nonprofit, including those focused on aid for children, disaster relief, and veterans’ concerns. Animals trumped the others in every category the craigconnects team examined in their study, from “Look Who’s Talking” to “But Who’s Talking Back?” to “Whose Words Are Having the Most Impact?”

If that study doesn’t convince you of the animal organizations’ online power, take a look at the numbers: PETA has more than two million followers on Facebook and almost half a million on Twitter, while UNICEF USA, a leading children’s advocacy nonprofit, has 422,000 and 163,000 respectively.

The contrast is even more striking when PETA squares off against an organization like the Foundation for Biomedical Research (FBR), which attempts to explain why medical testing on animals is sometimes necessary. It has but 130,000 Facebook pals, and 1,700 Twitter adherents.

And PETA is only one animal advocacy organization.

Animals: A Soaring Interest

Other animal welfare groups, including the Humane Society and the Association for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, also have chest-thumping numbers on both social sites. They are all also busy on Instagram, LinkedIn, Pinterest, YouTube, and Google+.

So why do so many of us flock to the sites of the furred and feathered?

It’s partly the times. In the past few years our interest in animals—who they are, how their minds work, what they feel—has soared.

“There’s been a shift on animal issues,” says Kerry Lauerman, the former editor of Salon and one of the co-founders of the all-animal-news website The Dodo, which was launched in mid-January and within weeks had more than a million subscribers.

“You can see it in things like the New York Times list of most emailed stories,” Lauerman says. “These days animals are often the top story.”

And these are not just cute critter tales, he notes. More often, they’re about such things as scientists discovering, via brain scans, emotions in dogs that are similar to ours. Or researchers puzzling over empathetic behaviors in rats and elephants.

“These stories push different buttons in people,” Lauerman says. “The discovery that animals are able to think in some way makes people deeply uncomfortable. At the same time, they really want to understand them, to know them.”

And scientists working in animal cognition are delivering: Hardly a week goes by without a new discovery or insight into the inner workings of some creature’s mind.

The Happy-Sad Equation

Intellectual curiosity may be driving people to the animal sites. But the content must keep them there—and keep them coming back.

Theoretically this requires following a fairly simple equation, says James Jasper, a scholar of social movements at CUNY Graduate Center in New York. “You juxtapose two emotional batteries: one negative, one positive,” he says. “So you show a photo of a happy animal, like a playful puppy, and close to it, you show one of an unhappy, tortured animal.”

People generally respond with outrage to the second image. Together, the two images spark hope for change. “It works: The two together really motivate people,” Jasper says.

PETA’s Goodman agrees, noting that the group’s website currently shows a happy dog next to a banner, “Spay-a-Thon a Huge Success,” followed by an image of a tiger cub biting the bars of its cage headlined, “10 Reasons Not to Attend the Circus.”

Double Trouble’s Sad Tale

PETA employed this technique when it introduced its followers to a cat named Double Trouble in 2012. She was being used in sound experiments at the University of Wisconsin and had been intentionally deafened and outfitted with a thick metal bar to hold her head still during tests.

“Yes, the photos are graphic, but they’re also incredibly sad,” Goodman says. “And people feel that. It makes them want to do something, to channel that emotion into doing something positive.”

PETA provides the means: a button to click or a petition to sign. “That’s all it takes, and you can help that animal. Your click, your signature matters.”

More than 200,000 people signed a petition urging the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the University of Wisconsin to end the research, and Double Trouble’s misery. Her image and story were seen and shared millions of times via social media, Goodman says.

In the end, the NIH requested that the invasive aspects of the project be stopped until they would be investigated. Following the investigation, the study was allowed to resume. In the meantime, Double Trouble had been euthanized after suffering from an infection. Other cats are now being used for similar tests, and PETA continues its campaign against them.

Double Trouble’s story illustrates another point: Particularly affecting tales can easily and quickly go viral.

“Emotional stories about the way we treat animals—such as the dolphin slaughter at Taiji or the death of Marius the giraffe—just explode on the Internet, in a way that other stories don’t,” Lauerman says.

That’s partly because of the passions they arouse and because social media makes it easy to exchange opinions.

You Are There!

Viewers may also have the sensation that the event is happening in real time, Lauerman says. “It was especially true with the dolphin hunt at Taiji, which was actually happening every day. If you were watching and sending tweets or passing on messages, it was as if you were participating, even if you weren’t there. In that kind of situation, you get the feeling that your reaction, your opinion may count.”

Just by sitting at their keyboards clicking buttons, e-signing petitions, and passing on messages, people have discovered that they can help animals. Every animal advocacy group I spoke to remarked on how its organization has grown or changed because of the rise of social media.

“It’s made advocacy as simple as a clicked button,” says Bruce Friedrich of Farm Sanctuary, which works on behalf of farm animals. Through social media, he adds, the organization is able to “reach into communities that would otherwise have been closed to us.” Members tell friends, and friends tell family, and soon people across the country are sharing stories about pigs that play like dogs, or chickens with the curiosity of cats.

Big Reach

Social media’s long arm also gives animal rights groups far more clout than they had in the past.

Maris Sidenstecker, the co-founder of Save the Whales, which works to free cetaceans in captivity, knew exactly what to do when a Facebook follower sent news about a baby pilot whale that was tied by its tail to a dock at a Jamaican resort.

From the organization’s headquarters in California, she threatened the owner: “If you don’t let it go, I’m posting this on Facebook right now.” He agreed, and she contacted Jamaican wildlife officials to make sure the owner carried out his promise.

“The Internet gives you leverage, something we never really had before,” she says.

Via social media, public shaming awaits those who tie up helpless baby whales, or win the chance to kill a hapless rhinoceros, or take part in coyote-killing contests.

Will the proliferation of cameras, e-petitions, and Facebook posts finally force us to treat animals better? Will animals gain more rights? Will we all become vegetarians and insist that no animal—even a rat—be used in medical testing?

Friending Animals: Today’s Kids

Justin Goodman of PETA is decidedly optimistic.. He thinks the data reflect a real societal change, and the high percentage of young people opposed to animals being used in biomedical research gives him hope that a “cultural shift” is under way.

“As younger people move into positions where they’re making policy,” Goodman says, “they’ll bring their attitudes with them. We see this change coming; it is closer than ever.”

The post Causes of the Furred and Feathered Rule the Internet appeared first on Coal-is-Dirty.

However, it begs the question, how effective can social media be? Can social media improve animal welfare and rights? Currently, almost everyone has an account on one or two social media sites, and during the COVID-19 pandemic the number of social media users even increased; over 500 million people have joined social media sites in the past twelve months (Data Portal, 2021). It is estimated that there are over four billion social media users worldwide (Data Portal, 2021). Social media is used for a variety of purposes such as communication, entertainment, education, and so on. Recently, however, more and more users are choosing to use their platforms to raise awareness and get support on certain social issues and promote social change. The online sphere, along with the offline sphere, has become a place of activism and protest. However, there is also a growing debate about the effectiveness and sincerity of so-called online activism. Is online activism meaningful for social and political change, or is it just slactivism? Do online activists engage with social issues? Can they establish a collective identity or is it just a minor gesture? There are many valid doubts about the role of social media in political and social activism.

Some scholars have argued that activism and social movements, like other aspects of our lives, have moved into the online sphere, and it is simply part of modern society; thus, it should not be dismissed or seen as a minor part of social or political activity. Moreover, because of the nature of the Internet, certain social actions can reach a wider audience more quickly and should not rely on traditional media and their attention as much as in traditional methods that promote political decentralization (Aji, 2019; Downing, 2018).

On the other hand, some voices have argued that online activism, which skeptics often call slacktivism or clicktivism , has no real power or social effect, but people can feel good about themselves because they share or change their Facebook profile picture to support a certain movement. without much sacrifice (Morozov, 2009). In addition, animal scientists have noted that social media can contribute to increased animal cruelty because some users profit from the popularity of Youtube channels or Facebook profiles that promote animal cruelty or support illegal animal trafficking (Edes, 2019).

This article briefly analyzes the role of social media in animal protection. Social media raises awareness of animal issues and can be a supportive tool for animal activism, but awareness alone is not enough to improve animal welfare. At the same time, social media creates a hostile environment that promotes animal cruelty and animal trafficking, which users may unintentionally support.

Is the Internet a tool of liberalization or repression? A long-standing debate and the emergence of social media.

The debate about the effectiveness and role of the Internet in social environments and socio-political change is not new. According to van Dijk (2006), “when new media emerged in the 1980s, some people talked about ‘polluting’ our social environment with new media infiltrating our private lives” (p. 2). Some of the early voices harshly demonized the Internet, viewing it as a wonderland for “pornographers, terrorists, and political extremists” (Newey, 1999, p. 13). The tone somehow changed in the 1990s, and many of the dystopian views were replaced by a more optimistic view of the Internet (van Dijk, 2006). Early media researchers and Internet enthusiasts believed that the Internet would be an egalitarian space that would not reflect social norms and hierarchies (boyd, 2011; van Dijk, 2006; van Zoonen, 2001; Vickery and Everbach, 2018). It was also assumed that the Internet would strengthen democracy and provide visibility to marginalized groups and viewpoints; in other words, it was seen as a tool for liberalization (Newey, 1999). Thus, some early scholars believed that the Internet and technology could be tools for overcoming various inequalities and oppressions. This view represents what is known as the theory of technological determinism. Technological determinism assumes that technology strongly influences and changes our society. It also assumes that “technology can solve the problems created by larger social and cultural institutions of sexism, racism, and power” (Vickery, 2018, p. 34). However, as critical media practitioners have observed,

In short, to the extent that the online sphere can promote positive social change and give a voice to marginalized groups, it can also be used to create hostile environments and encourage offensive behavior. Currently, most scholars do not see digital technologies as inherently bad or good (Powell & Henry, 2017; van Dijk, 2006), but that these technologies should always be studied in their broader sociocultural and political contexts, as well as in their production and consumption contexts (Shaw, 2014).

This discussion becomes even more prominent with the increasing popularity of social media. Social media has impacted society and influenced sociocultural and political change. The question is to what extent.

There is a lot of research on whether the Internet, especially social media, promotes participation and engagement in political and social change. According to Fuchs (2018), “social media is a kind of mirror of what is happening in society” (p. 385). Thus, people’s social and political engagement can be seen through social media, but the degree of this engagement is difficult to gauge.

Some scholars have argued that the Internet is detrimental to people’s social movements and political activism. For example, the connections and relationships among members of social and political movements are weak, and there is also a lack of the emotional involvement and hierarchical organization that is necessary in risky activism that challenges the status quo (Gladwell, 2010). Social media increases participation and awareness, but as Morozov (2009) argued, even if the online sphere raises awareness, it is still not enough to solve problems. Awareness must turn into action, and the online sphere complicates this process and reduces motivation to take action (Gladwell, 2010).

Other scholars, on the other hand, were more positive about online participation. They argued that the Internet can positively affect participation in social and political issues because it helps mobilize people, for example, by lowering the cost of participation and requiring participants to pay less (Cammaerts, 2015). It also allows for faster and more equitable dissemination as more voices and opinions have a platform to share opinions and information (Downing, 2018; Newey, 1999).

Nevertheless, online actions must be accompanied by offline activities. Social media can be an effective tool to support collective efforts because of its ability to reach a wider audience in a shorter time. It also gives ordinary citizens and groups the opportunity to increase their visibility without relying on mainstream media (Cammaerts, 2015). Social media also allows people to act globally and advocate for different issues around the world (Cammaerts, 2015), although global action is usually less effective than local action (Morozov, 2009).

Animal Rights/Welfare and Social Media: Does Social Media Raise Awareness of Animal Rights or Promote Cruelty to Animals?

The beginning of the animal rights movement is often attributed to Peter Singer’s “Animal Liberation” action in 1975, but the movement originated in the early 19th century when some began to promote policies to reduce torture and exploitation of animals (Aji, 2019; Munro, 2012). Early animal welfare organizations and activists focused primarily on developing policies to eradicate various forms of animal abuse (Aji, 2019). The debate and purpose changed in the 1970s as the philosophical framework based on the concepts of Peter Singer and Tom Regan focused on the human and non-human relationships and emotional feelings of animals (Aji, 2019). Currently, animal advocates are striving to improve animal welfare and protection, as well as eradicate animal cruelty through a variety of methods.

It is important to note that animal movements are heterogeneous; different groups have different agendas, goals, and philosophies regarding animal rights and welfare. Socio-cultural and political backgrounds play an important role in the development of animal rights organizations and activism, so the difference between these groups has several sources. According to Munro (2012), there are three main strands among animal advocates, such as animal welfare, animal liberation, and animal rights, but they are all “united on the principle that animals are sentient beings, not ‘things’ that can be turned into commodities. into food, research tools, or sports trophies” (p. 169).

Over the past few years, the Internet has become an important tool for animal rights advocates, activists, and organizations. Given the popularity of animal videos and images online, it is not surprising that activists and organizations would try to raise awareness of animal issues among social media users. As Ajie (2019) noted, “social media appears to have a significant impact on the collective identity formation process of animal advocates” (p. 395).

Animal shelters and rescue organizations often advertise their animals and events, which increases adoption. Almost all shelters rely on social media as a fundraising tool to allow virtual adoption or general donation.

Animal advocacy groups also use their Web sites to raise awareness about animal cruelty and generally inform people about animal welfare. For example, the Polish animal rights organization Otwarte Klatki (Open Cages) uses Facebook and Twitter to document animal cruelty and educate about animal welfare, mainly the protection of farm animals. The organization seeks to bring social and legal changes to the breeding and treatment of farm animals through their actions. Their social media profiles promote online petitions and campaigns; however, to increase their impact on social and political change, online actions are organized alongside offline actions.

As Morozov (2009) observed, raising awareness is not enough to solve all problems. The same is true for issues related to animal rights and welfare. Social media raises awareness of animal cruelty, but it does not mean that more people are taking direct action to prevent it. Animal organizations may have thousands of followers, but one click on their pages and it’s clear that they still need volunteers and activists to take offline actions, such as documenting animal cruelty, organizing protests, or meeting with politicians.

Social media can help raise awareness about animal welfare; however, it can also be used to glorify animal cruelty and support illegal trade, especially in the case of wild animals. Most social media users are likely to have seen videos and photos of animals, whether they are companions, farms, or wild animals performing tricks or acting like humans, such as swiping smartphones or wearing clothes. Facebook, Instagram and Youtube are full of such videos and images. Many of them seem harmless, even cute and funny, but in fact some of them promote animal cruelty, and viewers may unintentionally support harmful and illegal actions.

Edes (2019), a primatologist, observed that social media videos of primates can be harmful and dangerous to animals and their environment. This is especially important for wildlife because social media influences the perception of wild animals, such as slow loris or chimpanzees, as suitable pets and reduces the belief that these animals are endangered (Edes, 2019; Leighty et al. ., 2015 Nekaris et al., 2013).

Social media posts may not seem to have a real impact on the environment or the well-being of animals; however, they can impact animal conservation because the response to these videos and posts is noticed by exotic animal traders and increases the wildlife trade (Edes, 2019). Researchers argued that these videos and photos affect the public perception of wild animals, leading to an endorsement of animal cruelty. Primatologists agreed that posting and sharing videos and photos that show wild animals as pets promotes the exotic animal trade (Cole & Emerson, 2019).

It is also very easy to find videos glorifying animal cruelty on social media. Lady Freethinker, a non-profit organization, published a report on Youtube about animal cruelty. A search for keywords such as dog fighting, eating animals alive, etc. shows tons of videos that violate Youtube rules (violent and graphic content and animal cruelty are prohibited) and animal welfare laws in some countries (Lady Freethinker, 2019). Videos showing animal cruelty gain thousands of views, which means that some people are profiting from animal cruelty; many activists and scholars have called social media platforms ineffective in tracking and banning such videos and profiles.

Conclusion

In recent years there has been an ongoing debate about the role and impact of the Internet, especially social media, on the social movement and society. It is hard to deny that social media is often used to advocate for animal rights and welfare. Animal welfare organizations and activists turn to social media to raise awareness of animal issues and garner support. Of course, social media can be useful, and its impact on the animal movement is obvious, but its impact should not be overstated; online animal activism cannot replace street actions and campaigns.

In addition, researchers also agree that animal cruelty and illegal trade, especially in the case of wild animals, are increased because of social media. Social media users may unintentionally support harmful and illegal actions. Edes (2019) mentioned five freedoms to help social media users assess animal welfare through videos or images. The five freedoms were introduced in 1979 by the British Farm Animal Welfare Council and are recognized as basic standards for animal welfare. These five freedoms are as follows: 1) Freedom from hunger and thirst 2) Freedom from discomfort 3) Freedom from pain, injury or disease 4) Freedom to express normal behavior 5) Freedom from fear and suffering

If any of these freedoms are violated, the video or image should be reported, not shared. However, even if it is reported, it may not be enough. As many have pointed out, social media platforms themselves do not do enough to prevent and monitor posts that violate their own rules and national laws. Allowing these kinds of posts and videos on platforms contributes to animal cruelty and the escalation of harmful and illegal actions.

The post Is the Internet an animal ally? appeared first on Coal-is-Dirty.

The Critically Endangered addax (Addax nasomaculatus) is a true desert-adapted antelope – the only one of its genus (species group) – with all the evolutionary potential that implies for adapting to climate change in our changing world. Once found in large numbers across vast tracts of the Sahara, illegal over-exploitation and persecution led to a rapid decline in numbers over the past half-century. Since 2007, when there were estimated to be only 200-300 animals remaining, there has been a sharp fall in direct observations, tracks and local reports. This recent drop coincides with the start of oil exploration and production and an increase in numbers of people transiting through addax habitat. With these pressures exacerbated by regional security concerns, there are thought to be fewer than 100 animals – and perhaps less than half that figure – surviving in the wild today. There is also a large global captive population of addax, which has become a source for reintroduction in Morocco and Chad since 2019.

By the early 2000s, the only remaining, viable addax population was found in the Tin Toumma desert of eastern Niger, which in 2012 was incorporated into the Termit and Tin Toumma National Nature Reserve (TTNNR), with some of these addax crossing the border into Chad. However, in June 2019, the Niger Government reclassified the boundaries of TTNNR, resulting in about 50,000 square kilometres in the eastern part of the reserve being excluded from the reserve to remove overlap with oil concession blocks. To replace the declassified area, the Government extended the reserve to the west. As an unintended consequence, the addax habitat in the Tin Toumma desert now lies outside the protected area, along with much of the Termit Massif and its population of another Critically Endangered antelope, the dama gazelle (Nanger dama).

In January 2020, an IUCN mission visited Niger at the invitation of the government for a consultation on saving the addax, and the future of the Termit and Tin Toumma National Nature Reserve. The authorities warmly welcomed the team, which comprised representatives of the IUCN West and Central Africa Programme and the IUCN SSC Antelope Specialist Group, supported by an IUCN Save Our Species Rapid Action Grant awarded to Marwell Wildlife. The IUCN experts proposed a series of recommendations to support the conservation of the addax and the dama gazelle.

Herein lies the key challenge: how to save a highly mobile population of antelope faced with threats that require both strong political will and societal contributions to address, when even finding the animals is like searching for the proverbial needle in a haystack? Further, is the cost of overcoming these challenges worth the effort, when the species could be reintroduced from captive stock into more controlled environments?

As practitioners will testify, reintroductions of large animals from captivity to remote locations are expensive, technically and logistically challenging exercises that are not without risk. It is also the case that the global captive source populations of addax are genetically impoverished compared to those still found in the wild in Niger. Moreover, the genetic diversity of these remaining wild addax, together with their uninterrupted adaptations to and knowledge of their environment, makes them a uniquely precious population. Therefore, while reintroductions have an important role in addax conservation, it is nevertheless essential to protect the remaining wild animals.

The crucial challenge for the wild addax is to eliminate poaching and excessive disturbance across the desert region where the last population survives. This includes enhancing anti-poaching capacity in the reserve and extending targeted protective measures across the whole addax zone from the eastern boundary of the reserve up to the frontier with Chad, potentially aided by satellite tracking animals across their migratory pathways. In addition, it may be possible to protect a small group of breeding addax in Niger under captive or semi-captive conditions, with appropriate care given to preparing the animals for reintroduction. None of these interventions are easy in the remote and harsh desert environment, but the time has come to act if there is hope of avoiding this otherwise inevitable extinction.

All solutions require leadership and guidance from the state and local communities, including transboundary cooperation between Niger and Chad, and the coordinated support of the private sector, NGOs and donor agencies. In a landscape that generates significant income from oil extraction, the role of the oil sector is essential where their operational areas overlap with addax range. In this scenario, there is no inherent incompatibility between oil extraction and species conservation – addax just need protecting from shooting and disturbance, which is entirely compatible with corporate policies and legal responsibilities for safeguarding the environment. Amongst the NGO community, key actors include Noé Conservation, which manages TTNNR on behalf of the Niger Government, and the Sahara Conservation Fund, which gathered much of the key ecological information needed for the designation of the reserve in 2012 and has a preeminent track record in wildlife surveys and monitoring in Niger and across the region.

Saving the remaining wild addax in Niger is the most pressing step in the roadmap for the conservation of this species. Meanwhile, reintroduction initiatives underway in Morocco and Chad, and the management of addax between populations released into three protected areas in Tunisia, present the opportunity to reintegrate the species into these arid ecosystems and regain more of its historical range. As these countries recognise, the plight of the addax is symptomatic of pressures on precious desert ecosystems that have been internationally overlooked and undervalued.

The post To save the Addax antelope, the oil sector and the government must work together with conservationists appeared first on Coal-is-Dirty.

The IUCN Red List is an important indicator of the health of the world’s biodiversity. It is much more than a list of species and their status , it is a powerful tool to inform and stimulate action to conserve biodiversity and change policies that are critical to protecting the natural resources we need to survive. It provides information on range, population size, habitat and ecology, use and/or trade, threats and conservation actions to help make necessary conservation decisions.

The IUCN Red List is used by government agencies, wildlife departments, conservation nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), natural resource planners, educational organizations, students, and the business community. The Red List process has been a massive undertaking involving IUCN Global Conservation Program staff, partner organizations, and experts from the IUCN Species Survival Commission and partner networks that gather information on species to make the IUCN Red List the indispensable product it is today .

To date, many groups of species, including mammals, amphibians, birds, reef forming corals, and conifers, have been comprehensively evaluated. In addition to assessing newly recognized species, the IUCN Red List also reassesses the status of some existing species, sometimes with positive stories. For example, good news, such as the downgrading (i.e., improvement) of a number of species on the IUCN Red List category scale due to conservation efforts. The bad news, however, is that biodiversity is declining . More than 142,500 species are now on the IUCN Red List, of which more than 40,000 species are threatened, including 41% amphibians, 37% sharks and rays, 34% conifers, 33% reef-building corals, 26% mammals and 13% birds.

Despite the high percentage of endangered species, we are working to reverse, or at least halt, the decline in biodiversity. Expanding assessments will help turn the IUCN Red List into a more comprehensive “Barometer of Life. To do this, we need to increase the number of species assessed to at least 160,000. This will improve the global taxonomic coverage and thus provide a stronger basis for better conservation and policy decisions. The IUCN Red List is critical not only to help identify those species in need of targeted recovery efforts, but also to focus attention on the conservation program by identifying key locations and habitats that need to be protected. Ultimately, the IUCN Red List helps guide and inform future conservation priorities and funding.

The post Red List of Species appeared first on Coal-is-Dirty.

Sustainable use of flora and fauna

As far back as the last century it became clear that natural resources are exhaustible. Therefore it is necessary for everyone to refuse uncontrolled use of them. Restricting hunting and trapping of game species helps to reduce the rate of their decline, but only slightly.

Protection of animal habitats from pollution, destruction

In this regard, the transition in each region to low-waste production, reduction of emissions of pollutants into the water, control of felling and reforestation are important. Today 30% of the world’s oceans are already covered by an oil film – this significantly reduces the amount of plankton, the food base for many fish. Forests are disappearing at an enormous rate, about 4.5 billion m3 are cut down annually.

Protection of endangered species – creating nature reserves and sanctuaries

Areas protected at the state level from the destructive influence of human actions are of great importance for the conservation of species in their natural conditions.

Holding rallies, actions in defense of rare animals

The purpose of such demonstrations is to attract the attention of the population and authorities to the problems of preserving endangered animal species. The topics of such public actions can vary from protesting against the fur trade to calling for the preservation of a particular protected area.

Ending poaching

Reducing the scale of illegal hunting is necessary as soon as possible, because the problem has now become really serious.

The problem must be fought at the level of the authorities, but now it is not uncommon for officials themselves to take advantage of their position to hunt with impunity in protected areas. Other segments of the population, among whom poaching is widespread, are residents of areas where such hunting has become a tradition, as well as representatives of criminal gangs.

Donation to wildlife funds

Despite the fact that, according to polls, the vast majority of Russians cite the wealth of nature as the greatest source of pride in their country, less than 1% of the population donates to funds to protect it.

Organization of volunteer movements for the protection of wildlife

Previously, volunteer movements were for the most part concentrated around wildlife and conservation organizations. Now, thanks to the development of Internet communications, volunteers have the opportunity to act independently and to unite in small initiative groups. The main areas of work are cleaning up litter, planting trees, helping to care for animals, and even eliminating the consequences of ecological disasters.

The post Ways to Rescue Wild Animals: Local Level appeared first on Coal-is-Dirty.

Description and Appearance
The appearance of the brown bear is typical of all members of the bear family. The body of the animal is well developed and powerful.

Appearance.
A high withers are present, as well as a rather massive head with small ears and eyes. The length of the relatively short tail varies between 6.5-21.0 cm. Paws are quite strong and well developed, with the presence of powerful and unstretched claws. The feet are very broad, five-toed.

The size of the brown bear
The average length of the brown bear inhabiting the European part is usually about one and a half to two meters with body weight of 135-250 kg. Specimens inhabiting the middle belt of our country are smaller in size and may weigh about 100-120 kg. The largest are considered to be the Far East bears and grizzly bears, which often reach three meters in size.

Skin color
The coloration of the brown bear is quite variable. Differences in the coloration of the coat depend on the habitat, and the color of the fur can range from a light pale shade of pale to bluish-black. The standard color is considered brown.

Longevity
Under natural conditions, the average lifespan of the brown bear is about twenty to thirty years. In captivity, this species is capable of living fifty years, and sometimes more. Rare individuals survive in natural conditions up to the age of fifteen years.

The most common subspecies:

European brown bear with a body length of 150-250 cm, tail length of 5-15 cm, height at the withers of 90-110 cm and an average weight of 150-300 kg. This is a large subspecies with a powerful build and a pronounced hump on the withers. The overall coloration varies from light grayish-yellow to blackish-dark brown. The fur is thick and rather long;
Caucasian brown bear with an average body length of 185-215 cm and a body weight of 120-240 kg. The coat is short, coarse, and more pale in color than the Eurasian subspecies. The coloration varies from pale straw-colored to uniform gray-brown. There is a pronounced, large, dark-colored spot at the withers;
The East Siberian brown bear, with a body weight of up to 330-350 kg and a large skull. The fur is long, soft and dense, with a pronounced luster. Wool has a light brown or blackish-brown or dark brown coloration. For some specimens characterized by the presence in the color quite clearly visible yellowish and black shades;
Ussuri or Amur brown bear. In our country, this subspecies is well known under the name black grizzly. The average body weight of an adult male may range from 350-450 kg. The subspecies is characterized by a large and well-developed skull with an elongated nose. The skin is almost black in color. A distinctive feature is the presence of long hair on the ears.
One of the largest subspecies in our country is the Far Eastern or Kamchatka brown bear, the average body weight of which often exceeds 450-500 kg. Large adults have a large, massive skull and a wide, raised front part of the head. The fur is long, dense and soft, pale yellow, blackish-brown, or completely black in color.

The habitat where the brown bear lives
The natural range of brown bears has undergone significant changes over the past century. Previously, the subspecies was found in vast areas stretching from England to the Japanese Islands, and from Alaska to central Mexico.

The habitat of brown bears has changed during the last centuries, one of the reasons is mass extinction, which forced the bears to migrate.

Today, as brown bears are being extirpated and driven out of their living areas, the most numerous groups of the predator are registered only in western Canada, as well as in Alaska and forest areas of our country.

Lifestyle of the bear
The predator’s activity period is at dusk, early morning and evening hours. The brown bear is a very sensitive animal, which orientates in the space mainly by means of hearing, as well as by smell. A characteristic feature is poor eyesight. Despite their impressive size and large body mass, brown bears are almost silent, fast and very easy to move predators.

Brown bears are sedentary animals, but young bears that have separated from their families can roam and actively search for a mate. Bears mark the boundaries of their territory and defend them. In summer, bears rest directly on the ground, nestling among grasses and low shrubs. With the onset of autumn, the animal begins to prepare a safe winter shelter.

The post Brown Bear appeared first on Coal-is-Dirty.

Description of the leatherback sea turtle
The only modern species in the leatherback turtle family provides not only the largest but also the heaviest reptiles. The Dermochelys coriacea (leatherback turtle) weighs between 400 and 600 kg, rarely gaining twice that weight (900-plus kg).

The lute has a special shell structure: it consists of thick skin rather than horny plates like other sea turtles.

Appearance
The pseudocarapax of the leatherback turtle is represented by connective tissue (4 cm thick), over which there are thousands of small shields. The largest of them form 7 strong ridges, resembling tight ropes, stretching along the carapace from head to tail. Softness and some flexibility are also characteristic of the thoracic (not fully ossified) part of the tortoise shell equipped with five longitudinal ribs. Despite the lightness of the carapace, it reliably protects the lute from enemies, and also contributes to better maneuvering in the thick sea.

The head, neck, and limbs of juvenile tortoises display shields that disappear as they grow older (they only remain on the head). The older the animal is, the smoother its skin is. The turtle’s jaws have no teeth, but they have powerful and sharp horny edges on the outside, reinforced by the jaw muscles.

The leatherback tortoise’s head is quite large and is not able to retract under the shell. The front limbs are almost twice as large as the hind limbs, reaching a wavelength of 5 meters. On land, the leatherback turtle looks dark brown (almost black), but the main color background is diluted with light yellow spots.

Lifestyle of the lute
Were it not for their impressive size, the lute would not be so easy to spot – the reptiles do not bunch up in herds and behave like typical solitary individuals, cautious and secretive. Leatherback Turtles are timid, which is odd for their huge size and immense physical strength. Lutus, like other turtles, is rather clumsy on land, but beautiful and swift at sea. Its gigantic size and weight do not hinder it here: in water, the leatherback turtle swims quickly, maneuvers dashingly, dives deeply and stays there for a long time.

High speed (up to 35 km/h) is provided by the developed pectoral muscles and four limbs, similar to flippers. The back ones replace the rudder and the front ones work as a real engine. The leatherback turtle is reminiscent of a penguin – it seems to be floating in the water, smoothly rotating large front flippers.

Life span
All great turtles (thanks to their slow metabolism) live very long, and some species can live up to 300 years or more. Behind the wrinkled skin and sluggish movements can hide both a young and an elderly reptile, whose internal organs hardly change with time. In addition, turtles are able to go months or even years without food and drink (up to 2 years) and are able to stop and start their heart.

If it were not for predators, humans and infectious diseases, all turtles would live up to the age limit programmed in their genes. The lute is known to live about half a century in the wild, and slightly less (30-40) in captivity. Some scientists call another life span of the leatherback turtle – 100 years.

Habitat, habitat
The leatherback turtle lives in three oceans (Pacific, Atlantic and Indian), swimming up to the Mediterranean Sea, but it is not often seen. The lute was also seen in Russian (then Soviet) waters of the Far East, where 13 animals were found between 1936 and 1984. Biometric parameters of the tortoise are 240-314 kg in weight, 1.16-1.57 m in length and 0.77-1.12 m in width.

Important: As fishermen assure, the figure of 13 does not reflect the real picture: near the southern Kurils leatherback turtles are found much more often. Herpetologists believe that the reptiles are attracted here by the warm Soya Current.

Geographically these and more recent finds are distributed as follows:

Peter the Great Bay (Sea of Japan) – 5 specimens;
Sea of Okhotsk (Iturup, Shikotan and Kunashir) – 6 specimens;
South-western shore of Sakhalin Island – 1 specimen;
South Kuril Islands – 3 specimens;
Bering Sea – 1 specimen;
Bering Sea – 1 specimen; Barents Sea – 1 specimen.

Scientists hypothesized that leatherback turtles began to swim into the seas of the Far East due to the cyclical warming of water and climate. This is confirmed by the catch dynamics of pelagic marine fish and the discovery of other southern species of marine fauna.

The post Leatherback Turtle or Lute appeared first on Coal-is-Dirty.

Description of the Bengal tiger
The distinctive features of the Bengal tiger are its retracted type, sharp and very long claws, as well as its well-fluffed tail and incredibly powerful jaws. Among other things, the predator has perfectly developed hearing and eyesight, so these animals are able to see perfectly even in complete darkness. Length of a jump of an adult tiger is 8-9 m, and speed of movement at short distances reaches 60 km/h. Adult Bengal tigers sleep for about seventeen hours a day.

Appearance
The color of the Bengal tiger’s fur ranges from yellow to light orange in color, and the stripes on its fur are dark brown, bitter chocolate, or black. The belly area of the animal is white, and the tail is also predominantly white, but with distinctive black rings. The mutation of the Bengal subspecies, the white tiger, is characterized by dark brown or reddish-brown stripes on a white or light background. It is extremely rare to find absolutely white tigers without any stripes on their fur.

The average body length of an adult male Bengal tiger with tail is 2.7-3.3 m or more, and 2.40-2.65 m for females. The tail is maximal 1.1 m long and the height at withers is within 90-115 cm. Presently, Bengal tigers have the largest canines of all known representatives of the feline family. Their length can exceed 80-90 mm. The average weight of mature adult male tigers is 223-275 kg, but body weight of some, especially large specimens, reaches even 300-320 kg. The average weight of an adult female is 139.7-135 kg, and her maximum body weight reaches 193 kg.

Lifestyle, behavior
Predatory animals such as Bengal tigers live mostly alone. Sometimes, for a particular purpose, they are able to gather in small groups of a maximum of three or four individuals. Each male tiger fiercely guards his territory, and the roar of the enraged predator can be heard even at a distance of three kilometers.

Bengal tigers lead a nocturnal lifestyle, and during the daytime, these animals prefer to gain strength and rest. Strong and agile, a very fast predator, coming out to hunt at dusk or dawn, rarely remains without prey.

The area of one individual plot of raptor occupies an area of 30-3000 km2, and borders of such a plot are specially marked by males with their feces, urine and so called “scrapes”. In some cases the territory of one male partially overlaps with the territory of several females which are less territorial.

Longevity
“Bengals” prefer hot and humid climatic conditions, in which the average life expectancy is about fifteen years. In captivity, such strong and powerful predatory animals easily live to the age of almost a quarter of a century.

The white Bengal tiger
Of special interest is a small population of the white variation of the Bengal tiger (Pranhera tigris tigris v. Alba), bred by foreign scientists as a decoration for zoological parks. In the wild, such individuals would not be able to hunt in the summer, so they are practically not found in the wild. Occasionally appearing white tigers in their natural habitat are individuals with an innate type of mutation. Such a rare coloration is explained by specialists in terms of insufficient pigment content. The white tiger differs from its redskinned brethren in the unusual blue coloring of its eyes.

Habitat, habitat
All currently known subspecies of tigers, including the Bengal tiger, have a fur coloration that matches all the features of their natural habitat. The predatory species is widespread in tropical jungles, mangrove swamps, savannahs, and rocky areas up to three thousand meters above sea level.

Bengal tigers inhabit the territory of Pakistan and Eastern Iran, Central and Northern India, Nepal and Bhutan, as well as Bangladesh and Myanmar. Predatory animals of this species are found in the vicinity of the Indus and Ganges River estuaries, the Ravi and the Sutlij. The population of this tiger is less than 2.5 thousand individuals, with a probable risk of decline. Today, the Bengal tiger belongs to the category of numerous subspecies of the tiger and has been completely exterminated in the territory of Afghanistan.

The post Bengal Tiger appeared first on Coal-is-Dirty.