Conservation Assessment and Conservation Assessment and Management Plan/ PrioritizationManagement Plan/ Prioritization

(C.A.M.P. )(C.A.M.P. )

A methodology for Rapid Assessment of Conservation Status

Evolution of CAMP Workshops -

Impetus Sir Peter Scott, Chairman, SSC, asked Dr. U. S. Seal, Chairman, CBSG to find a method of

prioritizing species for zoo conservation.

Early exercises Global level CAMPs for large taxon groupse.g. Primates, Antelopes of the world

For plant species

St. Helena’s Island CAMPSouthern Indian Medicinal Plants CAMPs (4)

Mexican Cactus CAMPIndian B.C.P.P.

High altitude medicinal plants CAMP workshops for JMK & HP

Medicinal plants CAMP workshops for AP & Maharashtra

CAMP Workshops • Aid rapid assessment of conservation status and management prioritization through appraisal of available data on distribution, trends, habitat status, etc. with valuable inputs of experts (taxonomists, Aid rapid assessment of conservation status and management prioritization through appraisal of available data on distribution, trends, habitat status, etc. with valuable inputs of experts (taxonomists,

foresters, ecologists, ...) based on their field observationsforesters, ecologists, ...) based on their field observations• Result in assignment of IUCN Red List categories to each of the assessed taxaResult in assignment of IUCN Red List categories to each of the assessed taxa• Also record recommendations for research, management, information gathering, public awareness, and legislative activitiesAlso record recommendations for research, management, information gathering, public awareness, and legislative activities

MAIN FEATURES OF A CAMP WORKSHOP

• 10-40 Experts (Field Botanists,Foresters, User group representatives, Knowledgeable local inhabitants etc.) are brought together for the workshop.

• Full 3 days exercise by all participants

• Accepted list of taxa, under assessment, divided into 4-5 sub-lists

• 4 - 5 Working groups formed with each one taking up a sub-list of 7 to 10 taxa.

• Each working group has a Facilitator and a Taxon Data sheet recorder.

MAIN FEATURES OF A CAMP WORKSHOP

• Each group prepares detailed compilation on assessment and recommendations, for each allotted Taxon based on the information generated by the group members.

• All working group assessments and recommendations are presented, reviewed, discussed and finalized for each Taxon in the plenary sessions.

• CAMP document is finalized after obtaining review/ comments, of participants and other experts, on the draft document.

MAIN FEATURES OF A CAMP WORKSHOP

Decalepis hamiltonii WIGHT & ARN. (ASCLEPIADACEAE)

Threat Status : Endangered (Globally)

MAP

Species (& synonyms) Decalepis hamiltonii Wight & Arn.Vernacular name Maakaliberu (Kan); Nannaari, Naruinti (Mal.); Mahali kelangu (Tam.).Family PERIPLOCACEAETaxonomic status SpeciesHabit ClimberHabitat In open rocky slopes and crevices of dry to moist deciduous forestsOriginal global distribution ENDEMIC to southern IndiaCurrent regional distribution Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh.- Elevation (m) 300 - 1,800- Range (km2) > 20,000- Area occupied (km2) > 2,000- No. of locations Many, fragmented.Population Trends- % decline > 50- Time/Rate ( years orgenerations)

3 generations

- No. of mature individuals Not estimatedGlobal population DecliningRegional population DecliningData quality General field studies (2)Recent field studies K.Ravikumar, P.S.Udayan, S.P.Subramani (1997-98), Savanadurga MPCA;

K.Ravikumar (1997), BIRD-K MPCP forest; P.S.Udayan (1997) andR.Ganesan (1997-98), BRT Hills; S.P.Subramani (1997-98), and many more

Threats Harvest for medicine (Hm); Trade for parts (Tp), Over-exploitation (Ov).Trade Local, Regional and National.Other comments Decalepis is a monotypic genus. First time reported for Kerala State by N.Sasidharan

from Chinnar. Regeneration is severely affected since most of the plants are harvestedprior to seed setting. Roots, leaves and follicles are medicinal. Roots pickled andmarketed in a large scale. Also used as a substitute for Hemidesmus indicus (Sariva).Roots harvested in hundreds of tonnes from BRT Hills for pickling and medicinalpurposes (R.Ganesan, 1998). Conservator of Forest of Vellore and Salem circle statedthat the roots are auctioned around 100 tonnes every year (K.Ravikumar, 1998).Girijan Co-operative Society, Andhra Pradesh traded 351.6 tonnes of roots from 1st

Apr. 97 to Jan. 98.Status- IUCN ENDANGERED (EN)- Criteria based on Population reduction (A1d)- CITES No- IWPA (1972; 91) No- National legislation Not in negative list of exports (Notification 2 (RE-98) dt 13.4.98, 1997-2002)Recommendations- Research management Habitat management (Hm), Monitoring (M), Taxonomic/Genetic Studies (T).- P.H.V.A. NoCultivation prog. recommendations- Cultivation Level 2 (intensive cultivation needed)- Level of difficulty Level 1 (Least difficult)Existing cultivation None at commercial scale- Names of facilities Above 2,000 seedlings raised by LMC of SavandurgaPrevious assessment EN in CAMP-III (Jan.‘97) compiled by B.V.Shetty, Purushotham Singh,

S.R.Ramesh, K.Ravikumar, A.G.Pandurangan, J.L.Ellis, K.R.Geetha, R.Latha.Sources N.Sasidharan, P.S.Udayan, K.Ravikumar, A.G.Pandurangan and M.B.Viswanathan

(persn. observn.).Compilers N.Sasidharan, S.S.R.Bennet, T.Ananda Rao, K.Ravikumar, M.B.Viswanathan

V.Irudayaraj, Mohan Karnat, Subhash Mali, Sumy Oommen.Reviewers M.Abdul Kareem, M.Ahmedullah, N.Anil Kumar, Anjana Mudappa,

S.Aroumougame, and many more

Coscinium fenestratum (GAERTN.) COLEB. (MENISPERMACEAE)

Threat Status : Critically Endangered (in KT, TN & KE)

MAP

Species (& synonyms) Coscinium fenestratum (Gaertn.) Coleb.Vernacular name Maradrashina (Kan.); Maramanjal (Mal.and Tam.).Family MENISPERMACEAETaxonomic status SpeciesHabit LianaHabitat Moist deciduous to evergreen forestsOriginal global distribution Indo-malaya (southern India, Sri Lanka, Cambodia and W.Malesia).Current regional distribution Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu- Elevation (m) 350 – 1,200- Range (km2) > 50,000 (KA) < 3,000 (KL) < 5,000 (TN)- Area occupied (km2) > 5,000 (KA) < 50 (KL) < 10 (TN)- No. of locations 7 (KA) 20 (KL) 3 (TN).Population Trends- % decline > 80 (KA) > 80 (KL) > 80 (TN)- Time/Rate (years or generations) 3 generations.- No. of mature individuals < 20 (KA) < 50 (KL) < 5 (TN)Global population Not assessedRegional population Declining at a fast phaseData quality General field studies.Recent field studies K.R.Geetha (1999), Makut, Coorg; KFD (1998), Hebri, Uduppi, Devimane

Ghat, Gerusoppa, Sharavathi back water, Someshwara WLS; P.S.Udayan(1998), Charmady MPCA and Bisle Ghat (KA) and many more

Threats Human interference (I), Loss of Habitat (L), Over exploitation (Ov), Harvest formedicine (Hm).

Trade Local, Regional and National.

Other comments Valuable medicine in Ayurvedic preparation and a source of natural dye.Availability of suitable materials (tender shoots) is insufficient in numbers dueto destructive collection from the wild (by total uprooting) which leads to totaldepletion of wild stock. Being a dioecious plant, mature individuals are neededfor seed production. Liana cutting in forestry operations is a serious threat. Stemused as a substitute for Berberis aristata. Roots and stems are highly exploitedfor trade.

Status- IUCN CR (KA) CR (KL) CR (TN)- Criteria based on Population reduction (A1a,c,d).- CITES No- IWPA (1972; 91) No- National legialation Yes in negative list of exports (Notification 2 (RE-98) dt 13.4.98, 1997-2002)Recommendations- Research management Monitoring (M), Habitat management (Hm), Life history studies (Lh).- P.H.V.A. YesCultivation prog. recommendations Yes- Cultivation Level 1 (intensive cultivation needed)- Level of difficulty Level 2 (Moderately difficult)Existing cultivation None at commercial scale.- Names of facilities Sample specimens are grown in TBGRI, CIMH, AVS and KFRI gardens.

Multiplication studies are undertaken by UAS, Bangalore. Preliminary trials formultiplication conducted by KFRI using growth hormones showed encouragingresults. Micro propagation attempted by KFRI was not successful. Propagationby seeds quite successful (> 90% germination)

Previous assessment CR in CAMP-I (Feb.‘95) compiled by N.Anil Kumar, P.Balasubramanian,M.P.Nayar, A.G.Pandurangan, V.S.Ramachandran, S.R.Ramesh, D.Ramkanth,C.J.Saldanha, Sally Walker, Sanjay Molur, N.Sasidharan, U.S.Seal, A.N.Shetty,B.V.Shetty, C.K.Sreedharan, K.N.Subramanian, D.K.Ved, Vinay Tandon.

Sources K.R.Geetha, P.S.Udayan, A.E.Shanawaz Khan, N.Sasidharan, K.Ravikumar,R.Ganesan (persn. observn.).

Compilers M.Abdul Kareem, M.Ahmedullah, T.Ananda Rao, N.Anil Kumar, AnjaliWadehra, Anjana Mudappa and more

Summary of results of 4 CAMP Workshops for Medicinal plants of Southern India (Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu)

1. A total of 110 taxa assessed (1995, 1996, 1997 and 1999)

23%

6%

25%

46%Herb (25)

Shrub (7)

Climber (28)

Tree (50)

Habit-wise break up

2. 58 out of these are endemics and have been assigned Global RL status.

5%19%

29%

39%

3% 5%

Extinct (3)

Critically Endangered(11)

Endangered (17)

Vulnerable (22)

Near Threatened (2)

Data Defecient (3)

Category-wise break up of Endemics

ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATIONISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION

(Based on the experiences of 6 Med. Plant CAMP Workshops)

I Need for undertaking “Regional” assessments for well defined geographical units.

Whereas Global assessment of threat status of Taxa contribute to the formulation of guidelines and policies for conservation, it is the “Regional” threat status which prompts conservation action in a geographical region. For non-endemic Taxa, occurring over a wider geo-graphical area, the rapid “Regional” assessment of threat status is the only way for initiating urgent Conservation Action.

II Need for enlistment of “Experts” and ensuring their participation.

Without the participation of “Experts” (field botanists,foresters, local knowledgeable persons) with sufficient experience of field observations, in the region under consideration, the appropriate assessments cannot be made.

ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATIONISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION

(Based on the experiences of 6 Med. Plant CAMP Workshops)

III How to select plant Taxa, for threat assessment, systematically?

Generally the selection is subjective

After the obvious / spectacular candidates have been selected it is difficult to select additional Taxa for assessment.

ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATIONISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION

(Based on the experiences of 6 Med. Plant CAMP Workshops)

IV Need for refinement of CRITERIA for IUCN Red List Categories

Problem of assessing “Population Reduction” over very long time period of 3 generations ( > 50 years for perennials).

A large number of tree Taxa of tropics, especially those with narrow distribution, automatically qualify for threat status “Vulnerable” and above based on “Population Reduction” due to forest cover loss (exceeding 30 % over 50 years)

SUGGESTIONS FOR “REGIONAL” THREAT STATUS ASSESSMENTSSUGGESTIONS FOR “REGIONAL” THREAT STATUS ASSESSMENTS

I. (a) Need to follow internationally accepted standards for defining the geographical units for undertaking “Regional” assessments (following World Geographical Scheme for recording plant distributions by S. Hollis and R K Brummitt based on Plant Taxonomic Database Standards No.2 , Version 1.0, Jan ‘92)

(b) The “Regional” assessments need to be undertaken at the level of a “Basic recording unit” (more than one unit may be taken up at a time for threat assessment through a CAMP workshop.). In Indian context every State / UT / Island group corresponds to a basic recording unit.

SUGGESTIONSSUGGESTIONS FOR “REGIONAL” THREAT STATUS ASSESSMENTSFOR “REGIONAL” THREAT STATUS ASSESSMENTS

I. (c) In respect of non-endemic Taxa such “Regional” assessments, when pooled, can generate the “Global” assessment of threat status.

II. Compilation of geographical unit-wise list of experts.III.Need for rigorous pre-CAMP data collection and compilation effort.

Information on RANGE, DISTRIBUTION, EXTENT OF OCCURANCE (Global), TRADE (Quantities, Parts),HABITAT SPECIFICITY, FOREST COVER LOSS etc. needs to be collected and compiled from different sources by the organizers for undertaking a well informed CAMP workshop. Quantification of many of these parameters is essential through a pre-CAMP exercise. This helps “qualify” Taxa for assessment in a CAMP workshop.

Summing Up

• Comprehensive threat assessments need a large input of time and money.

• Use of rapid methods of assessment (CAMP process) is being advocated by Species Survival Commission (of IUCN) to guide timely conservation action .

• Need to urgently initiate rapid assessment process through CAMP Workshops for prioritized medicinal plants of each State