CANIS LUPUS IMPORT OF A HUNTING TROPHY FROM TAJIKISTAN

CANIS LUPUS IMPORT OF A HUNTING TROPHY FROM TAJIKISTAN For imports of Canis lupus from Tajikistan, the SRG 77 confirmed a no opinion (iii). According to this, all applications have to be referred to SRG and herewith we follow this agreed procedure. Application In the present case, Austria received an application for the import of one hunting trophy (pelt and skull) from a source W specimen of Canis lupus shot in the Murgab region of Tajikistan for taxidermy. Subsequently, the trophy will be transferred to the hunter and owner in the UK. The application is accompanied by an export permit issued by the CITES authority of Tajikistan. The permit expired on 01.03.2017 but we expect that it will be renewed should there be an indication that an import in the EU will be permitted. Hereafter, we summarize the results of our research and propose to refuse the import. Proposed Resolve Agree that the Tajikistan population of Canis lupus has to be treated as listed in Appendix A. Refuse the import due to insufficient information about the taxonomic and conservation status of the local population as well as probably insufficient wildlife management of this species. International Protection Whereas only the populations of Bhutan, India, Nepal, and Pakistan are included in Appendix I of CITES, all populations of Canis lupus except those of Spain north of the Duero and Greece north of the 39th parallel are listed in Appendix A (Appendix I of this document). Obviously, the FFH Directive causes the different protection status of the European populations. However, the Page 1

remaining inconsistences might be the result of a mistake 1. Both listings exclude the domesticated form and the dingo which are referenced as Canis lupus familiaris and Canis lupus dingo. According to our interpretation of the most recent version of the Council Regulation (EC) No 2017/160, the wolf population of Tajikistan is listed in Appendix A. Threat Assessment At a global level, the species is not threatened and has a stable or regionally even increasing population trend. At a regional level, however, several wolf populations are seriously threatened (Large Carnivore Initiative for Europe 2007; IUCN 2008). For the Central Asian populations no detailed assessment is available. Taxonomy Intraspecific phylogenetic relationships and taxonomy of Canis lupus are still not sufficiently resolved and for many populations there is no generally accepted subspecific classification available. Formally 37 subspecies of Canis lupus are described and it is obvious that many of them are not valid. According to our knowledge, the subspecific status of the population of Canis lupus inhabiting Tajikistan has never been addressed by specific research and might not even be homogeneous. The most plausible classification is Canis lupus lupus but according to the published literature, it cannot be excluded that the geographically vaguely delimited Indian Wolf (Canis lupus pallipes), Himalayan wolf (Canis lupus laniger), Tibetan wolf (Canis lupus chanco) or other scientifically less accepted taxa (e.g. C. l. campestris and C. l. desertorum) might occur in some regions of Tajikistan (Shortriya et al. 2012; Goldthorpe 2016). Especially, Canis lupus chanco is reported to occur in adjacent areas of East Afghanistan and North Pakistan (Ning 2013). Thus, at least a part of the population of Tajikistan could belong to these probably highly threatened taxa. Furthermore, two species have been described on the basis of clusters formed out of Canis lupus chanco and Canis lupus pallipes (Aggarwal et al. 2007). Both species are not generally endorsed by the scientific community (Shortriya et al. 2012) and recognition of Canis 1 We recommend revising this text in the next update of the Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97. Page 2

himalayensis and Canis indica has been recommended by the Animals Committee (AC24 Doc. 13 Rev. 1 Annex 1) but was rejected by the CoP15 (CoP15 Doc. 35 (Rev. 3)). Genetic studies revealed seemingly implausible relationships between geographically distant wolf-populations (Vila et al. 1999). However, this might be a consequence of high levels of migration and genetic exchange. Recently, several locally adapted ecotypes were identified in Europe and North America as an alternative to the conventional subspecies system. This reflects a wolf s preference to remain in the type of habitat that it was born into (Stronen et al. 2013; Schweizer et al. 2016) and not isolation due to migration barriers. The situation in Central Asia is probably similar. National Population and Protection Only sparse information about the population, protection, and management of Canis lupus in Tajikistan has been published. Table 1.3 of Mech & Boitani (2010) shows a population size of around 3000, a stable population trend, no legal protection, and no compensation to mitigate human-wildlife conflicts. The table is accompanied by the explanation This information was obtained by assembling data from available bibliographic sources and the informed and subjective estimates provided by the experts of the IUCN/SSC Wolf Specialist Group and the Large Carnivore Initiative for Europe (Boitani 2000). Except for a few local situations that are well known, most of the numerical estimates should be considered no more than indicative of the general status of the populations. Squires & Safarov (2013) consider the wolf as being over-hunted and placed at risk in Tajikistan. Furthermore, they report that For Tajikistan as a whole, less than a quarter of the region remains in reasonable condition, while less than 10 percent of the original vegetation, including forests, can be considered pristine. Numbers of large native herbivores such as wild sheep, camels, and asses have dropped dramatically over the past century as have carnivores.... Based on a biodiversity survey, Diment et al. (2012) concluded that Canis lupus is not rare in the Zorkul reserve within the Pamir Mountains. According to Saidov (2007) cited after Goldthorpe (2016), the Tajik National Park, which covers 2,600,000ha (22% of Tajikistan) is inhabited by an increasing population of around 1,300 wolves. In 2014, the national average population was estimated to be around 1,700 wolves and considered to be stable (Goldthorpe 2016). Page 3

Management and Human-Wildlife Conflict Goldthorpe (2016) reports that there is no national management plan for this species and the public acceptance is low. In a media report Amirkul Juraev, an expert at the Kulob regional department for the environment, reports that the region's wolf population has increased dramatically in the last several years and the local authorities had had to resume culling wolves ( More Livestock Lost To Wolves In Southern Tajikistan 2011). Another media article ( Tajik Granny Escapes Wolf s Jaws 2012) reports that in the first weeks of 2012 six people were attacked by wolves in southeastern Tajikistan and that attacks on livestock are common. Farkhod Mamadnazarbekov, the chief of the Environmental Protection Department, is cited with the announcement that within three days, wolves in the region will be neutralized. Another official of the Environment Protection Department considers the discontinuation of a program to kill wolves as the cause for a dramatic increase of the population size. We would definitely prefer other sources of information but these are currently the only published reports about this topic. Consultation with Tajikistan In April 2017, the MA of Austria contacted the MA (Neimatullo Safarov and Kodir Maskaev) and SA (Neimatullo Safarov) of Tajikistan and requested information concerning the following topics: (1) Has the subspecific status of the populations of Canis lupus inhabiting Tajikistan ever been addressed by specific research and do populations more closely related to other subspecies than Canis lupus lupus (e.g. Canis lupus chanco, Canis l. laniger, Canis l. pallipes, C. l. campestris, or C. l. desertorum) occur in any region of Tajikistan and especially in the Murgab region? (2) Any available information about the population size and trend, national protection, and management (especially in the Murgab region). (3) Is a share of the revenue earned by trophy hunting of wolves used to mediate human wildlife conflicts, or for other activities with a conservation benefit for this species and does the local population in the Murgab region benefit from tourist hunting? Until now, no reply has been received. Page 4

Independently, the MA of Austria received several personal communications from scientists with experience on the nature conservation efforts in Tajikistan: There is no science-based management of the wolf population in Tajikistan. The taxonomic affinities of the wolf population in Tajikistan have not been scientifically addressed so far. There is an active policy of culling wolves despite lack of knowledge of population size and trends. Among many reasons, wolves are killed to promote the effective and more lucrative hunting of Ovis ammon and Capra faconeri. The price for a wolf trophy hunt is about 1000$, which is about 5% of the revenue from Ovis ammon. Hence, the species is considered economically unimportant. A share of the revenues from hunting permits is used to fund general monitoring activities and providing aid to the local communities of the Murgab region (e.g. purchase of coal) but not in predator proof corrals or other means to alleviate human-wildlife conflicts. There are concerns about unethical hunting practices (e.g. wounding the wolf before the hunter arrives). The owner of the Murgab hunting concession acknowledges the ecological importance of a healthy wolf population but it is unknown if hunting of this species is restricted in any way. Conclusions Compared to the population size of other Asian countries, about 2000 specimens in a country as large as Tajikistan does not indicate a severe conservation problem. Human-wildlife conflicts probably result in considerable official and retaliation killings. In this scenario, one hunting trophy seems to be rather irrelevant. On the other hand, the genetic affiliations of wolves in Tajikistan are unknown and might be heterogeneous. According to the available data, it cannot be excluded that the current import application affects a hunting trophy from a restricted and possibly highly threatened subspecies which would require a careful conservation management which is currently not in place. In summary the available information indicates that the import should be denied because: the taxonomic identification of the specimen is not sufficiently precise to assess the conservation relevance, the wildlife management of wolves in Tajikistan is insufficient to ensure the sustainability of hunting, conflicts between humans and wolves are abundant and solved by indiscriminant killing, Page 5

revenues generated by hunting on wolves are not used for the conservation of this species and generate only marginal benefits for the local communities, and it would contradict every recommendation of paragraph 3 in Resolution 17.9 2. Literature: Aggarwal RK, Kivisild T, Ramadevi J, Singh L. 2007. Mitochondrial DNA coding region sequences support the phylogenetic distinction of two Indian wolf species. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research 45:163 172. Boitani L. 2000. Action plan for the conservation of wolves in Europe (Canis lupus). Council of Europe. Diment A, Hotham P, Mallon D. 2012. First biodiversity survey of Zorkul Reserve, Pamir Mountains, Tajikistan. Oryx 46:13. Goldthorpe G. 2016. The wolf in Eurasia - a regional approach to the conservation and management of a top-predator in Central Asia and the South Caucasus. Fauna and Flora International. Available from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/gareth_goldthorpe/publication/310327160_the_wolf_in _Eurasia_-_a_regional_approach_to_the_conservation_and_management_of_a_toppredator_in_Central_Asia_and_the_South_Caucasus/links/582b7f9708ae102f07209376.pdf?orig in=publication_detail (accessed June 1, 2017). IUCN. 2008. Canis lupus: Mech, L.D. & Boitani, L. (IUCN SSC Wolf Specialist Group): The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2010: e.t3746a10049204. Available from http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/3746/0 (accessed March 9, 2017). Large Carnivore Initiative for Europe. 2007. Canis lupus (Arctic Wolf, Common Wolf, Gray Wolf, Grey Wolf, Mexican Wolf, Plains Wolf, Timber Wolf, Tundra Wolf, Wolf). Available from http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/3746/1 (accessed March 9, 2017). Mech LD, Boitani L. 2010. Wolves: behavior, ecology, and conservation. University of Chicago Press. More Livestock Lost To Wolves In Southern Tajikistan. 2011, May 23. Available from http://www.rferl.org/a/livestock_lost_to_wolves_in_tajikistan/24183789.html (accessed March 6, 2017). Ning W. 2013. High-altitude rangelands and their interfaces in the Hindu Kush Himalayas. Page (International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, editor). International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, Kathmandu. Saidov A. 2007. The survey of Mammals Pamir-Alai transboundary conservation area. Project on the Establishment Pamir-Alai transboundary Conservation Area between Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan. Report to the European Commission, Dushanbe. 2 RECOMMENDS that Parties exporting hunting trophies of CITES-listed species ensure that trophy hunting is sustainably managed, does not undermine the conservation of target species and, as appropriate, provides benefits to local communities by having in place: a) a robust regulatory framework relating to the harvesting of trophies; b) an effective enforcement mechanism with adequate deterrents in the form of penalties for noncompliance; c) a monitoring system designed to effectively monitor population trends and status; and d) an adaptive management system through which harvest levels can be adjusted according to the needs of the specific population and based on results of the monitoring programme; Page 6

Schweizer RM, vonholdt BM, Harrigan R, Knowles JC, Musiani M, Coltman D, Novembre J, Wayne RK. 2016. Genetic subdivision and candidate genes under selection in North American grey wolves. Molecular Ecology 25:380 402. Shortriya KS, Salvador Lyngdoh, Bilal Habib. 2012. Wolves in Trans-Himalayas: 165 years of taxonomic confusion. Current Science 103:885. Squires VR, Safarov N. 2013. Diversity of plants and animals in mountain systems in Tajikistan. J. Rangleand Science 4. Available from https://works.bepress.com/victor_squires/1/ (accessed March 6, 2017). Stronen AV et al. 2013. North-South Differentiation and a Region of High Diversity in European Wolves (Canis lupus). PLoS ONE 8:e76454. Tajik Granny Escapes Wolf s Jaws. 2012, January 20. Available from http://www.rferl.org/a/tajikistan_wolf_attacks/24457676.html (accessed March 6, 2017). Vila C, Amorim IR, Leonard JA, Posada D, Castroviejo J, Petrucci-Fonseca F, Crandall KA, Ellegren H, Wayne RK. 1999. Mitochondrial DNA phylogeography and population history of the grey wolf Canis lupus. Molecular Ecology 8:2089 2103. Page 7

Appendix I COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 338/97 EN 04.02.2017 Page 8