Conservation Assessment and
Management Plan/ Prioritization
(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 groups
e.g. Primates, Antelopes of the world
For plant species
St. Helena’s Island CAMP
Southern Indian Medicinal Plants CAMPs (4)
Mexican Cactus CAMP
Indian 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,
foresters, ecologists, ...) based on their field observations
Result 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 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
MAIN FEATURES OF A
CAMP WORKSHOP
•
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.
Decalepis hamiltonii
WIGHT & ARN.
Threat Status : Endangered (Globally)
(ASCLEPIADACEAE)
MAP
Species (& synonyms)
Vernacular name
Family
Taxonomic status
Habit
Habitat
Original global distribution
Current regional distribution
- Elevation (m)
- Range (km2)
- Area occupied (km2)
- No. of locations
Population Trends
- % decline
- Time/Rate ( years or
generations)
- No. of mature individuals
Global population
Regional population
Data quality
Recent field studies
Decalepis hamiltonii Wight & Arn.
Maakaliberu (Kan); Nannaari, Naruinti (Mal.); Mahali kelangu (Tam.).
PERIPLOCACEAE
Species
Climber
In open rocky slopes and crevices of dry to moist deciduous forests
ENDEMIC to southern India
Karnataka, Kerala, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh.
300 - 1,800
> 20,000
> 2,000
Many, fragmented.
> 50
3 generations
Not estimated
Declining
Declining
General field studies (2)
K.Ravikumar, P.S.Udayan, S.P.Subramani (1997-98), Savanadurga MPCA;
K.Ravikumar (1997), BIRD-K MPCP forest; P.S.Udayan (1997) and
R.Ganesan (1997-98), BRT Hills; S.P.Subramani (1997-98), and many more
Threats
Trade
Other comments
Status
- IUCN
- Criteria based on
- CITES
- IWPA (1972; 91)
- National legislation
Recommendations
- Research management
- P.H.V.A.
Cultivation prog. recommendations
- Cultivation
- Level of difficulty
Existing cultivation
- Names of facilities
Previous assessment
Sources
Compilers
Reviewers
Harvest for medicine (Hm); Trade for parts (Tp), Over-exploitation (Ov).
Local, Regional and National.
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 harvested
prior to seed setting. Roots, leaves and follicles are medicinal. Roots pickled and
marketed 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 medicinal
purposes (R.Ganesan, 1998). Conservator of Forest of Vellore and Salem circle stated
that 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.
ENDANGERED (EN)
Population reduction (A1d)
No
No
Not in negative list of exports (Notification 2 (RE-98) dt 13.4.98, 1997-2002)
Habitat management (Hm), Monitoring (M), Taxonomic/Genetic Studies (T).
No
Level 2 (intensive cultivation needed)
Level 1 (Least difficult)
None at commercial scale
Above 2,000 seedlings raised by LMC of Savandurga
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.
N.Sasidharan, P.S.Udayan, K.Ravikumar, A.G.Pandurangan and M.B.Viswanathan
(persn. observn.).
N.Sasidharan, S.S.R.Bennet, T.Ananda Rao, K.Ravikumar, M.B.Viswanathan
V.Irudayaraj, Mohan Karnat, Subhash Mali, Sumy Oommen.
M.Abdul Kareem, M.Ahmedullah, N.Anil Kumar, Anjana Mudappa,
S.Aroumougame, and many more
Coscinium fenestratum (GAERTN.) COLEB.
Threat Status : Critically Endangered
(in KT, TN & KE)
(MENISPERMACEAE)
MAP
Species (& synonyms)
Vernacular name
Family
Taxonomic status
Habit
Habitat
Original global distribution
Current regional distribution
- Elevation (m)
- Range (km2)
- Area occupied (km2)
- No. of locations
Population Trends
- % decline
- Time/Rate (years or generations)
- No. of mature individuals
Global population
Regional population
Data quality
Recent field studies
Threats
Trade
Coscinium fenestratum (Gaertn.) Coleb.
Maradrashina (Kan.); Maramanjal (Mal.and Tam.).
MENISPERMACEAE
Species
Liana
Moist deciduous to evergreen forests
Indo-malaya (southern India, Sri Lanka, Cambodia and W.Malesia).
Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu
350 – 1,200
> 50,000 (KA)
< 3,000 (KL)
< 5,000 (TN)
> 5,000 (KA)
< 50 (KL)
< 10 (TN)
7 (KA)
20 (KL)
3 (TN).
> 80 (KA)
> 80 (KL)
> 80 (TN)
3 generations.
< 20 (KA)
< 50 (KL)
< 5 (TN)
Not assessed
Declining at a fast phase
General 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
Human interference (I), Loss of Habitat (L), Over exploitation (Ov), Harvest for
medicine (Hm).
Local, Regional and National.
Other comments
Status
- IUCN
- Criteria based on
- CITES
- IWPA (1972; 91)
- National legialation
Recommendations
- Research management
- P.H.V.A.
Cultivation prog. recommendations
- Cultivation
- Level of difficulty
Existing cultivation
- Names of facilities
Previous assessment
Sources
Compilers
Valuable medicine in Ayurvedic preparation and a source of natural dye.
Availability of suitable materials (tender shoots) is insufficient in numbers due
to destructive collection from the wild (by total uprooting) which leads to total
depletion of wild stock. Being a dioecious plant, mature individuals are needed
for seed production. Liana cutting in forestry operations is a serious threat. Stem
used as a substitute for Berberis aristata. Roots and stems are highly exploited
for trade.
CR (KA)
CR (KL)
CR (TN)
Population reduction (A1a,c,d).
No
No
Yes in negative list of exports (Notification 2 (RE-98) dt 13.4.98, 1997-2002)
Monitoring (M), Habitat management (Hm), Life history studies (Lh).
Yes
Yes
Level 1 (intensive cultivation needed)
Level 2 (Moderately difficult)
None at commercial scale.
Sample specimens are grown in TBGRI, CIMH, AVS and KFRI gardens.
Multiplication studies are undertaken by UAS, Bangalore. Preliminary trials for
multiplication conducted by KFRI using growth hormones showed encouraging
results. Micro propagation attempted by KFRI was not successful. Propagation
by seeds quite successful (> 90% germination)
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.
K.R.Geetha, P.S.Udayan, A.E.Shanawaz Khan, N.Sasidharan, K.Ravikumar,
R.Ganesan (persn. observn.).
M.Abdul Kareem, M.Ahmedullah, T.Ananda Rao, N.Anil Kumar, Anjali
Wadehra, 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)
Habit-wise break up
23%
46%
6%
25%
Herb (25)
Shrub (7)
Climber (28)
Tree (50)
2. 58 out of these are endemics and have been assigned Global RL status.
Category-wise break up of Endemics
Extinct (3)
3% 5%
5%
19%
Critically Endangered
(11)
Endangered (17)
Vulnerable (22)
39%
29%
Near Threatened (2)
Data Defecient (3)
ISSUES 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.
ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
(Based on the experiences of 6 Med. Plant CAMP Workshops)
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.
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 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 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.
SUGGESTIONS FOR “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