Biological Invasions

, Volume 12, Issue 6, pp 1467–1475 | Cite as

The slippery slope of exporting invasive species: the case of Himalayan tahr arriving in South America

Invasion Note

Abstract

Releasing alien mammals was considered positive in the past, but impacts were recognized as important already decades ago. Himalayan tahr were introduced to New Zealand (NZ), resulting in overt damage and continuous government control programs. Existing laws could not prevent NZ exports, and Argentina imports of tahr, although NZ authorities recommended against these imports. National and provincial legislation was possibly too complex, contradictory or incomplete to be enforced, or had loopholes such that tahr were imported to Argentina (2000, 2006). The estimated population in 2008 was 400–450 tahr. As even common travel routes are used to cross national borders in South America illegally with live ungulates, and enterprises importing tahr have been intercepted for illegally transporting wild ungulates previously, there are substantial risks that tahr might be released to new sites. As huge areas lack natural barriers, landscapes are very similar to NZ environments successfully invaded by tahr, and eradication or control are unfeasible, the future of Himalayan tahr in South America now hinges solely on releases or escapes. Importantly, the 2006 import was to Andean foothills which is an ecological time bomb. Considering climates, history of invasiveness in NZ, and low required propagule pressure, tahr could perform from 34°–55°S along the Andes. NZ still has many illegal liberations, thus it would be more difficult to contain illegal liberations in Argentina. It calls for more leadership and better standards by exporting countries, especially if they had the chance to experience the consequences of having received the exotic species earlier.

Keywords

Invasion Hemitragus jemlahicus Introduction Argentina Policy Alien Exotic 

References

  1. Bhatnagar YV, Lovari S (2008) Hemitragus jemlahicus. In: 2008 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Available via http://www.iucnredlist.org. Accessed 30 May 2009
  2. Bonino NA (2005) Guia de mamíferos de la Patagonia Argentina. Ediciones INTA, Buenos AiresGoogle Scholar
  3. Cabal GB (1988) Animales exóticos. Fauna Argentina. Centro Editor de America Latina S.A, Buenos AiresGoogle Scholar
  4. Caughley G (1970a) Eruption of ungulate populations, with emphasis on Himalayan thar in New Zealand. Ecology 51:53–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Caughley G (1970b) Liberation, dispersal, and distribution of Himalayan thar (Hemitragus jemlahicus) in New Zealand. NZ J Sci 13:220–239Google Scholar
  6. Chebez JC (1994) Los que se van. Editorial Albatros, Buenos AiresGoogle Scholar
  7. Christie AH, Andrews JR (1964) Introduced ungulates in New Zealand: (a) Himalayan Tahr. Tuatara 12:69–77Google Scholar
  8. Di Paola ME, Kravetz DG (2004) Invasive alien species: legal and institutional framework in Argentina. In: Miller ML, Fabian RN (eds) Harmful invasive species; legal responses. Environmental Law Institute, Washington DC, pp 71–88Google Scholar
  9. DoC (2009a) Department of conservation: the threat of tahr. http://www.doc.govt.nz, downloaded 27 Aug 2009
  10. DoC (2009b) Department of conservation: deer, chamois, tahr and pigs. http://www.doc.govt.nz, downloaded 27 Aug 2009
  11. Ezcurra C, Baccala N, Wardle P (2008) Floristic relationships among vegetation types of New Zealand and the Southern Andes: similarities and biogeographic implications. Ann Bot 101:1401–1412CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Flueck WT, Smith-Flueck JM (1993) Über das in Argentinien angesiedelte Rotwild (Cervus elaphus, L., 1758): Verbreitung und Tendenzen. Zeits Jagdwiss 39:153–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Flueck WT, Smith-Flueck JM (2006a) Predicaments of endangered huemul deer, Hippocamelus bisulcus, in Argentina: a review. E J Wildl Res 52:69–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Flueck WT, Smith-Flueck JM (2006b) Herbívoros exóticos y su papel en la recuperación del huemul. In: Administración de Parques Nacionales (ed) 5ta. Reunión Binacional Argentino-Chilena sobre Estrategias de Conservación del Huemul, Bariloche, Argentina, pp 30-35Google Scholar
  15. Flueck WT, Smith-Flueck JM (2007) El ciervo rojo exótico en el ambiente patagónico: biología, impacto y opciones de manejo para áreas protegidas. IUCN 2nd Latinamerican Congress on National Parks and Protected areas Bariloche, ArgentinaGoogle Scholar
  16. Flueck WT, Smith-Flueck JM, Naumann CM (2003) The current distribution of red deer (Cervus elaphus) in southern Latin America. E J Wildl Res 49:112–119Google Scholar
  17. Forsyth DM (1999) Long-term harvesting and male migration in a New Zealand population of Himalayan tahr Hemitragus jemlahicus. J Appl Ecol 36:351–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Forsyth DM, Tustin KG (2001) Advances in New Zealand mammalogy 1990–2000: Himalayan tahr. J R Soc NZ 31:251–261Google Scholar
  19. Forsyth DM, Parkes J, Hickling G (2000) A case for multi-species managemt of sympatric herbivore pest impacts in the central Southern Alps, New Zealand. NZ J Ecol 24:97–103Google Scholar
  20. Fraser KW, Cone JM, Whitford EJ (2000) A revision of the established ranges and new populations of 11 introduced ungulate species in New Zealand. J R Soc NZ 30:419–437Google Scholar
  21. Fraser KW, Parkes JP, Thomson C (2003) Management of new deer populations in Northland and Taranaki. Sci Conserv 212:1–30Google Scholar
  22. Godley EJ (1960) The botany of southern Chile in relation to New Zealand and the Subantarctic. Proc R Soc B 152:457–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hughey KFD, Hickling GJ (2006) Ecologically based policy evaluation: application to ungulate management in New Zealand. Environ Sci Policy 9:639–651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jiménez J, Guineo G, Corti P, Smith JM, Flueck WT, Vila A, Gizejewski Z, Gill R, McShea W, Geist V (2008) Hippocamelus bisulcus. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN, Gland, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  25. Kittur S, Sathyakumar S, Rawat GS (2009) Assessment of spatial and habitat use overlap between Himalayan tahr and livestock in Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary, India. Eur J Wildl Res doi:10.1007/s10344-009-0302-3
  26. Kolar CS, Lodge DM (2001) Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders. TREE 16:199–204PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Nunez MA, Pauchard A (2009) Biological invasions in developing and developed countries: does one model fit all? Biol Invasions doi:10.1007/s10530-009-9517-1
  28. Olson LJ (2006) The economics of terrestrial invasive species: a review of the literature. Agr Resour Econ Rev 35:178–194Google Scholar
  29. Perrings C, Dehnen-Schmutz K, Touza J, Williamson M (2005) How to manage biological invasions under globalization. TREE 20:212–215PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Petrides GA (1975) The importance of wild ungulates into Latin America, with remarks on their environmental effects. Environ Conserv 2:47–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pimentel D, Lach L, Zuniga R, Morrison D (2000) Environmental and economic costs of nonindigenous species in the United States. Bioscience 50:53–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Richard E, Julia JP (2004) Mamíferos introducidos de Argentina. In: Richard E (ed) Cátedra de Manejo y Conservación de Vida Silvestre, materiales de apoyo docente. Escuela Militar de Ingenieria, La PazGoogle Scholar
  33. Sage E (2001) The trouble with tahr. Forest and Bird. (http://www.forestandbird.org.nz), August
  34. Sala OE, Chapin FS, Armesto JJ, Berlow E, Dirzo J, Bloomfield R et al (2000) Global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. Science 287:1770–1774CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Simons SA, De Poorter M (2009). Best practices in pre-import risk screening for species of live animals in international trade. In: Proceedings of an expert workshop on preventing biological invasions, University of Notre Dame, IN, USA, 9–11 April 2008. Global Invasive Species Programme, Nairobi, Kenya, pp 1–30Google Scholar
  36. Tustin KG (1990) Himalayan tahr. In: King CM (ed) The handbook of New Zealand Mammals. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 392–406Google Scholar
  37. Ubeda C, Grigera D (eds) (1995) Recalificación del estado de conservación de la fauna silvestre Aargentina. Región Patagónica. Secretaría de Recursos Naturales y Ambiente Humano y Consejo Asesor Regional Patagónico de la Fauna Silvestre. Buenos AiresGoogle Scholar
  38. Vogel CA (1969) Parque Diana. Stefan Schwarz Verlag, MünchenGoogle Scholar
  39. Williamson M (2006) Explaining and predicting the success of invading species at different stages of invasion. Biol Invasions 8:1561–1568CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Council for Scientific ResearchBarilocheArgentina
  2. 2.Institute of Natural Resources AnalysisUniversidad Atlantida ArgentinaMar del PlataArgentina
  3. 3.Swiss Tropical InstituteUniversity BaselBaselSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations