1. Booking a seat on the AArk Richard Gibson and Kevin Johnson AArk Taxon Officers

2. The IUCN Amphibian Conservation Action Plan (ACAP), published in 2007, calls for unprecedented levels of conservation funding and activity in order to avert an amphibian extinction crisis

4. Among the disciplines considered essential for the successful mitigation of this crisis is ex situ conservation – or captive breeding

6. (that’s US dollars!)

7. There are more than 6000 species of amphibian, of which 1/3 to 1/2 are threatened with extinction to some degree. However, not all require, or will benefit from, ex situ conservation

8. We must therefore choose where to apply our limited ex situ conservation resources…

9. In February 2005, the IUCN CBSG and WAZA organised and facilitated the Amphibian Ex Situ Conservation Planning workshop in El Valle, Panama

10. Home of the Panamanian golden frog, now feared extinct… © Paul Crump

11. One of the working groups at this meeting produced a draft species ‘selection’ process which, after multiple revisions and improvements, is now the Amphibian Ark process: Species Prioritisation for Ex Situ Conservation

12. The full process is divided into three parts: 1. Prioritisation 2. Authorisation 3. Implementation We will focus on part 1.

13. The prioritisation process is designed to identify which species: 1.most urgently need ex situ conservation 2.will most benefit from ex situ work 3.we are most likely to ‘succeed’ with – i.e. meet the goals of any programme

14. Remember, ex situ conservation is not limited to captive breeding, whether short-term for reintroduction or as a long-term safety-net

15. Research and education / awareness programmes utilising ex situ populations can both make invaluable contributions to amphibian conservation

17. The process works by considering a series of questions about each species: 1.Extinction risk according to GAA 2.Likelihood of mitigating threats in the wild 3.‘Role’ in captivity 4.Phylogenetic distinctiveness (EDGE) 5.Biological significance 6.Cultural or socio-economic importance 7.Scientific importance

18. These questions are usually answered in a workshop attended by an assembled group of amphibian biologists with expertise in the species being considered

20. The process operates through a semi-automated Excel spreadsheet – pre-filled with species scientific and common names, country of origin and all the questions

23. For each question/column the answers are either pre-filled from existing databases (Extinction Risk – GAA and Phylogenetic Significance – EDGE) or possible answers are provided in drop-down menus from which the assembled panel of experts chooses the most appropriate answer…

26. An explanation of the Conservation Role can be viewed by clicking the ‘Appendices’ tab at the bottom left of the screen…

30. Notes and justifications for answers may be added by inserting ‘comments’ on the appropriate cells for future review or general reference

33. The answers in each column translate into points which are automatically assigned and summed in column L – Total The total score indicates the species priorities for ex situ conservation action

34. The questions and associated points can be viewed by clicking the ‘Help text’ tab at the bottom left of the screen…

36. …and the complete scoring for a species can be seen by scrolling all the way to right of the spreadsheet

38. The spreadsheet can be filtered and re-ordered by any column and with any value/answer. You can therefore also generate lists of, for example : high ED species and/or those with Biological Distinctiveness for husbandry researchhigh ED species and/or those with Biological Distinctiveness for husbandry research species with threatsspecies with threats considered reversible in the wild for prioritising in situ activity species recommendedspecies recommended for Education

39. Parts 2 and 3 of the process are highlighted in blue (Authorisation) and yellow (Implementation). They are rarely addressed in the prioritisation workshops as they are most relevant to the institutions tasked with acting upon the priorities set

40. They are intended to encourage institutions to: 1. confirm the relevant conservation mandate before acting upon the priorities identified ….

42. 2. ensure Range State (government/legal) approval for any proposed project and….

43. 3. consider all relevant requirements and commitments for the implementation of a potentially long-term amphibian ex situ conservation programme.

47. A ‘yes’ to all questions means you’re ready to start your programme…

48. Problems with the prioritisation process Not all questions can be answered quantitativelyNot all questions can be answered quantitatively Not all questions can be answered objectivelyNot all questions can be answered objectively Inconsistent interpretationInconsistent interpretation Language misunderstandingsLanguage misunderstandings Insufficient expertise/knowledgeInsufficient expertise/knowledge Disagreement betweenDisagreement betweenparticipants Information rapidlyInformation rapidly becomes out of date

49. The answers (or excuses)… Incomplete knowledge of species, a problem in itself, necessitates subjective and qualitative answersIncomplete knowledge of species, a problem in itself, necessitates subjective and qualitative answers Priority lists are NOT intended to be globally comparable….consistent interpretation is therefore important within a workshop but not so much between workshopsPriority lists are NOT intended to be globally comparable….consistent interpretation is therefore important within a workshop but not so much between workshops Workshops should be run by an experienced facilitator who is familiar with the process and competent in language of the workshopWorkshops should be run by an experienced facilitator who is familiar with the process and competent in language of the workshop

50. …more answers Workshops should aim to assemble a broad range of relevant expertise, of varied affiliation, and have access to the internet - but accept data deficienciesWorkshops should aim to assemble a broad range of relevant expertise, of varied affiliation, and have access to the internet - but accept data deficiencies Agree to disagree. Qualitative and subjective perspectives guarantee disagreement - a good facilitator will resolve disputesAgree to disagree. Qualitative and subjective perspectives guarantee disagreement - a good facilitator will resolve disputes Spreadsheets can be updated quickly and easily if the information is fed to the AARK -Spreadsheets can be updated quickly and easily if the information is fed to the AARK - e.g. new spp. Calotriton arnoldi recently added to the European priority list

51. Imminent improvements Re-build the programming of the spreadsheet so that Conservation Role is not answered by participants but is automatically generated according to the answers to the other questions –Re-build the programming of the spreadsheet so that Conservation Role is not answered by participants but is automatically generated according to the answers to the other questions – e.g. all CR species automatically get listed as Rescue/Supplementation based upon the standing CBSG mandate

52. Imminent improvements Further answer options will be added to the question on Threat Mitigation, including:Further answer options will be added to the question on Threat Mitigation, including: Species is effectively protected Species does not require conservation action at this time

53. Imminent improvements Aim to have the process incorporated into the GAA update, using same expertise and consolidating all information within one central amphibian conservation databaseAim to have the process incorporated into the GAA update, using same expertise and consolidating all information within one central amphibian conservation database Project Overview Partners Methods Future Steps Use and Citation Summary Red List Status Geographic Patterns Major Threats Habitat Preferences Press Room Donors Conservation Partners Contributing Scientists Photograph Information Data Types Limitations of the Data Glossary Project Overview Partners Methods Future Steps Use and Citation Summary Red List Status Geographic Patterns Major Threats Habitat Preferences Press Room Donors Conservation Partners Contributing Scientists Photograph Information Data Types Limitations of the Data Glossary

54. What the process doesn’t do Generate a global priority list.Generate a global priority list. Each regional/national list is generated independently and is therefore incomparable with others – in other words, a score of 55 on one list doesn’t make a species higher priority than one scoring 50 on another list Pretend to be perfect.Pretend to be perfect. If answers are subjective or qualitative in nature they may also be inaccurate or change. Priority lists should therefore be viewed in the broad sense of identifying clear trends and obvious urgent cases.

55. What the process does do Provides a logical, repeatable and, most importantly, transparent process for guiding amphibian ex situ conservation activities within a country or regionProvides a logical, repeatable and, most importantly, transparent process for guiding amphibian ex situ conservation activities within a country or region Demonstrates a measured and responsible approach to the amphibian extinction crisis by the ex situ communityDemonstrates a measured and responsible approach to the amphibian extinction crisis by the ex situ community (this is not a ‘frog gold rush’)

56. Coming soon to a zoo near you….