Mediterranean Basin species - videos, photos and facts | ARKive Popular Mediterranean Basin species Mediterranean Basin The Mediterranean Basin is one of the most biologically rich regions on Earth. Located at the crossroads of Europe, Asia and Africa, it includes a great variety of habitats, from pine forests and high mountain ranges to scrublands and dramatic coastlines. The region is home to a huge diversity of terrestrial species, from the iconic olive tree to the charismatic Iberian lynx , and the Mediterranean Sea supports a rich variety of marine life. Lynx lynx (Eurasian Lynx) Eurasian Lynx Lince, Lince Boreal Taxonomic Notes: Currently the following six subspecies of the Eurasian Lynx are proposed: Northern Lynx L. l. lynx: northern Europe and western Siberia (Scandinavia, Finland, Belarus, Baltic states, European part of Russia, Ural, Siberia east to the Yenisei river) Carpathian Lynx L. l. carpathicus: Carpathian Mountains Balkan Lynx L. l. balcanicus: Balkans (Albania, Macedonia, Montenegro, Kosovo) Caucasus Lynx L. l.

dinniki: Caucasus Mountains south to Turkey, Iraq and Iran, formerly also in the Kopet-Dag, Turkmenistan. Turkestan Lynx L. l. isabellinus: Central Asia (Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, China, India, Nepal, Bhutan) Siberian Lynx L. l. wrangeli: Siberia east of the Yenisei river (Russia) Additionally, three more subspecies have been described that need further investigation and clarification: Altai Lynx L. l. wardi: Altai Mountains (Russia, Kazakhstan, China, Mongolia) Baikal Lynx L. l. kozlovi: Central Siberia, form the Yenisei river to Lake Baikal Amur Lynx L. l. stroganovi: Russian Far East, Ussuri and Amur territories, North Korea, northeastern China (Manchuria) (von Arx et al. 2004, Breitenmoser and Breitenmoser-Würsten 2008).

Breitenmoser, U., Breitenmoser-Würsten, C., Lanz, T., von Arx, M., Antonevich, A., Bao, W. & Avgan, B. Reviewer(s): Nowell, K., Hunter, L. & Mallon, D. Contributor(s): Ali, H., Ali Shah, A., Anarbaev, M., Aromov, B., Askerov, E., Dykyy, I., Ghimirey, Y., Hameed, S., Ivanov, E., Kabir, M., Khan, M., Khorozyan, I., Moheb, Z., Molinari, P., Moqanaki, E., Mousavi, M., Nawaz, D., Nawaz, M.A., Protas, Y., Raza, H., Rosen Michel, T., Rozhnov, V., Shkvyria, M., Tharchen, L., Ud Din, J. & Yonunus, M.

Justification: Listed as Least Concern given its wide range and stable populations in the north of Europe and in large parts of its range in Asia (Bao 2010, Bersenev et al. 2011, Kaczensky et al. 2012, Moqanaki et al. 2010, Matyushkin and Vaisfeld 2003). A recent assessment of the status of Eurasian Lynx (hereafter just Lynx) in Europe shows that some isolated subpopulations remain Critically Endangered or Endangered (Kaczensky et al. 2012). Previously published Red List assessments: 2008 – Least Concern (LC) Geographic Range [top] Range Description: The Eurasian Lynx has a very broad distribution. It occurs along forested mountain ranges in southeastern and Central Europe and from northern and eastern Europe through the Boreal forests of Russia, down into Central Asia and the Tibetan plateau (Kaczensky et al. 2012, Nowell and Jackson 1996, Sunquist and Sunquist 2002).

The Lynx's stronghold is a broad strip of southern Siberian woodland stretching from the Ural Mountains to the Pacific (Matyushkin and Vaisfeld 2003). Subpopulations in the southeast of its range (Europe and southwest Asia) are generally small and widely separated, whereas the bulk of its historic range from Scandinavia through Russia and Central Asia is largely intact. In Europe, it was probably absent from some of the larger islands such as Ireland and Sicily and from countries with few forests. It was also absent from the Iberian Peninsula, where the smaller Iberian Lynx Lynx pardinus occurs. Lynx have been extirpated from most of Western and Central Europe with the exception of the Carpathian Mountains. It survived in a small area in the Balkans (Greece, Macedonia, Albania, Kosovo and Montenegro). Larger populations persisted in Fennoscandia, the Baltic States, and European Russia. Lynx have been released in several countries of Europe in an effort to bring back this elusive predator, including in Switzerland, Slovenia, Italy, Czech Republic, Austria, Germany and France (IUCN 2007).

Countries occurrence: Native: Afghanistan; Albania; Armenia (Armenia); Austria; Azerbaijan; Belarus; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bulgaria; China; Croatia; Czech Republic; Estonia; Finland; France; Georgia; Germany; Hungary; India; Iran, Islamic Republic of; Iraq; Italy; Kazakhstan; Korea, Democratic People's Republic of; Kyrgyzstan; Latvia; Liechtenstein; Lithuania; Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of; Mongolia; Nepal; Norway; Pakistan; Poland; Romania; Russian Federation; Serbia (Serbia); Slovakia; Slovenia; Sweden; Switzerland; Tajikistan; Turkey; Turkmenistan; Ukraine; Uzbekistan Additional data: Population [top] Population: The European Lynx population (excluding Russia and Belarus) has been estimated at 9,000-10,000. In Europe, the Lynx is divided into ten distinct subpopulations which are: Alpine, Balkan, Baltic, Bohemian-Bavarian, Carpathian, Dinaric, Jura, Karelian, Scandinavian and Vosges Palatinian (Kaczensky et al. 2012). Most Lynx populations in Europe are generally stable.

However, status and trend varies greatly within the European range (Kaczensky et al. 2012, Schmidt et al. 2011). The Balkan and the Vosges-Palatinian subpopulations have decreased and the Jura and the Scandinavian ones have increased (Kaczensky et al. 2012). The autochthonous populations in north and east Europe (Scandinavian, Karelian, Baltic and Carpathian) number each around 2,000 individuals. All the re-introduced populations are of small size (less than 200 or even less than 100 animals) and are classified as Endangered (Alpine, Dinaric and Jura subpopulation) or Critically Endangered (Bohemian-Bavarian, Vosges-Palatinian subpopulation) (Kaczensky et al. 2012). The European population with the greatest conservation concern is the Critically Endangered Balkan Lynx subpopulation estimated at only 40-50 individuals (Kaczensky et al. 2013, Melovski 2012).

In the Ukraine the Lynx is considered to be decreasing (Bashta and Dykyy 2013, Shkvyria and Shevchenko 2009). Its population in the Carpathian region has been estimated at 350-400 and the one in the Polysya region in the north of the country at 80-100 animals. Detailed status and trend information on European subpopulations can be found on . Although a large portion of the Lynx’s range is in Asia, status and trend in many countries are poorly understood due to insufficient data. The following information has been gathered through a questionnaire sent to range country representatives (see supplementary material). In Russia the Lynx is thought to be stable in some regions and to be decreasing in others (Bersenev et al. 2011). The Russian Lynx population has been estimated at around 22,510 individuals in 2013 (Monitoring and supervision centre for game animals and their habitats (CentrOkhotControl)). The numbers are based on different methods in different regions, but mainly on winter tracking plus expert corrections.

More accurate censuses are performed in regions with lower lynx densities than in areas where they are abundant. Lynx has been estimated to number 1,940 in the Central region, 4,110 in North-western region, 680 in the Northern Caucasus, 40 in the Southern region, 2,400 in the Volga region, 1,070 in the Ural, 6,390 in the Siberian region and 5,890 in the Russian Far East for 2013 (Monitoring and supervision centre for game animals and their habitats (CentrOkhotControl) and with help of V.V. Rozhnov 2014). In Mongolia the Lynx population was estimated at around 10,000 (Matyushkin and Vaisfeld 2003). The Lynx population in China has been estimated at around 27,000 by the State Forestry Administration in 2009 and is listed as Vulnerable (Wang 1998, Bao 2010). Its population and range is thought to be increasing in Inner Mongolia.

In Afghanistan the presence of the Lynx has been confirmed by camera trap surveys in the Wakhan District of Badakhshan and in the Northern Plateau, Yakawlang District of Bamyan provinces, since 2006. In Armenia the lynx is thought to be a common species, especially in some protected areas but the population trend is unknown. In Azerbaijan Lynx populations are thought to be stable in the Talysh Mountains, Zangezur Ridge and the foothills of the Greater Caucasus, and in arid and semi-arid landscapes around the Mingechaur Water Reservoir. In Bhutan the lynx is thought to occur in the Jigme Dorji National Park and Sakteng Wildlife Sanctuary, however, no concrete evidence exists (Wangchuck et al. 2004). The Lynx is proposed as Vulnerable in Iran (Moqanaki et al. 2010). In Iraq, except a Lynx sighting in 2006 in Darbandikhan and the first confirmed record of Eurasian Lynx in 2011 from the Barzan area, there are no recent observations (Barzani 2013).

The population in Kyrgyzstan is thought to be stable but not very high and classified as Near Threatened (Sludsky 1978). The Lynx is thought to be decreasing in Nepal and classified as Vulnarable (Jnawali et al. 2011), but there is no hard evidence. The only indication for its presence comes from the northwestern district of Humla, from the Dhorpatan hunting reserve and upper Mustand area in the Annapurna conservation area in 1996 (Fox 1985). Jnawali et al. (2011) maps the distribution of the lynx additionally in the Rara National Park and Shey-Phoksundo National Park. The Lynx might be declining in Pakistan and its long-term survival is not assured, although it is listed as Least Concern (Sheikh and Molur 2004). In 2003 the Lynx population in northern Pakistan has been estimated at 80-120 animals and the permanently occupied area in the whole country at around 25,252 km² (Sheikh and Molur 2004).

In Tajikistan the Lynx is considered as rare and is mainly found in the southern part of the country in the Darvaz range, westernmost part of the Pamir Mountains, the Ghunda valley and the Wakhan valley. In Uzbekistan, the Lynx is considered Vulnerable and thought to be decreasing but seems to be stable in the Gissar Nature Reserve, with an estimated population of 130 in 2013. For further information about this species, see 12519_Lynx_lynx.pdf . A PDF viewer such as Adobe Reader is required. Current Population Trend: Habitat and Ecology [top] Habitat and Ecology: The Eurasian Lynx occurs in a wide variety of environmental and climatic conditions (Schmidt et al. 2011). Throughout Europe and Siberia, it is primarily associated with forested areas which have good ungulate populations and which provide enough cover fur hunting. It inhabits extended, Temperate and Boreal forests from the Atlantic in Western Europe to the Pacific coast in the Russian Far East (Breitenmoser and Breitenmoser-Würsten 2008, Schmidt et al. 2013).

In Europe it can be found in Mediterranean forests up to the transition zone of taiga to tundra and lives from sea level up to the tree line (Breitenmoser and Breitenmoser-Würsten 2008). In Central Asia, Lynx occur in more open, thinly wooded areas and steppe habitats. The species probably occurs throughout the northern slopes of the Himalayas, and has been reported both from thick scrub woodland and barren, rocky areas above the tree line (Nowell and Jackson 1996, Matyushkin and Vaisfeld 2003, Breitenmoser and Breitenmoser-Würsten 2008). Lynx occur sporadically throughout the Tibetan plateau, and are found throughout the rocky hills and mountains of the Central Asian desert regions (Nowell and Jackson 1996). In Armenia Lynx are strongly associated with true forests and arid sparse forests and to a lesser extent with subalpine meadows. Lynx have been observed up to 5,500 m (Guggisberg 1975).

The Eurasian Lynx is the largest lynx, and the only one to primarily take ungulate prey, although they rely on smaller species where ungulates are less abundant. Lynx kill ungulates ranging in size from the 15 kg musk deer to 220 kg adult male red deer, but show a preference for the smaller ungulate species, such as Roe Deer, Chamois, Reindeer and Musk Deer. Occasionally, Lynx also hunt foxes, hares, marmots, wild pigs, beavers, birds or domestic animals such as sheep and goats, or, in Scandinavia, semi-domestic reindeer. In European Russia and western Siberia, where Roe Deer are absent,Mmountain Hares and tetraonids form the basic prey base. Hares and birds are important prey also in other Central Asian regions where habitats are dryer and less forested (Breitenmoser and Breitenmoser-Würsten 2008, Matyushkin and Vaisfeld 2003).

Home range size varies widely from 100 to over 1,000 km² (Breitenmoser and Breitenmoser-Würsten 2008). Home ranges averaged 248 km² for males (n = 5) and 133 km² for females (n = 5) in a radio telemetry study in Poland’s Bialowieza forest (Schmidt et al. 1997). Average home range sizes in Switzerland were 90 km² for females and 150 km² for male Lynx. Male home ranges generally enclose 1-2 female territories (Breitenmoser and Breitenmoser-Würsten 2008). Densities are typically 1-3 adults per 100 km², although higher densities of up to 5/100 km² have been reported from Eastern Europe and parts of Russia and lower densities of 0.3/100 km² from Scandinavia (Jedrzejewski et al. 1996, Schmidt et al. 2011, Sunde et al. 2000).

In the Saihanwula nature reserve in Inner Mongolia the density was estimated at 1.7-2.1/100 km² by camera trapping and track survey (Bao et al. 2014). In Turkey, a density of 4.2/100 km² has been estimated for the Ciglikara Nature Reserve, Antalya. However, this high Lynx density may be temporarily and may decline with major prey (hare) fluctuation (Avgan et al. 2014). Systems: Threats [top] Major Threat(s): The major threats to Lynx in Europe are low acceptance due to conflicts with hunters (and in northern Europe also with livestock farmers), persecution, habitat loss and fragmentation mainly due to infrastructure development, poor management structures and accidental mortality (Kaczensky et al. 2012). In the Jura Mountains human related mortalities (traffic accidents, poaching) were responsible for 70 % of the known losses (Breitenmoser-Würsten et al. 2007).

There are also concerns in regard of the low genetic diversity and small population sizes shown in some of the populations (Breitenmoser-Würsten and Obexer-Ruff 2003, Kaczensky et al. 2012, Schmidt et al. 2011, Sindicic et al. 2013). The Critically Endangered Balkan Lynx is mainly threatened by poaching, loss of prey base and habitat degradation (Kaczensky et al. 2012). In Asia the major threats are habitat fragmentation and loss mainly due to livestock farming, infrastructure development, resource extraction and logging activities, and poaching, mainly as retaliatory killing due to livestock depredation or for the fur trade (Kretser et al. 2012, Mousavi et al. 2014). In areas where livestock is the primary livelihood source, the conflict is even enhanced. Other threats include accidental mortality through trapping or dogs and human disturbance (Bao 2010). In Russia the Lynx is still important for the skin market and the pelt industry. In Azerbaijan, Mongolia and Pakistan prey base depletion due to poaching is considered a major threat (Clark et al.

2006, Ud Din and Nawaz 2010). In Turkey and Nepal low population size is assumed to be problematic. Poor management structures and insufficient law enforcement and the lack of capacity and funding facilitate poaching and lead to higher habitat fragmentation, aggravating the situation of the Lynx (Shkvyria 2012). Conservation Actions [top] Conservation Actions: Included on CITES Appendix II and protected under the Bern Convention (Appendix III). The Lynx is protected and hunting prohibited in Afghanistan, Albania, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bulgaria, China, Croatia, Czech Republic, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iran, Italy, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Macedonia, Nepal, Pakistan, Poland, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. In Sweden, Finland and Romania the lynx is protected but a limited number of Lynx can be killed under derogation. In Estonia and Norway the lynx is listed as a game species with an open hunting season and in Latvia Lynx can be exploited to a limited extent by sports hunting (Kaczensky et al. 2012).

The Lynx is also subject to hunting in Iraq and Russia. In Russia, the Lynx is only hunted in places where it is abundant as in some areas of the Central region and the Volga region, in most areas of the North-Western region, the Ural, the Sibirian region and the Russian Far East. Hunting is not allowed in the Northern Caucasus and in the Southern region. The Lynx is not protected in Armenia. Since 2006, a programme for the recovery of the Balkan Lynx is being implemented and range wide conservation strategies were developed (Kaczensky et al. 2012). In several European range states, prevention measures to counteract livestock depredation are in place and awareness has increased but measures for managing conflicts with hunters are still missing (Kaczensky et al. 2012). There is a need for improved monitoring activities in the Carpathian and Dinaric Lynx populations in Europe and many parts of Asia (a.o. Ud Din and Nawaz 2010, Kaczensky et al. 2012).

Connectivity between small isolated European lynx populations should be enhanced to allow gene flow and prevent inbreeding depression (Breitenmoser-Würsten and Obexer Ruff 2003). In Italy and Austria a reinforcement project has started to address the threat of genetic deterioration due to low population size and lacking connectivity by translocating Lynx. Detailed recommendations for the conservation of the European subpopulations are given in . Genetic monitoring is also needed in parts of Asia to detect the impact of habitat fragmentation on the genetic diversity of the Lynx (Bao 2010). In some parts of its range awareness for the species was enhanced as for example in Iraq, where stakeholders, students and social media were engaged to stop illegal hunting or as in Afghanistan, where public awareness has been raised among local communities, particularly in Badakhsahn and Bamyan Provinces, wildlife laws have been enforced in some areas and the Border Police and Customs office in certain parts of the country have been trained to control fur trade. In China the patrolling by local police was strengthened and a nature reserve network was established to expand suitable Lynx habitat.

In Iran a preliminary status assessment of the lynx was conducted from 2006-2009 and a country wide status assessment in 2010-2012 (Moqanaki et al. 2010, Mousavi et al. in press). In Pakistan measures specific for carnivore conservation have been introduced which benefit also the Lynx. In 2010 a project focusing on lynx research and conservation education has been implemented and the protected area network has been increased. In Tajikistan measures adopted to reduce conflicts with Snow Leopards are working for Lynx as well. From most range states there is only sparse information on the lynx available. Data on population trend is mainly missing. There is a need for management improvement, better monitoring and more research on Lynx ecology and distribution in Asia to increase the knowledge on the population status and trend, as well as on threats and conservation needs (Moqanaki et al. 2010, Bao 2010). Bibliography [top] Askerov, E.K. 2013. Lynx. Red Book of Azerbaijan, pp. 214-215. Baku.

Avgan, B., Zimmermann, F., Güntert, M., Arikan, F. and Breitenmoser, U. 2014. The first density estimation of an isolated Eurasian lynx population in South-west Asia. Wildlife Biology (in press). Bao, W. 2010. Eurasian lynx in China - present status and conservation challenges. Cat News Special Issue 5: 22-25. Bao, W., Bao, Q., Wuliji, Xia, W., Zhang, S., Yang, Y. and Dalai, M. 2014. Individual identification and behavior study of Eurasian lynx based on camera trapping techniques. Biodiversity Science (in press). Barzani, M.S. 2013. A recent record of Eurasian lynx in northern Iraq. Cat News 58: 24. Bashta, A.-T. and Dykyy, I.V. 2013. Rare and threatened animal species of the Lviv region (Ukraine). Liga-pres, Lviv.

Bersenev, A.E., Blohin, G.I., Vaisman, A.L., Gruzdev, A.R., Gubar, YuP., Domsky, I.A., Sipko, P., Pavlov, P.M., Okhlopkov, I.M., Pronyaev, A.B., Savelyev, A.P., Danilkin, A.A. et al. 2011. The lynx. Hunting and Hunting Resources of Russian Federation, State resource management Special. (Государственное управление ресурсами СПЕЦИАЛЬНЫЙ ВЫПУСК 2011 ОХОТА И ОХОТНИЧЬИ РЕСУРСЫ РОССИЙСКОЙ ФЕДЕРАЦИИ), pp. 59-65. Molodava gvardiya-style, Perm, Russia. Breitenmoser, U. and Breitenmoser-Würsten, Ch. 2008. Der Luchs: Ein Grossraubtier in der Kulturlandschaft. Salm Verlag, Wohlen/Bern.

Breitenmoser, U., Breitenmoser-Würsten, C., Okarma, H., Kaphegyi, T., Kaphegyi-Wallmann, U. and Müller, U. M. 2000. Action Plan for the conservation of the Eurasian Lynx (Lynx lynx) in Europe. Council of Europe, Strasbourg. Breitenmoser-Würsten, C. and Obexer-Ruff, G. 2003. Population genetics of two reintroduced lynx (Lynx lynx) populations in Switzerland: a molecular evaluation 25 years after translocation. Progress report. KORA Bericht. Bern. Breitenmoser-Würsten, C., Vandel, J.-M., Zimmermann, F. and Breitenmoser, U. 2007. Demography of lynx Lynx lynx in the Jura Mountains. Wildlife Biology 13: 381-392. Clark, E.L., Munkhbat, J., Dulamtseren, S., Baillie, J.E.M., Batsaikhan, N., Samiya, R. and Stubbe, M.

(eds). 2006. Mongolian Red List of Mammals. Regional Red List Series. pp. 159. Zoological Society of London, London, UK. Fox, J.L. 1985. An observation of lynx in Nepal. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society 82: 394-395. Guggisberg, C.A.W. 1975. Lynx Lynx lynx. Wild Cats of the World, pp. 49-58. David & Charles (Holdings) Limited, U.S.A. IUCN. 2007. European Mammal Assessment. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. IUCN. 2015. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2015.2. Available at: . (Accessed: 23 June 2015). Jedrzejewski, W., Jedrzejewska, B., Okarma, H., Schmidt, K., Bunevich, A.N. and Milowski, L. 1996.

Population dynamics (1896-1994), demography, and home ranges of the lynx in Bialowieza Primeval Forest (Poland and Belarus). Ecography 19: 122-138. Jnawali, S.R., Baral, H.S., Lee, S., Acharya, K.P., Upadhyay, G.P., Pandey, M., Shrestha, R., Joshi, D., Lamichhane, B.R., Griffiths, J., Khatiwada, A. and Amin R. (compilers). 2011. Lynx lynx. The Status of Nepal Mammals: The National Red List Series, pp. 82-83. Department of National Parks and Wildlife Conservation, Kathmandu, Nepal. Kaczensky, P., Chapron, G., von Arx, M., Huber, D., Andrén, H. and Linnell J. (eds). 2012. Status, management and distribution of large carnivores - bear, lynx, wolf & wolverine - in Europe.

This document has been prepared with the assistance of Istituto di Ecologia Applicata and with the contributions of the IUCN/SSC Large Carnivore Initiative for Europe under contract N° 070307/2012/629085/SER/B3. Kretser, E.H., Johnson, F.M., Hickey, M.L., Zahler, P. and Bennett, L.E. 2012. Wildlife trade products available to U.S. military personnel serving abroad. Biodiversity Conservation 21: 967-980. Matyushkin, Y.N. and Vaisfeld, M.A. 2003. The lynx – regional features of ecology, use and protection. Nauka, Moscow, Russia. Melovski, D. 2012. Status and distribution of the Balkan Lynx (Lynx lynx martinoi MIRIC, 1978) and its prey. Faculty of Natural Sciences, University of Montenegro. Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation. 2012.

State Report "Condition and environmental protection of the Russian Federation in the Year 2012". Moqanaki, E.M., Farhadinia, M.S., Mousavi, M. and Breitenmoser U. 2010. Distribution and conservation status of the Eurasian lynx in Iran. A preliminary assessment. Cat News 53: 32-35. Mousavi, M., Moqanaki, E.M., Farhadinia, M.S., Sanei, A., Rabiee, K., Khosravi, S. and Mohammadi, H. 2014. The largest lesser cat in Iran: current status of the Eurasian lynx. Cat News Special Issue 9 (in press). Nowell, K. and Jackson, P. 1996. Wild Cats. Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. IUCN/SSC Cat Specialist Group, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Schmidt, K., Jedrzejewski, W. and Okarma, H. 1997. Spatial organization and social relations in the Eurasian lynx population in Bialowieza Primeval Forest, Poland.

Acta Theriologica 42: 289-312. Schmidt, K., Ratkiewicz, M. and Konopinski, M.K. 2011. The importance of genetic variability and population differentiation in the Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx) for conservation, in the context of habitat and climate change. Mammal review 412: 112-124. Sheikh, K.M. and Molur, S. (eds). 2004. Status and Red List of Pakistan's Mammals. Based on the Conservation Assessment and Management Plan. IUCN Pakistan. Shkvyria, M. 2012. Conflict "human-predator in the Ukraine". Print Kvik. Shkvyria, M. and Shevchenko L. 2009. Red Data Book of the Ukraine. Publ. House "Hlobalkonsaltynh”, Kiev. Sindicic, M., Polanc, P., Gomercic, T., Jelencic, M., Huber, D., Trontelj, P. and Skrbinsek, T.

2013. Genetic data confirm critical status of the reintroduced Dinaric population of Eurasian lynx. Conservation Genetics: 1-12. Sludsky, A.A. 1978. Central Asian lynx. The Red Book of the Kazakh SSR - Part 1 (Центральноазиатская рысь. Манул./Красная книга Казахской ССР. -Алма-Ата), pp. 55-58. Sunde, P., Kvam, T., Moa, P., Negard, A. and Overskaug, K. 2000. Space use by Eurasian lynxes Lynx lynx in central Norway. Acta theriologica 45(4): 507-524. Sunquist, M. and Sunquist, F. 2002. Wild Cats of the World. University of Chicago Press. Ud Din, J. and Nawaz, M.A. 2010. Status of the Himalayan Lynx in the District Chitral, NWFP, Pakistan.

The Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences 20(1): 17-22. von Arx, M., Breitenmoser-Würsten, Ch., Zimmermann, F. and Breitenmoser, U. (eds). 2004. Status and conservation of the Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx) in Europe in 2001: Eurasian Lynx Online Information System for Europe ELOIS. Wangchuck, T., Thinley, P., Tshering, K., Thering, C. and Yonten, D. 2004. Field Guide to the Mammals of Bhutan. Department of Forestry, Ministry of Agriculture, Royal Government of Bhutan. Wang, S. 1998. China Red Data Book of Endangered Animals: Mammals. Science Press, Beijing Citation: Breitenmoser, U., Breitenmoser-Würsten, C., Lanz, T., von Arx, M., Antonevich, A., Bao, W. & Avgan, B. 2015. Lynx lynx.

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T12519A50655266. . Downloaded on 19 January 2017. Disclaimer: Britain’s lost lynxes and wildcats – Tetrapod Zoology More » You might have noticed very little/no activity here over the past two weeks: partly this is because I’m very busy (preparing for Dinosaurs – A Historical Perspective , among other things), but it’s also because I currently have no internet access at home. Sigh. In an effort to add something new, here’s the long-planned, third and final part in the series on Europe’s cat fauna, adapted from the Big Cats in Britain talk ‘The deep time history of Britain’s felid fauna’. In a previous article we looked at homotheres, lions and leopards , and in a second one at jaguars, pumas and cheetahs .

This time round we deal with the smaller cats: the lynxes, and the members of the domestic cat lineage… Lynxes are instantly recognisable: they’re proportionally long-limbed, they have a very shortened tail, a facial ruff and tufted ears, and they also have a reduced dentition compared to most other cats (Russell et al. 1995). Three lynxes inhabited Europe during the Pleistocene, and two of these are still with us, the large, ungulate-killing Eurasian lynx Lynx lynx and the much smaller Iberian lynx Lynx pardinus [Eurasian lynx image above taken from wikipedia]. The third species was rather different from living lynxes: it’s called Lynx issiodorensis, the Issoire lynx, and it had shorter, stockier limbs and a proportionally bigger head than living lynxes. It fact it was proportioned far more like a pantherine cat like a leopard, and its comparatively large size and big cat-like proportions mean that its remains have sometimes been confused with those of European cheetahs and pumas (Hemmer et al. 2004).

The Issoire lynx didn’t survive into the Holocene, but of course the Iberian lynx and Eurasian lynx did [adjacent image shows restoration of Issoire lynx by Mauricio Ant�n, together with lynx lower jaws]. The Iberian lynx previously occurred throughout central Europe (Kurt�n 1968, Kurt�n & Grandqvist 1987) – in fact it’s been described as the ‘original’ lynx of western Europe (Hemmer 1979) – but it’s restricted today to the Iberian Peninsula, and here it’s critically endangered, with a fragmented population limited to between 300 and 500 individuals (Bartolom� 2001, Johnson et al. 2004). During the Pleistocene, Eurasian lynxes colonised essentially the whole of Eurasia, but persecution, habitat loss and hunting have meant that they’re now locally extinct across much of western Europe [map below, from wikipedia, shows Eurasian lynx’s current range].

In Britain, the Eurasian lynx has generally been regarded as a Pleistocene animal that failed to make it into the Holocene. However, we now know that this is completely wrong. Eurasian lynxes were definitely still present in England and southern Ireland as recently as 9000 years ago. The English records, one of which comes from Devon and the other one from Derbyshire, have been carbon dated: both gave ages of 8800-9500 years before present (Coard & Chamberlain 1999, Bronk Ramsey et al. 2002). That’s all pretty good: it shows that lynxes were still in Britain during the Holocene. However, in 1997 came the surprising news that Eurasian lynxes had in fact survived in Scotland until as recently as the 3rd century AD. Radiocarbon dating of a lynx discovered in 1927 in Reindeer Cave in Sutherland showed that the specimen was about 1770 years old (Kitchener & Bonsall 1997).

Further radiocarbon dating of lynx bones from North Yorkshire, published in 2006, revealed even younger ages of about 1550 years old, dating these specimens to the 5th or 6th century (Hetherington et al. 2006). In their paper on these modern-era lynxes, David Hetherington and colleagues noted that a word for lynx – llewyn – was used in various 7th century stories and lullabies, all of which originated from north-western England, roughly the same area where the 5th or 6th century lynx specimens came from. And we know from pollen data that this area was well forested at this time, showing that it remained good potential lynx habitat. So it seems that lynxes persisted in north-western England until the 7th century at least, and of course it’s possible and likely that they survived even more recently than this (the few specimens that have been carbon dated are very unlikely to represent the youngest specimens that exist).

Quite why and how lynxes then became extinct in Britain – especially when they survived in Scandinavia and elsewhere in Europe – is open to speculation; it’s assumed that deforestation, hunting and persecution did the lynx in. Is it conceivable that they survived from the 5th, 6th or 7th century to even more recent times? Various zoologists in the past – including Bernard Heuvelmans and H. G. Hurrell – have suggested exactly this, and of course we have pretty good historical accounts, like William Cobbett’s account from the late 1700s, that seem to describe late-surviving British lynxes. Given the massive impact of people on Britain’s mammal fauna within the last couple of hundred years, I personally think that the idea that any mid-sized or large mammal might have survived undetected is very unlikely if not impossible. However, if you’d asked an expert 20 years ago as to whether lynxes might have survived to even the 5th century, I think you’d have been laughed at, so perhaps we should be prepared to be surprised again. The not so Scottish wildcat Finally, we come to the smaller cats.

Conventionally it’s been thought that, within recent history, the British Isles have only ever been home to a single small cat species, and this is Felis silvestris, the species most usually referred to (in Britain) as the Scottish wildcat. Of course, this name is entirely inappropriate given that the present restriction of the wildcat to Scotland is an artefact of human persecution: until very recently, the wildcat occurred across essentially the whole of Britain (even occuring in Ireland during the Holocene (Sommer & Benecke 2006), contrary to conventional wisdom). Human persecution and habitat destruction led to the decline of the wildcat: by about 1800, it had been eradicated from much of southern and central England, by about 1850 it was mostly gone from England entirely, and by the late 1800s it was essentially restricted to the Scottish highlands (Langley & Yalden 1977).

This historical pattern of decline was worked out by Peter Langley and Derek Yalden in 1977, but there are enough English sightings of wildcats from the 1800s and 1900s to suggest that small populations might have persisted outside of Scotland. Alternatively, wildcats might have successfully recolonised parts of the country, or been re-introduced to southern regions where they had locally become extinct. Wildcats interbreed with domestic cats wherever the two meet, meaning that pure-bred wildcats are very rare, if not critically endangered, and this is a problem not just restricted to Britain but affecting wildcats in mainland Europe and Africa as well (Pierpaoli et al. 2003, Yamaguchi et al. 2004). Where hybridisation has occurred, wildcat characteristics continue to crop up in the hybrids, and the result is a continuum with domestic cats at one end, true wildcats at the other, and a range of intermediates in the middle (French et al. 1988, Daniels et al. 1998, Kitchener 1998, Reig et al. 2001).

Exactly how and where we draw the line between ‘intermediates’ and ‘true’ wildcats is a thorny problem, compounded by the fact that some historical type specimens are apparently hybrids. Exotic small felids in the British record Until very recently it was thought that the wildcat was the only small felid that ever inhabited the British Isles within geologically recent times. This idea was challenged in 1997 when a fossil Swamp cat Felis chaus (or Jungle cat) was discovered at Aveley in Essex, in sediments dated to the Middle Pleistocene (Schreve 2001a, b). Unfortunately we only have this one specimen at the moment, and we essentially know nothing about the prehistoric distribution of the Swamp cat in Britain, both in term of geography and in terms of how recently it went extinct. In fact similar comments can be made about the distribution of the Swamp cat in Europe as a whole: several fossils of this species have been reported from the Middle and Upper Pleistocene of Greece, Germany and France, but all are questionable and Hemmer (1979) wrote that they required confirmation.

The absence of the Swamp cat from Holocene sediments in Britain as well as from the rest of Europe suggest that it didn’t survive until particularly recently, but – as with the lynxes we looked at a moment ago – evidence either way is very thin on the ground and we need more data. The Aveley specimen has yet to be properly described but a full description will appear soon (D. C. Schreve pers. comm. 2008). Even more poorly known than the presence of swamp cats in Britain is the suggestion that African wildcats once occurred in the British Isles as well: Scharff (1906) described some lower jaws from Ireland and identified them as being particularly close to Felis silvestris libyca, the African wildcat [adjacent image shows Scharff’s Irish cat jaws compared with others]. Based on bones discovered in Edenvale and Newhall caves in County Clare, Scharff thought that there were actually two Irish wildcats – a large one and a small one.

Scharff’s identification has been repeated a couple of times since: the implication being that maybe Ireland was home to an endemic wildcat, perhaps one quite distinct from the wildcats of Scotland, England and Wales – but the problem here is that African wildcats are very similar, if not identical, to domestic cats in skeletal and tooth characters. In fact domestic cats originated from African wildcats rather than from those of Eurasia, and as a consequence it can be almost impossible to distinguish the bones and teeth of the two. The Irish wildcat remains didn’t come from a prehistoric fauna – they were discovered in layers where domestic mammals were abundant – and, in an evaluation of Scharff’s wildcats, Stelfox (1965) concluded that they were domestic cats, the larger ones being males, the smaller ones females. Rather than accept the idea that African wildcats somehow got into Ireland without leaving a fossil record elsewhere in Europe, it does seem more sensible to conclude that Scharff’s Irish wildcats were just domestic cats (Fairley 1975).

Additional small cat species might have been present in Pleistocene Europe – there are some doubtful Middle Pleistocene German fossils and more reliably identified Czech fossils that might represent Pallas’s cat Otocolobus manul for example (Kurt�n 1968, Hemmer 1979) – but there’s presently no evidence that additional species occurred in Britain. Incidentally, there is no fossil or archaeological evidence for rabbit-headed cats , an observation which supports the view that they are teratological rather than a genuine taxonomic entity [adjacent image, from wikipedia, shows Pallas’s cat]. And that bring us to the end of our look at Europe’s cat fauna. The big sabre-toothed cat Homotherium latidens was still present in northern Europe during the Late Pleistocene, but almost certainly didn’t persist to the Holocene. Lions remained in Spain and south-eastern Europe until the early Holocene. Leopards inhabited Britain and the rest of Europe during much of the Pleistocene, but by the Late Pleistocene they were gone from northern Europe. The European jaguar lived alongside the leopard in several locations during the Middle Pleistocene.

Pumas and cheetahs occurred across Europe and Asia during the Early and Middle Pleistocene. Pumas were present in Britain but neither pumas nor cheetahs seem to have survived into the Late Pleistocene or Holocene. Lynxes definitely survived in Britain until the 1st century AD, may well have persisted until the 6th or 7th centuries, and were perhaps still present even more recently than this. Jungle cats were present in Britain during the Middle Pleistocene but there is as yet no evidence that they survived into the Holocene. There’s no evidence that African wildcats were present in Ireland, despite suggestions from the early 1900s that they were. Finally, European wildcats were here throughout the Pleistocene and Holocene, and have just about managed to survive until today. Europe’s cat fauna – and Britain’s cat fauna – was obviously a lot more diverse in the recent past than it is today. In fact, we have a thoroughly impoverished fauna compared to what we ‘should’ have. That’s all for now. Will be seeing some of you on Wednesday (23rd April) at the Natural History Museum for the CEE’s Modern Functional Anatomy Workshop .

Will be discussing what happened there here at Tet Zoo, internet connection permitting. Refs – – Bartolom�, J. 2001. A creature great and small. BBC Wildlife 19 (8), 22-27. Bronk Ramsey, C., Higham, T. F. G., Owen, D. C., Pike, A. W. G. & Hedges, R. E. 2002. Radiocarbon dates from the Oxford AMS system: Archaeometry datelist 31. Archaeometry 44 (supplement 1), 1-149. Coard, R. & Chamberlain, A. T. 1999. The nature and timing of fauna change in the British Isles across the Pleistocene Holocene transition. Holocene 9, 372-376. Daniels, M. J., Balharry, D., Hirst, D., Kitchener, A. C. & Aspinall, R. J. 1998. Morphological and pelage characteristics of wild living cats in Scotland: implications for defining the ‘wildcat’.

Journal of Zoology 244, 231-247 Fairley, J. 1975. An Irish Beast Book. The Blackstaff Press, Belfast. French, D. D., Corbett, L. K. & Easterbee, N. 1988. Morphological discriminants of Scottish wildcats (Felis silvestris), domestic cats (F. catus) and their hybrids. Journal of Zoology 214, 235-259. Hemmer, H. 1979. Fossil history of living Felidae. Carnivore 2: 58-61. – ., Kahlke, R.-D. & Vekua, A. K. 2004. The Old World puma – Puma pardoides (Owen, 1846) (Carnivora: Felidae) – in the Lower Villafranchian (Upper Pliocene) of Kvabebi (East Georgia, Transcaucasia) and its evolutionary and biogeographical significance.

Neues Jahrbuch fur Geologie und Pal�ontologie, Abhandlungen 233, 197-233. Hetherington, D. A., Lord, T. C. & Jacobi, R. M. 2006. New evidence for the occurrence of Eurasian lynx (Lynx lynx) in medieval Britain. Journal of Quaternary Science 21, 3-8. Johnson, W. E., Godoy, J. A., Palomares, F., Delibes, M., Fernandes, M., Revilla, E. & O’Brien, S. J. 2004. Phylogenetic and phylogeographic analysis of Iberian lynx populations. Journal of Heredity 95, 19-28. Kitchener, A. C. 1998. The Scottish wildcat – a cat with an identity crisis? British Wildlife 9, 232-242. – . & Bonsall, C. 1997. AMS radiocarbon dates for some extinct Scottish mammals. Quaternary Newsletter 83, 1-11.

Kurt�n, B. 1968. Pleistocene Mammals of Europe. Aldine Press, Chicago. – . & Grandqvist, E. 1987. Fossil pardel lynx (Lynx pardina spelaea Boule) from a cave in southern France. Ann Zool Fennici 24, 39-43. Langley, P. J. W. & Yalden, D. W. 1977. The decline of the rarer carnivores in Great Britain during the nineteenth century. Mammal Review 7, 95-116. Pierpaoli, M., Bir�, Z. S., Herrman, M., Hupe, K., Fernandes, M., Ragni, B., Szemethy, L. & Randi, E. 2003. Genetic distinction of wildcat (Felis silvestris) populations in Europe, and hybridisation with domestic cats in Hungary. Molecular Ecology 12, 2585-2598. Reig, S., Daniels, M. J. & Macdonald, D. W.

2001. Craniometric differentiation within wild-living cats in Scotland using 3D morphometrics. Journal of Zoology 253, 121-132. Russell, A. P., Bryant, H. N., Powell, G. L. & Laroiya, R. 1995. Scaling relationships within the maxillary tooth row of Felidae, and the absence of the second uper premolar in Lynx. Journal of Zoology 236, 161-182. Scharff, R. F. 1906. On the former occurrence of the African wild cat (Felis ochreata Gmel.) in Ireland. Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy 26, 1-12. Schreve, D. C. 2001a. Mammalian evidence from Middle Pleistocene fluvial sequences for complex environmental change at the oxygen isotope substage level. Quaternary International 79, 65-74. – . 2001b. Differentiation of the British late Middle Pleistocene interglacials: the evidence from mammalian biostratigraphy.

Quaternary Science Reviews 20, 1693-1705. Sommer, R. S. & Benecke, N. 2006. Late Pleistocene and Holocene development of the felid fauna (Felidae) of Europe: a review. Journal of Zoology 269, 7-19. Stelfox, A. W. 1965. Notes on Irish “wild cat”. The Irish Naturalists’ Journal 15, 57-60. Yamaguchi, N., Kitchener, A. C., Driscoll, C. A., Ward, J. M. & Macdonald, D. W. 2004. Craniological differentiation amongst wild-living cats in Britain and southern Africa: natural variation of the effects of hybridisation? Animal Conservation 7, 339-351.

Lynx pardinus (Iberian Lynx, Pardel Lynx, Spanish Lynx) Home » Lynx pardinus (Iberian Lynx, Pardel Lynx, Spanish Lynx) Lynx pardinus Iberian Lynx, Spanish Lynx, Pardel Lynx French – Lince Ibérico Taxonomic Notes: Was previously considered conspecific with Lynx lynx by some authorities, but is currently accepted as a distinct species on the basis of both genetics (Johnson et al. 2006, Eizirik et al. submitted) and morphology (Werdelin 1981, Wozencraft 2005). Nowell, K., Hunter, L., Breitenmoser-Würsten, C., Lanz, T. & Breitenmoser, U. Contributor(s): Fordham, D. & von Arx, M. Justification: After six decades of decline and pronounced range contraction, between 2002 and 2012 population size of the Iberian Lynx has continuously increased to 156 mature individuals in the two remaining wild subpopulations (Simón et al.

2012). Likewise the area of occupancy experienced a three-fold increase to reach 1,040 km2. One subpopulation contains 68% of all mature individuals. Twelve mature individuals survive in two additional localities where reintroductions are currently under way (Simón et al. 2012). As a result of the increasing population size, the Iberian Lynx no longer qualifies for Critically Endangered status and is therefore listed as Endangered under criterion D. The improved status of this species is all due to intensive ongoing conservation actions. Detailed demographic projections suggest that future range expansion and population increase depend upon continued reintroductions. In the absence of reintroductions, a marked decline would quickly re-occur and extinction is predicted to occur within 35 years (Fordham et al. 2013). Major future threats include uncertainty about the identity and intensity of environmental drivers on lynx prey in regions where conservation efforts are currently concentrated, and uncertainty about the suitability of these regions for lynx under future climate change (Fordham et al. 2013).

Previously published Red List assessments: 2008 – Critically Endangered (CR) Geographic Range [top] Range Description: The Iberian Lynx is restricted to two separate regions of southwestern Spain, namely eastern Sierra Morena and the coastal plains west of the lower Guadalquivir. These isolated subpopulations have been named by Simón et al. (2012) as Andújar-Cardeña and Doñana-Aljarafe, respectively. Two new nuclei are being founded though reintroduction 30 km southwest (Guadalmellato) and northeast (Guarrizas), respectively, of the existing Sierra Morena subpopulation, and contained a few breeding females in 2012 (Simón 2013). Five additional sites in four Spanish regions (Andalusia, Castilla-La Mancha, Extremadura, Murcia) and Portugal are being prepared for reintroduction; the first release in Portugal happened in late 2014 (Iberlince LIFE project 2014). Countries occurrence: ♦ Extreme fluctuations in area of occupancy (AOO): No Population [top] Population: The extensive survey by Guzmán et al.

(2004), carried out primarily during 2001, yielded an estimate of 26-31 breeding territories which could correspond to a maximum of 62 mature individuals. According to estimates produced in the framework of successive European Union LIFE Nature conservation projects, population size tripled from 52 mature individuals in 2002 to 156 in 2012 (Simón et al. 2012, Simón 2013). Current Population Trend: Habitat and Ecology [top] Habitat and Ecology: The Iberian Lynx is a strict feeding specialist; the European Rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) accounts for 80-99% of its diet (Ferreras et al. 2010). The Iberian Lynx is also a habitat specialist that breeds only in Mediterranean shrubland containing dense rabbit populations (Palomares et al. 2000, Palomares 2001). Threshold rabbit densities for lynx reproduction are 4.5 ind./ha during the annual population peak and 1.0 ind./ha during the annual trough (Palomares et al. 2001).

Productive breeding territories also contain a high density of scrub-pasture ecotones which favour both ecological conditions for rabbits and a structure suitable for lynx hunting (Palomares 2001, Fernández et al. 2003). Other essential habitat elements include natural cavities that are used as natal dens (Fernández et al. 2002, 2006). On the other hand, forestry landscapes, farmland or other open land devoid of native shrubs are rarely used by resident lynx (Palomares et al. 1991) but occasionally used by subadults during natal dispersal (Palomares et al. 2000). Systems: Threats [top] Major Threat(s): During the 20th century hunting and trapping were major sources of mortality associated with predator control and exploitation of wild rabbits (Rodríguez and Delibes 2004). Whereas the importance of this factor as a threat for Iberian Lynx has decreased (Ferreras et al. 2010), during the last years some lynx have been shot or caught with illegal traps (Iberlince LIFE Project 2014).

Road casualties typically produce several losses each year (Simón et al. 2012, Iberlince LIFE Project 2014), as the length of paved or widened roads, as well as average traffic loads, have significantly increased in and around lynx areas (Ferreras et al. 2010). Homogenization of mosaic cultural landscapes due to agricultural and silvicultural intensification during the 20th century conceivably contributed to lynx decline (Rodríguez and Delibes 2002, Ferreras et al. 2010). Continued trends of abandonment of marginal livestock farming and loss of small game, sometimes followed by afforestation, further reduce the amount of potentially suitable habitat for reintroduction. Without viable land uses, maintaining suitable mosaic landscapes for the Iberian Lynx would require enduring and expensive intensive management (Rodríguez 2013). Even in landscapes with suitable structure and subject to intensive conservation management, rabbit abundance exhibits large temporal variability closely tracked by the probability of lynx breeding (Palomares et al. 2001, Fernández et al. 2007, Iberlince LIFE project undated).

Effective population size does not exceed 25 for each isolated subpopulation (Casas-Marcé et al. 2013), announcing further losses of genetic diversity and accumulation of inbreeding through genetic drift. Indeed, persistent small population size over lynx generations, especially in the lowlands of the Doñana region, have produced signs of both demographic and genetic deterioration, including biased sex-ratios, decreased age of territory acquisition and litter size, and increased mortality due to disease and other natural causes (Palomares et al. 2012). Lowered demographic and genetic performance could positively interact in the form of an extinction vortex (Palomares et al. 2012). As a manifestation of global change, human-assisted spread of virulent diseases affecting European Rabbits had catastrophic effects on Iberian Lynx populations in the past (Ferreras et al. 2010). Although rabbits could eventually develop resistance, viral diseases remain a recurrent threat as the arrival of new strains may cause again a lasting depression of food availability for the Iberian Lynx.

Moreover, the prevalent rabbit lineage in southwestern Iberia, where rabbit restocking and other conservation measures take place, might be more vulnerable to rabbit haemorrhagic disease (RHD) than the northeastern lineage (Real et al. 2009). For example, a new RHD strain has been blamed for an annual 62% decrease in productivity (average number of kittens per territorial female) in Andújar-Cardeña subpopulation (Iberlince LIFE project, undated). Likewise, diseases affecting felids also spread, sometimes with the help of uncontrolled pets that become feral or visit lynx areas from nearby towns. For example, in 2007 a feline leukaemia outbreak killed a substantial fraction of lynx in Doñana (López et al. 2009, Palomares et al. 2011a). Finally, detailed models combining ecological niche and metapopulation dynamics show that, without intensive intervention, climate change will rapidly decrease lynx populations and would probably lead to Iberian Lynx to extinction within 35 years (Fordham et al. 2013).

Conservation Actions [top] Conservation Actions: Conservation actions undertaken during the last decade have been reviewed by Ferreras et al. (2010), Palomares et al. (2011b) and especially Simón et al. (2012). The main goal of habitat management is increasing prey density. Food management includes supplementation of rabbits within enclosures and boosting wild rabbit populations. Attempts to augment rabbit numbers are carried out basically through restocking in or out predator-proof enclosures, but also acquiring rabbit hunting rights or enhancing pastures and refuge for wild rabbits. Other important resources for lynx that may be in short supply in some localities, such as cavities usable as breeding dens or artificial water spots, are provided. Management is applied to sites where suboptimal habitat quality may preclude settlement of subadults born nearby. Although hunting or trapping might not be as important a mortality factor as it was in the past, lynx areas are regularly monitored for illegal traps. Measures for traffic calming and some crossing facilities have been implemented especially in road black spots.

Awareness campaigns systematically performed in and around lynx areas as well as in reintroduction sites warn about the drastic effects of poaching on small populations, and informs on the conservation benefits and ecosystems services associated with Iberian Lynx preservation. Parallel education programmes target schools and the general public, which may be also engaged as volunteers. Several NGOs and public administrations acquire rights on specific land uses, or help landowners to maintain their properties compatible with the conservation of the Iberian Lynx by compensating economic losses in which owners incur as a result of conservation action. Some adult lynx have been translocated in order to alleviate the effects of inbreeding in the Doñana subpopulation. Additional wild individuals have been translocated some 30 km away as founders of two ongoing reintroduction attempts in Sierra Morena. A few captive-born individuals have also been used in reintroductions, after the first births of the captive-breeding programme took place in 2005 (Vargas et al. 2009).

To date the ex situ conservation programme for the Iberian Lynx have produced over 270 individuals, and as the captive population has been built, captive-born animals are expected to be regularly used for reintroduction (Iberian Lynx Ex-situ Conservation Programme 2014). Recent models show that, to be effective, reintroductions should take into account the joint effects of climate change, prey abundance and habitat connectivity (Fordham et al. 2013). The Iberian Lynx is fully protected in Spain and Portugal, listed on CITES Appendix I, and on Appendix II of the Bern Convention, and Annexes II* and IV of the EU Habitats and Species Directive. Future actions Two main avenues can be envisaged for lynx conservation, namely consolidation of existing populations and recolonization, either natural or assisted. Continued intensive management, mainly in the form of habitat enhancement and increased prey density (Ferreras et al. 2010, Simón et al. 2012), has been suggested to resist the progressive effects of an extinction vortex whose symptoms can be noted at least in the Doñana population (Palomares et al. 2012).

Other components of intensive management include reduction of mortality rates from road casualties or game management (Rodríguez and Delibes 2004), and prevention of disease outbreaks transmitted by domestic animals or wildlife reservoirs (Millán et al. 2009). Natural recolonization requires increasing the chances for floaters to survive and establish in large areas surrounding occupied nuclei (Rodríguez and Delibes 2003, Palomares et al. 2011b, Rodríguez et al. 2012). These areas may be too large for intensive species-based management to be an option, but a shift to area-based, softer management could be considered. Such management could include tax incentives for small game management, reduced transportation, industrial or urban developments, enforcement of regulations on predator control, and awareness campaigns directed to local people. Regarding assisted recolonization, so far wild lynx made the bulk of founders for reintroduced populations. Continued extraction of wild lynx might not be sustainable in the long term if consolidation of existing nuclei is aimed and if extractions reduce the chances of natural colonization by surplus dispersing lynx. Individuals produced by the captive breeding programme may progressively increase their proportion in the groups of founders.

This may be accompanied by an improvement of the performance (survival and eventually reproduction) of released captive-bred individuals, perhaps by raising them in semi-natural conditions. Design of the genetic composition of founders should alleviate the markedly low genetic diversity of wild populations (Casas-Marcé et al. 2013). Adaptive selection of new reintroduction sites should also consider both present and forecast ecological suitability (Fordham et al. 2013). Citation: Rodríguez, A. & Calzada, J. 2015. Lynx pardinus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T12520A50655794. . Downloaded on 19 January 2017. Disclaimer:

Question: After which extensive region of Europe is a rare but distinct local species of lynx named?
Answer: Iberia