Many islands of fragile ecosystems in a region are usually surrounded by a sea of humans requiring resources, thus creating a scenario where small populations and small home ranges become even smaller, making them inevitably vulnerable to extinction (Gibbs et al. 2008). What people value influences their choices, hence economic, political and sociological factors should all be taken into account when trying to develop conservation strategies (Gibbs et al. 2008).
PHYSICAL / GEOGRAPHICAL & SOCIOECONOMIC
The Indo-Burma hotspot comprises of six large high-priority areas, namely: Thailand, Myanmar, Lao, Vietnam, and southern portions of China as well as Cambodia (Tantipisanuh et al. 2016). Several countries within this hotspot were ranked low in key socio-economic poverty indicators, such as access to water, undernourishment, and number of individuals living under the poverty line; making some conservation practices, such as land reclamation for conservation, in these areas a particularly difficult task, especially if the proposed changes would possibly impact their livelihoods (Tantipisanuh et al. 2016). The region’s dense and growing population has led governments to sacrifice conservation for economic growth (Kano et al. 2016). For example, in Lao, the government approved construction of the Xayaburi dam on the Mekong River, which is a water source for millions of people as well as more than 1200 animal species, with the hope that their dam will produce an ample source of electricity that can be exported (Tantipisanuh et al. 2016). Forest diversity is also one of the main livelihood options for 19 tribal communities, which is about 29% of the Tripura state’s population, and where a rich and varied biodiversity of plants and trees grow wild or are cultivated for consumption or commercial medicines (Majumdar & Kumar, 2016). The practice of ethnomedicine as a primary healthcare system of these rural people, which show that ecological diversity is an integral part of the culture of the Indo-Burma indigenous people (Rai & Lalramnghinglova, 2011).
MAJOR ECOSYSTEMS
In addition to the low levels of research done on the plant and animal species in the Indo-Burma region, species richness is almost impossible to measure, mainly because research typically relies on species that are important to the structure and function of an ecosystem, leaving out the many rare species part of the system (Gibbs et al. 2008). Forest and aquatic ecosystems are a host to rich endemic biodiversity, with many ecological functions and interactions that play a critical role in the biotic life that depend on them (Majumdar & Kumar, 2016). The Indo-Burma tropical semi-evergreen forests are one of the most important with respect to floral and faunal richness (Majumdar & Kumar, 2016). Many plant species however, are naturally rare and occur in small and isolated populations, that have consequently become more isolated due to habitat fragmentation and have had especially dramatic reductions in biota due to edge effects (Majumdar & Kumar, 2016). There are about four major forest types and three secondary forest formations in just one state alone, as well as 363 fish species within the Indo-Burma hotspot. The representative data has found to be uneven, with vertebrates being most represented (Tantipisanuh et al. 2016). Even so, within this representation, there are more conservation efforts and research being practiced on mammals (75%), reptilian (52%) and bird species (53%), with the most underrepresented species in the region being amphibians (27%) (Tantipisanuh et al. 2016).
PRINCIPAL THREATS
Anthropogenic disturbances resulting in forest and habitat fragmentation, especially along exposed forest edges, are the leading influencers of diversity, population structure and regeneration status of many biotic populations in this region (Majumdar & Kumar, 2016). Due to the history of logging for railway tracks and construction for houses and bridges, the shrinking of habitat for agriculture, roads, and human habitat, have significantly reduced several tree species in the region, leaving smaller patches that lack the habitat stability to influence tree regeneration and thus promoting strong edge effect pressure (Majumdar & Kumar, 2016). Rather than being affected by changes in climatic factors, the already small forest patches present before anthropogenic disturbances are now made more vulnerable to the loss of rare species due to these changes (Majumdar & Kumar, 2016). The limited remaining numbers of habitat have therefore lead to high levels of loss of endemic plant and animal diversity (Tantipisanuh et al. 2016). Likewise, the construction of dams in freshwater streams, on-top of the looming threat of climate change, have created synergistic effects on freshwater fishes (Kano et al. 2016). A study by Kano et al., found that all possible dam-construction scenarios they proposed would result in a trade-off between fish biodiversity and the economic benefits of hydropower generation. The study concluded that dam construction would have greater impacts on the diversity of fish species than global warming because of its construction limits the fishes’ ability to make proper range adjustments in response to the rising temperatures (Kano et al. 2016). The Indo-Burma hotspot has been ranked among the top ten hotspots for irreplaceability and the top five for threat vulnerability (Tantipisanuh et al. 2016).
CURRENT CONSERVATION ACTIONS / PROGRAMS
The Indo-Burma hotspot is one of the most economically poor and most threatened region in the world (Rai & Lalramnghinglova, 2011). In order to perform effective conservation in this hotspot, identifying the factors causing the declines in endangered species, as well as promoting co-existence between local humans and their biodiverse environment to encourage social acceptability is required (Tantipisanuh et al. 2016). Discharging local people from their land for conservation may be the least effective effort; rather, a combination of appropriate national and international legislation and effective forestry and wildlife management policies, may prove to be more successful (Tantipisanuh et al. 2016). A trans-boundary protection of patches of land in order to sustain viable populations has been a proposed conservation method (Tantipisanuh et al. 2016). This proposition was in light of the effort to conserve five large European carnivores whose distribution data overlapped across different countries, a few of which are the Canis lupus, Lynx lynx, Ursus arctos and Gulo gulo (Tantipisanuh et al. 2016). These species were heavily hunted, resulting in sparse distributions and densities, and ultimately extinctions for some (Tantipisanuh et al. 2016). However, by 1992, international legislation known as the “Habitat Directive” allowed for a recovery promotion, allowing these species to grow to stable and increasing populations (Tantipisanuh et al. 2016). To encourage governments to make sustainable decisions, some beneficial short-term economic outcomes may require governments to offer incentives to land owners who protect their lands and biodiversity, or to land owners who support habitat restoration on lands that were excessively used for agriculture (Tantipisanuh et al. 2016. Motivating local people to vote can also pressure governments into making positive environmental decisions. For example, in 2014 the Thai government proposed a plan to build a dam in what is currently the largest protected area in Southeast Asia, a critical habitat for a tiger species (Tantipisanuh et al. 2016). Due to the strong opposition of a vast number of people that disagreed with the plan, arguing that the consequential impacts and biodiversity loss that would be implicated by its construction would not be worth the proposed benefits, influenced the Thai government to halt the plan to gather more information before taking action (Tantipisanuh et al. 2016). Finally, for long term beneficial effects, ex-situ conservation programs (Gibbs et al. 2008) can play a role in helping to educate local people on the importance of biodiversity as well as teaching ways to practice protection (Tantipisanuh et al. 2016). Prioritization in conservation is often required due to the limits of time, land and money and therefore protected areas are usually those with already known biodiversity and information to deem as worthy of conservation act, putting areas like the Indo-Burma Hotspot at risk (Gibbs et al. 2008).
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS TO ANOTHER HOTSPOT – MADAGASCAR:
The threat to aquatic biodiversity of Madagascar is important to the livelihoods of those that are dependent on its resources, much in the same way as the populations of the Indo-Burma region (Jones, J et al. 2008). Biological invasions, like anthropogenic threats, have a large economic impact on the region (Jones et al. 2008). In 2007, a species endemic to America, of the genus Procambarus, was found in local fish markets, sparking huge concern amongst Madagascar’s conservation community (Jones et al. 2008). The introduction of this exotic crayfish into local waters resulted in major changes to the aquatic ecosystem as its population density increased (Jones et al. 2008). There is a growing concern over individuals who purchase these exotic fishes to rear in their local rice fields, as this species can not only threaten one of the largest inland fisheries in the country but, if released into Lake Aloatra, would also threaten one of the most important rice producing areas (Jones et al. 2008). Jones et al, in their study, have found that the exotic fish have co-evolved with endemic cray-fish, and have admittedly concluded a lack of information on future effects of the species. The Indo-Burma region faces a similar threat to their biodiversity, not in the same sense as an aquatic invader, but an anthropogenic –human-invader, one that changes spatial geography to suit habitual needs and thus ultimately changes the entire structure and ecology of the ecosystem, making it a very successful and potentially damaging invader. Identifying regions with the highest latent risk as well possible reasons for that risk, offers the best chance in anticipating species losses before they begin and allows time to implement effective premeditative conservation measures (Mace, et al. 2006).
LITERATURE CITED
Gibbs, J., Hunter, M., & Sterling, E.J. 2008. Problem-Solving in Conservation Biology and Wildlife Management: Exercises for class, field, and laboratory. Blackwell Publishing. Pp 1-317.
Jones, J., Rasamy, J., Harvey, A., Toon, A., Oidtmann, B., Randrianaarison, M.H., Raminosoa, N., & Ravoahangimalala, O.R. 2009. The perfect invader: a parthenogenic crayfish poses a new threat to Madagascar’s freshwater biodiversity. Biological Invasions. (11): 1475-1482. DOI: 10.1007/s10530-008-9334-y.
Kano, Y., Dudgeon, D., Nam, S., Samejima, H., Watanabe, K., Grudpan, C., Grudpan, J., Magtoon, W., Musikasinthorn, P., Nguyen, P. T., Praxaysonbath, B., Sato, T., Shibukawa, K., Shimatani, Y., Suvamaraksha, A., Tanaka, W., Thach, P., Tran, D. D., Yamashita, T. & Utsugi, K. 2016. Impacts of Dams and Global Warming on Fish Biodiversity in the Indo-Burma Hotspot. 2016. PLOS ONE. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.016015
Mace, G.M., Cardillo, M., Gittleman, J.L., & Purvis, A. 2006. Latent extinction risk and the future battlegrounds of mammal conservation. PNAS. 103(11).
http://www.pnas.orgcgidoi10.1073pnas.0510541103%20pna/
Majumdar, K & Kumar, B. Effects of patch size, disturbances and structural traits of tropical semi-evergreen forest in lowland Indo Burma hotspot: implications on conservation of the threatened tree species. J. Mt. Sci. (2016) 13 (8):1397-1410.
Rai, P.K & Lalramnghinglova, H. 2011. Threatened and less known ethnomedicinal plants of an Indo-Burma hotspot region: conservation implications. Environment Monit Assess. 178:53-62. DOI: 10.1007/s10661-010-1670-6
Tantipisanuh, N., Savini, T., Cutter, P., & Gale, G.A. 2016. Biodiversity Gap Analysis of the protected area system of the Indo=Burma Hotspot and priorities for increasing biodiversity representation. Biological Conservation. 195: 203-213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.12.043
April Marie Canillo 