Bears | The Conservation Report

The giant panda became a symbol of conservation when Sir Peter Scott designed the World Wide Fund for Nature’s (WWF) original logo after the panda. Today WWF is recognized around the world as a conservation leader, and its characteristic logo is very much associated with the organization.

Sir Peter Scott was wise to select the panda for WWF’s logo. Not only are pandas the quintessential flagship species, but pandas are also fascinating creatures—both in appearance and in habit.

A panda’s black and white markings, although appealing to the human eye, are odd when compared to other mammals. Furthermore, these solitary bamboo specialists are endemic to a few areas in China.

The panda is an endangered species, but according to the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species the giant panda’s population is increasing: “At least until recently there has been a general population decline, although there is hope that this has been reversed by general habitat improvements — nevertheless, this remains an uncertainty.”

At birth, giant pandas aren’t so giant (see images), and they are notoriously difficult to reproduce in captivity. Two types of giant panda are recognized: the nominate subspecies or the Sichuan panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca melanoleuca) and the Qinling panda, (Ailuropoda melanoleuca qinlingensis), which has a more restricted range.

The so-called red panda (Ailurus fulgens), another characteristic endangered bamboo specialist, isn’t a bear like the panda, but red pandas are related to raccoons, skunks, and weasels. From the People’s Daily Online:

Fang Shengguo told reporters that giant pandas distribute in six mountain ranges including Qinling, Minshan, Qionglai, Liangshan, Daxiangling and Xiaoxiangling in Shaanxi, Gansu and Sichuan provinces. The distribution of Qinling giant pandas have isolated from that of Sichuan giant pandas since 12 thousand years ago. Thus, it accords with the first condition.

After long time isolation and the suspension of exchange of genes, the genes of the two groups of pandas have split up and become completely different population after 12 thousand years evolution.

Judging from their genes, Qinling giant pandas are closer to their ancestors while Sichuan pandas experienced faster evolution. Thus Qinling panda accords with the second kind of classification to become a new sub species.

The two kinds of pandas are so different in their figures. Sichuan panda’s head is long and looks like a bear while the Qinling panda’s head is round and looks like a cat, and the skull bone is small but the teeth are big. In their hair color, Qinling panda’s chest is light brown, its chest hair is brown while Sichuan panda’s chest is black and its chest hair is white. Qinling panda has obvious differences from pandas in other mountains. The difference is identical to that of genes. This accords with the third condition. Due to the differences, Qinling pandas look more beautiful and lovely, Shaanxi people call them “the beauty among the national treasures”

To protect the purity of Qinling sub species of panda, experts suggest integrating the existing protection zones.

A survey shows that currently there are 273 Qinling giant pandas. “Qinling pandas population are seriously endangered.” said Yong Yange, director of the Giant Panda Research Center and senior engineer in Foping National Natural Protection Zone in Shaanxi province.

Yong Yange has studied giant pandas for 30 years. He said Wolong area in Sichuan province has solved the three difficulties in mating, pregnancy and nurturing the baby panda in artificial reproduction of pandas. It has successfully reproduced more than 100 pandas through artificial breeding. But Qinling pandas’ artificial breeding is not as good as that in Wolong, thus it is a severe challenge to protect Qinling pandas.

—
Photo source for attribution here, here, here (although this Flickr user credits this panda cub image to “China Photos/Getty Images”), and here. The authors or licensors of these images do not endorse my work or me and their images are protected under an attribution license.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Is John McCain a closeted bear lover, because he certainly voted for the bear study he recently criticized at the first presidential debate in Oxford, Mississippi, and he attacked the bear study in political ads criticizing earmarks. From FactCheck.org:

Republican presidential candidate John McCain cites three absurd-sounding examples of pork-barrel spending in a recent ad: a “bridge to nowhere,” a study of the DNA of bears and a Woodstock museum.

McCain is known for fighting against earmarks, the other term lawmakers use for funding of pet projects back home. But he appears to have chosen these three because they’re easy to mock, not because he had significant involvement in removing them from the budget.

He never specifically went after the “bridge to nowhere,” and he was absent for key votes on its funding.

While he tried to cut money for several other projects in the same bill, he never proposed cutting the bear study and voted for the final bill containing it.

He wasn’t present for the most important votes on the Woodstock museum, including one on an amendment he co-sponsored to kill the earmark and divert some of the funds.

What is the objective of the bear research McCain has consistently attacked although he supported it? The aim of the research certainly wasn’t what McCain claimed: a paternity test. From Scientific American:

Currently the front-runner for the GOP nod, McCain also hits the research in speeches on the stump, cracking jokes about bear paternity tests and criminal investigations. “I don’t know if it was a paternity issue or criminal, but it was a waste of money,” McCain railed last month during a campaign stop in Clawson, Mich. Scientists, however, are not amused: They insist that the study is not only worth every penny but that the $3-million price tag cited in the ad is, in a word, wrong.

. . .

“This is not pork barrel at all,” says Richard Mace, a research biologist with Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP). “We have a federal law called the Endangered Species Act and [under this law] the federal government is supposed to help identify and conserve threatened species.”

The grizzly has been listed as a threatened species since 1975 and scientists say that it is essential to get a handle on the population to preserve it. But, according to Kendall, until the feds decided to invest in this grizzly bear DNA study, researchers lacked the funds to conduct research at the scale necessary to get a reliable measure.

In 2002 Kendall assembled a scientific panel with representatives from the USGS, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and FWP, along with other scientific and environmental organizations to determine the best way to measure the remaining grizzly population of the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem. It recommended setting up barbed wire hair-snagging stations to painlessly pluck fur from passing bears that would be used for DNA fingerprinting, a technique employed to distinguish individuals of the same species by the differences in their genetic material. This is the only way to accurately estimate population in such heavily forested terrain, where bears are difficult to spot, says Chris Servheen, a grizzly expert with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

In response, the USGS set aside $250,000 to launch the Northern Divide Grizzly Bear Project; the next year, Congress stepped in to provide additional funding, and from 2003 to 2007 appropriated $4.8 million to the effort, Kendall says.

Image Found Here