[Green Korea United] ENDANGERED SPECIES RELOCATION ASSESSMENT

[아름드리 나무]

This post is thanks to the Green Korea United. It is the PPT material on the summary on the Endangered species relocation assessment, which is originally from the independent environmental impact Assessment sponsored by the Emergency Action Committee to Save Jeju, joined by international environment experts such as the Green Peace and Green Korea United. The independent environmental impact assessment carried out right before the World Conservation Congress (WCC) was an investigation on the two contents of relocation on the three endangered species and soft coral habitats in the Gangjeong village. It had a great role to expose to the domestic and worldwide. serious nature environment destruction due to the Jeju naval base project . Korean language material can be found HERE. Best gratitude to Dr. Imok Cha who was denied entry and deported on Sept. 4 for her active works to save the Jeju!

Slide 1

ENDANGERED SPECIES RELOCATION ASSESSMENT

CIVILIAN-MILITARY COMPLEX PORT DEVELOPMENT,  JEJU ISLAND

 Slide 2

OVERVIEW 

•Assessment conducted independently by Endangered Species International (ESI).

•Relocation and habitat assessment of three endangered species found at the military construction site  conducted during August 2012.

•Species included Sesarma intermedium (estuary crab), Caridina denticulata keunbaei  (Jeju freshwater shrimp), and Kaloula borealis (boreal digging frog) which were relocated during 2010 and 2011 to three different sites in Jeju Island.

•Analysis of existing reports, interviews, and field assessment/study at relocation sites.

 Slide 3

Relocation Sites of Sesarma intermedium (estuary crab), Caridina denticulata keunbaei  (Jeju freshwater shrimp), and Kaloula borealis (boreal digging frog)

Slide 4

Problems of relocating Sesarma intermedium (estuary crab)

Slide 5

Problems of relocating Kaloula borealis (boreal digging frog)

Slide 6

Problems of relocating Caridina denticulata keunbaei (Jeju freshwater shrimp)  

Slide 7

Naval base construction site during August 2012

Slide 8

Naval base construction site during August 2012

Slide 9

MAIN FINDINGS

•Lack of transparency  for monitoring relocation activities and refusal after several attempts to meet ESI team during visit in Jeju for boreal digging frog monitoring.

•Relocation habitat  for endangered crab  is not  protected since a significant portion of the bank was already cleared by private owner after and near the release site impacting the survival and adaptation of the crabs.

•The release of 5,300 Jeju Shrimps within a limited habitat (between Gangjeong Creek and the dam 800 m upstream)  is a threat to the carrying capacity for the species; therefore a number of shrimps should have been released to other suitable site(s)

•No monitoring possible for Jeju shrimp! Cannot assess success or failure.

•Inadequate surveys/relocation of Jeju Shrimp since unknown numbers remain on construction site.

•Inappropriate timing and length of surveys/relocation and lack of adequate searches for relocation of the endangered boreal digging frog. Searches and relocation of frogs should have also included all life stages especially adult frogs.

Slide 10

• For boreal digging frog, terrestrial habitat is where a significant portion of feeding and growth occurs (up to 90% or more of the time is spent there) and where most boreal digging frog are found. No searches were conducted at terrestrial habitat prior construction activities!

•Boreal digging frogs remain on site, only tadpoles removed. At least 60 adult frogs were left on construction site.

•Tadpoles were relocated at Stone Park Museum without adequate studies on the proposed relocation site.

•Monitoring of metamorphs of the boreal digging frog  is essential and should have been conducted in 2011. Monitoring started in 2012  and appears to be highly inadequate.

•Data neither exit nor are collected on upland habitat  for boreal digging frog at relocation site;  predators found at the relocation sites are not known and high density of the dark-spotted frog  was observed (potential predator).

Slide 11

Table 2  Kaloula borealis surveys and capture flaws and their impacts

1. What was done   2. Inappropriate method    3. Impacts on Kaloula borealis 

4. What should have been done? 

A. 

1. 6 field visits within 15 days  2. Number of visits and period of field surveys/ relocation too short  

3. No adults found. Adult frogs will be killed by construction trucks   

4. 17 visits mostly in June during breeding period

B. 

1.  Field visits conducted in late June and July  2. Wrong period outside breeding activities

3.  No adult Kaloula borealis were found, only ted poles collected. All trucks will be killed by construction activities.  4. Surveys and relocation must be done from early May to end of July with peak surveys in June. 

C. 

1. Mostly day time visits 2. Should focus on nightmare surveys  3. Cannot find adult frogs. Only ted poles observed and captured. 4. Mostly conduct night surveys during rainy nights

D. 

1. Dip netting for ted poles during day time and traps for adults during night  2. Did not included visual searches at night for adults and detailed daytime searches within micro habitat where frogs are likely to hide (e. g., burrows, under deep vegetation etc.  3. Cannot find adults and juveniles remaining in upland habitat after breeding season  4. conduct night time visual and call surveys during rainy nights + detailed day time searches within potential micro habitats to locate frogs. Slow and careful digging and removal of natural features should be performed for locating hidden frogs.

E. 

1. No upland surveys  2. Upland habitat was not surveyed 3. Cannot identify frogs in burrows, vegetation, etc. Remaining adult frogs will be crushed by construction activities.  4. Upland habitat should have been flaged and surveyed for remaining adult frogs. 

F. 

1. Survey timing accepted and construction activities started with remaining population of adult frogs on site.  2. Inappropriate overall survey timing and method  3. Same as above and reducing trans location and establishment of a viable population of Stone Museum  4. Should have started Construction activities and until upland habitat fully searched and adult frogs are removed.

Slide 12

Recommendations:

·To halt immediately construction activities to avoid further killing of endangered boreal digging frogs and Jeju Shrimps remaining at the construction site.

·To allow transparent and independent proper surveys to relocate to the extent possible all boreal digging frogs living in the upland habitat and Jeju Shrimps remaining on construction site.

·To conduct proper monitoring surveys and allowing independent review and monitoring of frog and crab monitoring.

·To have independent biological monitor for boreal digging frog at construction site during raining period from late May to early August.  If a boreal digging frog is found during construction activities, work in the area shall stop and a qualified biologist, possessing all applicable permits to relocate this species, will relocate the individual to ponds at Stone Park Museum.

·Insure that impacted area along Seongwennae Creek where Sesarma intermedium (Crab) was released is restored and no further habitat loss and damages occur.