Assessment Results
Heleophryne hewitti
Hewitt’s Ghost Frog
Order:
Anura
Family:
Heleophrynidae
Synonym(s):
Assessed for:
South Africa
on:
18 Dec 2024
by:
AArk/ASG Southern Africa Workshop
Authors:
Werner Conradie, Louis du Preez, Jeanne Tarrant, Luke Verburgt, Adriaan Jordaan
IUCN Global Red List:
Endangered (EN)
National Red List:
(not assessed)
Distribution:
South Africa
Evolutionary Distinctiveness score:
39.15446715
Recommended Conservation Actions:
Additional Comments:
| Question # | Short Name | Question Text | Response | Comments |
| 1 | Extinction risk | Current IUCN Red List category. [Data obtained from the IUCN Red List.] | Endangered (EN) | |
| 2 | Possibly extinct | Is there a strong possibility that this species might be extinct in the wild? | No / unlikely | |
| 3 | Phylogenetic significance | The taxon’s Evolutionary Distinctiveness (ED) score, as generated by the ZSL EDGE program. (These data are not editable by Assessors). | ED value 20 - 50 | |
| 4 | Protected habitat | Is a population of at least 50% of the individuals of the taxon included within a well-managed or reliably protected area or areas? | No / unlikely | 10-20% of this species' range occurs within protected areas. |
| 5 | Habitat for reintroduction, conservation translocation or supplementation | Does enough well-managed and reliably protected habitat exist, either within or outside of currently protected areas that is suitable for conservation translocation, including population restoration or conservation introduction? | Yes / probably | The Groot Winterhoek and Baviaanskloof subpopulations occur within the boundaries of the Baviaanskloof Natural Heritage site. |
| 6 | Previous reintroductions | Have reintroduction or translocation attempts been made in the past for this species? | No | |
| 7 | In situ conservation activities | Are any in situ conservation actions currently in place for this species? (Only required if a Red List Assessment has not been completed, or if new actions have been implemented since the last Red List Assessment. (Information from the Conservation Actions section of the Red List assessment should be reviewed and considered when answering this question.). | Yes / probably | The Longmore Forestry has been actively monitoring the tadpoles numbers in Martins and Geelhoutboom Rivers in the Elandsberge for the last 15 years. |
| 8 | In situ conservation activities | Are additional in situ conservation actions required to help conserve this species in the wild (e.g. habitat restoration and/or protection, control of invasive species, national legislation etc.)? | Yes / probably | Agreements need to be drawn up with private landowners for the management and long term protection of sites. There is also a need for invasive species control. |
| 9 | In situ research | Is additional in situ research required to better understand the species, e.g. distribution, population trends, natural history etc.? | Yes | No quantitative population information is currently available for this species, tadpoles are seen regularly and adults rarely. Studies on its taxonomy, population size, distribution and trends, life history and ecology, and threats are needed. Continued monitoring of known populations and survey work for other populations are also needed. |
| 10 | Threat mitigation | Are the threats facing the taxon, including any new and emerging threats not considered in the IUCN Red List, potentially reversible? | Threats are likely to be reversible in time frame to prevent further decline / extinction | In the Elandsberg Mountains, the main threats are loss of suitable non-breeding and breeding habitat as a result of afforestation with exotic pine plantations, suppression of fires, erosion, silting of streams, dams, and road building. Introduced predatory fish (likely bass species) are also a threat in the lower reaches of the species’ stream habitat, as they predate on larvae and eggs. However, the major threat is plantations. In the other two Mountain chains, because they are contained within the Baavians Biosphere Reserve, the habitat is stable. However, because less rainfall pushes across the coastal plain to these two mountain chairs, decreasing rainfall patterns (due to global climatic changes) are most likely in these two chains and may explain the species local extinction in the westernmost part of its range in the Baavians Mountains. The streams on which the species depends are described as permanent but depend on rainfall and therefore affected by these changing patterns. Proper management and conservation will be key to this species' survival. |
| 11 | Over-collection from the wild | Is the taxon suffering from collection within its natural range, either for food, for the pet trade or for any other reason, which threatens the species’ continued persistence in the wild? | No / unlikely | |
| 12 | Population recovery | Is the known population of this species in the wild large enough to recover naturally, without ex situ intervention if threats are mitigated? | Yes / probably | |
| 13 | Action plans | Does an Action Plan for the species already exist, or is one currently being developed? | No | |
| 14 | Biological distinctiveness | Does the taxon exhibit a distinctive reproductive mode, behaviour, aspect of morphology or physiology, within the Order to which it belongs (e.g. Anura, Passeriformes etc.)? | No aspect of biology known to be exceptional | |
| 15 | Cultural/socio-economic importance | Does the taxon have a special human cultural value (e.g. as a national or regional symbol, in a historic context, featuring in traditional stories) or economic value (e.g. food, traditional medicine, tourism) within its natural range or in a wider global context? | No | |
| 16 | Scientific importance | Is the species vital to current or planned research other than species-specific ecology/biology/conservation within the Order to which it belongs (e.g. Anura, Passeriformes etc.) e.g. human medicine, climate change, environmental pollutants and conservation science? | No research dependent on this species | |
| 17 | Ex situ research | Does conserving this species (or closely related species) in situ depend upon research that can be most easily carried out ex situ? | No | |
| 18 | Ex situ conservation activities | Is any ex situ research or other ex situ conservation action currently in place for this species? (Information from the Conservation Actions section of the Red List assessment should be reviewed and considered when answering this question.) | No / unlikely | |
| 19 | Husbandry analog required | If an ex situ rescue program is recommended for this species, would an analog species be required to develop husbandry protocols first? | No / unlikely | |
| 20 | Husbandry analog | Do the biological and ecological attributes of this species make it suitable for developing husbandry regimes for more threatened related species? i.e. could this species be used in captivity to help to develop husbandry and breeding protocols which could be used for a similar, but more endangered species at a later stage? | No | |
| 21 | Captive breeding | Has this species been successfully bred and/or maintained in captivity? | Not held in captivity to date | |
| 22 | Conservation education/ecotourism potential | Is the species especially diurnal, active or colourful, or is there an interesting or unusual aspect of its ecology that make it particularly suitable to be an educational ambassador for conservation of the species in the range country, either in zoos or aquariums or within ecotourism activities? | Yes | A beautiful and mysterious species, although not as well known as the Table Mountain Ghost Frog (same genus). |
| 23 | Mandate | Is there an existing conservation mandate recommending the ex situ conservation of this taxon? | No | |
| 24 | Range State approval | If an ex situ initiative was proposed for this species, would it be supported (and approved) by the range State (either within the range State or out-of-country ex situ)? | Yes / probably | |
| 25 | Founder specimens | Are sufficient animals of the taxon available or potentially available (from wild or captive sources) to initiate an ex situ program, if one was recommended? | Yes / probably | |
| 26 | Taxonomic status | Has a complete taxonomic analysis of the species in the wild been carried out, to fully understand the functional unit you wish to conserve (i.e. have species limits been determined)? | Yes | Although the taxonomy of the genus needs revision. |
Citation:
Werner Conradie, Louis du Preez, Jeanne Tarrant, Luke Verburgt, Adriaan Jordaan 2024. Conservation Needs Assessment for Heleophryne hewitti, South Africa
(AArk/ASG Southern Africa Workshop).
https://conservationneeds.org/assessment/7142
Accessed 26 Jan 2025
