“Urial (Ovis vignei) in Tajikistan and adjacent areas – taxonomy and

“Urial (Ovis vignei) in Tajikistan and adjacent areas –
taxonomy and distribution areas”
Working paper of the project “Community based conservation and management of mountain
ungulates in Tajikistan”
by Stefan Michel, “Nature Protection Team”, Khorog, GBAO, Tajikistan
In collaboration with:
Institute for Zoology and Parasitology of
the Academy of Sciences of the
Republic of Tajikistan
Pamir Biological Institute of
the Academy of Sciences of the
Republic of Tajikistan
November 2008
Supported by:
1
Introduction
The status of urial in Tajikistan and the range areas of potentially distinct subspecies are currently rather unclear.
The only urial mentioned in the red book of Tajikistan (ABDUSALYAMOV, 1988) is the Bukhara urial (O.v.
bocharensis). SHACKLETON, 1997 additionally mentions a population in the southwestern part of the Pamirs which
is of unclear taxonomic status and may belong to the Ladakh urial (Ovis v. vignei).
The recently started project “Community based conservation and management of mountain ungulates in
Tajikistan” conducted surveys in distribution areas of urial known from the literature or from oral reports. In the
frame of these surveys urials could be observed in the nature and some horns were found. The observation of
one single urial in the SW Pamirs brought up the question of its taxonomic status and encouraged to compare it
with photographs of horns and animals from other parts of Tajikistan, from the Zoological Garden of Dushanbe
and from the collection of Sheikh Khalifa in the United Arab Emirates. Comparison of the pictures by Colin Groves
(Canberra, Australia), Roland Wirth (ZGAP, Germany), Peter Arras (Al Ain UAE) as well as Vladimir Shakula and
Akhmet Umetbekov (NPT Tajikistan), led to the conclusion that the urials recently found in Tajikistan are quite
distinct from the animals obtained by the Al Ain collection in the United Arab Emirates from Zoo Tallin (originating
from St. Petersburg) and their taxonomic status is not as obvious as it seems on the first view.
The taxonomy and distribution range of urial in Tajikistan and adjacent areas is not just of academic interest, but
of significance for conservation and sustainable use of the species. Fragmentation of the range area and the subpopulations and ongoing poaching pressure and habitat degradation may lead to local extinction or already have
led to it. In this situation re-introduction measures as well as captivity breeding are proposed by various
stakeholders and may in some cases be justified as the last option for prevention of total extinction. Such well
intended projects, however, bear the risk that animals are moved over long distances and populations belonging
to different taxa may become mixed. Another point is the classification of the urial in the CITES Annexes.
O.v.vignei is classified under Annex I, while the other subspecies belong to Annex II. This classification is
important in case of transboundary translocation as well as in case of consideration of export of animals for
captive breeding programs outside the country of origin or in case of launching of sustainable trophy hunting
programs. Further a new edition of the Red Data Book of Tajikistan is under preparation and clarification of
taxonomic status and distribution areas are needed for classifying the urial subspecies correctly.
In the following sections of this paper the current state of the discussion is briefly summarized. It is expected that
this paper may lead to the clarification of some open questions by systematic analysis of existing knowledge and
targeted research.
Subspecies of potential relevance
The Bukhara urial (O.v.bocharensis) is the only urial subspecies mentioned in the Red Data Book of the Tajik
SSR (Abdusalyamov, 1988) and is usually considered as the subspecies to which almost all urial populations in
Tajikistan belong.
The Ladakh urial (O.v.vignei) is mentioned for the SW Pamirs by different sources (HEPTNER et al. 1961,
LUZHEVSKY 1977, SAPOZHNIKOV 1976, SHACKLETON 1997, Fedosenko 2002) but not confirmed by recent research
documented in modern literature.
The Afghan urial (O.v. cycloceros) is in the literature not mentioned for Tajikistan. However, proximity of range
areas shown in SHACKLETON (1997) to the SW Pamirs suggest, that its occurrence should as well be considered.
The Severtzov argali (Ovis ammon severtzovi) has long been seen as an urial (e.g. SHACKLETON 1997) but
morphological and caryotypic marks distinguish it as an argali (SHAKULA et al. 1995, LYAPUNOVA et al. 1997,
SHAKULA 2001). In the context of this paper it is only to be considered as a taxon potentially confused with the
urial.
2
Distribution areas according to literature and actual reports
Published distribution ranges
Inside Tajikistan
CLARK (1978) writes about the distribution of O. v. bocharensis "...ranges in the upper Zarafshan drainage of the
Hissar Mountains to the east of Bukhara, southward to the west of the Poli country of the Russian Pamirs, then
westwards along the Oxus on the outlying spurs of the Hissar mountains. It apparently does not go very far north
of the Zarafshan, which flows westwards ...". The Oxus is nowadays called Pyanj in the South of Tajikistan and
indeed urials occur in the north-south oriented lower mountains which are spurs of the Pamiro-Alai system to
which the Hissar range belongs. The occurrence of urials in the Hissar Range itself is not confirmed by literature
known to the author of this paper. The same is the case for the Zarafshan valley and areas north to it. The one
single dot in the Zeravshan valley close to Penjikent in the area map in the Red Data Book (ABDUSALYAMOV,
1988) is likely concerning a reported site of Severtzov’s argali, formerly considered being an urial.
The Red Data Book (ABDUSALYAMOV 1988) shows a distribution map of Bukhara urial in Tajikistan. Key areas
mentioned in the text are:
- Pyanj Karatau (especially between Nizhniy Pyanj and Parkhor) (1)
- Surkhkuh (north of Nurek reservoir) (2)
- Kushvariston Mountains and Hazratishoh Range (3)
Further the urial is mentioned for the mountain ranges Tuyuntau (4), Aktau (5), Aruktau (6), Gardaniushti,
Sarsarak (7), Sanglok as well as Turkestan range (8) (likely confusion with O.a.severtzovi), Alay range
(potentially confusion with Ovis ammon polii?) and Ishkashim range (9). The map shows the latter range area
additionally stretching over parts of the Shugnan range. Interestingly the map does not show the (in the text
mentioned) key distribution area at the southern part of the Pyanj Karatau and the Wakhan valley from where
urials are mentioned in HEPTNER (1961) and SAPOZHNIKOV (1976). See fig. 1 where numbers show the areas
mentioned in the text.
Fig. 1 The distribution area of Bukhara urial in Tajikistan (Abdusalyamov, 1988)
Shackleton (1997) refers to Luzhevsky (1977) and Sapozhnikov (1976) and presents a distribution map (fig. 2)
showing basically three areas in Tajikistan:
- Pyanj Karatau and and Vakhsh range east of Vakhs river (1)
- Areas in the SE of Khatlon oblast and at the SW edge Gorno-Badakshan Autonomous Oblast along the
Pyanj River at the Afghan border (2)
- The distribution area in the Babatagh Mountains is mentioned in the text, but the map shows only areas
in Uzbekistan. (3)
3
- A questionable area in the SW Pamirs at the southern edge of the Ishkashim Range (4)
This map looks like a simplified version of the map provided by ABDUSALYAMOV (1988), but some areas shown
there, are completely missing here. See fig. 2 where numbers show the areas mentioned in the text.
Fig. 2: Urial distribution in the Central Asian Republics (Shackleton, 1997)
The map in BASKIN & DANIEL (2003) (see fig. 3) shows, with reference to Ishunin (1961), Ishadov (1972),
Sapozhnikov (1976) and Heptner (1989), the South of Tajikistan as distribution range of urial. The area shown in
this map leaves aside the southern part of Karatau (probably due to an error about the topographic location of this
area) but includes the entire W-Pamirs from where except the SW edge close to Ishkashim and the Wakhan any
urial reports are missing. O.v.bocharensis is mentioned for the W-Pamirs – a statement contradicting all other
literature and O.v.vignei for the SW of the Pamirs.
Fig 3: Distribution map of urial (BASKIN & DANIEL, 2003) Remark: 7 is not Karatau, but southern Hazratishoh, 9 is W-Pamirs which
is not “Pamir Plateau”, but consist of deep valleys and rugged mountains
4
In adjacent areas of Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan
The map in Shackleton 1997 shows distribution areas of (Bukhara) urial in Uzbekistan close to the Tajik border at
the Babatogh Range (3) and at the border between Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan at the Kugitang Range (4). See
fig. 2 where numbers show the areas mentioned in the text. The map in BASKIN & DANIEL (2003) shows the same
areas at the borders of Turkmenistan/Uzbekistan and Uzbekistan/Tajikistan.
BOGDANOV (1992) mentions two populations in Uzbekistan – one in the Baisunokugitang (at the Turkmen border)
and one in the Babatogh (at the Tajik border).
In adjacent areas of Afghanistan and in Pakistan
Fig. 4: Urial distribution in Afghanistan (Shackleton, 1997)
Shackleton (1997) refers to Petocz (1973) and provides a map of the urial distribution prior to 1979 (fig. 4, black known distribution, hachure – general distribution). In this map one area is shown in the NE of the country, close
to the Wakhan corridor and bordering with Pakistan, while no distribution areas bordering to Tajikistan are
mentioned. HABIBI (2003) presents a distribution map, showing records slightly west of Ishkashim (fig. 5, white
dots confirmed records). This map was modified by HABIB (2008) based on sightings of three groups in the lower
Wakhan in April 2007, findings of horns as well as reports by local people about sightings in the middle Wakhan
(fig. 6). The areas shown in both maps border in the NW to the western and southwestern edges of Tajikistan’s
GBAO, but do not join to the most important urial area in Tajikistan, the Pyanj Karatau. SHACKLETON (1997)
considers the urials in Afghanistan all as O.v.cycloceros, while HABIB (2008) does not make any statement about
the taxonomic status of the animals observed. That the taxonomic status of the species changes immediately with
the state boundaries looks a bit strange but could - beside reasons of research history - be explained by the River
Pyanj, potentially serving as natural boundary between subspecies.
Fig. 5: Urial distribution in Afghanistan (Habibi, 2003)
Fig. 6: Urial distribution in Afghanistan (Habib, 2008)
For Pakistan Shackleton (1997) shows a distribution map (fig. 7, black - known distribution, hachure – general
distribution) of O.v.cycloceros and O.v. vignei. The distribution area has shrunk significantly during the past
decades and most recent reports concern Chitral District (Kunar River valley, Chitral Gol NP), Gilgit District
(Miatsil River valley and Hunza Valley) and Baltistan District. The closest O.v.vignei areas are located about
5
200 km as the crow flies from the sites in the Wakhan where urials were recently recorded and are divided from
there by the high and glacier covered Hindukush Range.
Fig. 7: Urial distribution in Pakistan (Shackleton, 1997)
Fig. 8: Range areas of urial subspecies (2 – O.v.cycloceros, 3 – O.v.bocharensis, 4 – O.v.vignei) (FEDOSENKO 2002)
Fedosenko (2002) provides a summarizing distribution map of all urial species. He mentions the Ladakh urial
from the region of Ishkashim (SW corner of the Tajik Pamirs) and from the Shokhdara Range, at altitudes above
3000 m. However in the next sentence he writes that without doubt the Tajik urial (i.e. O.v.bocharensis) lives in
6
the NE parts of Afghanistan in the Wakhan. Most likely this is just a typo and his statement concerns O.v.vignei.
However, he neither specifies if he has own observations or to what sources he refers to, except statements by
local people, quoted by Sapozhnikov (1976), reporting about urials swimming through the River Pyanj between
both sides of the Tajik-Afghan border. Further he mentions an oral statement by A. Laylibekov, reporting that at
the end of the 1990s there were about 50 to 60 animals left in the Ishkashim Range. The distance from the upper
Kunar River (N Pakistan, where the Ladakh urial lived at least in the recent past), to the region around Ishkashim
is about 75 to 100 km, and the Hindukush passes between the basins of Kunar and Pyanj are at about 3800 m.
Thus he considers it possible, that both sections of the Ladakh urial’s distribution range in the past have been
connected.
Recent findings
In the frame of the project “Community based conservation and management of mountain ungulates in Tajikistan”
in June and July urials were searched in five areas, mentioned in the literature as key distribution areas:
1. Surkhkuh north of Nurek reservoir (Vakhsh River)
2. Aktau, west of the zapovednik Trigrovaya Balka at the junction of Vaksh River with the Pyanj.
3. Karatau, southern part, close to the Pyanj River and middle part
4. Hazratishoh Range west and east of zapovednik Dashtijum and in the north of zakaznik Dashtijum.
5. Lower Wakhan (southern slope of Shokhdara Range) and Pamir River basin (southern slope of
Southern Alichur Range)
In the Surkhkuh Range (1) no urials were observed during June 2008. One single pair of horns (fig. 11) as well as
reports from local shepherds and hunters indicate that the species is still present in the area. Reportedly urials
are at least during the summer months found close to the northern banks of the Nurek Reservoir.
In the Aktau range (2) between the 19 and 21 June 2008 eleven urials (6 ♂, 3 ♀ and 2 lambs) were observed.
One pair of horns (fig. 10) and two lambs were presented by local people.
Fig. 9: Areas of recent surveys in Tajikistan and sightings of animals and horns displayed (numbers according to the text, river
network slightly inaccurate due to differing map projection)
7
The Karatau Range (3) seems to be still the area with the largest urial population in Tajikistan. In the southern
part of Karatau range, close to the River Pyanj between 23 and 28 June 2008 in total 42 urials (among them 6 ♂,
20 ♀, 15 lambs) were observed. At 29 June 2008 in the central part of Karatau Range in the proximity of the
shrine of Hoja Akhtam Ali six urials (4 ♀ and 2 lambs) were recorded.
In the Hazratishoh Range (4) urials were confirmed only for the southern part, where in the proximity of Dashtijum
Zapovednik twelve urials (1 ♂, 7 ♀ and 4 lambs) were found. In the northern parts of the Hazratishoh Range no
signs of urial presence were found but there are reports by local people about the species’ presence in the area.
In the Wakhan (5) in July 2008 an intensive search was conducted in two sections from which observations of in
total about 50 urials during 2002/2003 were reported by Kadamshoev (2008). Unfortunately despite of intensive
search no urials were found, but only horns displayed at holy shrines (fig. 12) in the lower Wakhan (villages
Namadgut, Ptup and Udit). In May and October 2008 one male urial was observed (see fig. 13) in the vicinity of
Ishkashim (few hundred meters east of village Ryn). Further the species seems to survive still in small numbers
on the Afghan side (KADAMSHOEV, 2008, HABIB, 2008). According to local sources (hunters, KADAMSHOEV, 2008),
urials have also been found further up in the Pamirs (Southern Alichur range, right side of Pamir River and north
to Javhshangoz (upper Shokhdara River) and in the Shaydan valley north of Bulunkul (upper Gunt River).
Morphological characteristics of urials sighted and of horns found
Morphological differences of urial subspecies are described in the literature. E.g. Fedosenko (2002) provides
descriptions for O.v.bocharensis, O.v.cycloceros and O.v.vignei, but does not explicitly explain distinctive marks:
On O.v.bocharensis he states that the ruff reaches a length of 20 cm and more and has in its upper parts
light colour and in the lower part brown or black colour (young males). O.v.bocharensis is significantly
smaller than O.v.cycloceros but there are considerable variations between different parts of the range
area inside Tajikistan. The horns of O.v.bocharensis rams are significantly shorter than these of
O.v.cycloceros, but again there are variations between individuals from different areas.
O.v.vignei is comparably large. The horns of the males are distinguished from the horns of other
subspecies by their lower curvature. Their average length exceeds the length of the horns of
O.v.bocharensis. The ruff is well developed, but shorter, than at the Ustyurt urial (O.v. arkal). The body is
of reddish-cinnamon colour.
At another place Fedosenko (2002) states that O.v.arkal and O.v.cycloceros by their size of body and
horns significantly exceed the other subspecies. He further explains that the differences of colour
between the subspecies are small. No statements are given about possible differences between the
subspecies concerning the form of the horns
8
Fig. 10: Photographs of a pair of urial horns from Aktau, west of Tigrovaya Balka (Vakhsh valley, SW-Tajikistan). Photos: V.
Shakula
The horns in fig. 10 have been seen in a village in the SW of Tajikistan. With the slightly perverted form (?) and
the round lateral edges they look quite similar to the animals from Tallin Zoo (fig. 15) but rather different to the
animals in Dushanbe Zoo (fig. 14) and in Ishkashim. Colin Groves writes on these horns: “Obviously a very old
individual with the lateral edge rounded off, and the tips worn away, but you can see the slight outward turn of the
tips as is typical in all the vignei group.” Question: Does O.v.bocharensis belong to the vignei group?
9
Fig. 11: Photos of one pair of urial horns found at Surkhkuh east of Dushanbe (north of Nurek reservoir) in Tajikistan. Photos: V.
Shakula
The horns found in Surkhkuh (fig. 11), at the northern boundaries of the present urial distribution range in
Tajikistan look quite different from those, seen in SW Tajikistan. Colin Groves writes: “The tips again worn here,
yet the outer angle is strong enough not to have been bevelled off”. The question is if the form of the lateral edge
is a distinctive mark or just defined by individual variation and age. The round lateral edge of the Tallin animals
(fig. 15), about 4 years old, suggests that it has little to do with age.
10
Fig. 12: Photos of urial horns from a shrine in the region of Ishkashim (Tajikistan). Photos: V. Shakula.
On the horns found at shrines in Ishkashim (fig.12) Colin Groves writes: “These are interesting. Let me slightly
modify what I said before, because although good and poor lateral angles, and outturned and perverted horns do
occur in both Ladakh (vignei) and Afghan (cycloceros) sheep, the poor angle and perverted horns is usual in
vignei, the well-marked angle and outturned horns is usual in cycloceros. These, therefore, look like vignei horns.”
Thus the horn findings seem to support the idea that the urials in the Wakhan belong to O.v.vignei.
However, the animal, photographed close to Ishkashim and close to the sites where the horns in fig. 12 are
displayed, has rather strong lateral angles and outturned horns, i.e. seems to fit more with the description of
O.v.cycloceros. But Colin Groves comments: “He appears to have no ruff or neck markings of any kind! His body
and horns, however, are fine for vignei.” The ruff is indeed poorly developed, but the animal at beginning October
still had short summer hair and it is to expect that in winter the ruff will be more visible. It has clear black neck
marking and a larger black area at the throat.
11
Fig. 13: Photographs of the male urial in Ishkashim (Tajikistan), in October 2008, probably born in 2005. Photos: S. Michel.
12
Colin Groves writes on the comparison of the Ishkashim ram (fig. 13) and the animal likely originating from SW
Tajikistan (i.e. O.v.bocharensis area) kept in Dushanbe Zoo (fig. 14): “This one made me look again at your
Ishkashim ram, and I could see a small black throat area in him, but the one here in the zoo is much bigger, but
neither of them have any trace of a white ruff. As far as I can see, in all seasons vignei does have a prominent
white ruff (reduced to a beard on the jaw angle in summer, of course) and a lot of black on the throat, all the way
down to the brisket (which is the only part of the throat where I can detect it in either the Ishkashim ram or the one
in the zoo). The zoo one has longer horns with more of an angle on the lateral side, and I'm not sure the degree
to which that could be considered individual variation -- I think it could.”
Fig. 14: Male urial in Dushanbe Zoo of unknown origin, most likely from S-Tajikistan - Pyanj Karatau, Aktau (right side of River
Vakhsh) or Surkhkuh (east of Dushanbe). Summer 2008. Photo: V.Shakula. Pictures top and bottom right. The same animal End
October 2008. Photo: S. Michel.
The Ishkashim ram has a trace of white/black ruff (See title picture!). The zoo animal now at End of October has a
much more significant ruff than it had in July. The question is, if both individuals likely belong to the same
subspecies and if yes to which one, or if they rather belong to different subspecies. Even if the area of origin of
13
the urial in the zoo is not documented, statements by an animal keeper that it is from SW Tajikistan (region of
Kurgonteppa) seem justified, while it is rather unlikely that it has been brought from the diminishing Ishkashim
population over a distance of over 700 km of poorest roads. So both animals belong most likely to populations so
far considered as belonging to different subspecies.
The animals, originating from Tallin Zoo (fig. 15) look more different from the two animals in fig. 13 and fig. 14,
and also at least from the horns found in Surkhkuh (fig. 11), than these among themselves. Colin Groves also
states: “Now this is something else. I know that some recent authors, such as Valdez, synonymise bochariensis
with cycloceros, but it does seem to me that there is a difference (perhaps connected with altitude?). The
Bukhara sheep is smaller and seems to be lighter, with a much shorter white throat ruff, less of a lateral angle,
and usually perverted horns. I don't know the individual variation, but I do observe that some of these males have
a quite prominent black throat area.” According to the records of Zoo Tallin, their animals were originally from
St. Petersburg.
Fig. 15: Photos of urials originating from Zoo Tallin (Estonía) and labeled as O.v.bocharensis in the collection of Sheikh Khalifa
in Al Ain in the UAE. Photos: P. Arras
Conclusions
The urial populations in Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and likely also in Afghanistan and Turkmenistan seem to be
diminishing with an alarming speed. At the same time neither their taxonomic status nor their actual and past
distribution areas seem to be clarified and well documented. If the usually assumed distribution areas of the
subspecies are correct, the animals/horns in fig. 10, 11, 14 and 15 would belong to O.v.bocharensis and the
animals/horns presented in fig. 12 and 13 would belong to O.v.vignei. However, morphological differences and
similarities provide reasons for doubts. Thus questions are:
1) Do the animals and horns documented in this paper represent distinct subspecies?
2) To which subspecies do the documented animals likely belong according to area of origin and
morphology?
3) What are the overall distribution areas of distinct subspecies and how are they isolated from each other?
4) How the urial area in the Wakhan is connected to the core area of O.v.vignei, in particular due to the
high and glacier covered Hindukush range (passes at around 3800 m)?
14
5) In what extent individual variations exceeds inter-subspecies variation?
References
ABDUSALYAMOV, I. (ed.) 1988: Red Data Book of the Tajik SSR. Dushanbe.
BASKIN, L. &. DANIEL, K. 2003: Ecology of Ungulates, Chapter 22, Urial - Ovis vignei
CLARK J. L. 1978: The Great Ark of the Wild Sheep, University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Oklahoma.
BOGDANOV,O.P. 1992: Rare animals. Chief Editorial Board of Encyclopedies. Tashkent.
FEDOSENKO, A.K. 2002: Urial. Sostoyanie populyatsiy, ekologiya, povedeniye i khozyaystvennye ispolzlovanie.
Moscow.
HABIB, B. 2008: Wildlife Survey Program. Status of Mammals in Wakhan Afghanistan. Wildlife Conservation
Society. New York.
HABIBI, K. (2003): Mammals of Afghanistan. Zoo Outreach Organization and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services
HEPTNER, V.G., A.A. NASIMOVIC & BANNIKOV, A.G. 1961: Mlekopitayushchie Sovetskogo Soyuza. Vol 1. Nauka,
Moscow. (German 1966, Jena, English 1988).
LYAPUNOVA, E.A., BANJ, T.D., VORONTSOV, N.N., HOFFMANN, R.S. (1997): Khromosomnye nabory I
sistematicheskoe polozhenie barana Severtsova (Ovis ammon severtzovi). Zool. Zhurnal, T. 76, Vyp. 9. pp. 10831093.
LUZHEVSKY, A.M. 1977: The experience of Tadjik SSR in accomplishing practical measures aimed at protection
and increase of rare animal species included in the USSR Red Data Book. In: Rare animals and their protection
in the USSR. Nauka, Moscow. (In Russian)
SAPOZHNIKOV, G. N. 1976. Dikie barany Tajikistana. (The wild sheeps of Tajikistan). Donish, Dushanbe.
SHACKLETON, D.M. (ed.) 1997. Wild Shhep and Goats and their Relatives. Status Survey and Conservation Action
Plan for Caprinae. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. 390 + vii S.
SHAKULA, V.F., KAYUMOV, B.K., SNITKO, V.P. 1994: Kariotip, kyzylkumskogo gornogo barana. Selevinia, vol. 2, Nr.
2, p. 83-84.
SHAKULA, V.F. 2001: Population status and taxonomic problems of Caprinae in Western Tien Shan and Kisil-Kum
desert. Newsletter of the IUCN/SSC Caprinae Specialist group, Vancouver, Canada, pp. 5-6.
15