Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

There Are Fewer Than 100 Ocelots in the US - These Scientists Are Trying to Save Them

News Feed
Monday, March 10, 2025

CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas (Reuters) - In the race to save the endangered ocelot, scientists are trekking the United States, pursuing fertility treatments and striving to kickstart a new generation of the wild cat.Ocelots roamed the southwestern U.S. in the 1800s, but have since dwindled to fewer than 100 in two small breeding populations in South Texas. While the feline species is found in Mexico, Central America and South America, the Texas cats with striking spotted coats are believed to be the last wild population in the United States.   "Just look at the cat – why would you not want that animal to survive in nature?" said Bill Swanson, the Cincinnati Zoo's director of animal research, who has traveled the country trying to breed captive ocelots in animal institutions with sperm from wild ocelots from South Texas ranch land."It's not just saving the ocelot, it's saving the habitat and the ecosystem where it lives, which supports so many other animals that provide those services that let people survive on this planet," he said,  The nonprofit East Foundation, based in San Antonio, manages one of those breeding populations on more than 200,000 acres (810 sq km) of South Texas ranch land containing thorn scrub habitat, a dense covering of short, spiky shrubs that the elusive and nocturnal ocelots adore.Ashley Reeves, a research veterinarian at the East Foundation, said humans played a major role in the decline of the ocelot, listed in 1982 as an endangered species in the U.S."Back when the fur trade became very popular, they were hunted down for their beautiful fur," Reeves said. "And then also loss of habitat, human encroachment, large cities being built and roadways, so roadways are one of their No. 1 killers today."Reeves and Swanson have been working on their ocelot project since 2021. The team has tried - unsuccessfully so far - to breed ocelots two ways. The first is via artificial insemination, in which semen collected from a cat is deposited directly into a female cat's reproductive tract. The second is in vitro fertilization, in which oocytes, or eggs, are collected from the female cat's body and fertilized with semen in a petri dish before developing into an embryo in an incubator. The viable embryo is then surgically transferred into a cat or frozen to be transferred later. Of the 13 artificial inseminations and four in vitro fertilization procedures performed in recent years, none have produced a viable pregnancy.Swanson points to decreased quality in wild ocelot sperm due to signs of inbreeding, environmental stresses like dehydration from drought and decreased motility - the ability of sperm to move - from freezing specimens. "An ocelot usually has one kitten. That's the normal litter size," Swanson said. "And in the wild, the mother will raise that kitten for a full year until it's old enough to go out on its own. So ocelots are very slowly reproducing animals naturally."    At the Texas State Aquarium in Corpus Christi, Texas, in December, the team extracted two eggs from a five-year-old ocelot named Milla and patiently waited to see if an embryo would form after combining the eggs with wild sperm in a petri dish. After two days of waiting for a fertilized egg to cleave, or rapidly divide and develop into an embryo, the researchers were disappointed to find neither cell cleaved."It's disappointing," Reeves said. "But at the same time, science doesn't always go the way you expect it to."    Researchers will spend the next few months trapping wild male ocelots to collect their sperm before resuming fertility procedures in the fall.     By the end of the year, a facility in Kingsville, Texas, will be constructed to house ocelots, provide medical and reproductive care as well as a setting for young ocelots to learn how to hunt in the wild.(Reporting by Evan Garcia in Texas; Writing by Brad Brooks; Editing by Donna Bryson and Sandra Maler)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

By Evan GarciaCORPUS CHRISTI, Texas (Reuters) - In the race to save the endangered ocelot, scientists are trekking the United States, pursuing...

CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas (Reuters) - In the race to save the endangered ocelot, scientists are trekking the United States, pursuing fertility treatments and striving to kickstart a new generation of the wild cat.

Ocelots roamed the southwestern U.S. in the 1800s, but have since dwindled to fewer than 100 in two small breeding populations in South Texas. 

While the feline species is found in Mexico, Central America and South America, the Texas cats with striking spotted coats are believed to be the last wild population in the United States.   

"Just look at the cat – why would you not want that animal to survive in nature?" said Bill Swanson, the Cincinnati Zoo's director of animal research, who has traveled the country trying to breed captive ocelots in animal institutions with sperm from wild ocelots from South Texas ranch land.

"It's not just saving the ocelot, it's saving the habitat and the ecosystem where it lives, which supports so many other animals that provide those services that let people survive on this planet," he said,  

The nonprofit East Foundation, based in San Antonio, manages one of those breeding populations on more than 200,000 acres (810 sq km) of South Texas ranch land containing thorn scrub habitat, a dense covering of short, spiky shrubs that the elusive and nocturnal ocelots adore.

Ashley Reeves, a research veterinarian at the East Foundation, said humans played a major role in the decline of the ocelot, listed in 1982 as an endangered species in the U.S.

"Back when the fur trade became very popular, they were hunted down for their beautiful fur," Reeves said. "And then also loss of habitat, human encroachment, large cities being built and roadways, so roadways are one of their No. 1 killers today."

Reeves and Swanson have been working on their ocelot project since 2021. The team has tried - unsuccessfully so far - to breed ocelots two ways. 

The first is via artificial insemination, in which semen collected from a cat is deposited directly into a female cat's reproductive tract. 

The second is in vitro fertilization, in which oocytes, or eggs, are collected from the female cat's body and fertilized with semen in a petri dish before developing into an embryo in an incubator. The viable embryo is then surgically transferred into a cat or frozen to be transferred later. 

Of the 13 artificial inseminations and four in vitro fertilization procedures performed in recent years, none have produced a viable pregnancy.

Swanson points to decreased quality in wild ocelot sperm due to signs of inbreeding, environmental stresses like dehydration from drought and decreased motility - the ability of sperm to move - from freezing specimens. 

"An ocelot usually has one kitten. That's the normal litter size," Swanson said. "And in the wild, the mother will raise that kitten for a full year until it's old enough to go out on its own. So ocelots are very slowly reproducing animals naturally."    

At the Texas State Aquarium in Corpus Christi, Texas, in December, the team extracted two eggs from a five-year-old ocelot named Milla and patiently waited to see if an embryo would form after combining the eggs with wild sperm in a petri dish. After two days of waiting for a fertilized egg to cleave, or rapidly divide and develop into an embryo, the researchers were disappointed to find neither cell cleaved.

"It's disappointing," Reeves said. "But at the same time, science doesn't always go the way you expect it to."    

Researchers will spend the next few months trapping wild male ocelots to collect their sperm before resuming fertility procedures in the fall.     

By the end of the year, a facility in Kingsville, Texas, will be constructed to house ocelots, provide medical and reproductive care as well as a setting for young ocelots to learn how to hunt in the wild.

(Reporting by Evan Garcia in Texas; Writing by Brad Brooks; Editing by Donna Bryson and Sandra Maler)

Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Small Alligator Rescued in Boston After Slithering Into the City's Heart on Social Media

Wildlife officials say a small alligator spotted along the Charles River in Boston this week has been rescued and delivered to safety

BOSTON (AP) — It wasn’t a croc — there really was an alligator on the loose in Boston.And the story of the city's slithering saurian appears to have a happy ending. The small alligator, spotted along the Charles River in Boston multiple times this week, has been rescued and delivered to safety, wildlife officials in Massachusetts said Thursday.The approximately foot-long crocodilian startled a few people and became an instant star on social media after confused onlookers took videos of it slithering away from sight. But the animal is not native to Massachusetts, and couldn't possibly survive the harsh New England winter, so the search for the wayward gator was on.A local wildlife educator captured the critter on Wednesday night, and it's now awaiting a permanent home, officials said.Harvard University graduate student Whitney Lieberman was among the residents who caught a glimpse of the exotic visitor. She said she notified wildlife authorities when she saw the creature while she was jogging to work.“Yeah, I did a double-take. For a second, I had to check myself — alligators are not native to Boston waterways, right?” Lieberman said. “I texted my co-workers because I had a morning meeting: ‘Hey guys, this is a good excuse to be late for work. There is an alligator right in front of me and I don’t know what to do.'"The animal was in jeopardy due to the chilly temperatures on the Charles, which was 51 degrees Fahrenheit (32 degrees Celsius) on Thursday. Alligators prefer temperatures above 80 degrees Fahrenheit (27 degrees Celsius). They are cold-blooded and can't regulate their own temperature, so they enter a dormant, energy-saving state called brumation to survive colder temperatures.Joe Kenney, who runs a wildlife education business called Joe's Craz-zy Critters, captured the alligator, the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife said in a statement. The state has temporarily authorized Kenney to keep the alligator while it evaluates the best long-term placement for it, the department said.The wildlife department said the alligator's appearance is still being investigated, but added it was most likely a pet that escaped or was intentionally released.“MassWildlife is working in close collaboration with the Environmental Police to find a safe home for this alligator as an educational animal with a permitted facility. This incident serves as an important reminder that it is not legal to keep alligators or any crocodilian species as pets in Massachusetts,” state herpetologist Mike Jones said in a statement.Alligators have a history of occasionally showing up in urban areas far from their native ranges. One, dubbed Chance the Snapper, turned up in Chicago in summer 2019 and was eventually trapped. Another one showed up on the Charles River in the Boston area in 2010.Whittle reported from Scarborough, Maine.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

What we’ve done to the salmon

This story is part of a series supported by Animal Charity Evaluators, which received a grant from EarthShare. The last few decades have seen, arguably, the most sweeping transformation in how humans produce meat, and it has nothing to do with chickens, pigs, or cows. It has to do with fish. Traditionally, the vast majority […]

Farming salmon is bad at any stage of the fishs’ lives. This story is part of a series supported by Animal Charity Evaluators, which received a grant from EarthShare. The last few decades have seen, arguably, the most sweeping transformation in how humans produce meat, and it has nothing to do with chickens, pigs, or cows. It has to do with fish. Inside this story Over half of the world’s seafood now comes from fish farms, which resemble underwater factory farms. Chickens, pigs, and cows were domesticated over thousands of years, but fish have been domesticated in under a century. It’s created serious welfare issues, especially for salmon. Salmon are carnivorous and migrate thousands of miles. On farms, they’re reduced to swimming in small tanks and eating pellets. Fish farming has taken over the seafood sector, but some experts argue that it’s moved too fast, and we need to better understand welfare issues. Traditionally, the vast majority of fish that people consume has come from the ocean. But in 2022, humanity hit a significant milestone: Seafood companies began to raise more fish on farms than they caught from the sea. And they farm astonishingly large numbers of fish — in tiny, cramped enclosures that resemble underwater factory farms.  It amounts to the fastest and largest animal domestication project that humanity has ever undertaken.  For most of the land animals we eat today, domestication — or, as French fish researcher Fabrice Teletchea defined it, the “long and endless process during which animals become, generations after generations, more adapted to both captive conditions and humans” — has taken place over thousands of years. “In contrast,” a team of marine biologists wrote in the journal Science in 2007, the rise of fish farming “is a contemporary phenomenon,” taking off on a commercial scale around the 1970s.  By the early 2000s, humans were farming well over 200 aquatic animal species, virtually all of which had been domesticated or forced into unnatural conditions in extreme captivity over the course of the previous century, with many in just the prior decade. To put it another way, the marine biologists wrote, aquatic domestication occurred 100 times faster than the domestication of land animals — and on a vastly larger scale. Today, some 80 billion land animals are farmed annually, while an estimated 763 billion fish and crustaceans are farmed each year, a figure projected to quickly grow in the decade ahead. What’s more, this attempt to speedrun domestication occurred even as a clear scientific consensus emerged in recent decades that fish can suffer and feel pain. The revolution in how humans produce seafood has enormous implications for our relationship with species we’ve barely given any thought to. To understand why, consider America’s favorite fish to eat, and one of the most difficult to farm: salmon.  Like farming tigers Salmon farming is a relatively new industry, and it emerged largely in response to manmade problems.  Over the last century, overfishing — combined with industrial pollution, climate change, and heavy damming — has decimated wild Atlantic salmon populations. By 2000, the species gained protection under the Endangered Species Act after it was nearly driven to extinction in the US, effectively banning the commercial fishing of Atlantic salmon. Salmon populations in Europe, along with Pacific salmon populations on the West Coast of the US and beyond, have also experienced significant declines.  To take pressure off depleted wild populations, seafood producers began to scale salmon farming in the 1970s, with ample help from governments in the form of R&D, grants, state financing programs, and more. It’s proven to be a smashing commercial success. Last year, salmon farming companies — which are most concentrated in Norway, Chile, and the UK and export their product around the world — produced 2.8 million metric tons of the fish, or around 560 million individual salmon. They’re typically raised in tanks on land until they’re a year old then transferred to nets and cages floating in the ocean just offshore to be fattened up and eventually slaughtered (they’re supposed to be rendered unconscious prior to slaughter, with either electric stunning or a club to the head, though some aren’t successfully stunned). About one out of every five are shipped off to the US, where “young affluent consumers love to eat salmon,” according to the Norwegian company Mowi, the world’s biggest salmon producer. This taste for salmon and the farming industry it has necessitated has, in just a few generations, dramatically transformed what it means to be a salmon. In the wild, salmon live incredibly complex lives and embark on epic journeys. But on farms, they can’t do any of that.  According to Becca Franks, an assistant professor of environmental studies at New York University, salmon farming has created grave welfare problems by denying the animals the ability to engage in two of their essential natural behaviors: migrating and hunting.  In the US, Atlantic salmon begin their lives as eggs buried a foot under freshwater riverbeds in Maine, where they remain for six months until they hatch and emerge in search of food. At a few years old, they migrate hundreds of miles northward into the salty Atlantic ocean, then hundreds of miles further out into the Labrador Sea, near Greenland. There, they quickly put on weight — feeding on krill, herring, and crustaceans — which they’ll need for the long journey home that they make after a couple years of dining out at sea. Following scents and using the earth’s magnetic field, Atlantic salmon swim over 1,000 miles back to their home streams to spawn the next generation.  The salmon’s life cycle inspires more awe and reverence than most species in the animal kingdom, but on farms, they’re reduced to swimming in tiny circles for years and subsisting on small, manmade pellets. Their “welfare is harmed through loss of agency and choice,” Franks told me in an email. She likens salmon farming to trying to farm tigers.   Sophie Ryan, CEO of the Global Salmon Initiative — a coalition of salmon farming companies — challenged the idea that domestication has harmed salmon. “They have been domesticated over more than 50 years — similar to cattle or poultry — and have been selectively bred to thrive in a farm environment,” Ryan told me in an email. “Their nutritional needs, swimming patterns, and energy use are different from wild salmon, because their environment and purpose are different.” The selective breeding that Ryan speaks of has been used to make farmed salmon grow twice as fast as their wild counterparts, which has led to a number of serious health issues: heart problems, spinal deformities, high levels of deafness, and increased risk of an early death. They’re also more aggressive than wild salmon. To boost growth even further, salmon farms keep their lights on up to 24 hours a day, which makes the fish eat more and can damage their retinas. And in a concerning twist, the domestication of farmed salmon is hurting wild salmon. Since the 1970s, tens of millions of farmed salmon have managed to escape and compete for resources with wild salmon and even mate with them, leading to “genetic pollution” that has resulted in a hybrid line of salmon.  “We may now need to recognize a new biological entity — Salmo domesticus,” biologist Mart Gross wrote in a 1998 paper, “and treat it as an ‘exotic’ when it escapes into the wild.” Some research has found that these hybrid fish have lower survival rates. That means that the farming of salmon, which was intended to give wild salmon populations a break, created a new challenge for them. “Escape prevention is a top priority, with ongoing improvements in net strength, mooring systems, and real-time digital monitoring,” Ryan of the Global Salmon Initiative said. “Where escapes do occur, companies are required to report them and work with regulators to assess potential impacts on wild populations.” Franks considers fish farming a form of “captive dewilding”: the process of modifying animals to conform to captivity and to the harms that befall them as a result. And the reality of that captivity can be incredibly cruel. Fish farms up close In 2019, animal rights activist Erin Wing worked undercover with the group Animal Outlook for four months at a salmon hatchery in Maine operated by Cooke Aquaculture, one of the world’s largest salmon farming companies. Wing documented workers culling diseased fish by hitting them against the sides of tanks multiple times; fish thrown into buckets still alive, left to suffocate or be crushed to death by other fish; fish born with spinal deformities; and fish dying from nasty fungal diseases that ate away parts of their faces. “Over the years, you kinda get desensitized,” one employee told her.  In response to Wing’s investigation, Cooke Aquaculture CEO Glenn Cooke said in a statement that the company would re-train employees at the Maine facility. “We place animal welfare high in our operating standards and endeavor to raise our animals with optimal care and consideration of best practice,” Cooke said, adding that “what we saw today is most certainly not reflective of these standards.”  Wing, who has spent her career investigating factory farms, is skeptical of industry standards. “There are these [animal welfare] industry standards that are in place, and there are these guidelines, but at the end of the day, there’s not really any enforcement,” Wing told me. “So these farms will make up whatever rules they want that will work for them, for their workers, and then they’ll operate as they see fit. And that usually results in a lot of these animals suffering needlessly.”  Some of the suffering stems from putting farmed animals in the ocean, as crowding hundreds of thousands of salmon together in open waters attracts sea lice — tiny, painful parasites that feed on the salmon’s skin and can even kill them. In 2023, almost 17 percent of Norwegian farmed salmon died before they could be slaughtered for meat, largely from infectious diseases and injuries. To combat the scourge of sea lice, salmon farmers had, for years, dumped chemicals into the water to kill them, along with antibiotics and other chemicals to protect the fish from a range of fungal and viral diseases. These pollutants, combined with vast amounts of animal waste generated by the salmon, fall to the ocean floor and pollute marine ecosystems. That, in turn, contributes to what Franks calls “environmental dewilding,” or the process of modifying natural water bodies with artificial infrastructure — in this case, fish farm pens and cages — and polluting them. Sea lice have since developed resistance to these chemicals, so, over the last decade, salmon farmers have switched to other methods — including subjecting salmon to high heat — which can cause pain, injuries, and death.   The International Salmon Farmers Association and the Global Seafood Alliance didn’t respond to interview requests. Not just salmon  If we accept that farming salmon is bad for them and the environments in which they’re raised — and that we should protect dwindling wild populations — then we’ll have to accept eating a lot less salmon. We’ll also have to reconsider the ethical implications of farming many other fish species. Fair Fish, a team of fish welfare researchers, has compared the natural behavior and welfare needs of nearly 100 fish species with the conditions they experience on farms. Out of the 100 analyzed species, only two — tilapia and carp — have “the potential to be farmed in somewhat decent conditions,” according to João Saraiva, who researches fish ethology at the Centre of Marine Sciences in Faro, Portugal, and runs the nonprofit Fish Etho Group. But that doesn’t mean that they actually are; both tilapia and carp farms tend to be overcrowded, with poor water quality and high rates of disease. (Saraiva has worked with Fair Fish on its analyses but is no longer involved in the project.)  By contrast, he said, salmon is “way down on the list,” meaning it’s especially hard for farms to meet their basic welfare needs.  Fair Fish’s research demonstrates how little attention the fish farming industry, and the governments that helped it take over the seafood sector, has paid to the simple question of how its captives experience being farmed. It also illustrates the damage we can do when we flatten “fish” — an incredibly diverse group of species — into a monolith.  Franks said industry and government need to pump the brakes on the expansion of fish and crustacean farming, which is currently the world’s fastest-growing agricultural sector, noting, “I think we should not be farming any new species of fish or crustaceans and putting in transition programs for folks already farming those species to move towards seaweeds and bivalves.” The latter is a class of invertebrate animals that includes scallops, oysters, and mussels, which Franks said have far fewer environmental and welfare concerns than farmed fish and crustaceans (whether bivalves are sentient or can feel pain remains an ongoing scientific debate).   She’s one of the few academics studying fish farming willing to go there, to suggest that we ought to fundamentally rethink how we produce seafood and how much of it we consume. “I think there is a huge reluctance to even broach the possibility of shifting diets away” from animal protein, said Franks. When the global fish farming boom took off, many in the field had good intentions, and it looked good on paper; a way to boost the global food supply without further exploiting oceans. Plus, fish tend to have a lower carbon footprint than farmed land species (though higher than plant-based proteins). But few questions were asked about what it would mean, ethically and environmentally, to rapidly domesticate, then confine and slaughter, hundreds of billions of animals annually with distinct needs — let alone the capacity to feel pain.  Researchers like Saraiva and Franks are trying to convince the world to catch up with what we now know about fish and to further expand our knowledge. As consumers, we can help, and we can start by thinking twice about the salmon on our plates. 

Housing secretary tells Labour MPs to vote down planning bill amendment

Amendment restricts protection for animals to allow faster house buildingHousing secretary Steve Reed has told Labour MPs to vote down an amendment to the new planning bill intended to protect British wildlife and its habitats from destruction.The amendment, which was passed with a large majority in the House of Lords, restricts the most controversial part of the draft bill by removing protected animals such as dormice, badgers, hedgehogs, otters and nightingales, and rare habitats such as wetlands and ancient woodlands, from new rules which allow developers to sidestep environmental laws to speed up house building. Continue reading...

Housing secretary Steve Reed has told Labour MPs to vote down an amendment to the new planning bill intended to protect British wildlife and its habitats from destruction.The amendment, which was passed with a large majority in the House of Lords, restricts the most controversial part of the draft bill by removing protected animals such as dormice, badgers, hedgehogs, otters and nightingales, and rare habitats such as wetlands and ancient woodlands, from new rules which allow developers to sidestep environmental laws to speed up house building.Under the draft legislation proposed by Labour, developers will be able to pay into a national “nature recovery fund” and go ahead with their project straight away, instead of having to carry out an environmental survey and to first avoid, then mitigate damage, before putting spades into the ground.Experts say this is a regression on decades-old environmental law and it has been criticised as “cash to trash” by ecologists and environmental groups.The Lords’ amendment would mean the nature recovery fund is restricted to impacts from water and air pollution, meaning developers would still have to take the usual measures to mitigate damage to wildlife and habitats.Reed has recommended rejecting the amendment when the bill returns to the Commons on Thursday for the final stages before being passed into law.In a letter to MPs some of the UK’s biggest nature charities, including the Wildlife Trusts and RSPB, say the government rollback of environmental law “lacks any rigorous scientific or ecological justification.“There is no credible, published, or well established evidence that this model can simply be scaled or replicated for multiple species nationwide without risking serious ecological harm, legal uncertainty, and increased costs for both developers and land managers,” the letter reads.The Guardian revealed this week how the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, and housing minister Matthew Pennycook have met scores of developers in the past year over the planning bill. Reeves has not met a single environmental organisation or the body for professional ecologists, while Pennycook has had just four meetings with such groups, compared with 16 with leading developers.A spokesperson for the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government said: “The planning and infrastructure bill will remove barriers to building vital new homes and infrastructure and this amendment is an unnecessary limit on the benefits which the nature restoration fund will create for both nature and the economy. There are already safeguards in our legislation to ensure environmental delivery plans are effective for the environment, as we get Britain building again and deliver the homes we need.”

I discovered a new Australian native bee, but there are still hundreds we need to identify

The discovery of a horned native bee that pollinates a rare plant highlights how little we know about Australian pollinators.

The female of the species has devil-like black horns, and a taste for extremely rare pollen. But until now, this Australian native bee has never been officially named or identified. My discovery of Megachile (Hackeriapis) lucifer, underscores the lack of knowledge and investment in Australia’s unique native bees. Whilst considerable funding and attention has been focused on the introduced European honey bee, Apis mellifera, there are still hundreds of native bees that are yet to be identified and named. How was this bee found? This fascinating new megachile (or leaf cutter) bee was first discovered while on a surveying trip in the Bremer Ranges in the goldfields region of Western Australia in 2019. I was conducting surveys for pollinators – such as bees, other insects, flies and wasps – of a critically endangered plant called Bremer marianthus, or Marianthus aquilonaris, which is only known in this region. Sadly, as is common for many threatened plant species, the pollinators for this straggly shrub with blue-tinged white flowers were completely unknown. One of the native bees collected on this visit immediately caught my attention because the female had large devil-like horns protruding from her clypeus – the broad plate on the front of a bee’s head. When I investigated, it was clear this wasn’t a species that had been found before. Whilst some native bees have horns or prongs, none have the large and slightly curved horns of this one. Comparing it with museum specimens, along with DNA barcoding, confirmed this species was new to collectors and to science. DNA barcoding also revealed a male native bee I had collected at the site was her partner, but he lacked horns. This is the opposite of the situation in much of the animal kingdom, where the males are more likely to be amoured. Bringer of light When you discover a new species, you have the honour of choosing a name. The first new species of native bee I “described” (or scientifically identified) in 2022, Leioproctus zephyr, is named after my dog, Zephyr. For this new species, the horns meant the name Lucifer was a perfect choice. Lucifer is also Latin for “light bringer”, and I hope this new species brings to light the wonders of our native bees. Australia has more than 2,000 species of native bees. They help keep our ecosystems healthy and play a crucial role in pollinating wildflowers. We need to understand native bees This new native bee, Megachile lucifer, is only one of an estimated 500 native bees that are not described. Far more attention has been given to the introduced European honey bee Apis mellifera. Whilst the honey bee is important for crop pollination, this species is not threatened, and can in fact harm our native bees. The truth is honeybees compete with native animals for food and habitat, disrupt native pollination systems and pose a serious biosecurity threat to our honey and pollination industries. Currently, there no requirement to survey for native bees in areas about to be mined, farmed or developed. Even if they are found, any species that has not been officially identified it has no conservation standing, which is one reason why taxonomic research is so important. Protect the pollinators Megachile lucifer was collected on a flowering mallee plant that attracted thousands of native bees and other insects. In subsequent years of surveying this site, the mallee was not flowering, Megachile lucifer was not seen, and far fewer insects were recorded. With no monitoring of native bees, we also don’t know how their populations are faring in response to threatening processes, like climate change. More interest and investment into the taxonomy, conservation and ecology of native bees, means we can protect both them and the rare and precious plants they pollinate. Kit Prendergast received funding from the Atlas of Living Australia, with a Biodiversity Mobilisation Grant and Goldfields Environmental Management Group Grant. The surveys were conducted as an ecological consultant, subcontracted to Botanica Consulting, who were commissioned by Audalia Resources Limited.

Margay Rescued in Costa Rica After Backyard Sighting

A young margay wandered into a residential backyard here, prompting a swift rescue by environmental officials who found the wildcat in an oddly calm state. The incident unfolded on November 5 when a local resident noticed the small feline resting on a low branch in their yard. Concerned about potential risks to a child or […] The post Margay Rescued in Costa Rica After Backyard Sighting appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

A young margay wandered into a residential backyard here, prompting a swift rescue by environmental officials who found the wildcat in an oddly calm state. The incident unfolded on November 5 when a local resident noticed the small feline resting on a low branch in their yard. Concerned about potential risks to a child or nearby farm animals, the family contacted the National System of Conservation Areas (SINAC), part of the Ministry of Environment and Energy (MINAE). Officials from the Tortuguero Conservation Area arrived quickly and identified the animal as a margay, known scientifically as Leopardus wiedii and locally as caucel. The cat’s docile demeanor stood out—it appeared asleep and showed no fear of people, which raised questions about its background. For the safety of both the community and the animal, the team captured it without incident. They placed the margay in a secure carrier and moved it to an approved wildlife rescue center for assessment. Veterinarians at the center sedated the margay for a thorough check. They reported the animal in solid health overall, with no major wounds. However, they removed several porcupine quills from around its mouth, signs of a recent failed hunt in the forest. Experts now observe the young margay over the coming days to check for any human habituation, which could suggest prior captivity. If tests confirm it retains wild instincts, authorities plan to release it back into a protected natural area. SINAC used the event to stress proper handling of wildlife encounters. Residents should avoid contact and report sightings to officials or emergency services at 9-1-1, allowing trained teams to step in safely. Margays rank among Costa Rica’s six native wildcat species, sharing forests with jaguars, pumas, ocelots, oncillas, and jaguarundis. These agile climbers can descend trees headfirst and grip branches with a single hind paw. Yet they face ongoing pressures from shrinking habitats and illegal pet trade captures. This rescue highlights how human expansion brings wildlife closer to homes, calling for balanced conservation efforts in regions like Pococí. The post Margay Rescued in Costa Rica After Backyard Sighting appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.