Conserving Musk Deer the Uses of Musk and Europe's Role in its Trade (pdf, 360 kb)

46

Musk deer farming and extracting musk from live animals

Musk deer are difficult to manage and breed on farms because of their solitary habits, territorial behaviour

and excitable nature.  Experience in managing and breeding the animals and in extracting musk from live

animals has been gained in China, India and Russia.

There are methods already developed to extract musk from live animals in the wild.  The collection of

musk from wild musk deer could form a substantial contribution to the income of people in rural areas,

and could at the same time encourage the protection of musk deer populations and their habitat.  It is

precisely in rural areas that earning money is difficult and the temptation for poaching and smuggling is

significant.  Musk deer farming and extracting musk from live animals in the wild could lead to sustainable

production of musk from musk deer.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Action in the following categories could be taken to improve the conservation of musk deer in the wild.

The most important action would be to reduce the use of natural musk by increasing public awareness of

the conservation concerns surrounding musk deer.  Use of natural musk obtained by hunting wild deer

should also be reduced through use of substitutes, including musk from farmed deer and musk taken from

live wild deer.

Improvement of scientific information on the conservation status of musk deer 

In this context,

Û

Accurate assessments of musk deer populations and their conservation status should be urgently

undertaken in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bhutan, Myanmar, Vietnam, North and South Korea, Russia,

Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan (possible range country), China, Mongolia, India and Nepal.  These

assessments of musk deer populations are most urgently needed in China, Mongolia and Russia,

because these are the range countries where use and export of musk occur in significant quantities.

In Russia, scientific field studies and properly conducted counts of musk deer need to be carried

out to examine the ecology and conservation status of individual subspecies, as a basis for their

protection and sustainable exploitation.  This report recommends the results of such assessments

to be presented to the 11th meeting of the Conference of the Parties.

Û

Accurate information should be compiled on the western distribution range of Moschus spp., to

clarify whether Kyrgyzstan is a valid range country.  

Û

The taxonomy of various musk deer species should be clarified, in particular because recommen-

dations for legal actions under CITES are established at species level.  Molecular genetics and

other laboratory methods could assist in distinguishing species as well as in identifying musk in

derivatives, and perhaps to help differentiate between musk originating from CITES Appendix I-

listed musk deer species from that derived from Appendix II-listed musk deer species.

Investigation of harvest, trade and demand in musk deer range countries

Û

Surveys of the domestic markets for musk deer in China, South Korea, India, Nepal, Vietnam,

Mongolia and Russia, should be undertaken as priorities, but the demand for musk, and its harvest

and legal and illegal trade should be surveyed in all musk deer range countries and the possibilities

determined for reducing demand for musk from wild deer.  This report recommends the results of

such surveys to be presented to the 11th meeting of the Conference of the Parties.  For example:

---

47

¥

Accurate market analyses of the use of musk in traditional medicine in Asia are needed so

that the level of the demand, the market characteristics, trends and user groups can be better

identified and monitored.  If sustainable use concepts and attempts to harness market forces

to improve long-term management are to be successful, they have to be developed and

implemented using a participatory approach where the relevant stakeholders are concerned. 

¥

In India and in other countries in the Himalayas domestic and overseas demand for musk

should be identified, as well as the trade routes and stakeholders.  The level of poaching and

smuggling should be determined, the main incentives for hunting and trading musk

assessed. 

¥

Studies are needed to clarify the significance of poaching and of illegal trading in musk in

key regions along the border area between Russia and China, Mongolia, Kazakhstan and

North Korea.

Improvement of legal protection for musk deer in range countries

Û

Although more accurate information is required regarding the conservation status of musk deer

(see first recommendation), appropriate measures to protect musk deer need to be taken in musk

deer range countries straightaway

.

In situ protection of different species and subspecies of musk

deer should be strengthened, particularly for highly threatened populations, such as the Sakhalin

Musk Deer in Russia, Mongolian musk deer populations and Himalayan populations in China,

Nepal and India.  The range countries should enact and enforce suitable protection laws for these

species and sub-species of musk deer where these are lacking and create effective protected area

systems.  Given the lucrative rewards associated with the poaching of musk deer, additional funds

and information should be made available by governments to managers of protected areas, for

personnel involvement in anti-poaching operations, in order to combat the threat to musk deer and

other species.

¥

In Russia, Prikhod‘ko (1997) describes a series of national measures which will need to be

undertaken to protect the Siberian Musk Deer in different regions of the country, namely the

creation of a network of protected areas and a ban on commercial hunting within their

boundaries, particularly in the regions of Kemerovsk, Krasnoyarsk, Chakasi, Irkutsk and in

the south of Yakut-Sakha.  A minimum size of 450-500 km

2

per protected area, with a musk

deer population of at least 350-370 animals per area is recommended, as proposed by

Prikhod‘ko (1997).  The habitats of the Sakhalin Musk Deer on Sakhalin Island and those

of the subspecies in the Russian Far East - the Bureiskii regions and the Amgun river basin

- should be declared protected areas.

¥

Once scientific studies have identified the level of vulnerability of the different subspecies

of musk deer in Russia, a complex and regionally focused conservation programme should

be initiated on the basis of the findings.  Meanwhile, the Verkhoyanski subspecies of musk

deer should be included in Russia’s Red List, and a ban on capturing of the animals in the

Republic of Yakut-Sakha and in the Magadan region should be enforced, (as recommended

by Prikhod‘ko (1997)).  The existing legal protection for the only subspecies of musk deer

on Russia’s Red List, the Sakhalin Musk Deer, should be better implemented.

It is

necessary to list the subspecies that lives in Russia’s Far East on Russia’s Red List and

commercial capture of this subspecies should be prohibited for 10 years in the Amur,

Khabarovsk and Primorye regions, while non-sustainable timber harvesting in forests in the

area should be restricted, as has been recommended by Prikhod‘ko (1997).

---