Dwarf blue sheep Pseudois schaeferi are known to survive only in Batang County, Ganzi Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, Sichuan Province, China. According to the results of a survey between 19 November and 21 December 1997, the species has declined steeply in both range and numbers since the 1950s and 1960s because of excessive hunting. The survey found that dwarf blue sheep were concentrated on steep cliffs between 2700 and 3200 m. In the area near Batang, the species's range was estimated to cover 295 sq km and the population to number c. 200 individuals. The average group size was 6.2 individuals, with a male: female ratio of 67.7:100. The authors recommend that the species be included in Class I of the National List of Protected Animals in China.

There are probably more illegal ivory items for sale in Egypt than anywhere else in Africa. The author visited the main tourist centres of Cairo, Luxor and Aswan in late 1998 and counted over 21,000 ivory items for sale. Most of the ivory has come from elephants hunted illegally in Central and West Africa. Traders still transport the raw tusks, by truck and on camels, through Sudan across the desert into Egypt. Since the 1990 CITES ban on the international commercial ivory trade, Egypt, a member state, has prohibited not only the import and export of ivory but domestic trade as well. Ivory sales continue openly, however, in the markets and hotels, and new ivory items are still being made. The main buyers are from France, Italy, Spain and Latin America. The Egyptian Government must enforce its legislation against this ivory trade to reduce the serious elephant poaching in the Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Sudan.

The maleo Macrocephalon maleo (Megapodiidae; Galliformes) is a megapode, endemic to Sulawesi, Indonesia, that lays its eggs communally in geothermally or solar-heated soil. The majority of maleo nesting grounds are threatened to some degree and over one-third of known sites have been abandoned. Maleos are severely threatened by habitat degradation and uncontrolled egg-collecting. Hunting of adult birds is also contributing to their decline in some areas. Conservation measures implemented so far have not been sufficiently effective in preventing maleo population declines. In order to safeguard the maleo from further declines we recommend that the laws protecting the maleo and its habitat be strengthened as a matter of urgency and that long-term community conservation and environmental awareness projects be implemented. To achieve these goals we advocate the formation of a collaborative network of international NGOs, Indonesian conservationists, government departments and local communities.

The history of the endemic rodents of the Galápagos Islands began with the discovery of the first Galápagos rice rat species by Charles Darwin in 1835 and the last species was described as recently as 1980. Unfortunately, of the seven described species known to occur in the islands during the past 150 years, only two were known to be extant to 1995. Since then, two expeditions to the Galápagos Islands have been conducted to survey endemic rodent populations. The first confirmed the existence of a small endemic rice rat, Nesoryzomys fernandinae, on Fernandina, known previously only from owl pellet remains found in 1979. In 1997, an expedition to Santiago revealed a population of the larger rice rat N. swarthi, a species collected alive only once in 1906 and considered extinct in all recent literature on the Galápagos Islands. Survey efforts on Santa Cruz resulted only in the collection of introduced rodent species (Rattus rattus, R. norvegicus and Mus musculus). The extant species of native rodents in the Galápagos Islands now number four: N. narboroughi and N. fernandinae on Fernandina; N. swarthi on Santiago; and Oryzomys bauri on Santa Fe. Three species are found on islands where no introduced rodents or cats occur, whereas only one (N. swarthi) co-exists with R. rattusand M. musculus. Nesoryzomys darwini and N. indefessus on Santa Cruz and O. galapagoensis on San Cristóbal are still considered extinct. Strategies for conservation should include monitoring islands for introduced rodents and cats, development of emergency plans in the event of introductions, and captive management.

The Canadian Swift Fox Reintroduction Programme lasted from 1972 to 1997. From 1983 to 1997, a total of 841 captive-raised swift foxes and 91 translocated swift foxes were released in the Canadian Prairies. In South Central Saskatchewan, 406 captiveraised animals and 14 translocated animals were released from 1990 to 1997. This area was used to develop new release methods (in particular, portable protective shelters (PPS)) and saw the co-operation of a nongovernmental organization (NGO) (Cochrane Ecological Institute (CEI)) with two levels of government (Heritage Canada (Grasslands National Park) and the Government of Saskatchewan). A 1996–97 survey of swift foxes in South Central Saskatchewan estimated the population to be 87 animals. No attempt has been made to establish if this population level is sustainable.

Wild mammals sometimes need to be restrained for conservation purposes. Game rangers, wildlife managers, field biologists and wildlife veterinarians need to be fully conversant with a wide array of environmental and biological variables when using chemical restraint on wild mammals. In order to minimize risks to subject animals, they also need to be able to react appropriately using the correct equipment with sufficient skill to deal with anything that can go wrong. The importance of thorough background research and planning before going into the field cannot be overemphasized. The physiological results of immobilization drugs delivered by dart depend on dosages, the success of dart placement and drug delivery in good muscle, as well as the physiological state of the animals prior to and during anaesthetic induction. This paper describes the essential components of a planning and monitoring protocol for chemically restraining terrestrial mammals under field conditions.

Crop raiding by wild elephants is one of the most significant sources of park–people conflict in Sumatra, Indonesia. The distribution, impact and conservation implications of elephant crop-raiding in 13 villages that border Way Kambas National Park in southern Sumatra were studied for 18 months. The data are based on rapid village and field assessments, data logs maintained by village observers and a quantitative household survey. Elephants raided crops year-round at a mean rate of 0.53 elephants per day for the entire study area. The frequency of crop raiding was related to vegetation type along the park border, the size and presence of rivers, and the distance to the park's Elephant Training Center (ETC), which houses about 150 captive elephants. Wild elephants damaged at least 450,000 sq m of corn, rice, cassava, beans and other annual crops, and close to 900 coconut, banana and other perennial trees in the area surveyed. Elephants killed or injured 24 people over a 12-year period in villages near the park. Villagers try to reduce elephant damage by guarding fields, digging trenches between the park and their fields, and modifying their cropping patterns. Elephant–human conflict decreases the probability of support from local people for conservation efforts. We suggest methods to improve the effectiveness of existing elephant trenches, the need to consider electric fences, external support to affected villages, and compensation to villagers for any damage caused.