Editing Himalayan tahr (section)

== Introduction as an invasive species ==
[[Image:Junges-Himalaja-Tahr2.JPG|thumb|Young tahr]]
{{More citations needed section|date=July 2020}}
A key factor contributing to the success of the Himalayan tahr as an [[invasive species]] is their mobility. During the night, they move to locations with lower elevations to have better access to resources such as food and water, whereas during the day, they move to locations with higher elevation to rest and avoid predators.<ref name="watson" /> This mobile behavior not only allows them to seek refuge from predators, but also allows them to have access to resources over a large area.

Another key characteristic that allows Himalayan tahr to be successful as an invasive species is their digestive tract. Their [[digestive system]] allows them to consume a wide variety of vegetation ranging from easy-to-digest leaves/grasses to woody shrubs and other “tough” vegetation not as easily digested by other species. This flexibility in diet not only allows Himalayan tahr to have a competitive advantage for resource use in their environment among other species, but it also allows them to be less hindered by abiotic disruptions and other natural disasters. In other words, their ability to digest a large range of vegetation allows the Himalayan tahr to have a bigger [[#Fundamental niche|fundamental niche]], and as a result, increases their success as an invasive species.<ref name="flueck">{{cite journal | last1 = Flueck | first1 = Werner | year = 2009 | title = The Slippery Slope of exporting invasive species: the case of Himalayan tahr arriving in South America | journal = Biological Invasions | volume = 12 | issue = 6 | pages = 1467–1475 | doi = 10.1007/s10530-009-9590-5 | s2cid = 25763068 | url = http://doc.rero.ch/record/314854/files/10530_2009_Article_9590.pdf | access-date = 6 January 2019 | archive-date = 2 March 2022 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20220302224313/http://doc.rero.ch/record/314854/files/10530_2009_Article_9590.pdf | url-status = live }}</ref>

Lastly, the Himalayan tahr lacks predators in the regions where it has been introduced, so is only limited by access to food and water, and its own reproductive rate.<ref name="flueck" />

=== Argentina ===
The tahr was introduced into [[Argentina]] in 2006 by private individuals, presumably for hunting purposes. The importation has been deemed successful, but it is too soon to determine whether it will be detrimental to the environment.<ref name="assessment">DPIPWE (2011) Pest Risk Assessment: Himalayan tahr (''Hemitragus jemlahicus''). Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment. Hobart, Tasmania.</ref> The IUCN lists the tahr as being possibly extirpated from Argentina despite its introduction.

=== New Zealand ===
Himalayan tahr were introduced to New Zealand in 1904 around the [[Aoraki / Mount Cook|Mount Cook]] region for sport and have since expanded rapidly into neighboring areas. Their heavy grazing of native plants in New Zealand has caused significant environmental damage.<ref>{{Cite news|title=Department of Conservation hopes Southern Alps tahr cull will slow environmental devastation|language=en|work=[[Newshub]] |url=https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2020/02/department-of-conservation-hopes-southern-alps-tahr-cull-will-slow-environmental-devastation.html|access-date=24 September 2020|archive-date=5 August 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200805044044/https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2020/02/department-of-conservation-hopes-southern-alps-tahr-cull-will-slow-environmental-devastation.html|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Roy |first=E. A. |date=2020 |title=Alpine ecosystems at risk as tahr population booms in New Zealand |work=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/26/alpine-ecosystems-at-risk-as-tahr-population-booms-in-new-zealand |access-date=24 September 2020 |issn=0261-3077 |archive-date=28 March 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200328074920/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/26/alpine-ecosystems-at-risk-as-tahr-population-booms-in-new-zealand |url-status=live }}</ref> They currently inhabit a portion of the [[Southern Alps]] and are still being hunted for sport.<ref name="assessment" /><ref>Christe, A. H. C., Andrews, J. R. H. (1964). Introduced Ungulates in New Zealand- Himalayan Tahr. Tuatara: Volume 12, issue=2.</ref> The [[Department of Conservation (New Zealand)|Department of Conservation]] (DOC) culled 12,000 tahr between July 2019 and February 2020, and over 7,000 between July and November 2020.<ref>{{Cite web|date=25 February 2020|title=Tahr cull tops 12,000 but native plant life 'may take years' to recover|url=https://www.stuff.co.nz/timaru-herald/news/119775242/tahr-cull-tops-12000-but-native-plant-life-may-take-years-to-recover|access-date=24 September 2020|website=Stuff|archive-date=9 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200709022305/https://www.stuff.co.nz/timaru-herald/news/119775242/tahr-cull-tops-12000-but-native-plant-life-may-take-years-to-recover|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=DoC wraps up tahr operations for the year with over 7000 kills|url=https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/doc-wraps-up-tahr-operations-for-the-year-with-over-7000-kills/O74XJ5UUNAGIQLUPCDRFXPJU24/|access-date=2020-12-15|work=[[The New Zealand Herald]]|language=en-NZ|archive-date=2 December 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201202010144/https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/doc-wraps-up-tahr-operations-for-the-year-with-over-7000-kills/O74XJ5UUNAGIQLUPCDRFXPJU24/|url-status=live}}</ref>

Groups such as hunters and farmers have resisted tahr eradication. A report prepared in 2005 by Kenneth F.D. Hughey and Karen M. Wason presented the results of a survey conducted among 43 farmers living within tahr distribution.<ref name="kenneth">K. F.D. Hughey, Wason K. M. 2005. Management of [https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/35459751.pdf Himalayan] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211207024220/https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/35459751.pdf |date=7 December 2021 }} Tahr in New Zealand. High Country Farmer Perspectives and Implications. Lincoln University.</ref> Roughly 80% of farmers view tahr as a resource, not as a threat. The respondents indicated they placed conservational and commercial value (live animal/meat, hunting, farming) on tahr. Thirty six percent of these farmers also reported to having earned at least $1,000 a year in profit from having tahr on their property, with the highest earnings being above $50,000 (Table 5.5 of that study), usually as a result of allowing professionally guided hunters on their property.<ref name="kenneth" /> Also, a 1988 study showed that hunters spent $851 per person per year on hunting, with expenses being greatest for big-game targets, such as the Himalayan tahr.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Nugent | first1 = G | year = 1992 | title = Big-game, small-game, and gamebird hunting in New Zealand: Hunting effort, harvest, and expenditure in 1988 | journal = New Zealand Journal of Zoology |volume=19 | issue = 3–4| pages = 75–90 |doi=10.1080/03014223.1992.10422312 | doi-access = free}}</ref>

Tahr could be eradicated from New Zealand but "this has not happened due to intense lobbying pressure from hunting interests, so ongoing ecological costs are incurred by the natural environment."<ref>{{Cite book|last=Clout|first=M.N.|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/738438596|title=Biological invasions : economic and environmental costs of alien plant, animal, and microbe species|date=2011|publisher=CRC Press|isbn=978-1-4398-2991-2|editor-last=Pimentel|editor-first=David|edition=2nd|location=Boca Raton|pages=288|chapter=Ecological and economic costs of alien vertebrates in New Zealand|oclc=738438596}}</ref>

The hunting lobby has protested against the culling of tahr in 2020.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2020 |title=Tahr Jam attracts 1000-strong crowd protesting DOC cull plan |url=https://www.stuff.co.nz/timaru-herald/news/122178036/tahr-jam-attracts-450-cars-protesting-doc-cull-plan |access-date=24 September 2020 |website=Stuff |archive-date=4 September 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200904124701/https://www.stuff.co.nz/timaru-herald/news/122178036/tahr-jam-attracts-450-cars-protesting-doc-cull-plan |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=Over 500 vehicles gather for tahr-culling protest against Department of Conservation |work=[[Newshub]] |url=https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/rural/2020/07/over-500-vehicles-gather-for-tahr-culling-protest-against-department-of-conservation.html |access-date=24 September 2020 |archive-date=21 September 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200921063435/https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/rural/2020/07/over-500-vehicles-gather-for-tahr-culling-protest-against-department-of-conservation.html |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |title=Hunters protesting Southern Alps tahr cull win over high-profile ally: Ex-All Black Luke Romano |work=TVNZ |url=https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/hunters-protesting-southern-alps-tahr-cull-win-over-high-profile-ally-ex-all-black-luke-romano |access-date=24 September 2020 |archive-date=20 January 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210120141717/https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/hunters-protesting-southern-alps-tahr-cull-win-over-high-profile-ally-ex-all-black-luke-romano |url-status=live}}</ref> DOC released a management plan for 2020–2021 which was contested in the High Court. The Court ruled that DOC should consult with interested parties and stakeholders which resulted in a number of changes to the plan; the revised plan was welcomed by the Tahr Foundation.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2020|title=Tahr Control Operational Plan: 1 July 2020 – 30 June 2021 (reconsidered after consultation)|url=https://www.doc.govt.nz/globalassets/documents/parks-and-recreation/hunting/tahr/tahr-control-operational-plan-2020-21.pdf|access-date=15 December 2020|website=Department of Conservation|archive-date=29 October 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201029013619/https://www.doc.govt.nz/globalassets/documents/parks-and-recreation/hunting/tahr/tahr-control-operational-plan-2020-21.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=The New Zealand Tahr Foundation Incorporated v The Minister of Conservation, 1669 (NZ High Court)|url=https://mcusercontent.com/056bc28505444958c9358e331/files/59b11a5e-4ebe-4b4b-9cd5-7248c121f476/The_NZ_Tahr_Foundation_Inc_v_Minister_of_Conservation.pdf|access-date=15 December 2020|archive-date=2 March 2022|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220302224255/https://mcusercontent.com/056bc28505444958c9358e331/files/59b11a5e-4ebe-4b4b-9cd5-7248c121f476/The_NZ_Tahr_Foundation_Inc_v_Minister_of_Conservation.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=10 July 2020|title=Tahr Foundation Welcomes Landmark High Court Decision On Doc's Controversial Extermination Plan|url=https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU2007/S00197/tahr-foundation-welcomes-landmark-high-court-decision-on-docs-controversial-extermination-plan.htm|access-date=2020-12-15|website=www.scoop.co.nz|archive-date=5 December 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201205005356/https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/BU2007/S00197/tahr-foundation-welcomes-landmark-high-court-decision-on-docs-controversial-extermination-plan.htm|url-status=live}}</ref>

==== Impact as an invasive species ====
A negative impact the Himalayan tahrs have on their environment is increased [[herbivory]] on the native vegetation of the ecosystem, which can make it harder for other herbivores to find food. The increased herbivory can also lead to a decrease in soil nutrients, such as [[oxygen]], [[nitrate]]s, and [[ammonia]], resulting in [[Positive feedback| positive feedback loop]], making it harder for plants to grow at all. Consequently, the natural [[fauna]] of the ecosystem is heavily affected. This increase has also resulted in poor [[soil quality]] in many environments occupied by the Himalayan tahr and has severely limited the presence of certain plant species.<ref name=":1" /><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Cruz|first1=Jennyffer|last2=Thomson|first2=Caroline|last3=Parkes|first3=John P.|last4=Gruner|first4=Ingrid|last5=Forsyth|first5=David M.|date=2017|title=Long-term impacts of an introduced ungulate in native grasslands: Himalayan tahr (Hemitragus jemlahicus) in New Zealand's Southern Alps|url=http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10530-016-1283-2|journal=Biological Invasions|language=en|volume=19|issue=1|pages=339–349|doi=10.1007/s10530-016-1283-2|bibcode=2017BiInv..19..339C |s2cid=27297965|issn=1387-3547|access-date=15 December 2020|archive-date=10 February 2023|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230210085326/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10530-016-1283-2|url-status=live}}</ref> The lack of certain vegetation, in turn, may affect animal species that rely on them as a food source.<ref name=":1">{{Cite book |last=Department of Conservation |url=https://www.doc.govt.nz/globalassets/documents/conservation/threats-and-impacts/animal-pests/tahr/thar-plan-1993.pdf |title=Himalayan Tahr Control Plan |publisher=Department of Conservation |year=1993 |access-date=15 December 2020 |archive-date=26 November 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201126123203/https://www.doc.govt.nz/globalassets/documents/conservation/threats-and-impacts/animal-pests/tahr/thar-plan-1993.pdf |url-status=live}}</ref>

Data on the rapid expansion of the tahr are documented by government agencies. Over a time span of 16 years, the Himalayan tahr reached up to 33 tahr/km<sup>2</sup> in New Zealand – twice the initial population (2*N<sub>0</sub>). Without regulated hunting or the presence of natural barriers, the Himalayan tahr can pose a large threat to the [[Indigenous (ecology)|indigenous]] fauna and flora populations within the area.<ref name=":1" />

==== Control methods ====
In 1930, the Himalayan tahr was denied protection by the Animals Protection and Game Act (1921–22) and was recognized as a danger to the environment,<ref name="andrews">{{cite journal |last1=Andrews|first1=J.R.H.|last2=Christie|first2=A. H.C.|year=1964|title=Introduced ungulates in New Zealand: (a) Himalayan Tahr|journal=Tuatara: Journal of the Biological Society|volume=12|pages=69–77}}</ref> although the species is still considered to be endangered in the Himalayas on the IUCN Red List.<ref name=iucn/> Since 1937, various government operations have been undertaken to reduce tahr population and/or keep it at fixed numbers. The control of tahr remains ecologically and economically significant because of their widespread destruction of native flora and fauna and their valuable capture for hunters, respectively.

===== Hunting =====
<!-- Deleted image removed: [[Image:Himalayan Tahr Hunting in New Zealand.jpg|thumb|Himalayan tahr hunters]]  -->
In 1993, the Department of Conservation prepared the Himalayan Tahr Control Plan which lists “aerial game recovery operations, recreational and safari hunting as primary means of control”.<ref name=":2">{{Cite book |title=Himalayan Thar (tahr) Control Plan 1993 |url=https://www.doc.govt.nz/about-us/science-publications/conservation-publications/threats-and-impacts/animal-pests/himalayan-thar-control-plan-1993/ |access-date=2020-12-15 |via=www.doc.govt.nz |year=1993 |language=en-nz |isbn=0-478-01546-1 |archive-date=23 January 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210123121732/https://www.doc.govt.nz/about-us/science-publications/conservation-publications/threats-and-impacts/animal-pests/himalayan-thar-control-plan-1993/ |url-status=live}}</ref> Under the plan, the area of the tahr distribution was divided into two exclusion zones and seven management units. The exclusion zones set boundaries on the area that the tahr inhabits, with the official control operations to be employed to prevent them from spreading beyond those zones. The management unit has a fixed maximum density, which varies from 1–2.5 tahr/km<sup>2</sup> and is considered to be low enough to have a minimal negative impact on the ecosystem and, even, restore native vegetation. Under these conditions, the plan aimed to keep tahr numbers below 10,000  throughout the South Island.<ref name=":2" /> Since then, the Department of Conservation has been actively advertising tahr hunting and has created 59 tahr-hunting areas. Hunting remains the primary means of control.

===== Poisoning =====
{{Main|1080 usage in New Zealand}}
[[Image:1080PoisonWarning gobeirne.png|thumb|left|Sign warning of poisonous sodium fluoroacetate baits]]

In 1960, [[Sodium fluoroacetate|sodium monofluoroacetate]], also known as compound 1080, was used to poison tahrs.<ref name="andrews" /> This derivative of fluoroacetic acid is commonly used in many countries such as Mexico, Australia, the United States, and New Zealand as a [[pesticide]]. Compound 1080 is highly water-soluble and is diluted by rainwater and broken down by aquatic microorganisms.<ref name="poison">{{Cite web |url=http://www.dpiw.tas.gov.au/inter/nsf/WebPages/RPIO-4ZM7CX?open&gt |title=Poison 1080 |work=Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water, and Environment}}</ref> Water samples after baiting operations did not reveal dangerous levels of the compound.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Suren | first1 = A. | last2 = Lambert | first2 = P. | year = 2006 | title = Do toxic baits containing sodium fluroacetate (1080) affect fish and invertebrate communities when they fall into streams? | journal = New Zealand Journal of Marine and Freshwater Research | volume = 40 | issue = 4| pages = 531–546 | doi=10.1080/00288330.2006.9517443| bibcode = 2006NZJMF..40..531S | s2cid = 85244853 }}</ref>  In the soil, [[sodium monofluoroacetate]] is converted by bacteria and fungi to metabolic products, shown to be nonhazardous to the environment.<ref>{{cite journal | last1=Eason |first1=C. T. |last2=Wright |first2=G. R. |last3=Fitzgerald |first3=H. |year=1992 |title=Sodium Monofluoroacetate (1080) Water-Residue Analysis after Large-Scale Possum Control |journal=New Zealand Journal of Ecology |volume=16 |issue=1 |pages=47–49}}</ref>

According to Australia's Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water, and Environment,<ref name="poison" /> mammals (particularly cats and dogs) are the most susceptible to compound 1080 poisoning. Fish, birds, and amphibians generally are highly tolerant to the poison.<ref name="poison" />  Although compound 1080 is a strong enough pesticide to eradicate the entire tahr population, political pressures from hunter groups hinder its use. Opposition by the general public also contributes to the decreased use of 1080 with concerns that the accumulation of 1080 at higher levels of the food chain will pose danger to mammals such as dogs, deer and pigs.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book|last=Clout|first=M N|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/48810970|title=Biological invasions : economic and environmental costs of alien plant, animal, and microbe species|publisher=CRC Press|year=2002|isbn=0-8493-0836-4|editor-last=Pimentel|editor-first=David|edition=First|pages=190–193|oclc=48810970}}</ref>

=== South Africa ===
The Himalayan tahr was introduced to South Africa when in the 1930s, two Himalayan tahrs escaped from a [[Groote Schuur Zoo|zoo]] in Cape Town. Subsequent populations of tahrs have descended from the original escaped pair and spread quickly over the Cape Peninsular mountain range.<ref>Dickinson, Peter. "Zoo News Digest: The Return of the Tahr." Zoo News Digest. 1 February 2010. Web. 12 March 2013.</ref> Most of the population has been [[cull]]ed to make way for the reintroduction of the indigenous [[antelope]], the [[klipspringer]].

===United States ===
The Himalayan tahr is present in [[New Mexico]], where it has been introduced. According to the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish news release dated 28 May 2014, "Only one Wildlife Management Area, Water Canyon, allows hunting for nongame species as a management tool for the non-native Himalayan tahr, a large ungulate related to the wild goat." However, outside of Water Canyon Wildlife Management Area, Himalayan tahr may be taken. There is no closed season or bag limit on Himalayan tahr, and they may be hunted even with an airgun.