Red List of South African Species

Alternatively, Explore species
| National Red List categories | Partners |
Endangered (EN)
B1ab(iii)+2ab(iii)
Assessors: IUCN SSC Amphibian Specialist Group South African Frog Re-assessment Group (SA-FRoG)
Contributors: Alan Channing Alex Rebelo Andrew A Turner Atherton L de Villiers Francois Becker James Harvey Jeanne Tarrant John Measey Krystal A Tolley Leslie Minter Louis du Preez Marius Burger Michael Cunningham Ninda Baptista Rob Hopkins Sarah Davies Peter Conradie Yankho Chapeta
Facilitators: Alex Rebelo Elena Garollo John Measey Kelsey Neam
Reviewers: Jennifer Luedtke

Rationale (Changed due to Same category and criteria)

Listed as Endangered because its extent of occurrence (EOO) is 338 km2, its area of occupancy (AOO) is 141 km2, all individuals occur in two locations, and there is continuing decline in the quality and extent of its habitat.

Distribution

This species is endemic to the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. It appears to be restricted to four perennial rivers (Geelhoutboom, Martin's, Klein and Diepkloof) with their headwaters in the Elandsberg Mountains. An additional site is in the Cockscomb Mountains (Cunningham et al. 2003). Its altitudinal range is 400–930 m Asl. Two historical sites, Diep and Enkeldoom River, have not been surveyed during the last ten years, so recent observations of this species from that area are lacking; however, it is likely that the species still occurs there (Reeves et al. 2014). Its EOO is 338 km2 and its AOO is 141 km2. All known sites are thought to represent two threat-defined locations.

Decline

The spatial distribution of this species is not considered to be severely fragmented as one site holds >50% of individuals and the distances between subpopulations are not considered to be too great for dispersal within one generation.

Population trend

Trend

No quantitative population information is currently available for this species, tadpoles are seen regularly and adults rarely, fitting their cryptic life history. The population is not considered to be severely fragmented as one site (Elandsberg) holds >50% of individuals and the 30 km distance between subpopulations is not considered to be too great for dispersal within one generation.

Threats

The main threats are loss of suitable non-breeding and breeding habitat as a result of afforestation with exotic pine plantations, suppression of fires, erosion, siltation of streams, dams, and road building. Introduced predatory fish are probably also a threat.

Uses and trade

There are no records of this species being utilized.

Conservation

Conservation Actions
The Cockscomb subpopulation occurs within the boundaries of the Baviaanskloof Nature Reserve. The Longmore Forestry has been actively monitoring the tadpoles numbers in Martins and Geelhoutboom Rivers in the Elandsberge for the last 15 years (W. Conradie pers. comm. August 2016).

Conservation Needed
Agreements need to be drawn up with private land owners for the management and long term protection of sites. There is also a need for invasive species control.

Research Needed
Studies on its taxonomy, population size, distribution and trends, life history and ecology, and threats are needed. Continued monitoring of known populations and survey work for other populations are also needed.

References 

[@book{596,
 address = {Ithaca and London},
 author = {Channing, A.},
 publisher = {Cornell University Press},
 title = {Amphibians of Central and Southern Africa},
 year = {2001}
}
,@book{596,
 address = {Washington, D.C.},
 author = {Minter, L.R., Burger, M., Harrison, J.A., Braack, H.H., Bishop, P.J. and Knoepfer, D.},
 publisher = {SI/MAB Series No. 9},
 title = {Atlas and Red Data Book of the Frogs of South Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland},
 year = {2004}
}
,@book{596,
 address = {Johannesburg},
 author = {Passmore, N.I. and Carruthers, V.C.},
 publisher = {Southern Book Publishers and Witwatersrand University Press},
 title = {South African Frogs, 2nd Edition},
 year = {1995}
}
,@book{1301,
 address = {Cape Town},
 author = {du Preez, L. and Carruthers, V.},
 publisher = {Struik Nature},
 title = {A Complete Guide to the Frogs of Southern Africa},
 year = {2009}
}
,@electronic{1301,
 address = {http://research.amnh.org/herpetology/amphibia/index.html},
 author = {Frost, D.R.},
 publisher = {American Museum of Natural History},
 title = {Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 6.0 (31 March 2016)},
 year = {2016}
}
,@electronic{3069,
 address = {www.iucnredlist.org},
 author = {IUCN},
 title = {The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2017-2},
 year = {2017}
}
,@article{9772,
 author = {Boycott, R.C.},
 journal = {Annals of the Cape Provincial Museums, Natural History},
 pages = {309--319},
 title = {Description of a new species of <i>Heleophryne</i> Sclater, 1899 from the Cape Province, South Africa (Anura: Heleophrynidae)},
 volume = {16},
 year = {1988}
}
,@article{9772,
 author = {Cunningham, M., Henderson, C.L. and Tolley, K.A.},
 journal = {African Herp News},
 pages = {22--25},
 title = {Herpetological surveys: Cockscomb (T'Numqa) mountain},
 volume = {36},
 year = {2003}
}
,]
Send feedback about this assessment to SANBI

Lead agencies, Partners and Funders

See the partners page