Map_thumbnail_large_font

Widdringtonia whytei 

Scope: Global
Status_ne_offStatus_dd_offStatus_lc_offStatus_nt_offStatus_vu_offStatus_en_offStatus_cr_onStatus_ew_offStatus_ex_off

Translate page into:

Taxonomy [top]

Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family
Plantae Tracheophyta Pinopsida Pinales Cupressaceae

Scientific Name: Widdringtonia whytei
Species Authority: Rendle
Common Name(s):
English Mulanje Cedar, Mulanje Cedarwood, Mulanje Cypress
Synonym(s):
Widdringtonia nodiflora (L.) Powrie var. whytei (Rendle) Silba
Taxonomic Source(s): Farjon, A. 2010. A Handbook of the World's Conifers. Koninklijke Brill, Leiden.

Assessment Information [top]

Red List Category & Criteria: Critically Endangered A4acde; B2ab(i,ii,iii,iv,v) ver 3.1
Year Published: 2013
Date Assessed: 2011-07-12
Assessor(s): Farjon, A.
Reviewer(s): Thomas, P.
Justification:
Widdringtonia whytei has been heavily exploited for more than 100 years. Its current actual area of occupancy is estimated to be about 845 ha. Continued illegal logging, combined with an increased frequency of fires, a lack of regeneration, the impact of invasive species, exotic pests and over collection of firewood is likely to produce a decline of more than 80% by 2030. As a result it is assessed as Critically Endangered under the criteria for A4 and B2.
Previously published Red List assessments:

Geographic Range [top]

Range Description:The Mulanje Cedar is endemic to Mt. Mulanje in Malawi. The extent of occurrence is estimated to be less than 600 km2 with an actual area of occupancy estimated to be 845 ha. It is known from a single location (sensu IUCN)
Countries occurrence:
Native:
Malawi
Additional data:
Estimated area of occupancy (AOO) - km2:15Continuing decline in area of occupancy (AOO):Yes
Extreme fluctuations in area of occupancy (AOO):NoEstimated extent of occurrence (EOO) - km2:600
Continuing decline in extent of occurrence (EOO):Yes
Number of Locations:1
Lower elevation limit (metres):1830
Upper elevation limit (metres):2550
Range Map:Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.

Population [top]

Population:A recent survey (Makungwa 2004) has concluded that only 845 ha of ‘Cedar forest’ is left on Mt. Mulanje. Within this area almost 33% of the trees were dead. Given the current rate of illegal logging, combined with a range of other threatening processes, the overall decline is likely to exceed 80% by 2030.
Current Population Trend:Decreasing
Additional data:
Continuing decline of mature individuals:Yes
Population severely fragmented:Yes

Habitat and Ecology [top]

Habitat and Ecology:Widdringtonia whytei is an important to co-dominant species in the Afromontane forest on Mt. Mulanje, which also includes Podocarpus milanjianus, Cassipourea malosana, Ekebergia capensis, Olea capensis, Polyscias fulva, Rapanea melanophloeos and Xymalos monospora, and in the more fire-prone ecotone (with ericaceous scrub) to grassland, the closely related species Widdringtonia nodiflora. It is a successional species after fire ("periodic fire climax"), but unlike its congener, it does not coppice from (fire-caused) stumps and has to regenerate from seed (Pauw and Linder 1997). Thickets of Erica benguelensis which develop after fire offer protection for cedar seedlings, leading to W. whytei becoming the dominant tree until invading angiosperms succeed; however, these have been prevented from doing so by the next fire at a cycle of 100-200 years. Mt. Mulanje is a granitic batholith rising through surrounding older sediments. The soils are therefore largely rocky, acidic and shallow except in colluvial pockets in gorges and valleys. The altitudinal range is 1,830-2,550 m a.s.l. The climate is cool tropical montane, with abundant precipitation, much of it as fog.
Systems:Terrestrial
Continuing decline in area, extent and/or quality of habitat:Yes
Generation Length (years):40

Use and Trade [top]

Use and Trade: The wood of this species is highly valued for construction and building of houses as it is the only sizable tree in the family Cupressaceae that occurs naturally in a large surrounding region. Its wood, as of other members of the family, is decay and insect resistant. Large timber yielding trees are becoming increasingly rare due to overexploitation of this valuable resource for more than a century (Chapman 1995). Attempts at plantation forestry using this species have been made, but have been much less successful than the plantations of the exotic species Cupressus lusitanica and Pinus patula which grow faster. It also appears that most of these plantations involve a mixture of two species (Pauw and Linder 1997), often with W. whytei at a disadvantage as it grows slower. The wood of W. whytei is yellowish brown and of excellent quality for construction, general carpentry and joinery, wood panelling, flooring, and furniture making. In colonial times some of its wood found its way to English interiors, nowadays there is no export of this timber. This species does not appear to be in horticultural use, although it is present in a few botanic gardens in South Africa.

Threats [top]

Major Threat(s): This species is acutely threatened with extinction for a range of reasons. Its area of occupancy and the number of individuals has been severely reduced through excessive felling in the past 100+ years. Currently, only dead standing timber is legally harvested but illegal cutting of living trees is a major problem. An increase in the extent and frequency of fires further reduces remaining stands and prevents regeneration. Although some fires are natural, the majority are the result of deliberately set hunting fires, crop burning and, to a lesser extent, forestry and tourism activities. Fuelwood collection and the expansion of small holder farms into the lower slopes is a more indirect, but widespread threat as it leads to deforestation and degradation of forests at lower altitudes. As these lower forests disappear, pressure increases on the higher altitude forests including the remaining cedar stands. One recent study (Hecht 2008) indicated that, if current trends continue, the lower slopes could be completely deforested within the next decade, with the upper forest following soon after. Forestry plantations have been established in many parts of the plateau: Pinus patula has since become the dominant species in some areas. Introduced pests such as the Giant Cypress Aphid (Cinara cupressivora), originally associated with the exotic forestry species Cupressus macrocarpa caused significant losses in the 1980s and 1990s. Despite the introduction of biological controls, it is still a significant problem. A potential threat in the near future relates to open cast mining of the significant bauxite deposits that have been found on several parts of the plateau.

Conservation Actions [top]

Conservation Actions: Mt Mulanje was declared as a Forest Reserve in 1927, partly to regulate the exploitation of the cedar forests but also to protect the watersheds. Currently all logging of live cedars is illegal and the collection of dead timber is regulated by licenses issued by the Forestry Department. Enforcement of these regulations is problematic. Fire breaks have been established in many parts of the reserve but maintenance, along with  and monitoring and fire fighting are limited. Small nurseries have been established to produce material for restoration programmes - a limited amount of replanting has taken place but it is too early to judge their success. A range of schemes have been initiated to try and reduce the demand for fuelwood from people in the surrounding areas: a recent review indicated these programmes were too limited in their benefits and that fuelwood demand was likely to increase (Hecht 2008). Biological controls have been introduced to combat aphid infestation. Programmes for invasive weed control are urgently required.

Classifications [top]

1. Forest -> 1.4. Forest - Temperate
suitability:Suitable  major importance:Yes
1. Land/water protection -> 1.2. Resource & habitat protection
2. Land/water management -> 2.3. Habitat & natural process restoration
3. Species management -> 3.1. Species management -> 3.1.1. Harvest management
3. Species management -> 3.1. Species management -> 3.1.2. Trade management
3. Species management -> 3.3. Species re-introduction -> 3.3.1. Reintroduction
3. Species management -> 3.4. Ex-situ conservation -> 3.4.1. Captive breeding/artificial propagation
5. Law & policy -> 5.4. Compliance and enforcement -> 5.4.3. Sub-national level
6. Livelihood, economic & other incentives -> 6.1. Linked enterprises & livelihood alternatives
6. Livelihood, economic & other incentives -> 6.2. Substitution

In-Place Research, Monitoring and Planning
  Systematic monitoring scheme:Yes
In-Place Land/Water Protection and Management
  Occur in at least one PA:Yes
  Percentage of population protected by PAs (0-100):91-100
  Area based regional management plan:Yes
  Invasive species control or prevention:Yes
In-Place Species Management
  Harvest management plan:Yes
  Successfully reintroduced or introduced beningly:No
  Subject to ex-situ conservation:Yes
In-Place Education
  Subject to recent education and awareness programmes:Yes
  Included in international legislation:No
  Subject to any international management/trade controls:No
2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.2. Small-holder farming
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Minority (<50%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 5 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.2. Wood & pulp plantations -> 2.2.2. Agro-industry plantations
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 6 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

3. Energy production & mining -> 3.2. Mining & quarrying
♦ timing:Future ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Rapid Declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 5 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality

5. Biological resource use -> 5.1. Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals -> 5.1.2. Unintentional effects (species is not the target)
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 6 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

5. Biological resource use -> 5.3. Logging & wood harvesting -> 5.3.1. Intentional use: (subsistence/small scale)
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Whole (>90%) ♦ severity:Rapid Declines ⇒ Impact score:High Impact: 8 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality

6. Human intrusions & disturbance -> 6.1. Recreational activities
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Minority (<50%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 5 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

7. Natural system modifications -> 7.1. Fire & fire suppression -> 7.1.1. Increase in fire frequency/intensity
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Whole (>90%) ♦ severity:Rapid Declines ⇒ Impact score:High Impact: 8 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality

8. Invasive & other problematic species & genes -> 8.1. Invasive non-native/alien species -> 8.1.2. Named species [ Cinara cupressivora ]
♦ timing:Past, Likely to Return ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Past Impact 
→ Stresses
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.3. Indirect species effects -> 2.3.7. Reduced reproductive success

8. Invasive & other problematic species & genes -> 8.1. Invasive non-native/alien species -> 8.1.2. Named species [ Pinus patula ]
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 6 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.3. Indirect species effects -> 2.3.2. Competition
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.3. Indirect species effects -> 2.3.7. Reduced reproductive success

11. Climate change & severe weather -> 11.2. Droughts
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 6 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.3. Indirect species effects -> 2.3.7. Reduced reproductive success

1. Research -> 1.3. Life history & ecology
2. Conservation Planning -> 2.1. Species Action/Recovery Plan
2. Conservation Planning -> 2.3. Harvest & Trade Management Plan
3. Monitoring -> 3.1. Population trends
3. Monitoring -> 3.2. Harvest level trends
3. Monitoring -> 3.4. Habitat trends

♦  Fuels
 Local : ✓ 

♦  Construction or structural materials
 Local : ✓ 

♦  Handicrafts, jewellery, etc.
 Local : ✓ 

Bibliography [top]

Bayliss, J., Makungwa, S., Hecht, J., Nangoma, D. and Bruessow, C. 2007. Saving the Island in the Sky: the plight of the Mount Mulanje cedar Widdringtonia whytei in Malawi. Oryx 41(1): 64-69.

Chapman, J. D. 1995. The Mulanje Cedar, Malawi’s National Tree. The Society of Malawi, Blantyre.

Farjon, A. 2010. A Handbook of the World's Conifers. Koninklijke Brill, Leiden.

Farjon, A. et al. 1998. Data collection forms for conifer species completed by the IUCN/SSC Conifer Specialist Group between 1996 and 1998.

Hecht, J. 2008. When will community management conserve biodiversity? Evidence from Malawi. Field Actions Sci. Rep. 1: 9-17.

IUCN. 2013. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (ver. 2013.1). Available at: http://www.iucnredlist.org. (Accessed: 12 June 2013).

Makungwa, S.D. 2004. Inventory results of Mulanje Cedar resources on Mulanje Mountain. Mulanje Mountain Conservation Trust, Blantyre, Malawi.

Pauw, C.A. and Linder, H.P. 1997. Tropical African cedars (Widdringtonia, Cupressaceae): systematics, ecology and conservation status. Biological Journal of the Linnaean Society 123: 297-319.

Richardson, D.M. 1998. Ecology and biogeography of Pinus. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.


Citation: Farjon, A. 2013. Widdringtonia whytei. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2013: e.T33216A2835167. . Downloaded on 28 August 2016.
Disclaimer: To make use of this information, please check the <Terms of Use>.
Feedback: If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown on this page, please provide us with feedback so that we can correct or extend the information provided