WII Technical Reports/Books/Manuals
Permanent URI for this collectionhttp://192.168.202.180:4000/handle/123456789/314
Browse
14 results
Search Results
Item World heritage biodiversity programme for India(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2003) Mathur, V.B.; Krishnaswamy, Jagdish; Singsit, S.; Bawa, Kamajit S.; Ishwar, N.M.; Vanak, Abi TamimIndia, one of the earliest signatories to the World Heritage Convention has five key Protected Areas currently on UNESCO’s World Heritage List - Kaziranga and Manas in Assam, Keoladeo Ghana in Rajasthan, Sundarbans in West Bengal and Nanda Devi in Uttaranchal. All five sites satisfy the natural heritage criterion ‘contain the most important and significant natural habitats for in-situ conservation of biological diversity, including those containing threatened species of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science and conservation’ (iv) and hence are critical to the preservation of globally Significant biodiversity. A strong potential exists to build and to strengthen the constellation of India’s World Heritage Biodiversity (WHB) sites in ways that are exemplary and beneficial for the larger network of PAs in India and abroad. The World Heritage Convention also offers a unique possibility in India to link nature and culture in innovative ways to promote conservation of species like the tiger and the elephant at a nation-wide scale. India presents the greatest challenge anywhere in the world for integrating conservation and development on a grand scale, and success here could have major implications for other parts of the developing world. The WHB sites symbolize humanity's struggle to conserve the earth's precious biological heritage against its own onslaught of nature. Combined with other Protected Areas such as National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries, WHB sites represent the last stand of the nature and the best hope for humanity to conserve our most precious endowment. India represents a remarkable example of successful efforts to conserve significant amounts of biodiversity against all odds. Despite the presence of more than one billion people, India has managed to place 154,826 km? of its land area under its PA network. Considerable amount of biodiversity also occurs in habitats outside protected areas. Furthermore, protected areas in India are among the best-managed reserves in the developing world. The WHB sites and other Protected Areas in India, however, remain highly vulnerable to degradation. As islands, these areas are surrounded by harsh biophysical landscapes and alienated local communities. The PA management is not fully equipped to deal with the growing threats to the parks. The staff is inadequately trained in the enforcement of laws protecting wildlife. In some cases such as Manas in the northeast, field staff is demoralized, having suffered setbacks due to insurgency and social turmoil in the area. Moreover, the field staff have neither access to good communications nor to facilities for health and education for themselves and their families and the basic infrastructure required for the effective management of the PAs are generally lacking. World Heritage Biodiversity Programme for . At higher levels, the park management has been unable to incorporate concepts of conservation science and wildlife management in developing management plans. Since parks represent habitat islands surrounded by dissimilar habitats with high densities of human populations, changes inside the park due to intrinsic and extrinsic factors are inevitable. However, there is no significant effort to adopt a systems approach to anticipate and predict future changes. Continuous assessment and monitoring of biodiversity are almost non-existent. The "island" status of the World Heritage sites also makes them highly vulnerable to anthropogenic pressures. Although these islands are connected to varying degrees with other natural habitats, there have been no comprehensive efforts to examine the feasibility of establishing habitat connectivity in areas containing the WBH sites. Since the areas surrounding sites are even more vulnerable to human pressures than the WBH sites, it is critical to examine the potential of connection among natural areas wherever these sites are located and to bring these areas under greater protection. A more serious problem is the lack of local community involvement in conservation efforts. Local communities in many cases remain hostile to the idea that the parks cannot be used for their traditional purposes of grazing, fishing, or extraction of fuel wood and non-timber forest products. Wild animals from the parks also pose a danger to their livestock, crops and houses, thus exacerbating the conflict. Thus, local communities perceive conservation legislation as a threat to their livelihoods. Although there are economic benefits from conservation, such as ecotourism, such benefits generally do not accrue to local communities. Protected areas also have a low profile. The civil society in general is not aware of the importance and in some cases even the existence of World Heritage sites. Although the protected areas have a tremendous educational potential, educational institutions hardly ever use world heritage sites for educational purposes. A new initiative funded by the United Nations Foundation (UNF) and United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and coordinated by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India initially covering four existing and ten proposed World Heritage Cluster Sites in India has been initiated to address the key conservation and management issues within a single new framework. This framework referred to as the ‘World Heritage Biodiversity Programme for India (WHBPI)’ has been developed through a collaborative planning process by the, Wildlife Institute of India (WII) and the Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE). The ten year WHBP' will have two phases of four and six years each. Four of the existing five WHB sites in India namely Kaziranga, Keoladeo, Manas and Nanda Devi National Parks have been included in the WHBPI. programme as it is receiving a similar support from the Asian Development Bank under the ‘Sunderbans Biodiversity Project’. The goal of the WHBPI is to strengthen biodiversity conservation in Protected Areas by \ building replicable models at WHB sites that emphasize law enforcement, promote habitat integrity and connectivity, enhance the role of local communities in Protected Area management, improve the professional, social and political profile of the Protected Area management community and its civil society partners. The specific objectives of WHBP! are to: 1) increase the capacity of the staff to address critical needs in conservation, management and protection of the WHB sites, (2) enable the . park staff to incorporate principal concepts of modem science in management plans, (3) increase the connectivity among natural areas in the vicinity of the WHB sites, (4) enhance the stake and the involvement of local communities in the management and the protection of the parks, (5) raise the profile of the WHB sites in civil society, (6) bring about policy and governance reforms so that the management have the flexibility to address contemporary challenges to the conservation of biodiversity in the parks, and (7) conduct surveys at sites that may be designated as additional World Heritage. Biodiversity cluster sites.Item Mapping of the protected area (PA) and surrounding areas in Pench Tiger Reserve, Madhya Pradesh(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2000) Sankar, K.; Qureshi, Q.; Mathur, V.B.; Mukherjee, S.K.; Areendran, G.; Pasha, M.K.S.In this study the task included the preparation of baseline maps of Pench tiger reserve and surrounding areas consisting of features relevant to PA management and ecodevelopment activities. The maps were digitized and incorporated in Geographical Information System (GIS) domain. As part of assignment the spatial database developed for the Pench tiger reserve has been installed in the PTR office at Seoni.Item Conserving biodiversity in the Indian Trans-Himalaya: New initiatives of field conservation in Ladakh : a collaborative project of Wildlife Institute of India, US fish and Wildlife Service and International Snow leopard Trust(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2000) Mathur, V.B.; Bhatnagar, Y.V.; Qureshi, Q.; Chundawat, R.S.; Adhikari, B.S.; Rana, B.S.; Kala, C.P.; Uniyal, V.P.; Vasudevan, K.; Choudhury, B.C.; Vijayakumar, S.P.; Singh, Pratap; Jayapal, R.; Wangchuk, Richen; Hussain, S.A.; Singh, R.K.; Jackson, Rodney; McCarthy, TomItem An Ecological assessment of Baan Ganga wetland, Uttaranchal(Uttaranchal Forest Department and Wildlife Institute of India, 2006) Rawat, G.S.; Pandav, Bivash; Mathur, V.B.; Sankar, K.; Hussain, S.A.; Adhikari, B.S.; Sinha, B.C.; Pandav, Bivash; Sivakumar, K.; Padalia, H.; Chaturvedi, R.K.; Babu, M.M.An Ecological Survey of Baan Ganga Wetlands in Haridwar Forest Division, Uttaranchal was conducted during January to November 2006 by a team of faculty and researchers from the Wildlife Institute of India (WII) Dehra Dun. The study components include rapid assessment of the flora, fauna (mammals, birds and fishes), water and soil quality of the area, mapping of the conservation reserve and designing of interpretive facility for the wetland. 2. Baan Ganga wetland represents a remnant Terai habitat in Uttranchal. Occurrence of endangered swamp deer and a variety of floral and faunal communities typical of Terai habitat amidst human dominated landscape warrants careful co-management approach. A total of 178 plant species were recorded from the Baan Ganga wetlands. Of these, 40 species were hydrophytic, 122 species semi-aquatic and 117 mesophytic. Detailed list of the flora along with their habitat and photographic records have been provided. 3. The survey area faces heavy anthropogenic pressures including heavy livestock grazing, fishing, pollution from the untreated sugar mill effluents, cutting and burning of natural vegetation and agricultural encroachment. Despite several pressures the area continues to attract a variety of wetland birds and has tremendous opportunity for developing a popular eco-tourist destination and thereby creating new opportunities in education, recreation, eco-tourism and research in the area. 4. Based on the rapid ecological surveys on various aspects, following major recommendations are given for the conservation and management of the Baan Ganga area: (i) Maintenance of stream flow all through the year (ii) Traditional fishing as in practice at preset may be continued (iii) Initiate a project to promote aquaculture (iv) Initiate conservation awareness programme for the local people especially about the adverse impact of pesticide use in the agriculture fields around the Baan Ganga. There should be a check on the release of effluents from the industries which are located on the upstream areas. Effluents must be treated before releasing into the natural system (v) Maintain heterogeneity in vegetation types. Aquatic weeds are required to be managed properly in year-wise plan. There should not be any construction along the banks of river which will change the hydrological system hence there will be change in the vegetation types. Cattle grazing needs to be regulated and a proper rotational grazing system needs to be implemented in consultation with the local communities (vi) Control of water hyacinth by utilizing this species as a compost / green manure (vii) Regulate exploitation of Phragmites and Typha and (viii) Develop an interpretation centre highlighting the biological and conservation significance of this area for development of eco-tourism.Item National Biodiversity Information outlook (NBIO)(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2012) Chavan, Vishwas; Gaikwad, Jitendra; Mathur, V.B.Item Assessment of cumulative impacts of hydroelectric projects on Aquatic and terrestrial biodiversity in Alaknanda and Bhagirathi basins, Uttarakhand(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2012) Rajvanshi, Asha; Arora, Roshni; Mathur, V.B.; Sivakumar, K.; Sathyakumar, G.S.; Rawat, G.S.; Johnson, J.A.; Ramesh, K.; Dimri, Nandkishor; Maletha, AjayItem Management Effectiveness Evaluatin (MEE) of tiger reserves in India: process and outcomes(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2011) Mathur, V.B.; Gopal, R.; Yadav, S.P.; Sinha, P.R.Item Ecological Effects of road through sensitive habitats implications for wildlife conservation : Executive summary(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2012) Rajvanshi, Asha; Mathur, V.B.; PragatheeshItem Management Effectiveness Evaluation (MEE) of Tiger reserves in India: Process and outcomes(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2014) Mathur, V.B.; Gopal, R.; Yadav, S.P.; Negi, H.S.; Ansari, N.A.The need to evaluate PA management effectiveness has become increasingly well recognised internationally over the past one and a half decades. In both developed and developing countries it has been seen that declaration of PAs does not always result in adequate protection (Hockings and Phillips 1999, Hockings et al. 2000, Ervin 2003). Evaluation is necessary because PAs face many threats. However, evaluation is not simply a way of looking for problems; it is as important to identify when things are going well. Assessment of management effectiveness should include both issues within and/or beyond the control of individual managers. This approach facilitates a range of responses to threats and deficiencies in management, from site-based actions to broad political and policy reviews.Item Management of human wildlife interaction and invasive species in India(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2015) Mathur, V.B.; Bist, S.S.; Kaushik, M.; Mungi, N.A.; Qureshi, Q.Human – carnivore conflict is perceived as one of the most negative interactions in wildlife and humans, owing to the direct loss of human life associated with the presence of carnivore. Tiger, lion, leopard, snow leopard, wolf, dhole and bear are the most conflict related species. Studies on conflict related to tiger, lion, snow leopard and leopard are available while that for wolf, dhole and bear are rarely conducted. Owing to the conservation value of tiger and lion, guidelines and policies have been centered to the conflict related to these flagship species. In almost all the cases, management system has guaranteed economic compensation. Standard operating protocol (SOP) is developed for identifying and removing an individual that has repeatedly reported in conflict with humans. As few of these carnivores need healthy habitat and ample prey species for their sustenance, co-existence with increasing human pressure seems distinct from the present facts. Thus, in order to minimize the negative interaction, it is essential to relocate human settlement from the protected areas inhabited by these species. Attack by leopard on humans is amongst the major conflict cases. As leopard and snow leopard also inhabit in areas dominated by humans, it is of immense importance to amplify the social carrying capacity through awareness camps and increasing the vigilance during peak activity time of a species in the shared area. Frequency of conflicts associated to leopard in human dominated areas has triggered concern about the sustenance of these species, as shown by recent series of studies invested on subject. Results of these studies were adapted to form guidelines in order to avoid and mitigate the conflict issue and the SOP is being developed for conflict scenario management. In all the cases of carnivore conflict, economic compensation has helped to elevate the social carrying capacity. Hence, timely facilitating the desired amount of compensation can reduce the negative perception associated with conflict case. In case of snow leopard, the medical and life insurance policy has helped in building positive perception towards snow leopard conservation. However, such solutions are possible by joint efforts from multiple sectors and active participation of governmental agencies; and hence should be considered for managing conflict of other species as well. Human - Herbivore conflicts are mainly centered towards the loss of agricultural crops. These losses are high if the crop fields are present around Protected Areas or in the forest used by herbivores involved in conflict. Nilgai, Wild pig, Elephant and Black buck are ranked as species with highest conflict records owing to their vast distribution across India and habitat overlap with human settlements. While conflict caused by Rhino and Wild ass though restricted in few parts of the country, is similar conflict case. Particularly, in case of elephants, agricultural fields are used as corridors for colonizing or moving across adjacent protected forests. Conflicts with herbivores are speculated to be caused due to habitat degradation, absence of predator, absence of quality forage in the forest, etc. However, these speculations are not tested in field. Nevertheless, looking at increased individual and group raiding on the crops, it is essential to put a control on the reproductive rate of these individuals to avoid long-term conflict. Reproductive control needs an understanding of optimal demographic age and sex ratios to be maintained for sustenance of species. Hence, it should be practiced only in addition to the ecological population monitoring. Techniques used in reproductive control are new to the country and should be executed by expert research team. In case of a species like wild pig that can cause repeated conflict, provision of declaring such species as vermin for a particular area is available. In case of managing the on-going crop raiding, bio-fencing around the crop fields, night vigilance, alarm alerts and barricades should be used. Elevating the social carrying capacity by forming a self help group in the conflict prone villages that includes people from various sectors can provide immediate and economical solutions. Human - Non-human primate conflict is one of most serious issue in the negative interactions in human and wildlife. Though Rhesus macaques, Bonnet macaques and Hanuman Langur carry cultural respect from the dominant society, their increasing population in human settlements is increasingly resulting in negative interactions. Devotees and animal lovers feel gratified in feeding monkeys in temples, highways or roof tops and consider it a religious deed. Apart from many monkeys getting diseased and killed due to these habits, they have become habitual of snatching food from people and attacking them. Macaque troops involved in conflict are often translocated to the forests or enclosures in many parts of the country. Often these empty habitats are re-colonized by the surrounding macaque troops, and the conflict continues. Reproductive control is the most convenient and long term solution for controlling the negative interactions, but should be carried with regular population monitoring to keep the densities at optimal low levels. Methods such as oral administrative contraceptives, intra-uterine devices, and blockade of tubal patency following transcervical administration of polidocanol foam should be used for female monkey sterilization. Removal of specific macaque individuals that show persistent aggressive behavior or learnt raiding behavior should be implemented. Additionally social awareness about Solid waste management and proper disposal of rural organic waste as well as prohibition on feeding of monkeys in public places is of immense importance; as most of these troops colonize the area due to readily available food. Management of prioritized invasive species by 2020 is India’s 4th target of Fifth National Report to the Convention of Biological diversity. In total, 21 species were identified as high concern invasive species for 4 different ecosystems of India viz., terrestrial ecosystem (Lantana species complex, Prosopis juliflora, parthenium hysterophorus, Mikania micrantha, Chromolaena odorata, Ageratina adenophora, Ageratum conyzoides, Xanthium strumarium, Mimosa diplotricha, Hyptis suaveolens, Senna tora and Great African Snail (Achatina fulica)) island ecosystem (Axis axis and Hoplobatrachus tigerinus), freshwater ecosystem (Oreochromis mossambicus, Salmo trutta fario, Clarias gariepinus, Cyprinus carpio, Ipomoea carnea and Eichhornia crassipes) and marine ecosystem (Kappaphycus alvarezii). As a response to the impacts of these species, many regional managerial interventions are carried to remove the species. Most of these management practices are guided by the umbrella legislation of Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and National Biodiversity Action Plan, 2008. It was also concluded during the workshop, that restoration of the native ecosystem should be the focus of management in the terrestrial ecosystem and hence the removal of any species should be followed by active/passive restoration of native ecosystem. The major gap that was observed was in the information about distribution and magnitude of invasion across country for any invasive species; and in the studies of restoration techniques in terrestrial ecosystem. The repeated introduction of fishes via aquaculture and escape through the controlled culture are the main invasion pathways in freshwater ecosystem. It should be addressed by enhancing the present quarantine techniques to identify the fry of these species during the import, and safeguarding the outlets of culture discharge (particularly in the floods).