Technical Reports

Permanent URI for this communityhttp://192.168.202.180:4000/handle/123456789/7

Browse

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Tigers of the Transboundary Terai Arc Landscape: Status, distribution and movement in the Terai of India and Nepal
    (Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2014) Chanchani, P.; Lamichhane, B.R.; Malla, S.; Maurya, K.; bista, A.; Warrier, R.; Nair, S.; Almeida, M.; Ravi, R.; Sharma, R.; Dhakal, M.; Yadav, S.P.; Thapa, M.; Jnawali, S.R.; Pradhan, N.M.B.; Thapa, G.J.; Yadav, H.; Jhala, Y.V.; Qureshi, Qamar
    While the conservation of tigers is emphasized in protected areas throughout their range countries, the species continues to be distributed in forests of varying protection status, and in habitats that span international borders. Although India and Nepal share a long border in the Terai belt, this area that was once forested is now largely agricultural, and wildlife is restricted to remnant forest patches. This study details the status of tiger and ungulate prey species populations in around 5300 km2 transboundary Terai Arc Landscape (TAL), documents the movement of tigers between forests in India and Nepal based on camera trap data and makes specific recommendations for the conservation of tigers and their prey in Transboundary TAL. Notable protected area within the study area includes Chitwan and Bardia National Parks in Nepal and Dudhwa and Valmiki Tiger reserves in India. This study was carried out in 7 protected areas and reserve forests in India, and 5 protected areas, three biological corridors (protected forests) and adjoining forest patches in Nepal. Occupancy surveys for animal signs involved 4496 kilometres of foot surveys in Nepal and India. Between November 2012 and June 2013, these sites were sampled with a total of 1860 camera trap stations, with a total sampling effort of 36,266 trap nights. Nearly 9000 km2 of tiger habitat was sampled with camera traps. 3370 kilometres of line transects (n=239) were sampled in the landscape. Cumulatively, this sampling exercise is the largest survey effort of its kind in the Terai Arc Landscape to date, and involved partnerships between National and State government agencies, research institutions, non-governmental organizations and members of local communities who participated in the research. Data analysis was carried out using contemporary analytical methods including site occupancy models, spatial explicit capture recapture models and distance sampling framework. Site occupancy was estimated to be 0.55 (0.44-0.66) in Nepal and 0.77 (0.67-0.85) in the region between Nandhaur WLS and Suhelwa WLS in India. A total of 239 individual adult tigers were identifi ed from camera trap photos, of which 89 were adult males and 145 were adult females. 5 animals could not be ascribed a gender from camera trap data. Site-specific minimum tiger numbers varied from 3 in Banke National Park in Nepal to 78 in Chitwan National Park, also in Nepal. Tiger numbers and/or abundances in other sites within the Transboundary landscape were estimated to lie within this range, with notably large populations in Bardia National Park and Pilibhit Tiger Reserve, and smaller populations in Dudhwa National Park, and Kishanpur Wildlife Sanctuary and Shuklaphanta Wildlife Reserve. Tiger densities in the Transboundary Terai Arc Landscape range between 0.16/100 km2 in Banke National Park, Nepal to 4.9/ 100 km2 in Kishanpur Wildlife Sanctuary, India. Spatial heterogeneity in tiger densities has been mapped for the entire study area. Densities of principal ungulate prey species of tigers were found to vary widely across sites, and while density estimates in some protected areas in Nepal were as high as 92.6/km2 (Bardia National park), they were seven fold lower in other sites in India and Nepal (13.6 in Dudhwa National Park and 10.7 in Banke National Park). While habitat connectivity has severely been compromised in this landscape, tigers exist as one wholly-connected population in the protected areas of Chitwan National Park, Nepal and Valmiki Tiger Reserve, India as well as in Shuklaphanta Wildlife Reserve, Nepal and the Lagga-Bagga Block of Pilibhit Tiger Reserve, India. Other than these sites we photo-documented movement of tigers between Nepal and India along the Khata corridor (between Bardia National Park and Katerniaghat Wildlife Sanctuary) and Shuklaphanta - Tatarjanj - Pilibhit Corridor. We failed to document tiger movement in four other corridors: Boom-Brahmadev, Laljhadi, Basanta, and Kamdi. Forest connectivity has severely been compromised in these corridors by land use change. There are notably large differences in tiger and prey densities within and between sites. This study points to the infl uence of habitat (forest-grassland mosaics and riparian areas) on the distribution and density of tigers and their prey. However, these factors alone are likely to provide incomplete explanations for observed patterns. Observed patterns of tiger and prey densities are likely to also be on account of anthropogenic pressures on wildlife and their habitats in the form of poaching, livestock grazing and the entry of large numbers of wood and grass collectors deep into wildlife habitats. Another significant threat to the survival of tigers and other mammals arises from the proposed development of new roads in Nepal and India that may severely degrade the region’s fragile corridors. The establishment of new settlements near existing tiger habitats constitutes encroachment, and poses a significant challenge for conservation in some parts of this landscape. The continued use of two forest corridors between Nepal and India by tigers and other large mammals is encouraging. The dispersal of tigers between sites plays an important role in maintaining demographically stable and genetically robust populations. The most pressing task for conservation is to protect these corridors and to re-establish connectivity between other sites by restoring corridors that have been eroded by development and land-use change. There are also significant opportunities to build conservation and development programs that emphasize the protection of the Terai’s remnant wilderness areas, while also attending to legitimate needs of forest-dependent human communities. This report also identifies key interventions that are needed to secure the future of tigers in the Terai. These include policy initiatives, important interventions to create functional biological corridors, key enforcement and protection measures, prescriptions for community involvement in conservation and identifying important themes for future research and monitoring. To set tangible management and conservation targets, recommended actions under these themes have been listed separately for twenty four sites in the transboundary TAL. The future of tigers and other large mammals in Nepal and India are intertwined, as is the wellbeing of the peoples of the Terai who live along this forested frontier. Building effective partnerships for conservation between the governments, conservation organizations and civil society of India and Nepal, and working toward common goals are imperative to maintain and promote populations of tigers and other endangered wildlife in this unique eco-region.