Technical Reports
Permanent URI for this communityhttp://192.168.202.180:4000/handle/123456789/7
Browse
9 results
Search Results
Item Status, distribution and conservation perspectives of lesser florican in the North-Western India: a survey report(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2011) Bhardwaj, G.S.; Sivakumar, K.; Jhala, Y.V.The Lesser Florican Sypheotides indica, a species endemic to the Indian subcontinent, is largely seen during the monsoon season in north-western India, where it breeds. Its population and range is believed to be decreasing at an alarming rate due to breeding habitat loss and threats in the non-breeding habitats, believed to be in south and south-east India. In this connection, to understand the present status and distribution of Lesser florican in the north-western India i.e. in Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Rajasthan, a survey following an established protocol (Sankaran 2000) was carried out in the month of August 2010, which is a part of breeding season of this species, when most of males display in the grasslands. A total of 84 individual Lesser Floricans (83 male and 1 female) were sighted in three states of north-western India, which is 65% less than the sightings reported in 1999 by Dr. Sankaran. It was found significantly fewer sightings than reported in 1999 in all grasslands surveyed (t=2.81, df=14, p<0.05). Of the 169 potential grasslands available for floricans in the north-western India, 91 grasslands were surveyed, which include grasslands surveyed during 1999. Of the surveyed grasslands, Lesser Floricans were found in 24 grasslands as against 37 grasslands in 1999. Among the three states, more sightings of Lesser Florican were reported in the state of Gujarat (N=54) followed by Rajasthan (N=18) and Madhya Pradesh (N=12). But in 1999, more sightings of florican were reported in Gujarat (N=141) followed by Madhya Pradesh (N=63) and Rajasthan (N=34). More than 55% of grasslands in Gujarat that were reported with florican in 1999 (Sankaran 2000) were observed without florican in 2010. More or less similar situation was in Madhya Pradesh also. Population and habitat of Lesser Florican in the north-western India was observed to be continuously declining at an alarming rate. Lack of a National Policy on grassland management, habitat degradation, plantations, poor landuse planning, pesticide pollution, invasive species, inadequate coverage of florican habitats in the Wildlife Protected Area Network and lack of knowledge on the non-breeding habitats of this species are observed to be major threats to this species.Item Status of the Tigers, co-predators, and prey in India 2010(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2010) Jhala, Y.V.; Qureshi, Qamar; Gopal, Rajesh; Sinha, P.R.This report synthesizes the results of the second countrywide assessment of the status of tigers, co-predators and their prey in India. The first assessment was done in 2006 and its results subsequently helped shape the current policy and management of tiger landscapes in India. The current report is based on data collected in 2009-2010 across all forested habitats of 17 tiger States of India with an unprecedented effort of about 477,000 man days by forest staff, and 37,000 man days by professional biologists. The results provide spatial occupancy, population limits, and abundance of tigers, habitat condition and connectivity (Fig E1). This information is crucial for incorporating conservation objectives into land use planning across landscapes so as to ensure the long term survival of free ranging tigers which serve as an umbrella species for the conservation of forest biodiversity. The study reports a countrywide increase of 20% in tiger numbers but a decline of 12.6% in tiger occupancy from connecting habitats. The methodology consisted of a double sampling approach wherein the State Forest Departments estimated occupancy and relative abundance of tigers, co-predators, and prey through sign and encounter rates in all forested areas (Phase I). Habitat characteristics were quantified using remotely sensed spatial and attribute data in a geographic information system (Phase II). A team of trained wildlife biologists then sampled a subset of these areas with approaches like mark-recapture and distance sampling to estimate absolute densities of tigers and their prey (Phase III), using the best modern technological tools (remote camera traps, GPS, laser range finders). A total effort of 81,409 trap nights yielded photo-captures of 635 unique tigers from a total camera trapped area of 11,192 km2 over 29 sites. The indices and covariate information (tiger signs, prey abundance indices, habitat characteristics) generated by Phase I & II were then calibrated against absolute densities using Generalized Linear Models (GLM) and the relationships were used for extrapolating tiger densities within landscapes. Tiger numbers were obtained for contiguous patches of occupied forests by using average densities for that population block. Numbers and densities were reported as adult tigers with a standard error range. Habitat suitability for tigers was used to model least cost pathways joining tiger populations in a GIS and alternative routes in Circuit scape. These were aligned on high-resolution satellite imagery to delineate potential habitat corridorsItem 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, QamarWhile 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.Item The status o ftigers, copredators and prey in India 2014(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun and National Tiger Conservation Authority, 2014) Jhala, Y.V.; Qureshi, Qamar; Gopal, R.The tiger is an icon for conservation across forested systems of Asia. The Government of India has used the charismatic nature of the tiger to promote on conservation of biodiversity, ecosystem functions, goods and services by launching Project Tiger in 1972 and subsequently using legislation to gazette tiger reserves and by allocating appropriate resources for their conservation. Since 2006 the status of tigers in India is being assessed every four years across all potential habitats in 18 Indian states within the distribution range of the tiger. This document reports the results of the third country wide assessment conducted in 2013-14. undisturbed forests with good prey populations. Tiger population (excluding < 1 year cubs) was estimated to be 2226 (SE range 1945 to 2491) in India (Table 2.1). Amongst tiger reserves Corbett had the largest tiger population estimated at 215 (range 169-261) tigers, four tiger reserves (including Bandipur, Nagarhole and Kaziranga) had over 100 tigers. Tiger Reserves accounted for over 70% of all the tigers in India (Table 2.2). Leopard population in India was estimated to be 7910 (SE range 6566 to 9181) (Table 2.3). The state of Madhya Pradesh had the highest number of leopards at 1817 followed by Karnataka at 1129 leopards. The leopard population was estimated only within forested habitats in tiger occupied states, therefore, it should be considered as a minimum number since leopards, unlike tigers, are also found outside forests. This is the first attempt to estimate leopard abundance at landscape scales. Distribution range and spatial extent of all major mammalian species are provided in the report. Tiger occupancy and abundance has substantially increased in the Shivalik Hills and Gangetic Plains landscape, primarily due to improved status of tigers in the state of Uttrakhand. Rajaji-Corbett tiger population is now contiguous with Dudhwa-Pilibhit population since the intervening forests of Haldwani and Terai Divisions along with new protected areas like Nandhor Wildlife Sanctuary have tiger occupancy and reasonable tiger density. The landscape would benefit from supplementation of tigers in Western Rajaji that will assist in the occupancy of Shivalik forests in Uttar Pradesh and Kalesar Wildlife Sanctuary in Haryana. Maintaining and enhancing trans-boundary corridor connectivity between India and Nepal is an essential element of tiger, elephant and rhino conservation in this landscape. This connectivity is threatened by the new India-Nepal border road and special care is needed to ensure that proper mitigation measures are in place. Tiger status has improved within the Central Indian landscape with an increase in tiger occupancy and numbers. This increase is contributed primarily by the states of Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh. Indravati Tiger Reserve in Chhattisgarh was assessed for the first time. Sampling was limited to accessible areas of Palamau Tiger Reserve in Jharkhand. Conservation efforts need to focus on tiger populations in Orissa (Simlipal-Satkosia tiger reserves), Palamau landscape and in Northern Andhra Pradesh (Kawal Tiger Reserve). Sanjay-Guru Gasidas-Palamau landscape holds promise for future expansion of tiger population provided planned conservation investment continues. Tiger populations in Central Indian landscape are highly fragmented and some are quite small in numbers, therefore, their survival is dependent on corridor connectivity. Corridors in this landscape are threatened by developmental activities like mining and infrastructure. Appropriate safeguards and mitigation measures need to be implemented for development projects in this region so as to ensure that corridor connectivity between tiger populations is not compromised. Madhya Pradesh has also taken initiative to provide resources for corridor restoration by implementing corridor specific management plans. Western Ghat Landscape has maintained its tiger status across all the three states of Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu. The world's largest tiger population (Nagarhole-Bandipur-Mudumalai-Wayanad- 2 Satyamangalam-BRT) has further increased to about 585 tigers covering 10,925 km . New Protected Areas declared by Karnataka on the boarder of Goa has assisted in tiger dispersal into Goa and their movement further north into Radhanagri and Sahayadri Tiger Reserve. This region needs more conservation focus as it viii STATUS OF TIGERS IN INDIA, 2014 holds great potential for tiger and biodiversity conservation. It would be timely to consider declaring inter-state tiger reserve between Karnataka, Goa and Maharashtra. There is loss in tiger occupancy in the intervening habitat between Kudremukh-Bhadra and Anshi-Dandeli, threatening to disrupt connectivity between these tiger populations. Populations south of the Palghat gap (Parambikulum-Anamalai, Periyar, and Kalakad Munduntherai) have improved; attention is needed to conserve forest connectivity between these three major populations.Only select areas were sampled in the North Eastern Hills and Brahmaputra Flood Plains landscape, therefore, tiger occupancy and numbers from this region are minimal estimates. The tiger population in Kaziranga-Karbi Anglong-Paake-Nameri-Orang is the largest source in this landscape (about 163 tigers) and should be managed as a single metapopulation with strategies to address movement corridors between these populations. Dibang and Namdapha were assessed through Scat DNA and opportunistic camera traps and show good promise for tiger and biodiversity conservation but need more conservation investment. Manas-Buxa along with areas of Bhutan landscape have potential for sustaining higher number of tigers and are currently below their carrying capacity. Enhanced protection in this region will help build prey and subsequently tiger population in the long-term. However, the management focus for these Protected Areas should be for forest biodiversity and not become tiger centric, since tiger density in many of these close canopy forests would be inherently low. The entire Sundarban tiger reserve and parts of the Twenty Four Parganas were camera trapped in 2013-14. Tiger population of about 76 (62 to 92 tigers) has remained stable since 2010 and is likely to be near its carrying capacity. Sundarban tiger population is contiguous with that of Bangladesh and transboundary management including anti-poaching strategy and management of ship traffic in specific water channels needs to be implemented for long-term conservation of this unique tiger. Genetic analysis based on a panel of 11 micro-satellites of 158 tiger individuals from across India has shown that at the country scale the tiger population of the North-East is genetically different. The most unique genetic unit of tigers are from Odisha and these need high conservation priority as their population is on a declining trend. The western-arid zone tigers of Ranthambore-Sariska showed a different genetic composition from those of terai and central Indian tigers with some genetic contribution from both these regions. At the local scale the tiger populations south of the Palghat gap differed from the Northern Western Ghat population. The tigers from Sahyadri (northern Western Ghats) shared their genetic makeup with tigers from central India. This preliminary country scale genetic analysis shall assist in planning reintroduction and supplementation strategies for tigers in the future and to prioritize conservation investments to target unique gene pools. Reduction in tiger and prey poaching and in centivised-voluntary relocation of human settlements from core areas of tiger reserves have been the primary drivers for the improved tiger status in India. These schemes and activities need continuous resource allocation for ecosystem maintenance and restoration. The implementation of MSTrIPES, landscape scale tiger management plans inclusive of buffer and corridors, and use of green infrastructure for mitigating impacts of development especially on corridors, need to become the norm across India. Tigers are conservation dependent species, political will driven by public opinion to ensure proper resource allocation is essential for their continued survival.Item Status of leopards in India 2018 : Summary report(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2018) Jhala, Y.V.; Qureshi, Qamar; Yadav, S.P.Item A rapid field survey of tigers and prey in Dibang Valley district, Arunachal Pradesh(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2014) Gopi, G.V.; Qureshi, Qamar; Jhala, Y.V.The Dibang valley district is the largest district of Arunachal Pradesh with an area of 9129 sq km and is also the least populated district of the country with approximately 1 person/sq km. The district shares international borders in the north, North West and Eastern sides with Tibet (China), the South Western region is bound by Upper Siang district and the Southern Side is bound by lower Dibang Valley district. This district was chosen to survey for tigers and their prey due to the recent rescue of tiger cubs from the district in Angrim valley during december 2012. Our survey confirms the occurrence of tigers in the district. We camera trapped the first ever image of an adult tiger from the Dibang valley Wildlife Sanctuary. We also observed 10 pubmarks and collected 11 scats in and around the WLS. All the 24 people whom we informally interviewed confirmed the presence of tigers in the WLS and reported either having had a direct sighting, observed indirect evidences or heard about livestock depredation incidents by the tigers. Preliminary assessment of prey suggest that the WLS holds a good diversity and abundance of prey like Takin Budorcis taxicolor taxicolor, wild pig Sus crofa, Goral Naemorhaedus goral, Musk deer Moschus fuscus, Barking deer Muntiacus muntjak, Himalayan Serow Capricornis thar and Mithun Bos frontalis which can sustain a good population of tigers in the DWLS. The DWLS has the potential of becoming a tiger reserve in future as it may harbour a very important source population of tigers in this region, However the next immediate priority must be to ensure that this vital tiger population is protected and continuously monitored. This can be achieved by a collaborative effort between NTCA, WII, GoAP and most importantly the local people by conducting long term research to establish robust ecological and genetic baselines that can aid in long term conservation and monitoring of tigers, co-predators, prey and their habitats in this unique landscape that in part of a global biodiversity hotspot.Item Status of tigers, co-predators and prey in India 2018 : Summary report(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2019) Jhala, Y.V.; Qureshi, Q.; Nayak, A.K.Item Status of leopards in India 2018(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2018) Jhala, Y.V.Leopard abundance was estimated at the scale of four major tiger conservation landscapes 1) Shivalik Hills and Gangetic plains, 2) Central India and Eastern Ghats, 3) Western Ghats and, 4) North Eastern Hills and Brahmaputra Flood Plains. this exercise not only comes up with tiger numbers for the country but also evaluates the status of co-predators, prey, habitat and human disturbance parameters for all tiger occupied forested landscapes of the country.Item Status survey of Migratory birds and key wildlife in Bikarner district, Rajasthan(Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, 2021) Dutta, S.; Kher, V.; Uddin, M.; Supakar, S.; Karkaria, T.; Gupta, T.; Paul I; Verma, V.; Pandey, D.; Verma, V.; Phasalkar, P.; Khanra, A.; Jora, V.S.; Kataria, P.S.; Chhangani, A.K.; Bipin, C.M.; Jhala, Y.V.The Bikaner district of Rajasthan supports a wide variety of wildlife that has not been rigorously surveyed in the past. Robust status assessments with reproducible methods are vital for monitoring wildlife trends, particularly in regions like Bikaner that are undergoing large-scale land-use changes, which are potentially detrimental to native wildlife. Therefore, a large-scale survey was organised by the Wildlife Institute of India in collaboration with Rajasthan Forest Department, Government Dungar College and Maharaja Ganga Singh University to assess the status of key wildlife in the Bikaner district of Western Rajasthan. Notably, this survey was planned at the request of Bikaner district residents, who conveyed their wish to conduct a wildlife survey to the Hon’ble Member of Parliament, who invited the Wildlife Institute of India through the Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change and to execute the survey. Consequently, the data collection was conducted in a citizen science framework and involved active participation by a diverse group of researchers, frontline staff, University students and wildlife enthusiasts. The survey assessed the distribution and abundance status of key wildlife, particularly migratory, arid-adapted and raptorial species of birds, their habitat associations, potential threats in the landscape, and community perceptions towards conservation. The Bikaner parliamentary constituency was divided into four sampling blocks (Bikaner, Kolayat, Chattargarh and Mahajan) and overlaid with 144 km2 (12 x 12 km grid) cells. A total of 89 such cells covering 12,816 km2 area were extensively surveyed using vehicle transect method. In each cell, dirt-trails or unpaved roads of 16.2 ± 4.1km length were traversed using slow-moving vehicles and animals were recorded during peak activity periods (0700hrs-1300hrs and 1600hrs-1900hrs). Data on iconic native fauna (chinkara, foxes, bustards, cranes and raptors) and key neobiota (dog, pig and nilgai) was collected on these vehicle transects (1442 km total length). Information on small birds, habitat characteristics and anthropogenic disturbances was recorded at regularly placed transect stop-over points (802 points). Major avian congregations or 'hotspots' (carcass dump at Jodbeed, wetlands and lakes at Gajner, Lunkaransar, RD507 and RD750) were surveyed using simultaneous point-counts and line transects. Community perception towards conservation was assessed using structured questionnaires conducted in select households of randomly selected villages. Species' population estimates were obtained using analytical techniques such as distance sampling and simultaneous block counts. During the survey, 1,880 Chinkara individuals were detected in 684 herds with an encounter rate of 139.78±18.72 individuals per 100km. The estimated density of chinkara in the surveyed area was 4.27±0.65 individuals/km2, yield abundance of 54,745±8,392 individuals 12 in the surveyed area. Similarly, 112 desert foxes were seen during the survey and the density was estimated to be 0.58±0.11 foxes/km2, yielding abundance of 7,456±1,356 individuals. Other mammals recorded during the survey were Desert Cat (0.57±0.2 individuals/100km), Nilgai (14.39±2.91 individuals/100km), free-ranging Domestic Dogs (26.07±3.6 individuals/100km) and Indian Wolf (one sighting). Among large birds, the encounter rate of the Demoiselle Crane was estimated at 5.47±3.14 individuals/100km. The five most common raptor species (individuals per 100 km) were Griffon Vulture (16.44±6.94), Egyptian Vulture (8.73±2.35), Common Kestrel (7.39±0.88), Black-winged Kite (5.35±0.89) and Long-legged Buzzard (5.13±0.69). Among small birds, 2,859 individuals from 103 species were recorded on point counts. The most abundant species were Common Babbler, Eurasian collared Dove, House Sparrow, White-eared Bulbul, Red-vented Bulbul, Greater short-toed Lark and Variable Wheatear. The total density of small birds, excluding birds in flight and rare species, was estimated at 997±58 individuals/km2. A total of 24,674 individual birds belonging to 95 species across 36 families were recorded during hotspot surveys. RD750 had the highest number of individuals and species (15,666 individuals of 76 species), followed by RD507 (6,501 individuals of 34 species), Lunkaransar lake (1,749 individuals of 25 species) and Gajner lake (758 individuals of 38 species). Common Coot, Demoiselle Crane, Common Pochard, Common Teal and Gadwall were the most abundant species that were recorded. Two Endangered (Egyptian Vulture and Steppe Eagle), two Vulnerable (Common Pochard and River Tern), and six Near-Threatened species (Black-headed Ibis, Dalmatian Pelican, Eurasian Curlew, Ferruginous Duck, Northern Lapwing, and Painted Stork) were recorded during the hotspot survey. The habitat was characterised by flat and mildly undulating terrain, dominated by scrublands followed by agriculture (fallow and cultivated). Active disturbance such as humans or livestock was present in 72% of surveyed plots. Passive disturbance such as fences, electric lines, paved road/ highway etc., was recorded at 87% of the points. In terms of vegetation, the most dominant natural vegetation was Kheemp (Leptadenia pyrotechnica) > Khejri (Prosopis cineraria) > Bhui (Aerva sp.) > Phog (Calligonum polygonoides) > Chugh (Crotalaria burhia) > Aak (Calotropis procera) > Ganthia (Dactyloctenium scindicum) > Prosopis juliflora. There was a positive association between the presence of fences and that of cultivation, human, livestock, dog, water-source and power-lines, indicating that fences could be a proxy for other disturbances. We found distinct associations between species and habitat. Plants such as Leptadenia and Calligonum occurred more in undulating and less disturbed areas. Aerva occurred more in sandy, less disturbed areas, whereas Prosopis juliflora and Calotropis procera occurred more in flat, disturbed areas. Faunal species such as Chinkara decreased 13 in abundance with the proportion of area under cultivation while Nilgai showed an opposite trend. Desert Fox and Desert cat did not show any response to habitat gradients, whereas dogs were more abundant in flat, disturbed areas. Steppe Eagle, Egyptian Vulture and Laggar Falcon decreased in abundance along canal-irrigated areas. Birds such as Eurasian collared dove, Grey Francolin, Indian Robin and Indian Peafowl preferred flat terrain. Presence of disturbances favoured the Common Babbler, Eurasian Collared Dove, Grey Francolin, Red Vented Bulbul and Variable Wheatear, but negatively impacted the Ashy-crowned Sparrow Lark, Greater Short-toed Lark and Yellow-eyed Pigeon. Questionnaires were conducted with 170 respondents in 61 villages spread over 24 cells. 1.7±1.0% of respondents reported seeing a Great Indian Bustard (Ardeotis nigriceps) around their villages in the past 5 years. The reporting frequency of dog, nilgai and fox was higher than that of chinkara, crane and wild pig. More people reported an increasing population trend for neo-colonised species (dogs, nilgai and wild pigs) than for native species (chinkara, fox or crane). On similar lines, more people reported that native biota (particularly chinkara and vultures followed by cranes and peafowls) have reduced in occurrence over the past few years. Habitat loss due to agricultural expansion and associated activities (fencing, pesticide usage, borewell irrigation etc.) was the most widely reported cause for wildlife decline; other causes being poaching, predation by dogs, climate change and powerlines. A high percentage of respondents (85±3%) were aware of a conservation area (managed either traditionally as Orans or by the Forest Department) around their village. 12±3 % of respondents complained regarding encroachment of Orans around their villages. Our survey highlights that Bikaner region is undergoing rapid land-use changes due to intensive irrigated agriculture, infrastructure and industries. To understand their ecological impacts, regular assessments of wildlife populations through standard, reproducible methods become important. Based on this survey and consultation with Rajasthan Forest Department and local experts, the following preliminary recommendations are suggested: a) greater conservation emphasis on sites such as Jorbeed Conservation Reserve, Deshnok Oran, Tokla Oran, Bhinjranwali and 750RD, b) mitigation of potential threats such as power-lines, fences and free-ranging dogs, c) protection of Orans from encroachment and development of grasslands for wildlife/livestock use, d) development of sites such as RD750 and Lunkaransar lake for ecotourism through careful and consultative planning, e) and replication of this survey for assessing wildlife trends.