Kazi Kamrul Islam (Kyushu UniversityDipesh Joshi (Wageningen University)

Sato Noriko (Kyushu University)

Today’ s menu:

• Tiger status & Background information

• Research questions

•Study area

•Discussion•Social aspect•Ecological aspect•Management

• Evaluation

• Conclusions

Tiger sub species Range country Population

Royal Bengal Tiger(Panthera tigris tigris)

BangladeshBhutanIndiaMyanmarNepal

62-36267-81 (adult)2500-3750124-23193-97 (adult)

Caspian Tiger (P. tigris virgata)

Afghanistan, Iran, Chinese and Russian Turkestan, Turkey

Extinct 1970s

Amur Tiger (P. tigris altaica)

China, N Korea, Russia 360-406

Javan Tiger ; Bali Tiger(P. tigris sondaica; balica)

Java, IndonesiaBali, Indonesia

Extinct 1980s, Extinct 1940s

South China Tiger(P. tigris amoyensis)

China 20-30

Sumatran Tiger(P. tigris sumatrae)

Sumatra, Indonesia 400-500

Indo-Chinese Tiger(P. tigris corbetti)

Cambodia, China, Laos, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, Eastern Myanmar

1,227-1,785

Status of the tiger

Background In 1906 about 40,000 tiger exists in the Indian

subcontinent (Gee 1963) area But in 2008 it was only 3,176-4,556 (Tiger Action

Plan, 2010) Bengal Tiger accounts 60% of the existing tiger

subspecies of the world Nepal Govt. started the park conservation Act on

1973 and Royal Chitwan National Park (CNP ) is the first protected areas under this Act

Main Research question:• Is it possible to conserve the tiger population and its habitat

in CNP?

Sub Questions: • What are the legislation and policy of Government towards

tiger conservation? • Are the local communities accepting the tiger conservation

program?• Is the ecology of the tigers favorable for its natural

conservation process?• What are the management strategies of tiger conservation in

CNP and are they sufficient to conserve tiger or not?

Range of the tiger

Study area:

•Sub-tropical area•IUCN –II (National park), •70% tree ,20% grass, 7% riverrine forest•37 human settlements around the park areas

Source: Google.com

Social aspect

• Legislation and Govt. policy– Form NPWCA in 1973 – Hunting/poaching is strictly prohibited/banded– Fine of Rs. 50,000 -100,000 or imprisonment of 5-15 years– Because of International market poaching is not totally

banded– Govt. established Anti Poaching Unit (APU) with the

cooperation of various organization and local people

But the Execution level is problematic!!!!!

• View of the local community– Surrounded by numerous settlements and human

intervention to the core habitat is the most threat for tiger conservation

– People thought Govt. emphasis forest not them– Previously they collect NTFP from core forest area– Their livelihood depends on the forest resources since long

time agoTheir attitude towards tiger conservation is negative

Grass cutting

• Tiger-human conflict– 1.2 person/year up to 1998– 7.2 person/year 1998-2006– Huge number of livestock also– Compensation goes to whole community not individual level (Gurung et al. 2006, 2008)

• Involvement of the International agencies– UNESCO (1960-)– WWF’s (1980-)– ICDPs (1980-), UNDP, DFID, USAID, Focus on conservation

Ecology

• Reproductive capability– Gestation is short, 103 days– Female get mature at 3 yrs (3.4 mean)– Litter size is 3 common (2-5 range)– Inter-birth only 20 months

(Smith and McDougal, 1977)

• Population dynamicsGenetic diversity ( two main issue),

genetic drift (gene pool)gene flow

Little genetic diversity, and 95% genetic diversity will exist in CNP after 100 yrs (Frankham, 1995)

– Gene flow and genetic drift is not limiting factor at CNP

• Dispersal capability– Male can disperse 3 times higher than female– Most females were philopatric, settling next to their mothers– Male average 33km longest 65km– Female average 10km longest 33km– Young leaving their area 19-28months, establish new

territory(Smith, 1993; Sunquist, 1991)

• Food availability and requirement– A tiger required average 5-6 kg meat/day– Mostly occupy by deer

• (Biswas and Sankar, 2002; Sunquist, 1991)

Figure: Major prey species of tiger at CNP

Source: Biswas and Sankar (2002)

Prey species% of prey

eaten by tiger*Amount of meat

(Kg)Average body Wt of

prey species**Number of prey

spp.

Chital 33.3 86913 (75-100 kg)= 88 Kg 987

Sambar 29.3 76473 (100-150kg) = 125kg 611

Hog Deer 15.4 40194 (50-110 Kg) = 80 Kg 502

Wild Pig 10.6 27666 (70-90 Kg) = 80 Kg 345

Common Langur 4.1 10701 (4-24 kg) = 14Kg 764

Muntjac 5.7 14877 (15-20 Kg) = 18 Kg 826

Others 1.6 4176 50 Kg 84

Sources: *Biswas and Sankar (2002) on **www.worlddeer.org

Table: Estimated food requirement of 100 tiger per year in CNP

• Effect of prey– Prey density 96.65/sq.km– Total area 93,200 ha– Prey is not a limiting factor and tiger does not affect the

prey population (Biswas and Sankar 2002; McDougal 1979)

Management• Buffer zone

– Bag heralu (guard), form Buffer Zone management Council – Compensation (human life and livestock)– Lethal control (tiger)– Using pet dog (guide for human)

• Wild prey management– Maintain prey density

• Corridors– Between two fragment of forest

• Information, education awareness

Core forestBuffer Zone

Evaluation

SocialGovt. policy & regulationSociety viewsConflictInternational agencies

+--+

Ecological

Reproductive capabilityPopulation dynamicsDispersal capabilitiesFood availabilityEffect on prey

+++++

ManagementBuffer zoneWild preyCorridorInformation, awareness, etc

++/-+-

•The legislation strongly supports the tiger conservation of CNP but its execution level will need more attention. •The ecological aspects are also positive for tiger conservation•Management strategies especially local people attitude and compensations will require more emphasis. •More research will be needed to resolve the wildlife-human conflict at the CNP area.

Finally, the analysis clearly indicating that the possibility of tiger population and its habitat conservation is favorable at CNP. Still the Nepal Government has to go lot of miles for tiger conservation due to societal constraint at the CNP.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Thank you