ungulate conservation in india — problems and prospects

Applied Animal BehaviourScience, 29 ( 1991 ) 349-359 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam

Wild status and reintroduction

349

Ungulate conservation in India prospects

problems and

J.C. Daniel Bombay Natural History Society, Hornbill House, Shahid Bhagat Singh Road,

Bombay 400 023 (India)

ABSTRACT

Daniel, J.C., 1991. Ungulate conservation in India - - problems and prospects. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 29: 349-359.

India has 31 species of ungulates. Of these, 25 species or races are on the completely protected schedule of the Wildlife Protection Act of 1972. The most highly endangered are 4 species with only single populations: the Kashmir stag or hangul ( Cervus elaphus hanglu), the Manipur brow-antlered deer or sangai (Cervus eldi eldi), the Central Indian race of the swamp deer or barasingha (Cervus duvauceli branderi) and the Indian wild ass or khur (Equus hemionus khur). These require urgent attention for conservation.

For these ungulates, as for other wildlife species, India's huge, expanding human population is the crux of the conservation problem. The three principal manifestations are loss of land to human use or to degradation through over use, decreasing water availability owing to lack of planning coupled with lowering water tables, and increasing energy demand which strips away forest cover for firewood.

I N T R O D U C T I O N

The human population in India will cross the billion mark by the turn of this century. That is the crux of India's conservation problems. Demands on natural resources for human needs and the needs of domestic livestock are so great that very little is left for any other forms of life. These effects are most heavily felt by large wildlife species.

A brief review of some basic environmental parameters and the stress they presently bear will help introduce the discussion. India, although having hardly one-fortieth of the world's land surface, supports more than one-half of the world's water buffalo and more than one-seventh of its cattle and goats. The effect of the constantly increasing pressure of these domestics on the land (particularly grasslands and forests) has been disastrous. In India, land urgently in need of rehabilitation because of wind and water erosion, salinity and alkalinity, now exceeds an area of 100× l06 ha. The Chambal Valley,

0168-1591/91/$03.50 © 1991 - - Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.

350 J.C. DANIEL

with 4 X l06 ha ruined by erosion ravines, is a classic example demonstrating what can happen elsewhere. Another continuing pressure on land resources is for urbanization. The urban Indian population is the fourth largest in the world, and it will continue to grow while agriculture on impoverished land, fragmented by inheritance distributions among members of a family, fails to support the increasing rural population. At the same time, more agricultural land is taken up to meet the demands of urbanization. Approximately 1.5 X 106 ha of arable land have been lost in this manner since 1950. I emphasize these losses because, in the final assessment, forests and grasslands bear the brunt of the demand for land.

The second most important factor is water conservation. In historic times, rainfall was stored in ponds and tanks and this water was apparently suffi- cient to meet the requirements of the human population. These storage res- ervoirs neither have been maintained nor have increased in capacity nor have increased in number to conserve water while meeting the needs of an expanding population. India still uses only one-tenth of the rainfall that it receives. Floods wreak havoc each year, but India still lacks an effective policy of flood control and water conservation. Groundwater reserves, which were once 10 times as great as the annual rainfall, have been so over used that in many areas the water table has fallen far below economically retrievable levels. Aridity is now threatening many areas which were once fertile.

The third major consideration is energy. Firewood remains the main source of energy for cooking in India and particularly in villages where it may be the only source. Urban India alone uses ~ 20 × 10 6 t of firewood, worth > 5000 million rupees (> U.S, $350 million), more than was spent on afforestation between the years 1950 and 1980. Availability has become such a problem that Delhi obtains firewood from Assam which is 1000 km distant. Often en- tailing more than 10 h work per day, fetching fuel has become one of the most difficult chores in rural India. It has been computed that an average family in a Karnataka village walks 1400 km year-~ collecting firewood, a distance equivalent to that from Delhi to Bombay. The effect of this endless demand on resources is evident considering the area under forest cover. Satellite data indicate that India is losing 1.3 X 106 ha of forests per year; more than 8 times the figure given by the forest departments of the various states (Agarwal and Narain, 1985 ).

DISCUSSION

In spite of these grave constraints, India still has a variety of habitats, albeit considerably reduced in extent, in its forests, grasslands, marshes, rivers and lakes to support its wealth of wildlife. Like any other group of animals, ungulates have a varying record of survival. Among the 31 species of ungulates found in India, 25 (80%) of these species or races are on the completely pro-

UNGULATE CONSERVATION IN INDIA 351

tected schedule of the Wildlife Protection Act of 1972. In this group, 4 species, the Kashmir stag or hangul (Cervus elaphus hanglu), the Manipur brow- antlered deer or sangai ( Cervus eldi eldi), the Central Indian race of the swamp deer or barasingha (Cervus duvauceli branderi) and the Indian wild ass or khur (Equus hemionus khur), must be considered highly endangered, because only single populations of these species exist. These require urgent attention for conservation.

Brow-antlered deer

The species presently most endangered among the ungulates of India, and perhaps the world, is the Manipur brow-antlered deer. An aerial survey in 1975 reported 14 animals observed in the Kiebul Lamjao Sanctuary in Man- ipur, the only sanctuary in which this deer is found. Currently, the wild population is estimated to be 50, about half as many as in Indian zoos ( 102 animals; Prasad and Mathur, 1988 ). The Keibul Lamjao Sanctuary is a low-lying swamp south of the huge Logtak Lake in Manipur State in northeast India. Originally, 202 km 2 of this area was declared a sanctuary for the deer. How- ever, this was later reduced to 10 km 2. The present area is 13.75 km 2 of which the deer are confined to 6 km 2.

Chief problems affecting the Manipur brow-antlered deer are competit ion with domestic livestock for food, habitat change following trampling by water buffalo, static water level owing to a dam and mount ing pressure to release the whole area for agriculture. The peculiar feature of the deer's sanctuary is islands of floating vegetation known as "phumdi" on which the deer live. These islands are formed of matted grasses and reeds and are grounded during the dry season. The favored food of the deer is Saccharum latifolium which forms 5% of the grass composit ion of the islands. This grass is also the favored food of domestic water buffalo sent in for grazing. Unfortunately, trampling by buffaloes fixes these islands into the ground such that they fail to float off again in the next wet season. A dam constructed for hydroelectric and agricultural purposes brings an opposing woe. Designed to keep the water level at 770 m a.s.l., the dam has reduced normal fluctuation to between 768 m in summer and 771 m during the monsoon. Deprived of their summer grounding by the more or less static water level, the floating islands do not receive the rejuvenating effects that grounding brings. It will seem a miracle if the Manipur brow-antlered deer continue to survive in the wild under existing conditions.

Kashmir stag

The Kashmir stag, or hangul, is a race of red deer representing the extreme southern thrust in the enormous range of this widespread species. It is confined to the Kashmir Valley in the State of J ammu and to Kashmir in India.

352 J.C. DANIEL

The Kashmir stag was once widely distributed in the mountains of Kashmir but is now restricted to the 143 km 2 Dachigam Sanctuary near Srinagar. They summer in the alpine meadows at 3000 m and in winter move 15 km down into the valley of the Dagwan River. Population decline has been drastic since India gained independence in 1947. Official estimates are 550 in 1958, 250 in 1960, 360 in 1962, 280 in 1965, 384in 1968 and 347 in 1980. Independent estimates are 400 in 1957, 180 in 1965 and 180 in 1969. Schaller (1967) made the 1969 estimate based on 88 deer observed (44 stags, 29 hinds, 13 fawns).

Summer range pastures are shared with domestic stock. The core area, the Dagwan River Valley where the animals spend 6 months of the year, is as yet little disturbed. However, as in other Indian wildlife areas, illegal woodcut- ting remains a major and continual source of disturbance.

Swamp deer

The third species restricted to a single population is the peninsular race of the swamp deer, often referred to as the hardground swamp deer. This swamp deer has survived because Kanha Meadow, formerly Banjar Valley, has been a sanctuary since 1935. More than 3000 animals were counted in 1938, but the population fell to as low as 70-80 animals in 1971 before vigorous efforts were taken to save the species. Known as Kanha National Park since 1955, this Madhya Pradesh preserve now seems to have approached saturation level for its present size. Search for an additional home has become imperative.

Indian wild ass

The wild ass is believed to have become extinct in Baluchistan sometime during the past 40 years. This leaves the salt deserts of the Little Rann of Kutch in Gujarat State as the sole home of the Indian wild ass. Here, monsoon waters further restrict the animals as patches of slightly higher ground become islands, called "bets". One of the largest is ~ 3 km at its widest point and 12 km long (Ali, 1986).

Night feeding on ripening rice and wheat cultivated along the Rann's mar- gin causes conflict with local interests. Habitat destruction by the introduction of the exotic tree Prosopis chilensis and African horse sickness both threaten the wild ass. Epidemics of surra and African horse sickness reduced numbers from the 3000-5000 estimate for 1946 to < 1000 in 1962; a 1976 census estimated 720 (Ali, 1986).

Pigmy hog

Among the other species on the list of completely protected Indian ungulates, the diminutive pigmy hog (Sus salvanius) is in a dangerously critical


situation. Standing ~ 25 cm at the shoulder and weighing 8 kg for an adult male, this species was rediscovered in the grass jungles of the terai area in Assam close to the Himalayan foothills. The population is scattered and oc- curs in small pockets of habitat which are largely in danger of being taken over for cultivation. The Bornadi Forest Reserve near the Assam-Bhutan inter- national border where most specimens have been obtained has a total sanctuary area of 24.6 km 2 of which 8 km 2 has been extensively encroached. About half the sanctuary is covered with thatch grasses Saccharum spontaneum and Phragmites karka. These are burnt annually, restricting the pigmy hog to small, unburnt patches. This increases chances of predation. Only 30-40 pigmy hogs are believed to inhabit this area. How long they will survive here is an open question. Today's single most important pigmy hog habitat is the Manas Tiger Reserve in Assam with 40 km 2 of thatch grassland.

Wild water buffalo

Another species on the completely protected list with an additional unique problem is the wild water buffalo (Bubalus arnee). The problem is maintain- ing genetic purity. This parent stock from which all domesticated varieties have descended is faced with dilution of the pure wild form by domestic stock. Large numbers of domestic water buffalo, mostly of dubious strains, are grazed in the major buffalo habitats in the Kaziranga and other national parks. The resultant interbreeding brings reduction in quality of the wild stock.

A species characteristic of riverine grasslands of the great river systems of the Indian subcontinent, the wild buffalo is now confined to three areas. Riv- erine grasslands of the Bramahputra River system harbor pocketed groups in the wildlife sanctuaries of Assam. A second northern population inhabits the Ganges River system in Bihar near the Nepal border. The third population lives > 1000 km to the south along the Godavary River system. The total wild stock may not exceed 1000, but reliable estimates are unavailable.

Other protected species

Other species of ungulates considered by the Forest Department of the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, to be suffi- ciently endangered to deserve listing on Schedule I (completely protected species) of the Wildlife Protection Act of 1972 are all wild goats and sheep, 1 of 2 species of wild pig (the aforementioned pigmy hog), and all antelopes except the nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus). In fact, it is easier to name the handful of species considered not to be endangered: the wild boar (Sus scrofa except that the Andaman race of the wild boar is on Schedule I), chital or axis deer (Axis axis), hog deer (Axisporcinus), barking deer or muntjac (Muntia- cus muntjak), sambar ( Cervus unicolor), goral (Nemorhaedus goral) and nilgai.

354 J.C. DANIEL

The criteria for inclusion in the schedule of completely protected species named under the Indian Wildlife Protection Act ( 1972 ) remain undefined. Most species are listed on the basis of available information, or lack of it, on distribution and status. Usually, the less well known a species, the more likely it is to be included. Although based on insufficient scientific data, the inclusion of species presently on the list can be justified by the highly specialized habitat requirements of most, such as the wild goats and sheep. In some cases, like that of the musk deer (Moschus moschiferus), commercial exploitation has been the criterion.

For many Indian species, there is very little data. What little exists can be characterized as traditional, going back as it does to anecdotal information compiled by hunter-naturalists of the late nineteenth and early twentieth cen- turies. Some examples of this type of documentat ion are the information available on wild yak (Bos grunniens), Tibetan antelope (Pantholops hodgsoni ), Tibetan gazelle ( Procapra picticaudata ), takin ( Budorcas taxico- Ior) and serow (Capricornis sumatraensis), in fact, most of the high altitude forms of the Himalayas. Without the benefit of scientific scrutiny, it is difficult to estimate chances of long-term survival.

Ecological study of endangered Indian ungulates has largely been by scientists from other countries. Whether brief surveys or sustained field projects, their studies have drawn attention to the perilous state of the species examined. The pigmy hog, for instance, seems to have no future except in the Manas Tiger Reserve in Assam, the pressure on its grassland habitat being so over- whelming. Status of the musk deer studied in the Gharwal Himalayas is equally alarming. The total population on the southern face of the Himalayas is only ~ 30 000 in an area which could have supported ~ 200 000. Green (1985) estimated that the annual off-take owing to poaching is ~ 4000 males to real- ize the 100 kg of musk pods arriving in the markets each year.

But the outlook is not universally gloomy. Rice (1984) showed that, although careful monitoring is needed, the survival of the Nilgiri tahr (Hemi- tragus hylocrius) seems assured in spite of its specialized habitat requirements. Some species have even made a modest comeback. A notable case involves the Indian blackbuck antelope (Antilope cervicapra). It has been for- tunate in receiving considerable scientific attention from Indian as well as foreign investigators (Taibel, 1937; Dharmakumarsinhji , 1967; Schmied, 1973; Prasad, 1981; Dubost and Feer, 1981; Mungall et al., 1981, 1983; Ran-

jitsinh, 1982; Ramana Rao and Prasad, 1982 ). Special interest from the State of Texas, U.S.A., where many blackbuck are allowed the freedom of ranch pastures as intriguing exotic extras, has also added to the accumulated information (Mungall, 1978, 1979; Butts et al., 1982; Skrei, 1984). The blackbuck has now made such substantial gains in protected areas in its homeland that serious consideration has to be given to relocation or to controlling its numbers. A similar situation has arisen for the peninsular race of the swamp deer


which is now in urgent need of an additional reserve. Kanha National Park, to which these barasingha are presently confined, has benefited by having a scientific presence for long periods of t ime since Schaller started his 1963- 1965 study of the tiger and its prey there (Schaller, 1967). Martin followed with a study of swamp deer in 1971-1973 (Martin, 1977) and Newton with his study of the chi ta l -Hanuman langur (Presbytis entellus) association in 1980-1983 (Newton, 1984).

The future

If there is to be a future for wildlife in India, it is necessary that such studies be given priority. It is necessary to identify the major constraints. Problems requiring immediate attention in the conservation of wildlife in India can be listed in order of priority.

(1) The most crucial problem is habitat loss. Usually there is a gradual decline in habitat quality that is not evident unless all parameters of the system are examined. The endangered species are likely to be the best indicators of the loss of such habitats. As an example, the most endangered habitat in India, and the one holding the largest number of endangered species of mammals, is the riverine forests of swamps and grassland. This habitat, which ex- tended along the foot of the Himalayas and along the course of the rivers that emerge from them, is the most suitable for conversion into wetlands for the cultivation of crops. The loss of this habitat to human needs can be judged from a comparison of the past and present distribution of the Indian rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis). It once inhabited the Indo-Gangetic Plain as far west as Peshawar in what is now Pakistan, where the Moghul Emperor Babur hunted it 400 years ago. Five endangered species are typical of this habitat. Besides the rhinoceros, these are the swamp deer, wild water buffalo, pigmy hog and hispid hare (Caprolagus hispidus). One bird species, the pink-headed duck (Rhodonessa caryophyllacea), which favored this habitat is now extinct. Long-term studies on the ecology of such endangered habitats, presently found only in various sanctuaries and protected areas, require urgent consideration. Unless these areas are sustained and rehabilitated where degradation has set in, wildlife conservation in India is a lost cause.

( 2 ) Secondly, constant and continued ecological monitoring is essential for endangered species if they are to survive, particularly those with only a single population. In many instances, such studies could be combined with habitat monitoring studies. Endangered species are often the indicator species for the status of an endangered habitat.

( 3 ) The third factor requiring urgent attention is the control of the population of an endangered species occupying specialized habitat, particularly where there is no possibility of increasing the area of such habitats. Capture and translocation are the methods of choice if a similar habitat is available

356 J.c. DANIEL

elsewhere within the country or in other nearby countries with similar cli- matic regimes. If not, hormonal implantation might be considered, if practic- able, for controlling births, or, as a solution of despair, culling. Several species in India such as the blackbuck, the Indian rhinoceros and the tiger have reached this point. In the case of the brow-antlered deer, the situation is somewhat different as both species and habitat have almost reached the point of no return. Attempts are now being made to rehabilitate the species by start- ing a new herd with a nucleus of captive-bred animals in the Pabitara Sanc- tuary in Assam. This area has been identified as the closest in habitat profile to the Keibul Lamjao Sanctuary of Manipur which is presently the species' only home (Prasad and Mathur, 1988).

(4) The fourth factor requiring attention is the behavior of ungulate species in relation to man, what I would consider as their tolerance level to human intrusion. To cite an example, the chital, which is perhaps the most suc- cessful and the hardiest among Indian deer, shows a remarkable change in behavior in the Bandipur Tiger Reserve. This strategy proves to have considerable survival value. At dusk, herds converge on the tourist complex and spend the hours of darkness resting on the lawns. It would be interesting to study how the safety factor in this behavior is transmitted between the different herds of chital using the reserve. The increasing human population has resulted in an increasing human presence in Indian wildlife habitats to the extent that there is hardly any forest area in India which is truly free of human intrusion. Those species which show a low tolerance for such intrusion have the least chance for survival.

( 5 ) Another area of serious concern is the fragmentation of habitats. Pop- ulations of animals such as the wild water buffalo, gaur (Bos gaurus), ele- phant (Elaphas maximus) and tiger (Panthera tigris) have become isolated from one another, and more species will develop isolated populations as cor- ridors of contact are lost. This makes genetic isolation a problem needing careful evaluation.

Thus, the main thrust for wildlife research in India should be on studies dealing with habitat viability, species viability and behavioral adaptations in relation to man.

Problems facing Indian researchers

Sustained university-level field projects on Indian wildlife are a recent in- novation, commencing late in the 1960s. The focus of early studies was prin- cipally restricted to large mammals. Some notable ungulate studies were Schaller's ( 1967 ) seminal study of the Kanha tigers and their prey, Berwick's (1974) community approach to investigating relationships among wild ruminants in the Gir Forest, Martin's (1977) ecological evaluation of barasingha in Kanha National Park, and Rice's (1984) ecological and ethological


work on Nilgiri tahr in the Eravikulam National Park. The majority of such studies leading to either a thesis at the Ph.D. level or preparation of a book have been undertaken by students or staff of foreign universities.

India has yet to develop its own trained core of wildlife biologists experi- enced in field methods. Only very recently have Indian students and universities entered this sphere. Among the few is Prasad's (1981) thorough study of a blackbuck population inhabiting an agricultural area. Considering the increasingly urgent need for such activities, it may be worth examining why Indian students and Indian universities have lagged behind in this regard, particularly with large mammals such as most ungulates. Two reasons can be advanced.

The primary cause of previous Indian indifference to wildlife biology as a scientific pursuit is that biological research, as the term is understood in In- dia, has been traditionally restricted to laboratories. Here time-consuming studies are more or less guaranteed to produce results. The study of biological sciences in India has been, and largely continues to be, very conservative and looks askance at innovations. Senior professors do not have a background in field research, nor have they shown a willingness to enter this field. The lead has to be taken by middle level academics and institutions oriented towards wildlife research such as the Wildlife Institute of India and the Bombay Nat- ural History Society. What is urgently required is a solid grounding in the techniques of study. This can be approached by seminars and workshops by people with field experience. We presently have in India a considerable cadre of young scientists interested in field research but lacking training in the techniques of study.

The second major cause for the slow take off of Indian scientists in field studies is finance. Unfortunately, funding authorities still equate field research with laboratory research, yet the needs of each are vastly different. Transport, for instance, is an essential requirement, and bureaucrats are often dismayed to note that a junior researcher has to be provided with a motorcy- cle or a jeep. The confusion is chiefly due to ignorance of field conditions and a lack of realization of the fact that it is a waste of time and money to ask a student to study a mobile animal without providing him with adequate mo- bility. Foreign funding authorities recognize this factor and build the cost of vehicles and maintenance and running costs into their budget estimates.

Indian students are usually left without this facility. That Indian students have produced excellent results in spite of this handicap is an indication of their capacity and determination. Other needs of a field researcher such as enhanced allowances, proper field equipment and infrastructural backing call for a flexibility of thinking at the administrative level which is unfortunately unavailable in government-based institutions and universities. Compelled to follow rigid accounting rules which cannot be flouted without serious conse- quences, the administrative head of the institution supporting the research is

358 J.C. DANIEL

usually helpless even though he may understand field problems. Basic guide- lines for field research funding are needed.

Collaborative projects involving both Indian and foreign researchers require patience as well as understanding if their potential is to be realized. After an exploratory trip to identify a collaborating institution and to assess the working environment, one of two alternatives can be selected. Wildlife projects are routed through the Ministry of Environment and Forests if the Indian collaborator is an organization such as the Wildlife Institute of India, if it is an autonomous organization under the Ministry, or if it is a separate body like the Bombay Natural History Society. The second avenue is the Uni- versity Grants Commission, which works under the Ministry of Education. The speed with which the project moves depends on the standing of the In- dian collaborator. Established organizations like universities may find it easier to speed matters. Normally, if there is no positive response in ~ 6 months, the project is best forgotten.

CONCLUSION

If there is to be a future for wildlife in India, wildlife research must build on its beginnings. Implementat ion of conservation goals needs an informed base. Indian academic institutions could contribute enormously by promot- ing field study programs that develop a trained group of wildlife scientists within India. Continuing field programs focused on Indian needs would help agencies like the Forest Department when they have topics needing further investigation.

The fact that so many species have survived in India, and continue to survive, in the minimal habitat that is available may be a reason to take an opti- mistic view. But time is running out. Having identified major constraints, conservation problems requiring immediate attention need to be addressed. No group of animals needs action more than ungulates. Often relatively large and conspicuous, they decline quickly in the face of habitat loss and continuing competition from domestic ungulates.

REFERENCES

Agarwal, A. and Narain, S. (Editors), 1985. The State oflndia 's Environment 1984-85. Centre for Science and Environment, New Delhi, 398 pp.

Ali, S., 1986. Asiatic wild ass (Equus hemionus). In: R.E. Hawkins (Editor), Encyclopedia of Indian Natural History. Oxford University Press, Oxford, on behalf of the Bombay Natural History Society, Delhi/Bombay/Calcutta/Madras, pp. 25-26.

Berwick, S.H., 1974. The community of wild ruminants in the Gir Forest Ecosystem, India. Ph.D. Dissertation, Yale University, New Haven, CT, 226 pp.

Bults. G.L., Anderegg, M.J., Armstrong, W.E., Harmel, D.E., Ramsey, C.W. and Sorola, S.H..


1982. Food habits of five exotic ungulates on Kerr Wildlife Management Area, Texas. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Tech. Ser. No. 30, 48 pp.

Dharmakumarsinhji, K.S., 1967. Browsing behaviour of (Gazella g. bennetti) and (Antilope cervicapra) in captivity and natural habitat. Int. U. Forest. Res. Organ., XIV Congress, Sec- tion 26, Munich, pp. 424-465.

Dubost, G. and Feer, F., 1981. The behavior of the male Antilope cervicapra L., its development according to age and social rank. Behaviour, 76 ( 1-2 ): 62-127.

Green~ M.J.B., 1985. Aspects of the ecology of the Himalayan musk deer. Ph.D. Dissertation, St. Johns College, Cambridge, 280 pp. (unpubl.).

Martin, C., 1977. Status and ecology of the barasingha (Cervus duvauceli branderi) in Kanha National Park (India), J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc., 74( 1 ): 60-132.

Mungall, E.C., 1978. The Indian Blackbuck antelope: a Texas view. Kleberg Studies in Natural Resources, College Station, TX, 184 pp.

Mungall, E.C., 1979. Effect of space limitations on behavior expressed by blackbuck antelope (Antilope cervicapra L. 1758 ). Environ. Aware., 2:41-54.

Mungall, E.C., Patel, B.H., Prasad, N.L.N.S. and Dougherty, S.E., 1981. Conservation and management of the Indian Blackbuck antelope (Antilope cervicapra). Final Project Report of the Joint United States-Indian blackbuck Project, Lewisville, TX, 111 pp.

Mungall, E.C., Patel, B.H., Prasad, N.L.N.S. and Dougherty, S.E., 1983. Example management situations for Indian blackbuck antelope (Antilope cervicapra). Cheetal, 25 (2): 14-26.

Newton, P., 1984. The ecology and social organisation of Hanuman langurs (Presbytis entellus Duffresne 1797) in Kanha Tiger Reserve, Central Indian Highlands. Ph.D. Thesis, Univer- sity of Oxford, Oxford, 473 pp.

Prasad, N.L.N.S., 1981. Home range, dispersal and movement of blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra L.) population in relation to seasonal change in Mudmal and environs. Ph.D. Thesis, Osmania University, Hyderabad, A.P., 238 pp.

Prasad, N.S. and M athur, P.K., 1988. A feasibility report on introduction of sangai (Cervus eldi eldi) in Pahitara Sanctuary, Assam. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehra Dun, U.P., Mimeo- graphed Report, 21 pp. (unpubl.).

Ramana Rao, J.V. and Prasad, N.L.N.S., 1982. Management and husbandry ofblackbuck. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, Bangkok, Rep. 53, 75 pp.

Ranjitsinh, M.K., 1982. Territorial behaviour of the Indian blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra, Linnaeus, 1758 ) in the Velavadar National Park, Guj arat. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc., 79 ( 2 ): 241-246.

Rice, C.G., 1984. The behavior and ecology of the Nilgiri tahr (Hemitragus hylocrius Ogilby, 1838 ). Ph.D. Dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 254 pp.

Schaller, G.B., 1967. The Deer and the Tiger. University of Chicago Press, Chicago/London, 370 pp.

Schaller, G.B., 1969, Observations on the hangul or Kashmir stag (Cervus elaphus hangul Wagner). J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc., 66: 1-7.

Schmied, A., 1973. Beitr~ige zu einem Aktionssystem des Hirschziegenantilope (Antilope cervicapra Linn6 1758 ). Z. Tierpsychol., 32:153-198.

Skrei, S.G.. 1984. Comparative food habits of blackbuck antelope and white-tailed deer. M.S. Thesis, Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, 42 pp.

Taibel, A.M., 1937. L'Antilope cervicapra: Osservazioni sul gruppo in allevamcnto presso la Stazione sperimentale di Avicultura di Rovigo. Rass. Faun. (Rome), 4 (2): 3-19.

ungulate conservation in india — problems and prospects

Documents