Population Status and Conservation Threats of Wild Ungulates in Barandabhar Corridor Forest, Chitwan
SAMBAR DEER (Cervus unicolor)
RHINOCEROS (Rhinoceros unicornis)
By
Bishnu Prasad Bhattarai
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE, CENTRAL DEPARTMENT OF ZOOLOGY-ECOLOGY PROGRAM TRIBHUVAN UNIVERSITY KATHMANDU Nepal 2003
1
POPULATION STATUS AND CONSERVATION THREATS OF WILD UNGULATES IN BARANDABHAR CORRIDOR FOREST, CHITWAN
By BISHNU PRAS AD BHATTAR AI
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN P ARTI AL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE, CENTRAL DEP ARTMENT OF ZOOLOGY-ECOLOGY PROGRAM TRIBHUV AN UNIVERSITY KATHMANDU, NEP AL 2003 2
TRIBHUVAN UNIVERSITY CENTRAL DEPARTMENT OF ZOOLOGY Kirtipur, Kathmandu NEPAL
RECOMMENDATION
This is to certify that Mr. Bishnu Prasad Bhattarai has completed his dissertation work entitled "POPULATION STATUS AND CONSERVATION THREATS OF WILD UNGULATES IN BARANDABHAR CORRIDOR FOREST, CHITWAN" as a partial fulfilment of the M.Sc. Degree in Zoology under m y
supervision. This is the candidate's original work, which brings out important findings essential for biodiversit y conservation. It is m y pleasure to recommend this work for the partial fulfilment of Master of Science in Zoology at Tribhuvan University.
I recommend that the dissertation be accepted for the partial fulfilment of the requirement for the Degree of Master of Science in Zoology specializing in Ecology.
__________________ Khadga Basnet Ph. D. Associate Professor Central Department of Zoology Tribhuvan University Kirtipur, Kathmandu Nepal
Date: ………………..
3
TRIBHUVAN UNIVERSITY CENTRAL DEPARTMENT OF ZOOLOGY Kirtipur, Kathmandu NEPAL
APPROVAL
This dissertation submitted b y Mr. Bishnu Prasad Bhattarai entitled "POPULATION STATUS AND CONSERVATION THREATS OF WILD UNGULATES IN BARANDABHAR CORRIDOR FOREST, CHITWAN" has been accepted for partial fulfilment of the requirement for the Master's Degree of Science in Zoology specializing in Ecology.
EXPERT COMMITTEE
__________________ Khadga Basnet Ph. D. Associate Professor Central Department of Zoology Tribhuvan University Kirtipur, Kathmandu Nepal
_____________________ Dr. Tej Kumar Shrestha Professor and Head Central Department of Zoology Tribhuvan University Kirtipur, Kathmandu Nepal
________________ External Examiner
Date: ……………….
4
Population Status and Conservation Threats of Wild Ungulates in Barandabhar Corridor Forest, Chitwan Bhattarai, B.P. Central Department of Zoology, Tribhuvan University , Nepal Email:
[email protected]
ABSTRACT
Present stud y was conducted during July 2002 to May 2003 in Barandabhar corridor forest (an area of about 87.9km 2 ) of the southern central part of Nepal. Sustainable management and conservation of wildlife requires baseline data (e.g. population estimation and existing threats) for a long term monitoring of wildlife populations. Total count and line transect count methods were emplo yed to estimate the populations of ungulates. The same transects were also used for habitat utilization, distribution, livestock-ungulate interaction, impact of grazing and other human pressure in the area. Three zones were made which included Khorsor, Parsa and New Padampur for the stud y of crop damage b y wild ungulates. Natural flood and its impacts on local biodiversit y were anal yzed b y using historical records and field observation. The stud y area consisted of five major habitats- sal forest, riverine forest, mixed forest, grassland, and aquatic. The ungulate species present in the stud y area were Chital (Axis axis), Hog deer (Axis porcinus), Barking deer (Muntiacus muntjak),Sambar deer (cervus unicolor), Wild boar (Sus Scrofa), Rhino (Rhinoceros unicornis) and Wild Elephant (Elephas maximus). Chital was the most abundant gregarious (solitary to 81 individuals) species with highest densit y (9 individuals/km 2 ) among the ungulates and the wild elephant the lowest (with just one individual) during the study period. I recorded 66,136 and 31chital per km 2 in the riverine forest and tall grass flood plain near Rapti river and sal forest around Bishazari lake respectivel y from fecal pellet counts. The ungulates showed patch y distribution in all the habitats. Habitat preference value obtained from fecal sample plot observation in line transects showed that the highest preference of riverine forest among the deer species and rhinoceros except sambar deer which prefer sal forest most. There were more than 2432 livestock regularl y grazing inside the forest. Grazing was more concentrated along village-forest border. A total of 102 plant species (herbs 55, graminoids 33, pterydoph ytes 3, and unidentified 11) were recorded from the stud y area. Aboveground biomass, significantl y lower in the grazed area, was below the requirement of the wild and domestic ungulates grazing there. A heav y economic loss of NRs. 645403 (i.e. NRs. 1167.09/household) was estimated due to crop damage b y wild ungulates in eastern side of Forest for the year 20022003. There were more than 540 ungulates killed b y major flood victims during last 50 years. Thus, this study revealed that the population of wild ungulates and their diversit y of this corridor have been threatened b y human disturbances (e.g. livestock grazing) and natural disturbances such as annual floods, and their conflicts with local people (e.g. crop damage), which need to be addressed for a long-term conservation of the ungulates and their habitats in Barandabhar Corridor Forest.
5
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I acknowledge heartful gratitude to m y honorable supervisor Dr. Khadga Basnet Associate Professor of Central Department of Zoology, for his noble guidance, regular supervision through out the study. He not onl y accompanies painfull y in the field visit but also cheerfull y accepted the tedious job on reading the entire manuscript without which this work was not possible to carry out. I am grateful to Prof. Dr. Tej Kumar Shrestha, Head of the Central Department of Zoology. I am also thankful to Prof. Dr. Suresh Bahadur Karki, Former Head of the Central Department of Zoology as well as other professors and staffs of this department for providing valuable suggestions and academic support. I wish to extend my thanks to Department of National Parks and Wildlife Reserve for granting permission to initiate this stud y. I would like to thank Mr. Puran Shrestha Chief Warden (RCNP) for his kind cooperation and inspiration. I am very much thankful to Mr. B.K. Sharma and Mr. B.R. Dahal of King Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation (KMTNC) Chitwan for their kind cooperation and perpetual advice. I am thankful to Mr. Hem Kanta Sharma, Khagendra Dhakal, Yam Giri, Dinesh Lamichhane, Rishi Lamichhane and Prakash Bhattarai who helped directl y and indirectl y for this work. At the end, but not the least, I heartily express my deepest gratitude to m y parents and brothers for their endless spiritual support, and for giving the financial help through out m y study period.
Bishnu Prasad Bhattarai Exam Roll No.: 1059 Regd. No.: 30715-94 Central Department of Zoology T.U., Kirtipur.
6
TABLE OF CONTENTS RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL ABSTRACT
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF PLATES LIST OF MAP
ii iii-iv v vi vi vi Page
1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background 1.2 Objectives 1.3 Rationale 1.4 Limitation of the Study 2. STUDY AREA 2.1 Location and boundary 2.2 Physical features 2.3 Local inhabitants 2.4 Climate 2.5 Biodiversity 2.5.1 Flora 2.5.2 Fauna 2.5.2.1 Ungulates 3. METHODOLOGY 3.1 Reconnaissance survey 3.2 Field survey 3.2.1 Abundance/distribution/habitat utilization 3.2.1.1 Population status and structure 3.2.1.1.1 Direct count 3.2.1.1.2 Indirect method 3.2.1.2 Distribution and habitat utilization 3.2.2 Threats to ungulates 3.2.2.1 Interaction with livestock 3.2.2.2 Livestock grazing 3.2.2.3 Questionnaire method 3.2.2.4 Flooding 4. RESULTS 4.1 Abundance/distribution/habitat utilization 4.1.1 Population status and structure
7
1-4 1 3 4 4 5 - 15 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 9 16 - 21 16 16 16 16 16 18 18 19 19 19 20 21 22 - 35 22 22
4.1.2 Distribution pattern 4.1.3 Habitat utilization 4.2. Threats to ungulates 4.2.1 Interaction with Livestock 4.2.2 Livestock grazing 4.2.2.1 Species abundance 4.2.2.2 Species composition 4.2.3 Crop damage 4.2.3.1 Traditional means applied to reduce crop damage 4.2.4 Flooding 5. DISCUSSION 5.1 Population status and structure 5.2 Distribution and habitat utilization 5.3 Interaction with livestock 5.4 Livestock grazing 5.5 Crop damage
25 26 27 27 29 29 29 30 34 34 35 - 44 35 40 41 42 42
6. CONCLUSIONS
45 - 47
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
48 - 50
8. REFERENCES
51 - 55
APPENDICES APPENDIX 1. Field Data Sheet for Population Counts.
56 - 62
APPENDIX 2. Field Data Sheet for Fecal Pellet Count in Line Transect. APPENDIX 3. Field Data Sheet for Livestock Pressure Inside the Forest. APPENDIX 4. Field Data Sheet for Canopy Cover of Grassland. APPENDIX 5. Field Data Sheet for Species Number of Vegetation. APPENDIX 6. Questionnaires Schedule. APPENDIX 7. Plant Species List Recorded in Barandabhar Corridor Forest. APPENDIX 8. Population Of Rhinoceros in Nepal. APPENDIX 9. The Mortality of the Rhinoceros (1973 - 2002). APPENDIX 10. Ecological Densities of Ungulates in Different Protected Areas in Asia.
8
LIST OF TABLES Page Table 4.1. Monthly records of ungulates population in Barandabhar corridor Forest. Table 4.2. Density (maximum number /km2) of ungulates from total and Line Transects counts (number /km2 ± 95% CI) inside and outside buffer zone of Barandabhar Corridor Forest. Table 4.3. Chital pellet group counting in the riverine forest. Table 4.4. Chital pellet group counting in tall grass flood plain. Table 5.5. Chital pellet group counting in the sal forest around Bishazari lake. Table 4.6. Grouping tendencies of wild ungulates in Barandabhar Corridor Forest. Table 4.7. Age and sex ratio of wild ungulates in Barandabhar Corridor Forest. Table 4.8. Mean, variance and distribution pattern of ungulates in different habitats. Table 4.9. Total number of plots in each sectors of study area and plots With fecal samples during April-May 2003 in Barandabhar Corridor Forest. Table 4.10. Mean number of plots, mean number of fecal samples, habitat preferences (HP) in different habitats and habitats compared with the help of chi-square test. Table 4.11. Villagers and herders opinion about the same habitat Utilization by wild and domestic ungulates in Barandabhar Corridor Forest. Table 4.12. Livestock observed from different sites of forest boundary. Table 4.13. Plant species number and similarity in grazed and nongrazed plots Table 4.14. Mean canopy cover (%) by different plant species in samples plots of different grazing spots. Table 4.15. The standing biomass (g/m2) at different locations in the Barandabhar corridor forest. Table 4.16. Reported crop damage in eastern side of Barandabhar Corridor Forest Table 4.17. Frequencies of ungulates in study area. Table 4.18. Ungulates involved in crop damage. Table 4.19. Distribution of economic loss (in NRs ,000) in different zones. Table 4.20. Traditional means applied to reduce crop damage. Table 4.21. Growing season for different crops in eastern side of Barandabhar Corridor Forest. Table 4.22. Impact of major flood in Chitwan.
9
23
23 23 23 23 24 25 25
26
27
28 29 29 30 30 31 32 32 33 34 34 34
LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Mean annual temperature (fig. a), precipitation (fig. b) and relative humidity (fig. c) from 1999 to 2001 recorded at Rampur, Chitwan (Source HMG/N, Department of Hydrology and Meteorology) Figure 2. Percentage distribution of ungulates. Figure 3. Livestock number recorded from questionnaire survey (N=450 households) Figure 4. Distribution of yield lost in different zones in metric tones. Figure 5. Distribution of paddy damage in different growing stages.
LIST OF PLATES Plate 1. Sambar deer in a line transect of riverine forest (December 2002). Plate 2. Rhinoceros in grassland (October 2002). Plate 3. Spotted deer in sal-grass boarder (November 2002) Plate 4. Rhinoceros in Bishazari lake (August 2002). Plate 5. Wild male elephant with domestic female elephant in Khorsor Elephant Breeding Center. (November 2002). Plate 6. Young wild boar captured by local people for rearing purpose (April 2003). Plate 7. Clearing of fixed quadrat in riverine forest (March 2003) Plate 8. Trench made by local people to remedy from crop damage (December 2002). Plate 9. Paddy damaged by rhinoceros and a tin bell to remedy from crop damage (September 2002). Plate 10. Plots showing measurement of damaged wheat field (January 2003). Plate 11. Machan guarding with plastic flags to remedy from crop damage (January 2003). Plate 12. Tall grass flood plain near Rapti river. (April 2003). Plate 13. Wild boar reared by local people (December 2002). Plate 14. Impact of flood on ungulate's habitat (August 2002). Plate 15. Impact of forest fires during the dry season (March 2003). Plate 16. Livestock grazing inside the forest (December 2002). Plate 17. Grass collection from the forest (October 2002). Plate 18. Sand and stone collection from Khageri Khola (March 2003). LIST OF MAP Map 1. Map of Barandabhar Corridor Forest showing study areas.
10
INTRODUCTION 1.1
Background Chitwan valley is one of the famous region of southern central part of Nepal. The word 'Chitwan' is derived by two Nepali words Chit or Chita (heart) and wan or born (Jungle), and it is called the heart of the jungle (Gurung 1983). Chitwan was indeed a unique place, long famous for the greatest variety and abundance of wildlife of any area in Asia. At the end of 1940s Chitwan contained more than 1000 square miles of virgin forests, swamps and grasslands and the abundant fauna included wild elephant, swamp deer and water buffalo, but after 1950, everything began to change. In this time, with the advent of democracy, people in hilly regions of Nepal began to search for easier life and migrated to the richer and fertile duns or valleys like Chitwan between the outer Himalayas and the Churia hills, and to the Tarai plains. A malaria eradication scheme launched by the Nepalese government in collaboration with the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in 1954s, which was good only for human beings but their influx was so vast and rapid that unfortunately it had a disastrous effect on wildlife habitat and their populations, which was mainly by migration of mountain people to Tarai. Heavy human pressures have accelerated encroachment of green forests much and of the prime jungle habitat has cleared for settlements and cultivation. By the end of 1950s the swamp deer and water buffalo had almost disappeared from Chitwan, which was true that if such a decline continued, the rhinoceros, elephant as well as other ungulates would soon face extinction. By the end of 1980, only 37.4% of Nepal's land area remained forested (Dhungel and O'Gara 1991). The forest areas in the Tarai plains were reduced by 99000 ha in just
11
twelve years from 1978/79 to 1990/91 with an average deforestation rate of 1.3% per year in the plains (FORESC 1994). Of the total 19 orders of world mammals, Nepal endows with 12 orders and 186 species (Majupuria 1998). Among this, Chitwan valley supports 56 species of mammals including Indian elephant (Elephas
maximus),
Gaur
(Bos
gaurus),
one-horned
rhinoceros
(Rhinoceros unicornis), four-horned antelope (Tetraceros quadricornis) and
tiger
(Panthera
tigris).
The
mammals
of
Nepal
are
now
decreasing due to rapid destruction of habitats, uncontrolled grazing by livestock, hunting, poisoning and forest fires, (Shrestha 1997). Over exploitations of forest resources outside the protected areas is still the main challenge of biodiversity conservation in Nepal. Critical problems of the people in the adjoining settlements to the protected areas, such as damage of agricultural crop, human harassment, injuries and death, and livestock depredation are the common
causes
of
this
imbalance
relationship
(Sharma
1986,
Jnawali 1989 and Shrestha 1994). Large mammals like rhinoceros, elephant and tiger need a large area. The increase in number of animals in Chitwan against the limited habitat will lead to increase competition for food and space. To maintain their reproduction and decrease in mortality, habitat needs to be increased. Corridor forest is very important for the mammals
and
birds
especially
for
the
migratory
and
large
mammalian species. Barandabhar Corridor Forest (BCF) is located adjoining to Royal Chitwan National Park (RCNP), is a very important forest, which connects RCNP or Churia forest in south with Mahabharat hill forest in the north of Chitwan valley (Rijal 1999).
National forests have almost disappeared around the park
except for Barandabhar Corridor. This forest is under serious threat. (Jha et al. 1994). Several mammals like common leopard, tiger, sloth bear, and deer species use this forest to move between those two
12
areas (Rijal 1999). Present ecological studies was mainly focused on ungulate species of this corridor are rhinoceros, wild elephant, and tiger's prey species such as sambar deer, spotted deer, hog deer, barking
deer
and
wild
boar
Sustainable
management
and
conservation of wildlife requires baseline data (e.g., Population estimation, habitat utilization explore existing threats and their conflicts with local inhabitants) for a long term monitoring of wildlife populations. Therefore, this study was designed to provide such baseline data for conservation and management of ungulates and their habitats in Barandabhar Corridor Forest.
1.2
Objectives The main objective of this study was to explore population status, use of habitat, distribution pattern, existing threats such as impact of livestock, material damage by ungulates and other natural disturbances for the conservation of ungulates and their habitats in Barandabhar Corridor Forest. The specific objectives were to:
a) determine the abundance, distribution and habitat utilization of ungulates. b) investigate livestock- ungulates interactions and impact of grazing on grassland habitat. c) assess crop damage by wild ungulates. d) explore natural disturbances on ungulates and their habitats. e) provide recommendations for conservation of ungulates and their habitats.
1.3
Rationale Many works have been conducted on conservation of ungulates by many researchers (Seidensticker 1976, Dinerstein 1979, Gurung 1983, Wegge 1976, Dhungel and O'Gara 1991, Jnawali 1989, Moe 1994, Mishra 1982, Mishra and Wemmer 1987, Eisenberg and Lockhart 1972, Spillet 1967, Schaller 1967, Prater 1998, Krishan 1972 in Nepal and outside. Despite various conservation processes for conservation
and
management 13
of
ungulates,
they
are
being
seriously endangered because of habitat destruction, food and habitat competition mostly with domestic ungulates, poaching and crop damage problem. Hence basic aim of this study is to provide baseline information for conservation and management of this corridor as well as to enhance the long-term survival of wildlife species in RCNP.
1.4
Limitation of the study The present study was conducted from July 2002 to May 2003 and with limited resources (e.g., fund and equipment). The National emergency period made it all difficult for field visit in the forested area
of
Nepal.
I
have
returned
several
times
without
field
observation because of the protection force didn't allow me to enter into the forest.
14
2. STUDY AREA 2.1
Location and boundary
The intensive study area is in and around the Barandabhar Corridor Forest (located between 84 o 22'30" and 84 o 33'0" East longitude and 27 o 34'7" and 27 o 43'30" North latitude) adjacent to the northern border of RCNP to the Mahabharat hill forest at the north of Chitwan Valley, which is situated in subtropical inner Tarai lowlands of southern central part of Nepal in Chitwan (26 o 22' to 26 o 46' North latitude and 85 o 55' to 84 o 47' East longitude) district of Narayani zone (Map 1).
2.2
Physical features The Barandabhar forest covers an area of 87.9 km 2 and bisects the Chitwan district in east and west Chitwan. Barandabhar, a 29 km long forest patch, comes in parts because the Mahendra highway dissects it into two in which 56.9 km 2 area is under the buffer zone of RCNP and 31 km 2 is under the district forest office. The buffer zone area of BCF holds 48.016 km 2 forest, 5.018km 2 grassland, 3.276 km 2 shrub lands and 0.5 km 2 of water bodies collectively called Bishazari lake. The surrounding six VDCs of this forest
are
Bachhauli,
Gitanagar,
Patihani,
Jutpani,
Pithuwa,
Padampur (New) and 2 Municipalities, Ratnanagar (Ward Number 5, 6, 7, 8 and 10), Bharatpur (Ward Number 8, 9, 11 and 12). The major rivers around the forest are Rapti, Budhi Rapti, and Khageri. The Beeshazari lake, which is located in the middle of jungle having altitude 256 m from sea level, is considered as the second largest natural wetland of Nepal and recently included in Ramsar site by HMG.
15
2.3
Local inhabitants The surrounding VDCs and Municipalities consist a total of 1,25,652 person and the family size 5.95 including Tharus and other ethnic groups (KMTNC 2002 and Resource Himalaya 2000)
2.4
Climate The forest has range of climate seasons winter, spring and monsoon with subtropical climate. Mean annual minimum and maximum temperature, mean annual precipitation and mean annual relative humidity
recorded
during
the
year
1999-2001
at
Rampur,
approximately 11 Km from study area has shown in figure 1. a, b and c respectively. The monsoon begins at the end of May and continues until September and the mean annual rainfall was 192 mm and highest in July (604.8 mm), lowest in January (0.9 mm) and no rainfall in December.
Se p O ct No v D ec
Ju l Au g
Ju n
40 30 20 10 0 Ja n Fe b M ar Ap r M ay
Temperature
a. Mean annual temperature (0C) (0C)
Maximum temp Minimum temp
Months
16
Precipitation in mm
b. Mean annual precipitation (mm) 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Jan Feb Mar
Apr
May Jun
Jul
Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Rainfall (mm)
Months
relative humidity in %
c. Mean annual relative humidity (%) 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Months
8.45 am
17.45 pm
Figure 1. Mean annual temperature (fig. a), precipitation (fig. b) and relative humidity (fig. c) from 1999 to 2001 recorded at Rampur, Chitwan (Source HMG/N, Department of Hydrology and Meteorology)
2.5
Biodiversity
2.5.1 Flora The flora of Barandabhar forest is dominated mainly by sal forest and partly by riverine, tall grassland and short grassland. The percentage of vegetation of Chitwan valley consists of (70%) sal forest (a moist deciduous type), grassland (20%), Riverine forest (7%) and sal with Chir pine (3%). (Majupuria 1998). The latter type of vegetation is not present in Barandabhar forest. a)
Sal forest:
17
Sal forest is dominated by sal (Shorea robusta) and the associated species
with
sal
are
Semecarpus
anacardium,
Terminalia
belerica,
Terminalia tomentosa. A large number of other tress, shrubs, creepers, ferns, flowers and grasses grow among or under the sal. b)
Riverine forest:
Riverine forests grow along watercourses and their composition varies greatly from place to place. Common species of riverine forest are simal (Bombax ceiba), sissoo (Dalbergia sissoo), and Bhellar (Trewia nudiflora) and in the lower canopy Clerodendrum viscosum, Zizyphus maurintiana are present. c)
Tall grassland:
The alluvial flood plains support a luxuriant growth of grasses interspersed with patches of riverine forest. These tall and dense stands of grasses are popularly called 'elephant grass'. Tall grassland is dominated by kans (Saccharum spontaneum), and distributed along the Rapti and Budhi Rapti riverside. d)
Short grassland:
Barandabhar forest is very important for short grassland, which is mainly dominated by Siru (Imperata sps.). It is the most important grass for human beings called as Siru Khar in Nepali, which is used by local people for thatching.
2.5.2 Fauna Sal forest dominated Barandabhar forest contains 22 species of mammals including tiger, rhinoceros, Asian elephant, sloth bear, wild boar, sambar deer, spotted deer, hog deer, barking deer and 280 species of birds including giant hornbill, hill myna, and storks. It is a critical habitat for many species of migratory birds (e.g., Siberian crane), aquatic birds, and mugger crocodile. More than 45 species of herpeto fauna represented by frog, toad, lizards, python and crocodile are found in Barandabhar Corridor Forest (Resource Himalaya 2000 and KMTNC 2002).
18
2.5.2.1 Ungulates Among the six orders of ungulates, 3 orders are distributed in Nepal,
which
include
Artiodactyla
(deers
and
bovines),
perissodactyla (horses and rhinoceros) and proboscidea (elephant) (Majupuria,
1998).
Among
the
ungulate
species
found
in
Barandabhar Corridor Forest, rhinoceros and wild elephant are listed on APPENDIX I (threatened with extinction) of CITES, Endangered on the IUCN Red list of 1996 and protected by HMG/Nepal under schedule 1 (section 10) of the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act 2029 (HMGN 1973), but other 5 species are in common category. a)
Spotted deer (Axis axis): Chital (Plate 3) is indigenous to Srilanka, India, Bangaladesh and Nepal (Prater 1998). The main distribution area in Nepal is through out Tarai, with major concentrations in parks and reserves (Mishra 1982). In Chitwan, males averaged 71 kg and female averaged 75 cm at shoulder height and weighed 50 kg (Mishra 1982) and the rutting period reaches a peak in May when most of the stags have hard antlers (Mishra and Wemmer 1987). Chital prefer newly burned phatas as feeding habitats (Moe 1993) and rest in forest habitats during the middle of the day (Naess and Anderson 1993). Chital are nocturnal, but might feed until late in the morning (Prater 1998). Their social organization is variable with small groups of 2 - 20 individuals common, but herds of more than fifty animals can be found (this study). The herd size varies seasonally, increasing during the monsoon season (75 - 81 individuals) (Schaller 1967 and this study).
b)
Sambar deer (Cervus unicolor): The main distribution of sambar deer (Plate 1) in Nepal is throughout reserves and parks of Tarai (Mishra 1982). The wooded districts of India, Burma, and Ceylon extending through the Malay countries and eastwards to the Philippines (Prater 1998). Hence sambar deer is widely distributed
19
in the forests of southern Asia, but little studies have been done on its biology. Several short accounts are available on the biology of the species (Schaller 1967, Johnsingh, 1983 and Krishan, 1972). These short accounts together give a good background of the species. The coat is coarse and shaggy. The general colour is brown with a yellowish or grayish tinge. Females are lighter in tone; old stags tend to become very dark, almost black. Sambar is found in a wide variety of habitats and is an animal of high adaptability. Their food consists of grass, leaves, and various kinds of wild fruit. They feed mainly at night and retire into heavy cover at daybreak and do not usually come out till dusk (Prater 1998). The group size ranges from 2 to 4 (this study) and rarely found associating in large numbers (Prater 1998). In disturbed forest, they are found mostly solitary and graze at early morning and late evening (this study). c)
Hog deer (Axis porcinus): Hog deer has a much wider distribution than Chital and covers the area through out the alluvial grassland of northern India, extending eastward to southern Nepal, Burma, Thailand, Indo-China, and Srilanka (Prater 1998). In Nepal, hog deer are mainly concentrated in Chitwan, Karnali-Bardia and Sukla Phantas (Mishra 1982). Antlers consist of long bony pedicels with a short brow tine and a straight beam with a fork at the top (Prater 1998 and Mishra 1982). Fawning occurred from January to April in Chitwan (Dhungel and O'Gara 1991). Mishra and Wemmer (1987) found that the fawning season starts in February and increases until May. Tall grasses along the riverbanks, open phantas are favoured habitats. They are generally solitary but sometimes-small groups may graze together. During the hot hours of the day hog deer shelter in tall grass and they feed early in the morning and in the evening (Dhungel and O'Gara 1991).
20
d)
Barking deer (Muntiacus muntjak): Muntjak is found in Nepal, northern India and Bhutan, from sea level to 3000 meters in the Himalayas (Mishra 1982). This is the smallest deer of Barandabhar Corridor Forest. The antlers are small, consisting of a short browtine and an unbranched beam set on bony hair covered pedicels (Prater 1998). Fawning season has a main peak in November and two smaller in May and August - September (Mishra and Wemmer 1987).
Barking deer are Solitary or exist in small family groups
and are most common in dense forest habitats and graze in open forest edges and is fairly diurnal (Prater 1998). e)
Wild boar (Sus scrofa): Wild boar is distributed through out India, the southern part of Nepal, Burma and Srilanka (Prater 1998). Older boars are grayer than the more brownish young ones (Plate 6). Adults have a more of black bristles from the nape and down the back. Wild boar breed in all seasons, and after breeding they live together with other individuals at the same size or alone (Prater 1998). Wooded grassland, swampy areas, forest and dense bush are preferred habitats, and they build shelters of grass, reeds or brush.
The wild boars are omnivorous, eating crops, roots,
tubers, insects, snakes etc. (Prater 1998). f)
Rhinoceros
(Rhinoceros
unicornis):
The
Indian
one-horned
rhinoceros ranged through out northern India, Myitkina (Burma), and Nepal (southern central Tarai to far western Tarai) (Prater 1998). The Indian rhinoceros has also been reported in Sylnet (Bangladesh) and Cacher (Rook Maaker 1980). It is one of the largest of all existing rhinoceros. The skin of this massive creature is divided into great shields by heavy folds before and behind the shoulders and in front of the thighs. Though it prefers swamp, grass as well as the rhinoceros is also found in wood jungle up ravines and low hills (Prater 1998). They are recorded in river and lakes as well as grassland (Plate 2) and forested area (this study).
21
All rhinoceros defecate on old piles and fresh dung is a stimulus to defecate. Usually, calves defecate after their mothers (Laurie 1979). The population of rhinoceros in Chitwan is considered as the second largest population in the world (Appendix 8 and 10). There are altogether 612 rhinoceros in Nepal (Appendix 8), with less than 100 rhinoceros in Nepal in the 1960s, the figure has risen to 612 in 2000, with a growth rate of 3.88% per year (DNPWC 2000). g)
Asian elephant (Elephas maximus): Elephants (Plate 5) are the largest living mammals found on land. The Asiatic or Indian elephant is widely distributed in the Himalayan Tarai in northern India, Nepal, Bangaladesh, Srilanka, Burma, South-China, Malaya, and Sumatra (Prater 1998). Generally only the males have large tusks. Elephants have very poor sight; the senses of smell and hearing are highly developed. Elephants chiefly frequent areas covered with tall forests of Nepal and India. Elephant sleep during the hot hours of the day, feed early in the morning and evening, in open forest or raid crops, retire to sleep after midnight (Prater 1998). The exact number of elephants in Nepal is not correctly assessed so far.
There are, however, reports of annual
fluctuation in their numbers due to their preference of favorable area in Nepal as well as Haldwani forest of India (Singh 1966). Thagunna (1999) studied about trans-boundary elephant corridor with great emphasis on protecting the wild elephant dispersal patterns of the far western Tarai region through corridor linking. According to their current population trends, the elephants are suffering from the adverse effects of mismanaged forests and loss of habitat. They occur in four main populations that exist along the eastern, central, western and far-western Tarai Belt, which has put their population of around 100 animals in the country, in grave danger.
22
3. METHODOLOGY 3.1
Reconnaissance survey I conducted reconnaissance survey of the study area in order to find out the occurrence of the ungulates and sampling sites. The survey was based on study site visits, field observations, and interactions with local people including concerned authorities of the park and check posts of district forest office.
3.2
Field survey The field survey was initiated from July 2002 and continued until May 2003. There were five study sites (including Simaldhap, New Padampur, Tikauli, Devnagar, Ujelinagar and Khorsor), which included sal forests, riverine forest, mixed forest, tall grass flood plain, wooded grassland, open grassland (phantas) and aquatic habitats as well as surrounding households. These study sites were divided by using man-made and natural demarcation. The field study was done by using binoculars, camera, measuring tape, questionnaires and field data sheets. The field observation was done by walking on foot, bicycle and observation from Machan and trees.
3.2.1 Abundance/distribution/habitat utilization 3.2.1.1 Population Status and Structure 3.2.1.1.1 Direct count Direct counting method was employed to determine the total number of animals in different study sites. This was done on monthly basis and animals were recorded according to their number, herd size, age and sex. Age and sex ratio of wild ungulates were determined by their coloration, body size, height, antlers and tusks using different criteria described by Schaller (1967), Eisenberg
23
and Lockhart (1972), Laurie (1973) and Mukherjee and Sengupta (1999). In case of rhinoceros, sub adults were also included as young. These age and sex ratios were determined by collecting all the data obtained during the study period and was based on frequency of encounter with male, female, and young individuals. Population counting was done throughout the day (early morning approx 6:30 am to evening approx 7:30 pm) to avoid counting the same animal and same group twice. a)
Total count: I applied this method to determine total number of ungulates in Barandabhar Corridor Forest, where eight transects was laid in five study sites. Besides, these roads, riverbanks and man-made tracks, were also used. The counting of animals was done at least ten days per month during eight months.
b)
Line transect count: The transect counts of animals were done only in eight transects which run in the same blocks of the total counts. Lengths of transects varied from 2.2 km to 7.4 km. and included all the habitat types. There was one transect each in study sites I and V, two transects each in study sites II, III and IV. From each transect animals were counted and recorded their number herd size, time, habitat types, and observed distance from the transect. Observed, as sighting distance is the distance from the observer to the animal group center, which was measured after the animal's departure from that place. The population density in line transects were determined by Gates' II method-(Naess and Andersen 1993) Gates' II D = 2N - 1/2LR Where, D = density estimate (number of individuals/km 2 ) L = Length of transect R = Arithmetic distance of sighting distance. N = Mean number of animals seen per transect.
24
3.2.1.1.2 Indirect method The relative abundance of chital was determined by fecal pellet counts in fixed quadrats in different habitats of the corridor, same as the block of total counts. In the riverine forest near Rapti River, 30 (4 x 4m 2 ) quadrats were established and seven (20 x 20m 2 ) quadrats were established in tall grass flood plain (Plate 12) of the same site on March 28 and 29, 2003. There were 35 (4 x 4m 2 ) quadrats established in sal forests around 20,000 lake on March 30 and 31. The quadrats were placed 20m apart from each other. All the pellets and leaves were removed when the quadrats were established and a peg in each corner marked the boundaries of the quadrat. The quadrats were checked 6 times during of a period of 60 days in an interval of 10 days. After controlling the quadrats the pellet groups but not the leaves and twigs of plants were removed. 3.2.1.2 Distribution and habitat utilization Distribution of ungulates in different habitats of Barandabhar Corridor Forest was determined by direct observation during eight months. Habitat utilization of ungulates were determined by the help of fecal sample plot observations in line transects (Appendix 2) same as line transects in case of population counts. This is the most useful indirect method for determining the habitat utilization trends
of
ungulates
(Seidensticker
1976).
Fecal
samples
plot
observations method was widely used in the past by various workers (Dinerstein 1979, Seidensticker 1976, Wegge 1976). The intensive study area was divided into two sectors, sector 'A' inside the buffer zone and sector 'B' outside the buffer zone. Altogether 530 (10 m 2 /1.78m radius) plots were examined in sector 'A'. Of the total plots 334 fell in sal forest, 32 in riverine, two in mixed forest, 146 in grassland (phantas) and 16 in tall grass flood plain. Altogether 263 plots were examined in sector 'B' among these plots, 205 fell in sal forests, three in mixed forest and 55 in grassland (Phantas).
25
Quadrats were made approx 50 m apart from each other in line transect and the circular plot of size 10 m 2 (1.78 m radius) was made along the line transects in right and left side. Observations of the plots were done by taking ungulates types, habitat types, and number of pellet groups. This was done in April and May 2003. Habitat preferences was calculated as HP =
Mean(%) of fecal sample present in each habitat type × 100 Mean (%) of total fecal sample present in all the habitat types
Where,
HP = Habitat preference.
A chi-square contingency test (Elliott 1971) was used to test whether the use of different habitats was statistically significant.
3.2.2 Threats to ungulates 3.2.2.1 Interaction with livestock Livestock interference inside the forest was determined by direct counting of livestock grazing inside the forest and the distance between forest boundaries and grazing livestock in different spots was taken approximately (Appendix 3). This information was suitable for determining the interaction between wild and domestic ungulates, intensive grazing spots and their numbers. 3.2.2.2 Livestock grazing The
impact
of
livestock
grazing
on
ungulates'
habitats
was
determined by vegetation sampling in grazed and non-grazed grasslands. The vegetation composition in both grazed and nongrazed area were determined by a simple line transects made in each sampling site and quadrat of size (1 x 1 m 2 ) were laid 20 m apart from each other. There were 10 sampling sites and in each site ten quadrats were laid in which plant species composition, species number and ground coverage of different plant species (herbs, grasses, pterydophytes and bare ground) (Appendix 4 and 5) and species similarity were estimated. The similarity of plant species in both grazed and non-grazed plots was compared with the help of Sorenson's index of similarity (Sorenson's 1948).
26
IS = 2C x 100/A+B Where, IS = Sorenson's index of similarity A = Total number of species in habitat 'A' B = Total number of species in habitat 'B' C = Species common to both habitat. Plant species collected form both of the habitats were identified at the Central Department of Botany of Tribhuvan University. The biomass of both grazed and ungrazed plots were harvested finally and the fresh and dry weight (sun dried for seven days, until concurrent reading appeared) of plants were determined and the difference was noted. These all parameters were determined in rainy, winter and spring season. A student t-test (Elliott 1971) was used to test whether the differences of above ground biomass of grazed and nongrazed plots was statistically significant. 3.2.2.3 Questionnaire method This method was mainly focused in eastern side of forest boundary due to limited time under student's research. I employed this method in order to determine the conflicts between local people and ungulates in the study area. A total of 450 households (144 households from western side and 306 from the eastern side) were interviewed using the questionnaires of Appendix 6.1. Crop damage by ungulates was assessed within a distance of 300m from eastern side of forest boundary and divided into three zones and each zone was 0.3 km wide. Altogether 553 households (292 from zone I, 103 from zone II and 158 from zone III) were taken and interviewed by using questionnaires of Appendix 6.2. Extent of damage in mustard, lentil, maize, and vegetables field were taken by interviewing with local people as well as visit of damage field where as in case of rice and wheat was done by Net Area Damage (NAD) method (Jnawali 1989).
27
a) b) c)
Damaged plots (Plate 10) were outlined and marked with ropes. Damaged plots were subdivided by parallel transects with the help of ropes and pegs. Damaged area was estimated by using formula; A = ∑ L x d. Where, A = Area of damaged plot L = Length of transects D = Distance between transects
3.2.2.4 Flooding Natural flood and its impact on local biodiversity were analyzed by reviewing published sources (e.g., books, reports, news) and field investigation.
Map 1. Showing Barandabhar Corridor Forest – the study area
28
4. RESULTS 4.1 Abundance/distribution/habitat utilization 4.1.1 Population status and structure a)
Total number and density: Direct count showed that the abundance of ungulates varied in different months (Table 4.1). They were observed the lowest in August (746 individuals) and highest in July (1067 individuals). Hog deer was recorded only
in July
(26
individuals) and September (8 individuals). The most abundant species was chital and its population ranged from 576 to 795 individuals followed by wild boar (93 to 168 individuals), barking deer (43 to 69 individuals), sambar deer (13 to 37 individuals), rhinoceros (21 to 35 individuals) and the lowest abundant was wild elephant (just one individual) (Table 4.1) The densities of ungulates inside and outside the buffer zone (Table 4.2) showed that they were more abundant inside the buffer zone than outside. The density of chital was 10.8 individulas/km 2 inside the buffer zone and 6 individulas/km 2 outside the buffer zone. Hog deer had the lowest density (0.4 individuals/km 2 ) except wild elephant and they were not found outside the buffer zone. The estimated density from line transect counts were also evaluated in relation to the confidence interval in order to determine its range (narrow or broad). The range of densities of ungulates was found to be narrower outside the buffer zone than inside it. Narrowest range was showed by rhinoceros (5.6±3.4 individuals/km 2 ) outside buffer zone
and
broadest
range
was
showed
by
chital
(140.24±36.7
individuals/km 2 ) inside buffer zone.
Table 4.1. Monthly records of ungulates population in Barandabhar Corridor Forest. U n gu l a t e s t yp e Ax i s ax i s
Ju l . 795
A u g. 576
29
Sept. 605
Oct . 621
No v. 610
De c. 636
A p r. 667
Ma y 642
26 36 60 118 32 1067
Ax i s p o rc in u s C erv u s u nic ol or M unt ia cu s m u nt j ak Su s sc ro fa Rh i no ce r os u ni co rn i s E le p h u s m ax im u s To ta l
13 43 93 21 746
8 21 56 99 27 816
28 65 120 31 1 866
32 69 114 24 1 850
37 61 135 25 1 895
26 53 168 29 943
34 62 154 35 927
Table 4.2. Density (maximum number /km 2 ) of ungulates from total and line transects counts (number /km 2 ± 95% CI) inside and outside buffer zone of Barandabhar Corridor Forest, Chitwan. U n gu l a t e t y p e s Ax i s ax i s Ax i s p o rc in u s C erv u s u nic ol or M unt ia cu s M u nt ja k Su s sc ro fa Rh i no ce r os u ni co rn i s
In si d e b u f fe r z o n e T ot a l L i n e t ra n se c t s Cou n t 1 0 .8 1 4 0 .2 4 ± 3 6 .7 0 .4 8 .2 ± 5 .8 0 .5 9 .4 ± 4 .5 0 .9 1 3 .5 ± 6 .2 2 .2 2 0 .7 ± 7 .2 0 .5 9 .5 ± 5 .0 4
Ou t si d e b u f fe r z on e T ot a l L i n e t ra n se c t Cou n t 6 1 0 4 .1 7 ± 5 8 .3 0 .3 6 .3 ± 3 .4 0 .6 1 1 .7 ± 9 .4 1 .4 1 3 .9 ± 8 .2 0 .1 3 5 .6 ± 3 .4
Indirect counts of chital from fixed pellet counts gave density estimates of 66, 136 and 31 Chital per Km 2 by using the defecation rate of 13 pellet groups per day per animal in the riverine forest and tall grass flood plain (Plate 12) near Rapti River and Sal forest around Bishazari lake respectively (Table 4.3, 4.4, and 4.5). Table 4.3. Chital pellet group counting in the riverine forest. Animal type Ch ita l
Observed time
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
Pe lle t s/ per i od Pe lle t s/ d a y / k m 2
26 542
38 792
52 1083
61 1270
31 646
39 812
To ta l =2 4 7 M ea n =8 5 8
Table 4.4. Chital pellet group counting in tall grass flood plain. Animal type Ch ita l
Observed time
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
Pe lle t s/ per i od Pe lle t s/ d a y / k m 2
66 2357
53 1893
68 2429
79 2821
21 750
9 321
To ta l =2 9 6 M ea n =1 7 6 2
Table 4.5. Chital pellet group counting in the sal forest around Bishazari lake. Animal Observed I II III IV V VI type time Ch ita l
b)
Pe lle t s/ per i od Pe lle t s/ d a y / k m 2
23 411
35 625
28 500
17 304
12 214
21 375
To ta l =1 3 6 M ea n =4 0 5
Population structure Among the wild ungulates, chital were the most gregarious and their herd size (over 20 individuals) were found decidedly on the open grassland (phanta). Barking deer were mostly found 90%
30
alone. During the study period, I observed male, female and young made the groups of ungulates. In case of rhinoceros, females were observed mostly with young and males were found mostly alone. The second gregarious ungulates were rhinoceros and wild boar (Table 4.6). Two groups with 6 and 7 individuals of rhinoceros (Plate 4) were recorded in Bishazari lake during midday at the time of wallowing. Sambar deer were frequently found alone, and in small groups of 24 individuals which included one female with one young, female with two males, one male with two females, one female with a small fawns and a sub-adult, in groups of 2 - 3 males and 2 - 3 females with fawns. During the study period, one male wild elephant was recorded which was found mostly with domestic female elephant in Khorsor Elephant Breeding Center (KEBC). Age and sex ratio of wild ungulates (Table 4.7) showed that there was higher percentage of females than males found in all the ungulates except spotted deer.
Table 4.6. Grouping tendencies of wild Ungulates in Barandabhar Corridor Forest.
U n gu l a t e s t yp e Ax i s ax i s Ax i s p orc i nu s C erv u s u nic olo r M unt ia cu s m u nt ja k Su s sc ro fa Rh i no ce r os un ico r ni s
Nu m b e r of g r ou p
G rou p si z e ( %) 1
2
3
4
5-19
20-34
35-49
440
2 3 .1
8 .8 6
9 .0
6 .1 3
2 8 .6
1 5 .2
6 .6
50 a b o ve 2 .3
23
61
30
9
-
-
-
-
-
170
7 5 .9
1 5 .3
8 .3
0 .6
-
-
-
-
432
90
9 .2
0 .8
-
-
-
-
-
541
5 4 .5
2 6 .7
1 0 .9
5 .7
2 .2
-
-
-
131
4 9 .6
3 7 .2
8 .8
2 .9
1 .5
-
-
-
31
Table 4.7. Age and sex ratio of wild ungulates in Barandabhar Corridor Forest. Adult U n gu l a t e s t yp e Ax i s ax i s Ax i s p o rc in u s C erv u s u nic ol or M unt ia cu s m u nt j ak Su s sc ro fa Rh i no ce r os u ni co rn i s
Ma l e 106 55 86 68 62 44
Y ou n g 22 14 7 80 29
Fe ma l e 100 100 100 100 100 100
4.1.2 Distribution pattern There was a patchy distribution of ungulates in all the habitats as shown by variance to mean ratio (Table 4.8). Deer species were mostly recorded in grassland except sambar deer. The distribution of ungulates in aquatic habitats was mainly restricted in Bishazari lake area and partly in other wetlands (Figure 2). Table 4.8. Mean, variance and distribution pattern of ungulates in different habitats. Ha b i t a t t yp e M ea n
Sal fo re st 4 4 .8 1
S a l - g ra s s b o rd e r 2 8 .5 4
G ra ssLand 5 4 .6 1
Ri ve ri n e
Mi x e d
2 2 .7 5
Va ria n ce
2 1 9 1 .6
3 3 8 7 .7
7 1 8 1 .6
PATCHY
PATCHY
PATCHY
V/ M
Aquatic
5 .2 1
Fl o od plain 5 .8
1 3 7 8 .5
7 4 .8
1 1 2 .8
1 6 .0 7
PATCHY
PATCHY
PATCHY
PATCHY
Percentage distribution of ungulates
100%
Aquatic
90%
Flood plain
80% 70% % distribution
5 .8 3
Mixed
60% Riverine
50%
Grassland
40% 30%
Sal- grassland border
20%
Sal-forest
10% 0% Chital
Sambar deer
Hog deer Barking deer Ungulate type
Wild boar
Rhino
Figure 2. Percentage distribution of ungulates.
32
4.1.3 Habitat utilization Of the total 793 plots, 201.5 numbers of plots were found with fecal samples of ungulates (Table 4.9). Habitat preference value of the five ungulates showed that grassland habitat was mostly preferred by deer species and wild boar. The sal forest has occupied the larger area, which was most preferred habitat by the sambar deer and less preferred by other ungulates. Different ungulates have different habitat preference (Table 4.10). A chi- square contingency test showed no significant difference among the uses of sal- forest, riverine
forest, and grassland (phanta) for all ungulates but
comparison of sal forest and grassland in case of wild boar showed significant difference.
Table 4.9. Total number of plots in each sectors of study area and plots with Fecal samples during April-May 2003 in Barandabhar Corridor Forest. Ha b i t a t t yp e s
T ot a l n u mb e r o f p l ot s
Me a n p l ot s n u mb e r wi t h fe ca l sa mp l e s
334 32 2 146
87 1 8 .5 5 3 .5
16
4
53
163
205 3 55 263 793
26 1 2 .5 3 8 .5 2 0 1 .5
S e ct o r- A S a l- f ore s t ( S F) R ive ri ne f o res t ( R F) M ixe d f ore st ( M F ) Gra s sla nd ( G L ) Ta l l g ra s s f l o od p la in ( TG F P) S ub t ota l S e ct o r- B S a l- f ore s t ( S F) M ixe d f ore st ( M F Gra s sla nd ( G L S ub t ota l T O TA L
33
Table 4.10. Mean number of plots, mean number of fecal samples, habitat preferences (HP) in different habitats and habitats compared with the hel p of chi-square test . Habitat types Ch i t a l SF RF MF TGFP GL Ba rk i n g d e e r SF RF MF TG F P GL S a mb a r d e e r SF RF MF TG F P GL Wi l d b oa r SF RF MF TG F P GL Rh i n oce r os SF RF MF TG F P GL
Mean number of plots
Mean number of fecal samples
HP
Comparison of habitat types (P>0.01, df=1)
269.5 32 2.5 16 100.5
87.5 16 3.5 4.3
22.08 33.98 14.87 29.07
SFVs RF, χ2=1.73 RF Vs GL, χ2=0.2 SF Vs GL, χ2=1.6
2 6 9 .5 32 2 .5 16 1 0 0 .5
8 2 .5 0 .5 7 .5
1 3 .9 3 6 .6 1 4 .6 3 4 .9
S F V s R F, χ 2 =0 .7 0 R F V s GL , χ 2 =0 .1 0 4 3 S F V s GL , χ 2 =3 .3 4
2 6 9 .5 32 2 .5 16 1 0 0 .5
1 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 3
3 3 .7 1 3 .5 2 7 .0 2 5 .8
S F V s R F, χ 2 =0 .0 2 R F V s GL , χ 2 =0 .0 4 S F V s GL , χ 2 =0 .0 0 8
2 6 9 .5 32 2 .5 16 1 0 0 .5
8 .5 2 .5 14
1 2 .7 3 1 .4 5 5 .9
S F V s R F χ 2 =0 .6 R F V s GL , χ 2 =0 .2 6 S F V s GL , χ 2 =1 2 .6
2 6 9 .5 32 2 .5 16 1 0 0 .5
1 3 .5 3 1 3 .5
1 9 .5 3 9 .5 2 6 .3 1 4 .7
S F V s R F, χ 2 =0 .4 3 R F V s GL , χ 2 =0 .6 4 S F V s GL , χ 2 =0 .0 3 2
Note: SF=Sal-forest,RF= Riverine forest, MF= Mixed forest, GL= Grassland, TGFP= Tall grass flood plain
4.2
Threats to ungulates
4.2.1 Interaction with livestock Questionnaire survey and field observation showed that
(Table
4.11) most of the habitats were utilized both by wild and domestic ungulates. Local people interviewed in the study area showed that 72.7% respondents agreed that livestock were using the same habitat used by wild ungulates, whereas 27.3% respondents were not sure. The highest preferred plant species of the livestock were 34
grasses (46%), followed by herbs (35%) and trees (19%).During rainy and spring seasons rhinoceros and buffalo together preferred the same habitat and plant species.
Questionnaire survey of 450
households around Barandabhar Corridor Forest showed that, there were 498 cows, 419 buffaloes, 879 goats and 167 sheep reared by local people (Figure 3). There were 2432 numbers of livestock (Plate 16) regularly grazing inside the forest mainly along the village forest border (Table 4.12). Table 11.Villagers and herders opinion about the same habitat utilization by wild and domestic ungulates in Barandabhar Corridor Forest. Op i n i on
S a me ha bi ta t ut il iz a t i o n No t su re To ta l
E a st e r n si d e o f Ba ra n d a b h a r Co r ri d o r F o re st (n= 306) 240
We st e rn si d e o f Ba ra n d a b h a r Co r ri d o r F o re st (n= 144) 87
T ot a l
%
327
7 2 .7
66 306
57 144
123 450
2 7 .3 100
Livestock number recorded from questionnaire survey 1000 900
Livestock number
800 700
Male
600
Female
500
Sub-adult
400
Calves
300
Total
200 100 0 Cow
Buffalo
Goat
Livestock type
35
Sheep
Figure 3. Livestock number recorded from questionnaire survey (N=450 households) Table 4.12.Livestock observed from different sites of forest boundary. Gra z i ng s po t s
Ca tt le N M 187 1 0 7 8 .2 152 3 2 8 .6 102 2 9 6 .6 263 5 8 8 .6 75 2 2 8 .3 178 4 2 6 .2 64 3150 10 7 0 .3 1031
B uf f a lo N M 1 3 2 1 1 1 0 .5 102 3 5 5 .2 65 5 2 2 .6 244 5 8 5 .4 62 2 5 2 .1 110 4 6 2 .2 46 3250 36 1 5 0 .4 797
N
G oa t M
N
S hee p M
G un d re- ma nd r e B h o j ha d 6 6 2 7 2 .5 46 Na ura n ge 4 2 2 1 5 .3 28 K ha g eri ba n k 9 6 4 9 2 .5 58 G o nd ra n g 52 3 5 .5 K h or so r 3 8 4 1 0 .2 18 M a i na ha ri U je li na ga r 1 3 2 1 3 1 .6 28 To ta l 426 178 N ot e N = N u m b e r o f l i v e s t o c k . M = M e a n d i s t a n c e f r o m f o r e s t b o u n d a r y
4 2 6 .8 4 6 6 .3 3 7 3 .5 2 5 1 .3 1204
To ta l L ive s t oc k 319 366 237 661 189 344 110 206 2432
in metre
4.2.2 Livestock grazing 4.2.2.1 Species abundance Vegetation sampling of both grazed non-grazed plots at different sites of Barandabhar Corridor Forest had shown several palatable plant species in the intensive study area. Of the total 102 species of plants viz. Herbs 55, graminoide 33, pterydophyte 3 (Appendix 7) and unidentified 11 species were recorded from the study area. Species Similarity was found higher in rainy season and the lowest in winter season. The plant species abundance was found high in grazed plots than non-grazed plots (Table 4.13). Table 4.13. Plant species number and similarity in grazed and nongrazed plots. S p e ci e s n u m b e r
S e a son Ra in y
54
Wi n ter
36
25
13
4 2 .6
S pri n g
43
31
20
5 4 .0 5
G ra z e d ( A )
Co mm on sp e ci e s( C) 29
S p e ci e s si mi l a ri t y ( %)
No n gra z e d ( B) 42
6 0 .4
4.2.2.2 Species composition Vegetation sampling of different locations inside the Barandabhar Corridor Forest represents different species of herbs and grass species in the vegetative communities. Dominant vegetation was Imperata cylindrica, which increases high canopy cover in non36
grazed plots. Bare ground was relatively higher in grazed plots (mean 16.04%) (Table 4.14). Table 4.14. Mean canopy cover (%) by different plant species in samples plots of different grazing spots. S e a son
Ca n o p y c ove r ( %) G ra mi n oi d e
He rb s
P t e r yd op h yt e
U n i d e n t i fi e d
Ba rre n
G
NG
G
NG
G
NG
G
NG
G
NG
Ra in y
4 9 .7 2
7 7 .4 2
3 3 .1
1 8 .1 4
1
0 .6
2 .4
1 .7 4
1 3 .7 8
2 .1
Wi n ter
6 0 .0 6
8 7 .4 4
2 0 .0 5
6 .2
-
1 .2
1 .7 5
1 .5 6
1 8 .1 4
3 .6
S pri n g
5 5 .2
8 2 .0 8
2 6 .4
1 2 .6
0 .4
1 .1
1 .6 2
1 .4 2
1 6 .2
2 .8
Note: G=Grazed, and NG=Non-grazed grassland
4.2.2.3. Standing biomass I found a high variation in above ground biomass in grazed and non-grazed plots inside Barandabhar Corridor Forest. All the grazed plots showed lower standing biomass than non-grazed plots (Table 4.15). A student t- test showed the significant difference between grazed and non-grazed plots in the above ground biomass (t= 8.58 in rainy, 9.26 in winter and 9.20 in spring season; P=0.05, df. 4) (Table 4.15). Table 4.15. The standing biomass (g/m 2 ) at different locations in the Barandabhar Corridor Forest. G ra z i n g sp ot s B h o j ha d Na ura n ge G o nd ra n g U je li na ga r K h ors o r
Ra i n y se a s on No nG ra z e d gra z e d 8 5 .8 2 6 8 .8 8 8 .2 2 1 3 .6 1 0 6 .4 3 2 4 .1 7 9 .8 3 1 2 .4 1 2 5 .2 2 6 5 .2
Wi n t e r se a so n No n G ra z e d gra z e d 6 2 .1 2 2 9 .2 7 4 .2 1 9 5 .2 8 7 .0 2 2 8 5 .1 5 8 .2 2 8 1 .0 7 8 9 .8 2 3 1 .2
S p ri n g se a s on No n G ra z e d gra z e d 7 5 .2 2 4 3 .2 8 1 .3 2 0 6 .3 9 6 .6 3 0 5 .5 6 4 .2 2 9 2 .4 1 0 2 .4 2 4 9 .1
4.2.3 Crop damage In eastern side of Barandabhar Corridor Forest, all the respondents reported about regular wildlife interferences in their crop field. Some of the respondents lost their total crops were grazed by ungulates, mostly rhinoceros. There were 23.7 hactare crop field damaged by wild ungulates, which lost a total value of Rs. 1167.09 per household (Table 16). More damage occurred in paddy field showing that paddy was the 37
most preferred crop by ungulates, among which 33.64% damage was caused by rhinoceros and chital (Table 4.16). The lowest damage was caused by barking deer (Table 4.17). The regular conflicts areas were
New
Padampur
(ward
numbers
5,
6,
7,
9),
Gadhuwa,
Ratnanagar Municipality (ward numbers 10, 5, 6), Bagmara, Malpur and Bothreni (Table 4.18). The most damage was caused by rhinoceros, recorded highest in zone-II and zone-III. Wild boars, which damaged mostly maize and vegetable crops, were serious problem in Zone I (Table 4.18). Crop preferences varied in different cropping system, growing stages of crops, crop types, and also upon distance from the forest. Early to mature stages were mostly preferred by ungulates in case of
paddy
crops
(Figure
5).
Ungulates
preferred
mature
and
flowering stage of lentils, juvenile and medium stage of wheat and tasseling and mature stage of maize. Mustard was damaged by rhinoceros mainly from trampling and grazing on mature and juvenile stage. Table 4.16. Reported crop damage in eastern side of Barandabhar Corridor Forest Damaged area Crop type Pa d d y M a iz e L en ti l W hea t M us ta rd Veg eta bl ea n d ot he rs To ta l
Estimated prod n /Katha in Kg
Market price/Kg
Total economic loss in Rs
Hectare
Katha
8 .4 7 .2 2 .8 0 .4 3 .4
2 4 7 .9 2 1 2 .1 8 2 .4 1 2 .8 9 8 .5
1 0 0 .0 7 0 .5 5 2 .4 6 4 .6 2 6 .2
9 .4 9 .8 2 3 .5 8 .2 2 6 .5
233026 146540 101467 6780 68390
1 .5
4 4 .6
-
-
89200
2 3 .7
6 9 8 .3
-
-
645403
Note: Total number of household under crop damage study=553
Pr od uct i o n ra te per ka t ha a re a d o pte d f r o m lo ca l pe o ple a t th e t i me o f in ter vi e w. M a rke t p ri ce a d o pte d f ro m l oca l ma r ket ( Ta nd i) . L o ss es of ve ge ta b le s a re e st i ma te d a s R s 2 0 0 0 / Ka t ha ba sed o n l oca l in f o r ma t io n. Da ma g e p er h ou se h ol d R s 1 1 6 7 .0 9
38
Table 4.17. Frequencies of ungulates in study area.
Damage based on frequency
Crop type Pa d d y
3 3 .3 4
M a iz e
2 8 .5
L en ti l W hea t M us ta rd
1 6 .2 2 .0 1 1 .6 5
Veg eta bl ea n d ot he rs
8 .0 1
To ta l
Highly frequented animals
Number of cases.
R hi n oc er os ,C hi ta l R hi n oc er os , W i ld boa r,C h ita l R hi n oc er os ,C hi ta l R hi n oc er os ,C hi ta l R hi n oc er os ,C hi ta l R hi n oc er os ,C hi ta l,W i l d boa r,S a mba r d eer,B a rk i ng d ee r.
453 384 218 27 157 108
100
1347
Table 4.18 Ungulates involved in crop damage.
Crop type
Area damage by wild animals
Number of frequency.
Total
R
C
W
E
S
B
R
C
W
E
S
B
Paddy
206.4
22.4
4.1
12.4
2.2
0.5
322
102
15
7
5
2
453
Maize
131.2
12.6
58.2
8.5
14
0.2
172
43
160
6
1
2
384
Lentil
60.8
20.5
112
103
Wheat
9.6
3.2
19
8
27
Mustard
61.3
37.2
83
74
157
Vegetable and others Total
24.2
7.3
51
36
19
493.5
103.2
759
366
194
1.1
74.9
20.9
4.7
1.1
3
218
108 13
9
6
Note: R=rhinoceros, C=chital, W=wild boar, E=elephant, S=Sambar deer, B=barking deer
Detail crop damage by ungulates and total economic loss in each zone varied significantly in different zones (Table 4.19). The greatest damage of crops occurred in zone II and the lowest in zone –I. There were 4.92 ha in zone I, 11.6 ha in zone II and 7.2 ha in zone III, area of crops damaged, which lost a total of 47.497 metric tones of crops damaged by ungulates viz. 8.789Mt in zone I, 23.6 Mt in II and 15.108 Mt in zone III (Figure 4) in terms of money it amounted to Rs 125181, 320115, and 200112 in Zone I, II, III respectively.
39
Table 4.19.Distribution of economic loss (in NRs 000) in different zones. Zone-I Zone-II Zone-III Crop Area Area Area Economi Economi Economi type (katha (katha (katha c loss c loss c loss ) ) ) Pa d d y
1 8 .5
1 7 .3 9
1 2 9 .6
1 2 1 .8 2 4
9 9 .8
9 3 .8 1 2
M a iz e
7 9 .2
5 4 .7 2
8 7 .6
6 0 .5 2 3
4 5 .3
3 1 .3
L en ti l
1 1 .7
1 4 .4
5 3 .4
6 5 .2 6
1 7 .3
2 1 .3
W hea t
2 .4
1 .2 7 1
8 .2
4 .3 4 8
2 .2
1 .1 7
2 1 .6
15
4 3 .3
3 0 .0 6
3 3 .6
2 3 .3 3
1 1 .2
2 2 .4
1 8 .8
3 7 .6
1 4 .6
2 9 .2
1 4 4 .6
1 2 5 .1 8 1
3 4 0 .9
3 2 0 .1 1 5
2 1 2 .8
2 0 0 .1 1 2
M us ta rd Veg eta bl e and ot he rs To ta l
47.497
Distribution of crop yield lost in different zones 50
Paddy
Maize
23.6
Lentil
Wheat
8.789
Mustard
Zone-III Total
2.58
1.134
0.88
0.566
0.832
0.53
0.142
0
0.16
4.319
2.8
0.906
0.613
14.976 6.176
3.2
1.85
10
5.6
12.96
20
15.108
24.79
Zone-II
9.98
30
Total
Crop type
Figure 4.Distribution of yield lost in different zones in metric tones 140
Distribution of paddy damage in different stages
120 100 Total lost
Lost in metric tons
Zone-I 40
Area damaged(hec)
80 60
Total yield(metric tones)
40
Total economic loss(in ,000)
20 0 Grow ing stage
Flow ering /early mature stage Different stages
Mature stage
Figure 5. Distribution of paddy damage in different growing stages .
40
4.2.3.1 Traditional means applied to reduce crop damage There were quite a number of traditional methods (Table 4.20) applied by local villagers to remedy the crop damage problem. Among
them,
Machan/houseguarding
(Plate
11),
Mukka,
Bunkhyacha, trench (Plate 8) and fence are the most commonly used methods. Table 4.20. Traditional means applied to reduce crop damage. V e ge t a b l e s
Me a n s
Paddy
Ma i z e
Le n t i l
Wh e a t
Mu st a rd
M a cha n / H ou se gua rd
√
√
√
√
√
√
M uk ka ( ra n k o)
√
√
-
√
-
√
Ti n b el l
-
√
√
√
√
√
B a it i ng s ti ck s
√
√
-
√
-
√
Thr o w i ng s to n es
√
√
√
√
-
√
L a m p( W h o le ni g ht )
-
-
-
√
√
√
Pla st ic F la g
-
√
√
√
√
√
B u nk h ya c ha
-
-
√
√
√
√
Tre nc h
√
√
√
√
√
√
Fe nce
√
√
√
√
√
√
a n d ot h e r s
( √ i nd ica t es t he me t h o d s a p p lie d t o re med y i nd iv id ua l cr op d a ma g e)
The common crops in eastern side of BCF are paddy, maize, mustard, lentils and vegetables .During rainy season most of the farming lands were covered with paddy and partly with maize and vegetable crops. Table 4.21. Growing season for different crops in eastern side of Barandabhar Corridor Forest Season Crops S u mm er ( J u ne- A u gu st )
Pa d d y, ma iz e, ve geta b les , b la c k gra m
A ut u m n ( S e pte m ber- N ove m ber)
Pa d d y, ma iz e, ve geta b les
Wi n ter ( De ce mb er- Feb rua r y)
W hea t, le n ti l s, v eg eta ble s, ma iz e, mu s ta rd a nd o t her o il seed s, bu ck w hea t , ba r le y, l in se ed s
S pri n g ( M a rc h- M a y)
Pa d d y, ma iz e, ve geta b les
41
4.2.4 Flooding Annual flood are common in Chitwan valley (Table 4.22). A Large number of ungulates (e.g. hog deer) and people are washed away and killed annually (Table 4.22). Thus, the floods are the major threat to ungulates, and their habitats (Plate 14). Table 4.22.Impact of major flood in Chitwan.
Ye a r
Ho u se l ost
Hu ma n killed
1990 1993 2002
1035 650 950
46 62 181
Cr op land ( h e c) >3 4 0 >1 7 0 0 >6 8 0
42
L i ve st oc k
Ha b i t a t
U n gu l a t e killed
>1 0 0 0 >2 5 0 0 0 >1 0 0 0
>3 0 0 >7 0 0 >5 0 0
>1 0 0 >2 0 0 >2 4 0
Plate 1. Sambar deer in a line transect of riverine forest
Plate 2. Rhinoceros in grassland
Plate 3. Spotted deer in Sal-grass border
Plate 4. Rhinoceros in Bishazari Lake
Plate 5. Wild male elephant with domestic female elephant in Khorsor
Plate 6. Young wild boar captured by local people 43
Plate 13. Wild Boar reared by local people
Plate 15. Impact of forest fires during the dry season
Plate 14. Impact of flood on ungulate’s habitat
Plate 16. Livestock grazing inside the forest
Plate 17. Grass collection from the forest
Plate 18. Sand and stone collection from Khageri Khola
44
Plate 7. Clearing of fixed quadrat in riverine forest
Plate 8. Trench made by local people to remedy from crop damage
Plate 9. Paddy damaged by rhinoceros and a tin bell to remedy from crop damage
Plate 11. Machan guarding with plastic flags to remedy from crop damage
Plate 10. Plots showing measurement of damaged wheat field
Plate 12. Tall grass flood plain near Rapti river
45
5. DISCUSSION 5.1
Population status and structure Barandabhar corridor forest (BCF) provides an ideal habitat for ungulates especially for large mammalian and migratory species. Ecological studies of wildlife in such government forest were difficult because of human disturbances, liovestock grazing, etc. In RCNP, there are 5476 chital, 704 sambar, 706 hog deer, 320 barking deer, 897 rhinoceros and 32 wild boars (Mishra and Jafferies 1991). The number and density of ungulates (Table 4.1 and 4.2) inside the buffer zone was higher than outside it. It may be due to the successful community forest programs (e.g., Bagmara Community Forest and Chitrasen Community Forest) and reduced livestock and human pressure. The population variation of ungulates in BCF
was
due
to
shared
habitat
with
RCNP
and
various
disturbances. Population density in BCF was lower than in RCNP (Seidensticker 1976; Appendix 10). The lowest number observed in August was probably due to flood. After September 2002 no hog deer (Axis porcinus) was recorded, most probably because the prime habitats in alluvial flood plains with tall grasses (Plate 18) were destroyed by flood of 2002. The special behavioral and morphological characteristics of the hog deer are closely linked with the tall grass areas (Schaller 1967) that are lost annually by annual floods. During July to September 2002, a total of 23 groups consisting of 34 animals were recorded in Devnagar and Mainahari sites of this corridor. The largest group size was 3 in July and solitary individuals were common. 46
Group size ranges from solitary to 20 in RCNP depending on height
and
density
of
grasses
(Seidensticker
1976).
Low
population density without young is not a viable population. This indicates that if these small populations persist, they will rapidly lose
genetic
variation
due
to
inbreeding
(Bhowmik
and
Chakraborty 2001). During the study period, Chital (Axis axis) was the most abundant ungulate species in the corridor. They are encountered
throughout
BCF
like
in
other
areas
of
Nepal
(Dinerstein 1980, Naess and Andersen 1993). The indirect counts overestimated the density of chital as compared to direct counts because of various reasons such as the growth of grasses and invisibility of pelletes in tall grassland and sal forest. In riverine forest, low number of pellets observed when they cleared (Plate 7). It was probably due to animals' behavior (Dinerstein 1976). Male to female and female to young ratio were found low (106:100:22)
in
comparison
Seidensticker 1976).
to
that
of
Chitwan
(115:100:28;
Single and smaller groups of chital made
easier for age-sex classification but larger groups (above 20) occurring in the forest made it difficult. There is considerable variation in the adult sex ratio of chital (Raman et al. 1996). Likewise Jamal et al. (1995) recorded 22.2% males and 53.7% females in Gir lion Sanctuary, India. Among the ungulate species, chital was the most gregarious and found mostly in groups of five to nineteen similar to other studies (Seidensticker 1976 and Jamal et al. 1995). During the study period, larger groups of deer species were found in open phantas at morning and evening time where as smaller groups and solitary individuals were in forest 47
areas probably due to livestock and human disturbances at daytime. Barking deer stands second abundant deer species in BCF. Male to female and female to young ratios were 68:100 and 100:7 respectively, which was low in comparison to RCNP’s ratio 74:100:11 (Seidensticker 1976). In my observations out of 432 groups (469 individuals), 90% and 10% were found solitary and in groups
respectively.
Similar
results
were
found
by
other
researchers (Seidensticker 1976 and Yonzon 1978). Sambar
deer
Population
stands
density
third (0.4
abundant
deer
individuals/km 2 )
species was
in
lower
BCF. and
percentage of solitary individuals was higher as compared to other study (Seidensticker 1976). My estimates of male and female to young ratio (86:100:14) were also low as compared to RCNP’s ratio 102:100:50 (Seidensticker 1976). The wild boars were abundant in BCF. Large area of plowing grounds showed that they are common in BCF but they were sighted low during the day time due to their nocturnal habit and human and livestock disturbances. The highest number found in April might be due to visibility of forests and growth of new tubers and roots. In my estimates, male to female to young ratio was 44:100:29. Male to female ratio was higher but female to young ratio was lower than that of Seidensticker (1976). Lower number of young may be due to collection of young ones by local people for rearing purposes. A total of 541 groups of wild boars were recorded in eight months consisting of 931 individuals which stand second gregarious ungulates species. 48
The population of rhinoceros in
BCF
ranges
from
21
to
35,
which shows that there is significant, increases in the population in this area and their largest populations were recorded in Bagmara Community Forest and Bishazari Lake area. They mostly use the area (Plate 4) for wallowing during the hot midday. In my estimates, male to female to young ratio was 62:100:80 including sub-adults
and
young.
Male-female
ratio
was
higher
than
Seidensticker’s (1976) estimate of (38:100). Laurie (1973) found the adult sex ratio by individually recognizable animals (60 ♂♂ to 100♀♀) in the Sauraha area. A total of 131 groups of rhinoceros were recorded in eight months consisting of 224 individuals. Rhinoceros is the third gregarious ungulate species in BCF. There was only one male wild elephant (Plate 5) recorded in my study. It was considered that this male came from RCNP to this corridor forest at Khoresor Elephant Breeding Center (KEBC) for mating purpose with domestic female.
5.2
Distribution and habitat utilization Ungulates showed patchy distribution in all the habitats (Table 4.8). Their distribution in forested area was mainly during midday hot for shelter and during dry season because of reduction of forages in grassland areas (Figure 2). Tall grass flood plain was least preferred by Chital and barking deer because they could not feed on young and soft tip of tall grasses. Hog deer were not reported in Sal forest of this corridor (Figure 2), similar to that reported by Dhungel and O’Gara (1991) in RCNP. The axis deer preferred short grassland and forest or forest edge, while hog deer preferred the tall grass flood plain (38.8%) (Figure 2). More than 28.2% hog deer were found in short 49
grassland. Their dispersal was also affected by floods. Among the deer species, sambar deer prefers Sal forest the most and riverine forest the least Barking deer and chital mostly preferred riverine forest followed by grassland as reported by Mishra (1982). Open grassland
terrain
containing
many
species
of
forage/plants
(Appendix 7) was recorded as the principal habitat for deer species. They use grassland for grazing in morning and evening where as forest was mainly utilized during the day time. Extremely low use of Sal forest by ungulates is explained by the scarcity of water and preferred food plants. This forest remains dry for longer periods. Habitat preference value shows that wild boar preferred open habitat the most and forested areas the least. They used cool and wet riverine forest for resting purposes and also use muddy aquatic habitat for wallowing. Rhinoceros prefers riverine forest most and short grassland with least
preference.
Direct
observation
shows
that
27.2%
of
rhinoceros were found in aquatic habitats, where as 34.6% found in riverine forest and only 23.2% in Sal forest though it is the dominant vegetation probably due to less palatable plant species.
5.3
Interaction with livestock A total of 2432 livestock (Table 4.12) were recorded grazing regularly inside the ungulates habitats. These animals are in meadows, riverbanks or forests all day mainly due to lack of ample grazing areas outside the forest. During the study period, there were three instances of hunters who chased ungulates with Catapults, Khukuris and Sickles. Domestic and wild ungulates 50
using the same meadows for grazing could reduce the food for wild ungulates and may transmit diseases. Grazing of livestock is mainly confined to the village forest border. Local people graze cattle and buffaloes at the border to the middle of jungle up to 3.5 km but goat and sheep graze along the border. It increases environmental degradation (Ale 1993) and affects the distribution and abundance of wildlife (Jackson and Ahlborn 1987). Dinerstein (1979) also reported the significant grazing pressure exerted exclusively by goats and sheep along the forest boundary. The grazing of livestock found higher outside the buffer zone than inside it. Inside the buffer zone, livestock grazing was mainly confined to Khoresor - Mainahari flood plain area and near highway at Gondrang, where as Khageri bank and Bhojhad were found ample grazing spots for livestock in case of outside the buffer zone. In study site I and II of the study area most of the livestock were freely grazed without their herders which sometimes attributed to damage crops in the village area mostly in New Padampur.
5.4
Livestock grazing All together 102 species of plants (Appendix 7) were recorded in BCF. The difference in species numbers among these areas was due to nature of vegetation, different landscape and degree of human and livestock influences (Belsky 1986). The plant species richness
was
high
in
grazed
plots
probably
due
to
low
competitive exclusion (Whittaker 1977). This study shows that there was high barren area percentage and significantly low above ground biomass in grazed plots probably due to regular livestock pressure. 51
5.5
Crop damage A heavy economic loss of Rs. 645403 was estimated due to crop damage by ungulates in eastern side of BCF. The reported economic loss was Rs 1167.09 per household and the highest loss (36%) occurred in Paddy (Plate 9) followed by Maize (23%), Lentil (16%), Vegetables (14%), Mustard (10%) and Wheat (1%) (Table 4.16). Among the crop pest species, rhinoceros was rated the highest (70.7%) followed by chital (14.8%), wild boar (10.6%), wild elephant (3%), sambar deer (0.7%) and barking deer (0.2%) (Table 4.18). The highest damage occurred in zone II followed by zone III (Table 4.19) because of high abundance of wildlife. The lowest crop damage in zone I (outside the buffer zone) was mainly due to low abundance of ungulates. Crop preferences varied in different growing stages and loss varied with the distance from the forest, i.e. highest damage occurred at the boundary of the forest. Although paddy damage occurred from growing to mature stage but the highest damage was at the mature stage. Paddy and mustard damage was occurred both by grazing and trampling. Wheat was damaged during early stage of growth; mature stage was not preferred as it becomes coarser. It’s damage was the lowest in my study because the area of wheat (Plate 10) farming at the adjoining area of forests was low. There was no provision of compensation from the park which may be the reason for some negative attitudes of people towards wildlife protection.
52
6. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Chital (Axis axis) was the most abundant and gregarious species and wild elephant (Elephas maximus) the least. Population and population density of ungulates are higher in buffer zone than outside it. There were 66,136 and 31 chital per km 2 in the riverine forest, tall grass flood plain
near
Respectively.
Rapti
river,
Among
the
and
Sal
ungulate
forest
around
species,
chital
Bishazari was
the
Lake most
gregarious observed in groups of 5 - 19 where as barking deer was mostly (90%) solitary. Distribution of wild ungulates was patchy in all the habitats. Low number of young ungulates showed that there is slow increase in population. Rhinoceros and all deer species except sambar preferred riverine forest. Wild boar showed highest preference of grassland habitat and riverine forest. There were more than 2432 livestock regularly grazing inside the forest and 1583 were grazing outside the buffer zone (e.g., Tikauli forest). A total of 102 plant species (viz. herbs 55, graminoide 33, pterydophyte 3 and unidentified 11 species) were recorded from the study area. Barren area (%) was higher in grazed plots (13.78%, 18.14% and 16.2% in rainy, winter and spring seasons respectively). Above ground biomass which was significantly lower in the grazed area was below the requirement of the wild and domestic ungulates. A heavy economic loss of Rs. 645403 was estimated due to crop damage by wild ungulates in eastern side of BCF for 2002 - 2003. Of the total damage area, 70.7% damage was caused by rhinoceros and the lowest (0.16%) by barking deer. The highest damage (48.8%) occurred in zone 53
II followed by 30.5% in zone III and 20.7% in zone I. Lack of guarding, poor fencing and trenching was the main reason for crop damage in all three regions. Machan (Plate 11) with Mukka and trenches (Plate 8) was the most effective traditional means of guarding. There was no compensation for crop damage by wild animals, which has increased some
negative
attitudes
of
local
people
towards
wildlife
and
conservation. Lowest frequency of ungulates in August was related to the impact of flood (Plate 14) during rainy season.
Recommendations Finally, the study suggests the following points: 1. Buffer Zone: The non buffer zone area of Barandabhar Corridor Forest should also be included under the buffer zone of RCNP. 2. Livestock
Livestock
Pressure:
disturbance
from
herders
grazing
affect
wild
(Plate
16)
ungulates
and
the
habits
and
habitats and their time of grazing. Therefore, livestock grazing zones should be demarcated for the local people, who should be encouraged to keep few numbers of improved varieties of livestock 3. I. Direct Methods: Lack of effective barriers between the forest and village is the major cause of conflicts like crop damage by wild animals. Hence there should be effective physical barriers as fencing and trenching. Compensation of damage should be provided by government through buffer zone of RCNP and district forest office.
54
II. Indirect Methods: Increasing human encroachments inside the forest should be controlled because they invite reversible effects. Unpalatable plant species inside the grassland of Barandabhar Corridor Forest should be removed annually to promote better growth of more palatable species. Hence, the annual grassland management
process
should
be
started.
Unpalatable
crop
varieties should be introduced in village forest border within a distance of 300 m. 4. Rearing of Wild Ungulates: During the study period, 86 wild boars (Plate 13) were found illegally reared by local people around Barandabhar Corridor Forest. This type of activity should be stopped or provided legal rearing programme. 5. Poaching: Poaching is a major threat to ungulates. During the year 1973-2002 more than 134 rhinoceros were killed by poachers around RCNP (Appendix 9). During the study period, poachers around New Padampur killed three wild boars. This increasing trend of poaching in these areas is mainly due to ineffective patrolling. It should be effective. 6. Human pressure: Local people freely entered into the forest for collection of thatch, fodder (Plate 17), timber, tubers, and other natural resources (Plate 18) throughout the year. These trend would be reduced by community based programs with people's participation
such
as
agroforestry and biogas.
55
community
forestry,
7. Large Number of Track and Roads used by local people for collecting natural resources should be reduced by managing fix entrance gets. 8. Fire: Local people, cattle herders and poachers intentionally set fire for
their
own
purposes and
most
part
of the
forests
are
completely burnt out during February to May every year (Plate 15). Fire causes adverse impact on shrubs and small trees as well as their seedlings in the forest and kills all the above ground parts. Besides these, fire may damage eggs and chicks of grassland birds, small mammals and fawns of large mammals. Therefore, periodic management of fire with training programs should be encouraged. 9.
Further Research: Further scientific researches on ecology and behaviour as well as regular monitoring of ungulates population for the sustainable conservation of predator and prey species of Barandabhar Corridor Forest should be conducted.
56
REFERENCES Ale, S. 1993. The effect of grazing in the Khangsar valley of the Manang Region in Annapurna Conservation Area. M.Sc. Thesis in zoology. Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal. Belsky, A.J. 1986. Population and Community Procession a Mosaic Grassland in the Serengeti, Tanzania. Journal of Ecology. 73:841856. Bhowmik, M.K. and T. Chakraborty, 2001. Density of Hog deer in Jaldapara and Gorumara protected areas of Himalayan West Bengal. Tiger paper. 28 (2): 8-18. Dhungel, S.K. and B.W. O'Gara. 1991. Ecology of the Hog deer in Royal Chitwan National Park, Nepal. Wildlife monographs.
119 : 40.
Dinerstein, E. 1976. Population estimates of several ungulate species within the Karnali-Bardia Wildlife Reserve February to June 1976. Not published. Dinerstein, E. 1979. An ecological survey of the Royal Karnali Bardia Wildlife Reserve Nepal. Part I Vegetatin, Modifying factors, and successional Relationship. Biological conservation. 15:127-150. Dinerstein, E. 1980. An ecological survey of the Royal Karnali Bardia Wildlife Reserves Nepal. Part II Ungulate Populations. Biological Conservation. 18(1): 5-38. DNPWC, 2000. Count Rhinoceros 2000, Initial Report Department of National
Parks
and
Wildlife
Conservation,
Kath.,
Nepal.
Unpublished. Eisenberg, J.F. and Lockhart, M. 1972. An ecological reconnaissance of Wilpattu National Park, Ceylon. Smithson. Contr. Zool. 101:1-118. Elliott, J.M. 1971. Some methods for the statistical analysis of benthic invertebrates. F.B.-A. Sci-Pub. No. 25. 57
FORESC 1994. Deforestation in the Tarai Districts 1978/79 - 1990/91. Ministry of Forestry and Soil Conservation. Publication Number 60. Kathmandu. Pages 9. Gurung, K.K. 1983. Ungulates (Hoofed Mammals). 26 - 43. In Heart of the Jungle The Wildlife of Chitwan, Nepal. Andre Deutsch, U.K. and Tiger Tops, Nepal. Pages 197. HMGN 1973. National Parks and Wildlife Conservation (NPWC) Act 2029 (1973). Nepal Gazette. 2029-11-28 B.S. (In Nepali). Jackson, R. and Ahlborn, G. 1987. A high altitude survey of the Hongu valley with special emphasis on Snow Leopard. Submitted to Woodlands Mountain Institute and His Majesty's Government, Department of National Park and Wildlife Conservation. Pages 26. Jamal, A.K., R. Chellam and A.J.T. Johnsingh 1995. Group Size and Age-sex composition of three major ungulate species in Gir lion sanctuary, Gujrat, India. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society. 92(3): 295-302. Jha, P.K., G.P.S Ghimire and G.R. Tripathi 1994. Royal Chitwan National Park past and present. Tigerpaper. 21(3): 5-10. Jnawali, S.R. 1989. park-people conflict. An assessment of crop damage and human harassment due to Rhinocerosceros in Sauraha area adjacent to Royal Chitwan National Park. Nepal. M.Sc. Thesis submitted to Agricultural University of Norway. Pages 102. Johnsingh, A.J.T. 1983. Large Mammalian prey predators in Bandipur. Journal of Bombay natural History Society. 80(1): 1-57. KMTNC, 2002. Brochure of Tiger/Rhinoceros Conservation Project. Chitwan, Nepal. Krishan, M. 1972. An ecological survey of the larger mammals of Penninsular India Journal of Bombay natural History Society. 69(2): 300.
58
Laurie, A. 1973. Ecology and behaviour of the Indian rhinoceros. Progress Report Number 2 to center for Field Biology and conservation, New York zoological society, New York. Pages 14. Laurie, W.A. 1979. The ecology and behaviour of the rhinoceros. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Cambridge, U.K. Majupuria, T.C. 1998. Wildlife, National Parks and Reserves of Nepal. Published by S. Devi, Saharanpur (U.P.), India. Pages 427. Mishra, H.R. 1982. The ecology and behaviour of Chital in the Royal Chitwan National Park, Nepal (with comparative studies of hog deer, Sambar deer and barking deer). Ph.D. Thesis. University of Edinburgh, U.K. Mishra, H.R. and M. Jafferies. 1991. Royal Chitwan National Park, Wildlife Heritage of Nepal. David Bateman, Newzealand. Mishra, H.R. and C. Wemmer. 1987. The comparative breeding ecology of four cervides in Royal Chitwan National Park. The bilogy and the conservation of the cervidae. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington D.C., U.S.A. Pages 259-271. Moe, S. 1993. Fire as management tool for wildlife grass pasture quality improvement in lowland Nepal II Ungulate response, submitted manuscript. Pages 12. Moe, S.R. 1994. Distribution and movement pattern of deer in response to food quality and manipulation of grassy habitat A case study with
emphasis
on
Axis
deer
in
low
land
Nepal.
Ph.
D.
Dissertation. Agricultural University of Norway. Pages 102. Mukharjee, S. and S. Sengupta, 1999. Census of Rhinoceros unicornis linn at Jaldapara wildlife sanctuary, Cooch Behar Forest division, West Bengal, India. Tiger paper. 26(4): 18-21. Naess, K.M. and H.J. Andersen. 1993. Assessing census techniques for wild ungulates in Royal Bardia National Park, Nepal. M.Sc. Thesis. Submitted to the Agricultural University of Norway. Pages 102. 59
Prater, S.H. 1998. The Book of Indian animals (6 t h ed.). Bombay Natural History Society. Oxford University Press. Pages 324. Raman, T.R., R.K.G. Menon and R. Sukumar 1996. Ecology and Management of Chital and Blackbuck in Guindy National Park, Madras, India. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society. 93(2): 178-192. Resource Himalaya, 2000. A Resource Himalaya Fact File. 3(1) : 2-3. Rijal, A. 1999. Biodiversity conservation in and around Royal Chitwan National Park, Nepal. UNICORN. A Scientific Journal of NCRTC. 1(1): 29-38. Rookmaaker, L.C. 1980. The distribution of the rhinocerosceros in Eastern India, Bangladesh, China and the Indo-Chinese region. Zool. ANZ, 205: 253-268. Schaller, G.B. 1967. The deer and the tiger. University of Chicago Press. Chicago. Pages 370. Seidensticker, J. 1976. Ungulate populations in Chitwan Valley, Nepal. Biological Conservation. 10(3): 183-210. Sharma, U.R. 1986. A study of park- people interaction in Chitwan National Park. Report Submitted to WWF. US. Pages 29. Shrestha, B. 1994. Studies on Park people conflict, investigation on resolving resources conflicts between park conservation and adjoining settlements in the northeastern boundary of RCNP. M.Sc. Thesis in zoology, T.U. Nepal. Pages 133. Shrestha, T.K. 1997. Mammals of Nepal. R.K. printers, Kathmandu, Nepal. Singh, V.B. 1966. The Elephant in Uttar Pradesh. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society. Pages 662. Sorenson, T. 1948. A method of establishing groups of equal amplitude in plant society based on similarity of species context. K. Danske Vidensk. Selsk. Pages 51-34.
60
Spillett, J. 1967. A report on the wildlife surveys in Northern India and Southern Nepal. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society. 63: 492628. Thagunna, Petra F. Ten Velde. 1999. Trans-Boundary Elephant Corridor "protecting the wild elephant dispersal patterns of the FarWestern Tarai Region though corridor linking." WWF Nepal program. Report series. 39: 24. Wegge, P. 1976. Tarai Shikar Reserves, Surveys and Management Proposals. FAO/NEP/72/002, Field Document. 4: 78. Whittaker, R.H. 1977. Animal effect on plant species diversity. In Vegetation and Fauna. Journal Cramer. Vaduz. Page 409-425. Yonzon, P.B. 1978. Ecological studies on barking deer. Journal of Natural History Museum. 2(1-4): 91-101.
61
APPENDICES APPENDIX - 1: Population Counts Date: ……………………... Weather Condition: ……… Time Started: …………….. Study Site: Time Ended: ……………….. ……………... Animal Type
Stud y Site
Adu lt ♀
Adu lt ♂
Youn g
Grou p Size
Vegetatio n Type
CHITAL
BARKING DEER
HOG DEER
SAMBER DEER
WILD BOAR
RHINO
ELEPHANT
62
Transec t No.
Observer's Name: ………… Starting Place……………... Ending Place: …………….. Observe d dtst. From transect
No. of individual s/ Transect
Tim e
Remark s
APPENDIX - 2: Fecal Pellet Count in Line Transect Date: ……………………... Weather Condition: ……… Time Started: …………….. Study Site: Time Ended: ……………….. ……………... Quadrat No
Vegetation Type
Transect No. and Length
Observer's Name: ………… Starting Place……………... Ending Place: …………….. No. of Pellet group
Time
Remarks
Chital Barking Deer Samber Deer Wild Boar Rhino
APPENDIX - 3: Livestock Pressure Inside the Forest Date: ……………………... Weather Condition: ……… Time Started: …………….. Study Site: Time Ended: ……………….. ……………... S.No .
Grazin g Spots
Observer's Name: ………… Starting Place……………... Ending Place: ……………..
Mean distance from forest boundary (meter) Cattl No Buffal No Goa No Shee No e . o . t . p .
63
Remark s
APPENDIX - 4: Canopy Cover of Ground Vegetation Date: ……………………... Study Site: ……………….. Quardrate No.
Grazing Spots
Graminoide UnGrazed grazed
Canopy Cover (%) Pteridophyte UnUnGrazed grazed grazed
Herbs Grazed
Observer's Name: ………… Unidentified Ungrazed
Grazed
Barren Ungrazed
Grazed
APPENDIX - 5: Species Number of Vegetation Date: ……………………... Study Site: ……………….. Quardrate No.
Study Site
Grasses
Observer's Name: …………
Plant Species Number Remarks Herbs Pteridophyte Unidentified
64
APPENDIX - 6: Questionnaires Schedule
Schedule 6.1 Name: Occupation: Address: Education: 1. Do you have livestock? If yes, how many do you have? Male
Female
Date:
Sub-Adult
Calves
Goat
Sheep
2. Which types of livestock do you have? Cow
Buffalo
3. Do you graze your livestock inside the forest? If yes, which area do you mostly graze your livestock? 4. Which plants are preferred by your livestock? Grasses ..............
Herbs..............
Trees..................
5. Which ungulates are present in this area? Rhino
Elephant
Hog deer
Hog deer
Barking deer
Sambar deer
Spotted deer
Four-horned antelope
6. Do livestock and ungulates graze together? Yes or Schedule 6.2 1. Do ungulates damage your crops? If yes which ungulate? Rhino
Elephant
Hog deer
Barking deer
Sambar deer
Spotted deer
wild boar
No
Wild boar Four-horned antelope
2) What kinds of crops do you grow in your field? ...................................................................................................................................................... 3) Among them which ungulate mostly damage your crops and how often do they enter the field? ...................................................................................................................................................... 4) How much land do you have? 5) How much yield would you get from this land? 6) Do you apply some techniques to chase ungulates from your field? If yes, what kind of techniques
do you apply? .................................................................................................................................. 7) At which stage of crops do they damage most? Maize -Juvenile, Tasseling stage, Mature stage
Lentil–Juvenile, Flowering, Mature
Wheat-Juvenile, Medium, Mature
Paddy-Green Flowering, mature
Mustard -Juvenile, Flowering, Mature 8) Please give the growing season for different types of crops? ................................................................................................................................................ 9) Could you suggest some better means to remedy these problems? ................................................................................................................................................ 10) Do you get compensation for the damage? ................................................................................................................................................
65
APPENDIX - 7: Plant Species List Recorded in Barandabhar Corridor Forest
S.No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46.
Botanical Name Elephantopus scaber L. Commelina benghalensis L. Commelina spp. 1 Cynodon dactylon (L.) pers. Kyllinga nemoralis Rungia parviflora (Retz.) Nees Evolvulus alsinoides (L.) L. Flemingia macrophylla (willd.) Merril. Urena lobota L. Panicum Paludosum Commelina spp. 2 Eclipta prostrata (L.) L. Corchorus spp. Setaria palledifusca (schumach.) (Stapf & C.E. Hubb.) Paspalidium punctatum L. Lindernia spp. Polygonum barbaratum L. Hedyotis corymbosa (L.) Lam. Luduligia adscendens L. Borreria alata Clerodendron infortunatum Hedyotis diffusa Willd. Cynoglossum lanceolatum Borreria biflora Fimbristylis bisumbellata L. Euphorbia hirta L. Paspalidium flavidum Euphorbia parviflora L. Cymbopogon microtheca (Hook. f) A. Camus. Phyllanthus urinaria L. Justicia simplex L. Persicaria spp. Apluda mutica L. Eleusine indica (L.) Gaertn. Colocasia esculenta (L.) Schott. Oplismenus compositus Saccharum bengalensis L. Saccharum spontanium L. Chloro phytum nepalense Fimbristylis Miliaoea (L.) Vahl. Leersia hexandra sw. Phyllodium spp. Rubia spp. Colebrookea oppositifolia sm. Cymbopogon spp. Equisetum debile Roxb. Ex. Vaucher.
Family Compositae Commelinaceae Commelinaceae Gramineae Acanthaceae Convolvulaceae Leguminosae Malvaceae Gramineae Commelinaceae Compositae Tiliaceae Gramineae
Local Name Bhiringi jhar Kane jhar Dubo Ukuche jhar Ankuri ful Bhatvasi Bhangeri jhar -
Polygonaceae Rubiaceae Onagraceae Rubiaceae Herbinaceae Rubiaceae Boraginaceae Rubiaceae Cyperaceae Euphorbiaceae Poaceae
Piringo Bhanti Mojithe jhar Dudhe jhar Masino dudhe Banso
Euphorbiaceae Acanthaceae Polygonaceae Gramineae Gramineae Araceae Gramineae Gramineae Liliaceae Cyperaceae Urticaceae Rubiaceae Labiatae Poaceae Equisetaceae
Bhui amala Karkalo Banso Jheksi Kans. Jwane jhar. Karaunti jhar Dhurseli Dhaddi Kurkure jhar (Ankhle
66
47 48. 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91
Erianthus ravennae (L.) P. Beauv. Fimbristylis miliaceae (L.) Vahl. Imperata cylindrical (L.) P. Beauv Oplismenus burmanii (Retz.) P.Beauv. Phaulopsis imbricata (Forssk.) Sweet. Phragmites karka (Retz.) Trin ex steud. Themeda spp. Thespesia lampus (cav) Dalz and Gibs. Elsholtzia flava (Benth.) Benth. Sambucus hookeri Render Oxalis spp. Selaginella spp. Bidens pilosa L. Dryopteris cochleata (D.Don) C. chr. Commelina spp. 3 Ceropegia pubescens Wall. Eupatorium adenophorum Spreng. Ageratum conyzoides. L. Grewia sclerophylla Roxb. Sida cordifolia L. Dioscorea bulbifera Centella asiatica (L.) Urban. Paspalidium flavidum (Retz.) A. camus Cassia tora L. Leersia hexandra sw. Daphne papyracea Wall. Ex steud. Cirsium arvense (L.) soop. Ageratum houstonianum Mill. Hedyotis gracilis Wall. Achyranthes aspera L. Floscopa scadens Lour. Hibiscus manihot L. Digitaria spp. -
Poaceae Cyperaceae Poaceae Poaceae Acanthaceae Poaceae Poaceae Malvaceae Labiatae Caprifoliaceae Leguminoceae. Selaginellaceae Compositae Aspidiaceae Commelinaceae Asclepiadaceae Compositae Compositae Tiliaceae. Malvaceae Dioscoreaceae Umbelliferae Urticaceae Gramineae Leguminoceae. Poaceae Thymelaeaceae Compositae. Compositae Rubiaceae Amaranthaceae Commelinaceae. Malvaceae. Asteraceae 1 Poaceae 1 Poaceae 2 Asteraceae 2 Asteraceae 3 Poaceae 3 Gramineae Labiateae Cyperaceae 1 Cyperaceae 2 Compositae 1 Compositae 2
67
jhar.) Khar. Mothe jhar. Siru Banso Phurke Narkat Khar. Ban Kapas. Ban Silam Galeni Kuro Niuro Ban simi Ban mara Gandhe Pharsa Balu Ban Githo Ghod tapre Janai lahara (Ghans) Ghode dubo Tapre Muse kharu Baruwa. Gaida kanda. Nilo Gandhe Mjithe jhar. Datiwan Kane Jangali Lasun -
APPENDIX - 8: Population of Rhinoceros in Nepal Population of Rhino RCNP RBNP RSWR 1.
