Login - The Malayan Nature Journal

28 downloads 1548 Views 242KB Size Report
Close. © Copyright The Malayan Nature Journal - 2015 - All Rights reserved. OJS Hosting, Support, Responsive Theme Design by: OpenJournalSystems.com.
Malayan Nature Journal 2011, 63(3), 549-560

A preliminary investigation into the effects of hunting on three large ungulate species in Peninsular Malaysia, with implications for tiger conservation

GARETH GOLDTHORPE1 and S. H. NEO2

Healthy tiger populations depend upon the availability of large ungulate prey species. Unfortunately, human hunters typically favour tiger-prey species and many, if not all, species in Asia are increasingly threatened. The loss of large ungulate species is, then, a conservation issue both in terms of tiger conservation and of species conservation as a whole. An interview-based survey was conducted at five sites around Peninsular Malaysia to assess the prevalent responses of wild ungulate populations to hunting over the preceding five years. Particular attention was paid to perceived changes in the demographics of key species over that time and where responses indicated a change in numbers the perceived causes were noted. Results indicated that numbers of wild boar have remained unchanged whilst those of both common muntjac (Muntiacus muntjak), and sambar (Rusa unicolor) appear to have been depleted with possible localised extirpations of the latter. The primary reason given for these losses was over-hunting. The local consumption of common muntjac and sambar is the main motivation for their harvest in three of the sites, whereas it is only non-local hunters that target wild boar. Hunting seasons applied to both common muntjac and sambar are routinely flouted in all sites. Several recommendations are made, key being for specific changes in the current wildlife law as well as the country’s capacity to enforce it. Key words: hunter interviews, large-mammal conservation, Malaysia, Panthera tigris jacksoni, population trends, tiger-prey interactions, wildlife protection

INTRODUCTION Studies have shown that the densities at which tigers inhabit an area are positively correlated to the available biomass of large cervids (Rabinowitz 1993) making prey density critical for supporting healthy tiger populations (Karanth and Stith

1 (Corresponding author): Apartment 42, Building 43, Paliashvili street, Tbilisi, 0179, Georgia. [email protected] (Unit 3A-02 Block H, Riana Green Condominium, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia, 474100). 2 Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), No. 42-C, Tingkat 3, SS6/8, Kelana Jaya, 47301, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia. (at time of research: TRAFFIC Southeast Asia, Regional Office, Unit 3-2, 1st Floor, Jalan SS23/11, Taman SEA, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia) Manuscript submitted: 23 December 2010 Manuscript accepted: 14 April 2011

549

1999, Karanth et al. 2004). As such, a healthy tiger population requires access to an abundant prey base as well as effective protection from poaching (Johnson et al. 2006) and it is the human-driven depletion of natural prey that has been identified as a primary reason for the recent declines in the worlds’ tigers (Karanth et al. 2004). A depressed prey population negatively affects tiger populations at the level of recruitment by reducing the survival rate of cubs (Karanth et al. 2004). This, coupled with a tendency for individual tigers to move into unsuitable habitat (either as a permanent territory shift or temporary exploratory forays) makes the overall response to prey depletion relatively fast (Karanth and Stith 1999). Habitat, prey abundance and life history all influence this predator-prey dynamic and so its’ specific nature varies across the tiger range-states (Johnsingh 1992, Bagchi et al. 2003) and so understanding the conditions at specific sites is important. We can, however, make some generalities; large carnivores (>15-20 kg) tend to specialise in large vertebrate prey with a body mass similar to their own (Carbone et al. 2007) and, in prey-rich habitats, tigers selectively kill larger animals in order to maximise the return of energy (Bagchi et al. 2003). This selection of large prey species is made even when a plentiful supply of smaller ungulate species is available. In both the Bandipur Tiger Reserve (Johnsingh 1992) and Chitwan National Park (Sunquist 1981) in India, tigers show a clear preference for sambar (Cervus unicolor) over more numerous but smaller ungulates such as the chital (Axis axis) and hog deer (A. porcinus). The basic mechanism behind this is well known and is based on a subtle interplay between the amount of energy available in a single food item and the amount of energy required to secure it; the main constituents of MacArthur and Pianka’s (1966) Optimal Foraging Theory, which has since been applied to large carnivores in India (Karanth and Sunquist 1995). Although habitat loss, fragmentation and degradation receive much attention in the global media as scourges of the natural world there are many who consider unsustainable hunting by humans, whether for subsistence or trade, as of equal threat to many species particularly larger species such as pigs, deer, and primates (e.g. Bodmer et al. 1997, Milner-Gulland et al. 2003, O’Brien et al. 2003, Rowcliffe et al. 2003, Rahul Kaul et al. 2004, Milner et al. 2006, Johnson et al. 2006, Corlett 2007). In fact, recent estimates indicate that more than 30% of mammals listed by the IUCN as Endangered are at risk, at least in part, because of over-exploitation (Baillie et al. 2004). Reports coming from all Asian countries tell of local extinctions in a wide array of commonly hunted species in the last few decades (e.g. Madhu Rao et al. 2005, Milner-Gulland et al. 2003, Corlett 2007). This wild meat crisis is a relatively new phenomenon, with most of the known declines of large mammals occurring within the last 50–100 years (Corlett 2007). In Asia, the modern-day poacher is able to empty the forests of their fauna at an alarming rate due to the commercialisation of hunting and easy access to both modern technologies (such as guns) and the forest itself (Bodmer et al. 1997, MilnerGulland et al. 2003, Steinmetz et al. 2006). How any particular species responds to

550

high levels of hunting will depend on a variety of biological and environmental factors, including the degree to which populations are exposed to human activities (Woodroffe and Ginsberg 1998, O’Brien et al. 2003). However, Bodmer et al. (1997) have determined that species with relatively long-life spans coupled with a slow generation time will be especially vulnerable to hunting pressure. The primary objective of this study was to determine, via an interview-based survey, whether the abundances of three species of large ungulates, wild boar (Sus scrofa), common muntjac (Muntiacus muntjak), and sambar (Rusa unicolor) were perceived to have changed over a five-year period between 2000 and 2005. Furthermore, if the perception is of a decline in numbers, the question of whether or not numbers are being lost to hunters was asked. Implications for the management of tigers in Peninsular Malaysia are described and recommendations based on the findings are made. MATERIALS AND METHODS An interview-based survey was carried out over a 15-month period (February 2006 to April 2007) with a total of 38 man-days ranging from 5-10 days at each site. Five sites across Peninsular Malaysia (see below) were visited and 61 participants, all male, included a mixture of Orang Asli, the indigenous people of the Malay Peninsula, and ethnically Malay villagers. Perceptions of local hunters and non-hunters regarding changes in the abundances of the three subject species were gauged in interview sessions. Participants were asked to report on their memories of prey species’ occurrence from 2000 to 2005. We chose a five-year interval on the assumption that interviewees could easily remember occurrences within the time allotment. We also deemed five years to be a biologically significant interval, allowing time for potential recruitment or decline of the target species. Participants were interviewed on the current status of these animals in terms of one of three possible categories (no-change, depleted, or no longer present) intended to give a rough indication of prey status. Where a decline was indicated the interviewees were asked to identify the causal factor in order to provide some measure of the level at which, for example, hunting is impacting wildlife from the point of view of those living in those areas (an often overlooked source of information (Steinmetz et al. 2006)). The subject species were chosen because of their assumed importance as key tiger prey species in Malaysia (Kawanishi 2002). They are also considered to be readily available to large predators in the Malaysian forests and are amongst those typically hunted by humans for their meat (Corlett 2007). As important prey animals, the abundance and distribution of these three species plays a major role in supporting viable tiger populations in Malaysia. Wild boar and common muntjac are both listed as Lower Risk Least Concern whilst sambar is considered Vulnerable (IUCN 2010). Although no intensive studies of these species have been carried out in Malaysia several small, site-specific studies carried out over the past decade

551

(Kawanishi and Sunquist 2004, Wahab et al. 2006, Darmaraj 2007, Lynam et al. 2007) infer their recent presence in the chosen study sites. The recently amended wildlife law in Malaysia, the Wildlife Conservation Act 2010 (WCA) (DWNP 2010) recognises two levels of protection for wildlife. Listed species are either Protected (Schedule 1 species) and can be killed by licensed hunters (depending on the species, the license may include restrictions on the number of animals permitted to be killed and the time of year they can be hunted) or Totally Protected (Schedule 2 species) and cannot be hunted under any circumstances except for those specifically recognised in the legislation (scientific research and the defence of human life being the two most notable). The wild boar is a particularly fecund species with an average gestation period of 115 days and with no distinct breeding season in the tropics. With typical litters of up to eight piglets, a single female can produce around 20 young each year (MacDonald 2001). They are recognised under national law as a “hunted species” (DWNP 2010) and may be hunted year round, although hunting times are restricted to daylight hours (DWNP 2011). Notably, eating wild boar is considered haram (forbidden) by Muslims and so is not usually hunted by them. The common muntjac has a gestation period of approximately 180 days. Typically only a single fawn is produced and so annual reproductive rates are low, especially when compared to the more fecund wild boar. The common muntjac is also a Schedule One species (DWNP 2010) but has a distinct open and closed season with hunting allowed only in November (DWNP 2011). The sambar, which also produces only a single fawn each season, has an even longer gestation period of 240 days (MacDonald 2001). It is listed as a Schedule One species (DWNP 2010) and shares its open season with the common muntjac. The cost of a license for hunting sambar is, however, double that of a common muntjac (DWNP 2011). Five sites were selected according to the recorded presence of both tigers and one or more of the subject species: Jerangau Barat (Terengganu); Jeli (Kelantan); Endau-Rompin (spanning Johor and Pahang); Cameron Highlands (spanning Pahang and Perak); and Durian Burung (Kedah) (Fig 1). All pertinent data were collated for qualitative analysis. This consisted of collating scores regarding the status of the three prey species, the perceived causes for any change and the presence of hunting and non-local hunters. Monetary values are given in Malaysian Ringgit (MYR) and converted to US Dollars (USD) using the conversion rate was 1 USD = 3.24 MYR (February 2008). RESULTS Of the 61 respondents, 31 identified themselves as hunters whilst 30 claimed to be dealers. The ethnic breakdown was 36 Orang Asli and 25 Malays (Table 1). There was a general consensus amongst respondents regarding the population trends for each species; numbers of wild boar are stable whilst those of both muntjac

552

Figure 1. Map showing sites visited during the survey

and sambar have been depleted, in some cases to the point of local extinction (Table 2). In order to determine more specific patterns and causative factors, detailed findings are given for each site in the next section. In Endau Rompin (n=15) many respondents associated stable numbers of all species with the presence of a Johor National Parks Corporation (JNPC) office at Kampung Peta. However, of those that did report depletions in muntjac (53%) and sambar (67%) over-hunting was cited as the cause. Five interviewees reported that only local hunters were active in nearby forests because the villages are relatively isolated and access to the forest is restricted by the existence of only one logging road. All stated that the three species were hunted year round despite the 11 month closed season for the common muntjac and sambar. 553

Table 1. Geographic and demographic breakdown of the survey Orang Asli Hunter Dealer Endau Rompin: Johor State, Kahang District: Peta Punan Pahang State, Rompin District: Sungai Mok Serdang Cameron Highlands: Perak State, Kinta District: Ulu Gerantum Sungai Poh Sejam Pos Raya Pos Slim Pawong Sungai Ruil Perak State, Batang Padang District: Batu Village Jerangau: Terengganu State, Terengganu District: Jerengau Barat Jeli: Kelantan State, Jeli District: Sungai Long Buloh Galah Berdang Jeli Durian Burung: Kedah State, Padang Terap District: Durian Burung Total

554

Malay Hunter Dealer

3 4

3 0

0 0

0 0

3 2

0 0

0 0

0 0

2 1 1 1 1 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 1 1

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7

4

0

0

0

0

2

6

2 0 0 0

0 0 0 0

0 1 0 1

0 1 3 3

0

0

0

8

27

9

4

21

Table 2. Overall population trends for the three species shown as percentages of the entire interviewee sample No Change (%)

Depleted (%)

Not Present (%)

For wild boar: Endau Rompin Cameron Highlands Jerangau Jeli Durian Burung

100 95 100 100 0

0 5 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

For common muntjac: Endau Rompin Cameron Highlands Jerangau Jeli Durian Burung

47 0 0 0 63

53 47 100 100 37

0 53 0 0 0

For sambar: Endau Rompin Cameron Highlands Jerangau Jeli Durian Burung

33 0 0 0 37

67 5 25 9 63

0 95 75 91 0

In the Cameron Highlands (n=19) more than half (53%) of those respondents that reported the local extinction of sambar stated that this had happened as long as ten years ago. Although local villagers do hunt in the area the loss of prey species is seen as a result of over-hunting by non-local hunters. It was also noted that all species were hunted year round, despite the ostensible implementation of strict hunting seasons. Nearly two-thirds (62%) of interviewees from Jerangau Barat (n=8) believed that over-hunting and forest conversion were the main cause for the depletion of common muntjac whilst half also gave this as the reason behind the disappearance of sambar from the area. According to respondents from Jeli (n=11) non-local hunters primarily targeted wild boar whilst locals focused on deer, the meat of which is consumed locally and not normally sold on to dealers. According to the majority of interviewees (91%) the depletion of common muntjac, as well as the possible disappearance of sambar, was due to over-hunting. The causal factor cited for depleted deer species in Durian Burung (n=8) was, unlike all other sites, forest-conversion. According to four of the interviewees, DWNP officers patrol the area once every week or two, enough to act as a local deterrent against hunting illegally. 555

DISCUSSION In summary, we found that only one species, wild boar, was consistently thought to show stable numbers over the five-year period whilst both common muntjac and sambar were considered to have been depleted throughout most of the study area, with local extinctions in some sites. that they are now th There were two exceptions to these findings; Kampung Peta in Endau Rompin and Durian Burung. Respondents at both sites reported stable numbers for all three species and cited the presence of law enforcement officers in their areas as a reason for the lack of hunting. Field-based research in Taman Negara National Park (Kawanishi and Sunquist 2004) supports these findings. An apparent lack of hunting pressure within the large (600 km2) study site led the authors to conclude that enforcement efforts (including regular patrols by the DWNPs Rhino Protection Unit) were effective in reducing the threat of poaching. These two outliers help demonstrate that it does not matter how well laws are written if effective and real measures to enforce them are not in place. For example in North Myanmar, where illegal hunting was thought to be responsible for local extinctions in several large mammals, Madhu Rao et al. (2005) concluded that onthe-ground enforcement of wildlife laws would be paramount in preventing further loss. Similarly, O’Brien et al. (2003) associated low tiger and tiger-prey species numbers in Bukit Barisan Selatan National Park, Indonesia, with areas of high human density citing an absence of effective law enforcement as the ultimate source of untenable pressure on tiger populations there. It should come as no surprise then that Corlett (2007), in his region-wide review of hunting in Asia, argues that only proper enforcement of national wildlife protection laws has the potential to stop a region-wide decimation of tropical forest biodiversity. Both common muntjac and sambar are, according to the letter of the law, free from the threats of hunting for 11 months of the year in Malaysia. However, in all sites surveyed, this restriction was completely ignored. Hunting of both species continued throughout the year. Furthermore, the extremely localised effect of enforcement where it is applied (only those living in the same village as the JNPC office reported any reluctance to hunt) illustrates the need for larger-scale efforts. If Kampung Peta and Durian Burung represent one end of the scale, then Jeli may be seen as sitting at the opposite end. Here, sambar were reported as extirpated and muntjac as severely depleted. This finding is confirmed by camera-trapping studies carried out in the area between 2004 and 2005, which failed to record a single sambar (Darmaraj 2007). The historic local densities of this species are unknown but, given the biology of the sambar, it is likely that it was once abundant in the forests around Jeli. Indeed, two long-term Orang Asli residents informed us that sambar numbers only began to decline around 15 years ago when shotguns came into wide use. They also cited a similar trend developing in the numbers of common muntjac. Despite such evidence of unsustainable hunting, the sambar remains subject to an open season in Malaysia and this is clearly at odds with any desire to maintain its numbers. The current wildlife protection legislation for Peninsular Malaysia, 556

though recently amended and updated, is obviously lacking in terms of both its content and its enforcement. Southeast Asian forests have suffered widespread losses of animals in relatively short time-spans and this has given rise to “empty forests”; seemingly intact forests that, on closer inspection are found to lack key fauna species (Redford 1992). Both O’Brien et al. (2003) and Corlett (2007) highlight how this phenomenon is evidence for the importance of hunting, rather than habitat loss, for species declines. In three of the five sites studied here (Jerangau, Jeli, and Durian Burung) hunting is solely for subsistence and not intended to provide meat to local markets. In such cases, it may be possible to reduce hunting by improving the availability of resources to communities. However, this would likely require an increase in livestock that may, in tiger-country, lead to human-wildlife conflict and the direct persecution of tigers. The suitability, then, of any management prescriptions must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The local market in wild meat does seem to feature heavily in the remaining study sites. Wildlife is heavily hunted around two of the Endau-Rompin villages (Kampung Punan in Johor and Kampung Sungai Mok in Pahang) and large amounts of meat are sold to dealers in Kahang and Bandar Rompin. The bulk of the meat coming from the Cameron Highlands, where both local consumption and trade seem important, goes either to one particular restaurant in Gopeng (presumably to satisfy a niche market amongst tourists) or to a dealer based in Ringlett. It is important to understand the fate of wild meat in an area. Hunting to supply markets is usually carried out at levels far beyond those typical of subsistence hunting. Commercial hunting may also target species for which there is no local use (Rabinowitz 1998) and the general trend in Asia is for hunters to target wildlife that is popular in trade rather than species that are eaten locally (Corlett 2007). Robinson and Bennet (2002) note that an increase in development and a shift of people from rural to urban areas inevitably leads to an increase in a demand for luxury goods; including wildlife products and exotic pets. This transition, of course, implies greater effort in hunting and exploitation. In Malaysia as elsewhere, the loss of large ungulates will inexorably lead to the demise of its tigers. Malaysia must therefore resolve to control hunting. A large area of Peninsular Malaysia’s forest remains as prime tiger habitat and as such, Malaysia is critical to regional tiger conservation (Sanderson et al. 2006). A twopronged approach is required to maintain this: 1) an effectively enforced legislative ban on the hunting of principal prey-species (Karanth and Stith 1999) and 2) a scientifically rigorous assessment of species’ status allowing for a thorough understanding of the causative factors involved in their decline (Sutherland 2000). If this basic premise of conservation, ascertain numbers and monitor, is not addressed there can be no real progress in reversing the current trend of loss. In summary, the current work provides a preliminary indication that the hunting of large mammals in Malaysia is unsustainable and that existing mechanisms to protect the nations’ wildlife are insufficient. Evidence from other work shows us that the loss of large ungulates is a conservation issue not only for those species 557

but also for the large predators that depend on them. With these points in mind, the following recommendations for Malaysia are made: 1) Increase enforcement of wildlife legislation, particularly targeting illegal hunting: The frequency of active law enforcement, such as anti-poaching patrols, intelligence gathering and arrests should be increased in rural areas, particularly in and around villages that are located close to tiger habitat. Extending beyond the importance of effective enforcement, this needs to be supported by an equally effective judiciary system that places a premium on ending wildlife crime. Efforts should be made to improve both the rate of convictions associated with infringements of the wildlife law and the punishments meted out to the offenders. 2) Upgrade the level of protection afforded to common muntjac and sambar: The perception of depleted populations of both common muntjac and sambar is not consistent with the current protection afforded these species. DWNP should consider upgrading the legal status of both to Totally Protected. This would remove any ambiguity surrounding their legal status, allowing a total ban on their hunting to be enforced and giving the populations the time they need to recover. The effectiveness of this strategy is, of course, wholly dependent on efforts to improve enforcement as identified above. 3) DWNP to increase efforts to monitor wildlife trade: Whilst monitoring wildlife trade largely falls under the remit of DWNP it is a resource-intensive activity. It may be prudent for the department to actively collaborate with NGOs, such as TRAFFIC Southeast Asia, as well as other well re-sourced government agencies, such as the Forestry Department, police and army. Such efforts should include the development of standard wildlife hunting and trade monitoring schemes, including the development and maintenance of informant networks. This should lead to an effective monitoring system that includes mechanisms for alerting the authorities to illegal trade activities and to revealing emerging trends in that trade. 4) Research: It is clear that there is a lack of ecological information on wildlife. The prioritisation of the following areas of research is recommended for implementation across Peninsular Malaysia: (i) basic abundance, density and distribution studies of all large-bodied species; (ii) baseline levels of hunting pressure and off-take and monitoring thereof; (iii) monitoring of the effectiveness of conservation interventions, such as banning of all hunting or regular patrol, on the status of the target species; (iv) determining the levels of dependence of local communities on wild-meat and the main economic drivers of legal and illegal hunting in the country. The details of these projects should be decided by government agencies, academic institutes and NGO’s, led by DWNP and outlined in an updated Wildlife Plan for Peninsular Malaysia. REFERENCES Bagchi, S., Goyal, S.P. and Sankar, K. 2003. Prey abundance and prey selection by tigers (Panthera tigris) in a semi-arid, dry deciduous forest in western India. Journal of Zoology 260: 285–290. 558

Baillie, J.E.M., Hilton-Taylor, C. and Stuart, S.N. 2004. 2004 IUCN red list of threatened species. A global species assessment. Gland, Switzerland, and Cambridge, United Kingdom: World Conservation Union. Bodmer, R.E., Eisenberg, J.F. and Redford, K.H. 1997. Hunting and the likelihood of extinction of Amazonian mammals. Conservation Biology 11: 460-466. Carbone, C., Teacher, A. and Rowcliffe, J.M. 2007. The costs of carnivory. PLoS Biology 5: e22. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050022. Corlett, R.T. 2007. The impact of hunting on the mammalian fauna of tropical Asian forests. Biotropica 39: 292–303. Darmaraj, M.R. 2007. Tiger monitoring study in Gunung Basor Forest Reserve, Jeli, Kelantan. Petaling Jaya: WWF Malaysia. DWNP. 2010. Wildlife Protection Act 2010. Kuala Lumpur: Department of Wildlife and National Parks, Peninsular Malaysia. DWNP. 2011. License type and fees. Kuala Lumpur: Department of Wildlife and National Park, Peninsular Malaysia. http://www.wildlife.gov.my/index.php/ en/component/content/article/58-perundangan-dan-penguatkuasaan/393jenis-serta-fi-lesen Viewed on 2nd April 2011. IUCN. 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4: www.iucnredlist.org Download on 03 April 2011. Johnsingh, A.J.T. 1992. Prey selection in three large sympatric carnivores in Bandipur. Mammalia 56(4): 517-526. Johnson, A.C., Vongkhamheng, M.H. and Saithongdam, T. 2006. Effects of humancarnivore conflict on tiger and prey populations in Lao PDR. Animal Conservation 9: 421-430. Karanth, K.U. and Sunquist, M.E. 1995. Prey selection by tiger, leopard and dhole in tropical forests. Journal of Animal Ecology 64: 439-450. Karanth, K.U. and Stith, B.M. 1999. Prey depletion as a critical determinant of tiger population viability. In Riding the tiger: tiger Conservation in HumanDominated Landscapes, ed. Seidensticker, J., Christie, S., and Jackson, P. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp.100-113. Karanth, K.U., Nichols, J.D., Kumar, N.S., Link, W.A. and Hines, J.E. 2004. Tigers and their prey: predicting carnivore densities from prey abundance. PNAS 101: 4854–4858. Kawanishi, K. 2002. Population Status of tigers (Panthera tigris) in a primary rainforest of Peninsular Malaysia. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville.. Kawanishi, K. and Sunquist, M.E. 2004. Conservation status of tigers in a primary rainforest of Peninsular Malaysia. Biological Conservation 120: 329–344. Lynam, A.J., Laidlaw, R., Wan Shaharuddin Wan Noordin, Elagupillay, S. and Bennett E.L. 2007. Assessing the conservation status of the tiger Panthera tigris at priority sites in Peninsular Malaysia. Oryx 41: 454–462. MacArthur, R.H. and Pianka, E.R. 1966. On the optimal use of a patchy environment. American Naturalist 100: 603-609.

559

MacDonald, D. 2001. The new encyclopaedia of mammals. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK. Madhu Rao, Than Mynit, Than Zaw and Saw Htun. 2005. Hunting patterns in tropical forests adjoining the Hkakaborazi National Park, north Myanmar. Oryx 39: 292-300. Milner, J.M., Nilsen, E.B. and Andreassen, H.P. 2006. Demographic side effects of selective hunting in ungulates and carnivores. Conservation Biology 21: 3647. Milner-Gulland, E.J., Bennet, E., and the SCB 2002 Annual Meeting Wild Meat Group. 2003. Wild meat: the bigger picture. TRENDS in Ecology and Evolution 18: 351-357. O’Brien, T.G., Kinnaird, M.F. and Wibisono, H.T. 2003. Crouching tigers, hidden prey: Sumatran tigers and prey populations in a tropical forest landscape. Animal Conservation 6: 131-139. Rabinowitz, A. 1993. Estimating the Indochinese tiger Panthera tigris corbetti population in Thailand. Biological Conservation 65: 213-217. Rabinowitz, A. 1998. Findings: Killed for a cure. Natural History 107: 22–24. Rahul Kaul, Jandrotia, H.J.S. and McGowan, P.J.K. 2004. Hunting of large mammals and pheasants in the Indian western Himalaya. Oryx 38: 426–431. Redford, K.H. 1992. The Empty Forest. Bioscience 42: 412-422. Robinson, J.G. and Bennett, E.L. 2002. Will alleviating poverty solve the bushmeat crisis? Oryx 36: 332–332. Rowcliffe, J.M., Cowlishaw, G., and Long J. 2003. A model of human hunting impacts in multi-prey communities. Journal of Applied Ecology 40: 872-889. Sanderson, E., Forrest, J., Loucks, C., Ginsberg, J., Dinerstein, E., Seidensticker, J., Leimgruber, P., Songer, M., Heydlauff, A., O’Brien, T., Bryja, G., Klenzendorf, S. and Wikramanayake, E. 2006. Setting Priorities for the conservation and recovery of wild tigers: 2005-2015: New York & Washington, DC, USA: Wildlife Conservation Society, World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), Smithsonian and NFWF-STF??. Steinmetz, R., Wanlop Chutipong and Nareth Seuturien. 2006. Collaborating to conserve large mammals in Southeast Asia. Conservation Biology 20: 13911401. Sunquist, M.E. 1981. The social organisation of tigers (Panthera tigris) in Royal Chitwan National Park, Nepal. Washington DC: Smithsonian Institution Press. Sutherland, W.J. 2000. The conservation handbook; research, management and policy. , Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science. Wahab, A.Z.A., Lee, B., Sharma, D.S.K. and Jayasilan, M.A. 2006. Tiger ecology study in FELDA Jerangau Barat, Peninsular Malaysia. Petaling Jaya: WWF Malaysia.. Woodroffe, R. and Ginsberg, J.R. 1998. Edge effects and the extinction of populations inside protected areas. Science 280: 2126-2128.

560