Wildlife of Lao PDR: 1999 Status Report - IUCN

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The Mekong wetlands are a very special habitat, particularly where the river widens, as in this stretch of southern Champasak Province. February 1998. S. Chape / IUCN. In the late dry season, many rivers become in effect a series of pools, e.g. this tributary of the Nam Kading. May 1998. S. Chape / IUCN. Introduction Pools are among the most important and the most vulnerable habitat features of forests, particularly in the lowlands. Dong Khanthung PNBCA, February 1998. S. Chape / IUCN. Forest rivers (e.g. the Nam Hai) support specially adapted wildlife species. Some of these cannot persist if the forest is felled. May 1997. S. Chape / IUCN. 11
Wildlife of Lao PDR: 1999 Status Report Bao; and the north-central boundary follows route 8 from the Vietnamese border north-east of Ban Lak (20) in a southsouth-west direction to join the Mekong at 18ºN. This northern boundary diverges from the line of King et al., running some way to the south. However, the latter’s line cuts across major survey and/or management units (e.g. Nam Kading NBCA), whereas the modification of Thewlis et al. does not do so. Furthermore, it is easily recognisable on the ground. Using this modification thus greatly simplifies the placement of modern records from this region (which was one of the most extensively surveyed areas in Lao PDR during 1994-1998) into national context. Unfortunately Thewlis et al. (1998: Fig. 1) mis-portrayed the line (it should not in fact cut across Nam Theun Extension PNBCA) and stated erroneously that it followed the line of King et al. (1975). However, all records classified for that paper (and also Thewlis et al. 1996, Duckworth 1996a, Evans and Timmins 1998, Duckworth et al. 1998) used the road as the boundary. No published primary source has used any other boundary since the publication of King et al. (1975). Little recent field work has taken place in the area of the centre-south boundary (Evans in prep.). David-Beaulieu’s (1949-1950) work around Muang Somoy falls in southern Lao PDR according to the boundary indicated in King et al. (1975). Perhaps because Somoy lies north of the Xe Pon (which forms the Lao-Vietnam border for a short length), records from there have sometimes been allocated to central Lao PDR. David-Beaulieu’s observations from Xe Pon (“Tchepone”) could lie either in central or south Lao PDR, depending on which side of the river his observations were made; here we follow previous authors in regarding them all as central Lao PDR. These boundaries are basically a convenient latitudinal ladder to indicate the spread of a species’s records in Lao PDR. They have little meaning on the ground, and boundaries of true biogeographic units would be blurred over dozens if not hundreds of kilometers. Vidal (1960) gave ample reason using climatic and vegetation patterns to place the north-central divide some way to the north; Nam Kading and Phou Khaokhoay NBCAs, and Nam Theun Extension and Nam Chouan PNBCAs, all fall in central Lao PDR under this scheme. MacKinnon and MacKinnon (1986) placed a divide even further to the north. The selection of the boundaries used here does not imply that we consider them superior in any biological sense; it reflects merely their prior usage for vertebrate records. With the great volume of recent data on distribution, particularly of birds, a meaningful biogeographic analysis would now be possible, perhaps using cladistic principles, e.g. Parsimony Analysis of Endemism (see Morrone 1994, Raxworthy and Nussbaum 1997). Pending this, the present report sets all distributional information into north, central and south Lao PDR, as defined above. 12 HUMAN USE OF WILDLIFE Human use of wildlife in Lao PDR is high. There seem to be few if any taxa of wild vertebrates not used by at least some (and in many cases, many) ethnic groups, be it for food, medicine or in trade. Visitors from other countries in the region generally comment on the scarcity of wild birds, bats and other land vertebrates around Lao towns and villages. While most of the majority ethnic Lao of the lowlands are Buddhists, this seems to have little influence on dampening the exploitation of wildlife, in contrast to some other Buddhist regions (e.g. Sri Lanka, Tibet and Bhutan). Vientiane residents have been observed hunting small birds in the grounds of the city’s Buddhist temples. Several non-Buddhist tribes, however, have spiritual taboos against the exploitation of some species. For example, at least some Hmong tribes do not eat or touch snakes, and the Kri have taboos on the killing of all snakes, canids, bears, cats, elephants, rhinos and wild cattle. Some observers have suggested that the intensity of wildlife exploitation in Lao PDR is a recent artefact of the war and post-war years of the 1960s and 1970s when rural life in many areas was severely disrupted by bombing and fighting, the economy was in disarray, and distribution systems broke down. These features would all dispose people to turn to wildlife to sustain themselves. However, the large variety of traps, evidently of some antiquity, and the observations in historical sources of the varied methods used to catch wildlife (e.g. David-Beaulieu 1944, 1949-1950), all indicate that per capita hunting pressure has been high in Lao PDR for a very long time. The major long-term effect of the war in stimulating harvesting of wildlife is in the prevalence of arms which remain in many areas of Lao PDR. Human exploitation of wildlife in Lao PDR today has several readily-identified motives and takes many forms. The more significant are discussed below. Hunting Techniques Techniques to capture wildlife range from passive methods, such as snare lines, nets and traps (including baited explosives), to active pursuit using dogs, catapults (slingshots), cross-bows (sometimes with poison tipped arrows) and guns (e.g. Tayanin and Lindell 1991, Baird 1993, Claridge 1996). Information about techniques used in harvesting of mammals, birds, reptiles and invertebrates is scattered throughout the literature, often in sources not widely accessible (e.g. David-Beaulieu’s (1949) documentation of fish owl trapping in Savannakhet Province). Much remains to be documented and there is a role for a sister publication to that of Claridge et al. (1997) which documents fishing techniques in Lao PDR. Most passive techniques are non- or weakly-selective. This is of special concern when threatened species (e.g. pheasants, Saola, wild cattle, dolphins and crocodiles) are included in the catch. Snares vary in strength depending on the target group, ranging from small birds to very large mammals (Plates
Page 2 and 3: IUCN - The World Conservation Union
Page 4: PREFACE In 1993 IUCN, in collaborat
Page 7 and 8: Crombie, USNM. Tanya Chan-ard allow
Page 9 and 10: At Risk in Lao PDR (ARL): this cate
Page 11 and 12: ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Page 13 and 14: ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Page 15 and 16: List of Plates ○ ○ ○ ○ ○
Page 17 and 18: Wildlife of Lao PDR: 1999 Status Re
Page 25: Wildlife of Lao PDR: 1999 Status Re
Page 77 and 78:
Wildlife of Lao PDR: 1999 Status Re
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
LARGE MAMMALS J. W. Duckworth, R. J
Page 177 and 178:
1965), but no detailed fauna has ye
Page 179 and 180:
no hunter could confuse a gibbon, e
Page 181 and 182:
Species Phou Dendin NBCA Large Mamm
Page 183 and 184:
Species Nakai - Nam Theun NBCA Naka
Page 185 and 186:
Species Xe Bang-Nouan NBCA Xe Sap N
Page 187 and 188:
• Specific surveys to gain cleare
Page 189 and 190:
Young White-handed Gibbon, Xaignabo
Page 191 and 192:
m in limestone karst. Status Inform
Page 193 and 194:
Duckworth in press). Status Informa
Page 195 and 196:
[• Hylobates gabriellae Yellow-ch
Page 197 and 198:
Range and Habitat: North M15 , cent
Page 199 and 200:
ear action and management plan and
Page 201 and 202:
Common Palm Civet, Ban Lak (20) mar
Page 203 and 204:
[• Lutra sumatrana Hairy-nosed Ot
Page 205 and 206:
• Hemigalus owstoni (= Chrotogale
Page 207 and 208:
Table 14. Asian Golden Cat locality
Page 209 and 210:
Sun Bear, Xe Pian NBCA, early 1997.
Page 211 and 212:
China and Vietnam (Martin 1992, Sri
Page 213 and 214:
1986, Dobias 1992a, Salter 1989b),
Page 215 and 216:
Table 15. Summary of observations o
Page 217 and 218:
ace of S. scrofa in Lao PDR, S. s.
Page 219 and 220:
Eld’s Deer footprint, Dong Khanth
Page 221 and 222:
areas during the rainy season (Deuv
Page 223 and 224:
• Consideration of appropriate me
Page 225 and 226:
wide-ranging field experience in In
Page 227 and 228:
the headwaters of the Xe Bangfai an
Page 229 and 230:
The three squirrels most commonly t
Page 231 and 232:
Lao range to merit designation as a
Page 233 and 234:
Conservation Management and Researc
Page 235 and 236:
ORDER INSECTIVORA M. F. Robinson IN
Page 237 and 238:
of north-east Laos. In Malaysia it
Page 239 and 240:
ORDER CHIROPTERA: BATS C. M. Franci
Page 241 and 242:
Rhinolophus acuminatus, Dong Khanth
Page 243 and 244:
1992). In Lao PDR has been found ro
Page 245 and 246:
• Hipposideros armiger Great Roun
Page 247 and 248:
[Pipistrellus coromandra Indian Pip
Page 249 and 250:
east Thailand, that had apparently
Page 251 and 252:
ORDER RODENTIA, FAMILY MURIDAE C. M
Page 253 and 254:
1997). Forest habitats, probably at
Page 255 and 256:
REFERENCES Written Allen, G. M. 192
Page 257 and 258:
Laos. Bull. Soc. Roy. Sci. Nat. du
Page 259 and 260:
ats in Phou Khao Khoay NBCA. Vienti
Page 261 and 262:
mittee (draft report). MacKinnon, J
Page 263 and 264:
Robinson, H. C. 1915. On the birds
Page 265 and 266:
Thewlis, R. M., Duckworth, J. W., A
Page 267 and 268:
ANNEX 1 Selected bird and mammal sp
Page 269 and 270:
ANNEX 2 CITES-listed wildlife speci
Page 271 and 272:
ANNEX 3 Amphibian, reptile, bird an
Page 273 and 274:
Species Key species: status Current
Page 275 and 276:
ANNEX 4 Birds and large mammals ass
Page 277 and 278:
Species Association with wetlands R
Page 279 and 280:
Annexes with respect to the strengt
Page 281 and 282:
4 : 5 14 : 20 14 : 16 8 : 9 14 : 16
Page 283 and 284:
Reports of rhinoceroses during vill
Page 285 and 286:
5 : 5 20 : 20 16 : 16 8 : 9 15 : 16
Page 287 and 288:
Species Global Lao threat status ri
Page 289:
Species Global Lao threat status ri
show all

Wildlife of Lao PDR: 1999 Status Report - IUCN

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?