A Supplemental HCVF Assessment on the Sumatran Tiger ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

FINAL REPORT Tiger <strong>HCVF</strong> <strong>Supplemental</strong> <strong>Assessment</strong> – Serapung FMU 2.4.6 The Tiger as a High Conservation Value (HCV) Central to the determination of High Conservation Value Forests within a forest management unit is the assessment and identification of High Conservation Values. The generic <strong>HCVF</strong> Global Toolkit, developed by ProForest, takes the six Forest Stewardship Council definitions of HCVs (FSC 2000), and describes a series of steps to conduct a systematic evaluation of conservation values in a forest area. <strong>HCVF</strong> delineation within any forest area is concerned with providing a rationale for its <strong>HCVF</strong> status, and developing management and monitoring steps for maintaining and/or enhancing identified HCVs. Under the Indonesian <strong>HCVF</strong> Toolkit the Sumatran tiger is assessed within the guidelines for HCV 1, defined as, “Forest areas containing globally, regionally or nationally significant concentrations of biodiversity values (e.g. endemism, endangered species, refugia)”, and under the specific component threshold of HCV1.2 defined as, “Critically Endangered Species - Any species listed as critically endangered by IUCN or on Appendix I of CITES that is actually or potentially present within the FMU is an HCV.” The ProForest and Indonesian <strong>HCVF</strong> Toolkit defines <strong>HCVF</strong> as the area of forest required to maintain or enhance identified HCVs. The Toolkits state that any part of the FMU that has been identified as a priority site for threatened or endangered species, endemics or for maintaining significant temporal concentrations of species, will normally be considered as <strong>HCVF</strong>. In the absence of nationally-defined <strong>HCVF</strong> “thresholds” the identification of priority sites (hence <strong>HCVF</strong> according to the definition above), particularly for endangered, wide-ranging species such as the tiger, requires a value judgement on the part of the assessment team. For tigers specifically, recognising the intense threats to survival of the Sumatran subspecies across its current range, this value judgement should be made within the wider context of the current status and distribution of the subspecies as a whole. The Toolkits provide some examples, relevant to tigers, where <strong>HCVF</strong> delineation may be appropriate: • the presence of any species of exceptional international concern where the existing legislation and the current protected area network does not provide sufficiently for their protection. • the population size of the rare species, where for species of high conservation status the presence of a potentially breeding pair might be sufficient to warrant <strong>HCVF</strong> designation. The SmartWood scope for this tiger assessment provided additional suggestions relating to the decision process for tiger <strong>HCVF</strong> delineation in the FMU: If the tiger is found to be “present, an appropriate <strong>HCVF</strong> boundary will serve both the conservation needs of the tiger and the avoidance of a conflict situation.” However, if the tiger is “confirmed not to be present within the FMU, or the FMU does not constitute an integral portion of the habitat and range of the tiger population, then this <strong>HCVF</strong> will not exist within the FMU.” Specifically for this assessment discussions between STCP and APP, prior to initiation of field work, identified the theoretical difficulties of reliably confirming species’ absence within the time available. Given this it was suggested that, for the purposes of this assessment, tigers should be assumed to exist within the FMU, and that decisions regarding delineation of <strong>HCVF</strong> should focus on assessing whether forests in the FMU “constitute an integral portion of the habitat and range of the tiger population” (SmartWood) and/or can be identified as “priority sites for threatened or endangered species” (Sumatran tigers in this case) as defined by the <strong>HCVF</strong> Toolkit (ProForest). Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program Pg 20/68
FINAL REPORT Tiger <strong>HCVF</strong> <strong>Supplemental</strong> <strong>Assessment</strong> – Serapung FMU 3 <strong>Assessment</strong> Methodology 3.1 Background Tigers are notoriously difficult to census and study in the wild due to their secretive nature and innate sensitivity to humans (Karanth 1987, Nowell & Jackson 1996, Franklin et al. 1999a). Direct observation and counts of tigers in tropical habitats is, for the most part, an impossibility (Karanth & Nichols 1998, 2000, Franklin et al. 1999a). In the past, study and census of wild tigers has relied on measurements of the abundance of tiger secondary signs in the field. Tiger census based on individual identification of pug-marks has been frequently used as a basis for population assessment and monitoring (Panwar 1979, 1987). However, subject to much criticism pugmark counts have been found reliable only in circumstances where field workers have a high level of familiarity with resident tigers over many years (Karanth 1987, 1988, 1995), as in Chitwan National Park of Nepal (McDougal 1977, 1999). Even under such ideal conditions the “counts” provide consistent underestimates of true tiger abundance (Miquelle et al. 1996, McDougal 1999). In tropical rainforests these methodological constraints are even more pronounced. Pug-marks and other secondary signs of tiger activity have a short persistence in the typical climate of such forests. Torrential rain and regular flooding quickly obliterates many tracks, while faeces and urine sprays are rapidly lost due to high humidity and rapid rates of decomposition (Franklin et al. 1999a). Minimum counts of individuals based on tracks and secondary signs, such as those used for the Siberian tiger (Smirnov & Miquelle 1999), are of little value in rainforest habitats except under the seasonally driest of field conditions. Transect-based census methods, relying on direct observation of individuals, are also impractical to implement in tropical rainforests. Limited visibility due to density of vegetation leads to prohibitively low probabilities of encountering wildlife directly. Similarly, census by aerial photography is also unfeasible due to the dense forest canopy preventing an unobstructed view to the forest floor. In recent years remote camera monitoring has been developed as a tool for general wildlife management (Foresman & Pearson 1998, Cutler & Swann 1999). Tigers, with their secretive nature and near complete avoidance of humans, have benefited considerably from technological developments in this field. Camera units are now commercially available which are at once cost-effective, reliable and resistant to the field conditions found throughout Asia. Recent studies have included a study of the size and population density of tiger populations in India (Karanth 1995, Karanth & Nichols 1998, 2000), tiger distribution census in Thailand and Malaysia (A. Lynam pers. comm., Kawanishi 2002), short-term (Griffiths & van Schaik 1993b, Griffiths 1994) and longterm monitoring studies on the Sumatran tiger (Franklin et al. 1999a). Identification of individual tigers has been an important component of these studies, facilitated by the individually unique pattern of stripes on the flank and face of tigers (Schaller 1967, McDougal 1977, Karanth 1995, Franklin et al. 1999b). Finally, a further constraint to the effective study of tigers in the wild is the marginal nature, remoteness and general hostility of the habitat in which the Sumatran tiger characteristically survives. For the field worker a serious challenge is presented by the combination of extreme topography, dense vegetation, lack of identifiable trails, difficult access, logistical limitations and sheer size of the forest habitat regions to be covered. The extended field periods required to generate scientifically robust data on wild tigers can only be achieved with the assistance of a strong supporting team and with adequate logistical planning. This is further exacerbated by the intrinsically low rate of data-acquisition associated with ecological study and status assessment of secretive, wide-ranging, low-density, solitary species such as the tiger. Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program Pg 21/68
Page 1 and 2: SUMATRAN TIGER CONSERVATION PROGRAM
Page 3 and 4: FINAL REPORT Tiger HCVF</st
Page 19: FINAL REPORT Tiger HCVF</st

A Supplemental HCVF Assessment on the Sumatran Tiger ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?