The conservation of tigers and other wildlife in oil palm plantations

Table 13 - Tiger ranges as calculated from camera-traps and radio tracking data
Individual Sex Area (km 2 )
Slamet Male 12.2
Tiga Jari Female 1.7
Flash Male 14.2
Wendy Female 14.0
Despite ranges extending across the concessions, tigers were photographed more
often in habitats within the plantation. Using data from ‘tiger’ (non-random) cameras
only (random cameras never took a photograph of a tiger) photo-trapping rates were
calculated for each of the three broad habitat types within the plantation and
compared with trapping rates in the forest concession. The results show that tigers
were actually photographed more often inside the plantation concession than in the
forest concession. However, tigers appeared to avoid the oil palm crop - neither
camera-traps or radio tracking ever showed a tiger ranging into the oil palm (Table 14
and Figure 24).
Table 14 - Trapping rates (photos/100 trap nights) for tigers in different habitats
Region Habitat Non random cameras
Forest concession Forest 2.26
Forest total 2.26
Plantation Forest 1.08
Palm
Scrub 3.54
Plantation total 3.08
Total 2.90
Figure 24 - Camera-trapping rates in different habitats from “tiger” cameras only
Wildlife conservation in oil palm plantations 37