Camera traps as a valuable tool in patrolling

Most protected areas in India demand that guards patrol the forest daily on foot as a means of protection. Each forest guard is specified a ‘beat’, an area which is supposed to be patrolled every day, and systematically record observations on sightings and signs of wildlife. Many such beats comprise a ‘range’; the number of beats may vary depending on the size of each range, and several such administrative ranges subsequently comprise a protected area and/or a forest division. Information gathered systematically across beats on the presence of wildlife can be very valuable to reserve managers, such that it can help them understand, perhaps crudely, the presence or absence of wildlife at the smallest scale of the administrative reserve.  However, this information becomes all the more useful when speculations are ruled out, and hard evidence in the form of photographs is obtained on a regular basis on the presence of wildlife.  A good example in this case is the Ranthambore tiger reserve, where forest guards have been allotted camera-traps (remote cameras) to be deployed in their respective beats, so as to obtain photographs of tigers (and other wildlife) that use those areas. Prima facie, this seems to be a better patrolling initiative than the archaic ‘pugmark guessing’ of individual tigers, their sex, number and age of cubs present. This also appears to have given the forest guards a sense of heightened responsibility to report the genuine presence of tigers in their respective beats.

Although such activities will strictly not come under the scientific umbrella of monitoring, given the absence of a lack of a rigorous sampling framework of such ad hoc approaches, it nevertheless seems a much warranted inclusion in daily patrolling. It, in no way, undermines systematic monitoring to be taken up, such as intensive monitoring of source populations of tigers annually as endorsed by the National Tiger Conservation Authority (NTCA). However, the use of camera-traps in identifying individuals by their photographs, rather than pugmarks improves the quality of patrolling one notch higher. It enables managers to regularly keep a check on presence of tigers in source tiger areas and identify individuals present in the reserve by matching them to those identified during annual systematic monitoring of reserve. However, one must express deep caution by not regarding such secondary camera-trapping activities as ‘monitoring’, since they can only be used to validate observations in the respective beats. Such approaches do not provide any truthful estimate of population parameters nor would they be effective in measuring management effectiveness.

As such patrolling largely focuses on ‘protection’; this includes keeping a check on extractive activities of humans. However, observations on the presence of wildlife while patrolling are very useful for managers in day-to-day administrative activities, and remote cameras may be a helpful tool to aid regular patrolling. The use of remote cameras in patrolling will help managers to validate information collected by beat guards. Even today, guards are made to make plaster casts as ‘proof’ for detection of tiger pugmarks in their beats. Such casts are made every other day and stockpiled, and after a while many break and most others are forgotten. Instead, a digital photo is so much more informative an alternative. Cameras also enable managers to understand the presence of species which, otherwise being elusive, are rarely reported in daily patrols. Caution should be employed though, not to misuse this information for ‘estimation’ of population parameters, unless done in a scientific framework. Camera-traps are a valuable addition to patrolling, and a definite improvement from age-old pugmark guessing exercises.

Stripes or spots: Ecological reflections on the state of Palpur-Kuno

31st May, 2012

With recent habitat improvements and rehabilitation of villages from Palpur-Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary, a striped cat from Ranthambore has made Kuno its home. This is the second tiger that has migrated from Ranthambore. The cat was reported from Kuno in February last year and has been there ever since. With a potential riverine corridor between the two Protected areas along the Chambal and Kuno rivers and Ranthambore’s increasing population of tigers, more of these cats may soon migrate to Kuno from Ranthambore. Together with the Asiatic lion and African cheetah introductions stalled by diverse reasons, our national animal may slowly establish a population in the colossal forested landscape of Palpur-Kuno.

Palpur-Kuno wildlife sanctuary is situated in the Sheopur district of Madhya Pradesh about a 100 km from Ranthambore in adjoining Rajasthan. The 345 sq.km sanctuary has a generous buffer, which together forms a relatively large forested landscape of nearly 1300 sq.km. The habitat resembles many central Indian forests, with some patches of grassland which may gradually be overtaken by woodland. Many potential tiger prey species are found here, namely the Cheetal, Sambar and Nilgai. Smaller antelopes such as Chowsingha, Blackbuck and the Indian Gazelle also graze its premises. In addition, large numbers of feral cattle roam in profusion during the daytime. Prima facie prey densities seem adequate to support a small population of tigers and Palpur-Kuno may soon find some trotting on its trails. If at all the lion and cheetah do come, this potential smorgasbord of large carnivores would be a cat biologist’s delight. But, could Palpur-Kuno serve the conservation interests of any of these species? A recent study suggests it may, for the tiger.

A recently published study by Reddy et al. (2012) in the journal PLoS ONE uses genetic evidence and indicates that tigers move from Ranthambore to Palpur-Kuno and adjoining Madhav national Park- also situated in Madhya Pradesh. It states that this movement has largely been unidirectional as there was no evidence for first generation migration from Madhav or Palpur-Kuno to Ranthambore. It also suggests that migrating tigers have bred in newer areas adding to the genetic diversity of these smaller populations. It stresses on the importance of connectivity for tiger movement between these three reserves and managing them as one large landscape. This means inter-state collaborations between Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh to conserve the existing riverine corridors- most of which fall outside any legal protection status. Interestingly, many of these corridors along the Chambal and Kuno rivers are dominated by gullies and ravines and are treated as ‘wastelands’ by the Ministry of Rural development.

Tigers are known to be territorial and aggressive and studies have shown that they have a potentially delimiting effect on leopard populations. So, if at all tigers do set ground in Kuno, the possibility of negative interactions with the ‘mesopredators’ is expected. This includes the controversial African cheetah- alien, exotic and completely naïve to encounters with tigers. If at all introduced in the next couple of years, the presence of tigers may likely dampen any population resurrection efforts for the cheetah. Even if it is soft released, the high chances of interspecific killing cannot be ruled out. Add leopards and possibly Asiatic lions to this frame, and the cheetah has nowhere to run and nowhere to hide. Ecological separation between the larger and the smaller predators, as seen in Africa, may not be emulated in the Indian scenario.

Politically, the cheetah introduction project has given the state of Gujarat another alibi to delay the lion introduction in Kuno. Gujarat has hung onto the argument that the cheetah needs to be introduced before the lion to give it a better chance of survival. One also wonders the wisdom of such massive investments- the cheetah introduction project is budgeted at a whooping 300 crore. With such glaring uncertainties about the cheetah’s survival, deficient attention to other native species and the need to introduce lions into Palpur-Kuno, the cheetah project seems entirely grounded on horseback opinions.

So, where do we go from here? The pros and cons of the cheetah introduction have been much debated. The Supreme Court has, presently, sensibly stayed the Cheetah introduction. If all goes well, tigers may repopulate Palpur-Kuno in their own time, but the Asiatic lions would still need to be introduced once Gujarat accedes. As for now, the lion seems to have a better chance of survival at Kuno than the cheetah, which is plagued by both political and ecological upheavals. However, ecological interactions between the two apex predators need to be monitored closely if the lions do come. Kuno needs charismatic flagships and for once it could be two of the most formidable large predators found in Asia- the lion and the tiger.

25th March, 2012- De-"pressed' for time..

Depressing..how fast areas outside Pune city are changing.. surely as people of this country we are a deficient lot.. It was heartening to see gazelles though, but one often wonders for how long you would see them as well- these leftovers from the past. One fine day another earth shattering machine will turn up and blast the hillocks, make a road and all I'll do is shake my head in despair and write another post on this forum.. Isn't the amount of development in & around Pune enough? What pinnacles are we trying to achieve?

Some areas we passed today were, just 3 years back, a scatheless patch of grassland. But, now most are fenced, or blasted- the rock quarried, taken away and slated upon one of our many highways. On the road to development- merciless and demonic. My feelings normally remain ensconsed, under a viel of "nothing can be done about this". On a pragmatic front I even know writing about some godforsaken piece of 'wasteland' will not move any. 

I worry too often  and a little too much. But, of course we need development. I don't deny the fact that we do. But, why is the way things are changing around me hurting me so much? Perhaps, I don't realize the need for develpment or the larger importance of economics for our country's progress. Maybe, I am archaic in my thoughts, & selfish, since I want those places to remain the way they are so I could go there and watch some 'wildlife'. I feel utterly confused, torn at times. Two days from now, I'll even forget about it. Life will move on and places will change. We will shape our lands the way we want to, the way it suits us. Some may wince, but soon forget. As for me..

Playing ‘Cat’ch and mouse

Appalling as it may sound; it is not new to hear of revenge killing of an animal by irate villagers. The grueling act occurred on Saturday 24th September 2011, when a tigress was killed by a mammoth mob from Bhakru Tola village near Bamni in Chattisgarh. But this was a bomb waiting to explode. Now it’s time to point fingers and reprimand the accountable.

So who needs to be punished?  The tigress is already dead. The Maharashtra Forest Department is shirking responsibility and villagers are taking law into their hands.

But let’s go back a little- Apparently the tigress had mauled Sitaram Atram from Mendha Kirmiti and Anantrao Sondawle from Mayar village in Brahmapuri Forest division in Maharashtra in March 2011. The tigress was axed on the head by one of the victims. This injured tigress was then captured near Umargunda talao in FDCM's Brahmapuri range on April 3, 2011. It was then taken to Moharli in Tadoba and was treated in captivity for about 2 months. Finally, she was released in Navegaon national Park on June 12th 2011.

On June 19th and 22nd apparently the tigress killed two cows and injured 6 calves from Dhamditola village about 7-8 km from Navegaon. She used the forest area around Itiadoh lake, where most of the cattle depredation occurred. Angry villagers expressed their resentment and the forest department conducted a combing operation to drive the tigress back into Navegaon. Last report of the suspected tigress’s whereabouts was 4km from Dhamditola village around June 24th. For about two months from July to August no reports are available.

Around mid-September, Rajolabai Sonar, 65, from Murmadi village on Maharashtra-Chhattisgarh border was killed in an attack while at work in a farm, apparently by the very tigress. It was also believed that over 30 domestic animals from the forested villages in Chhattisgarh’s Rajnandgaon district had been depredated upon by the tigress in the month of September. On Saturday, September 24th, villagers from the Aamgaon Bhakru Tola village stoned the tigress to death.

In circumstances when people are mauled, once captured the tigress should not have been released at a new site. This simply transports the problem from one place to another. But to start with, was the capture warranted in the first place? If the attacks on people did not persist after the initial incident, then was she captured to treat her injuries? If the capture was to pacify the local public, then once captured why was she released after two long months, that too in a poor prey density area, like Navegaon national park? A low prey density in terms of large-bodied herbivores gives large cats such as tigers enough reason to kill slow, unguarded livestock in forest fringes. Second, many large carnivores, post release at another place, are known to track back to their original site of capture. So, where’s the wisdom of doing such ad lib releases based on horseback opinions?

Besides, wildlife researchers and serious conservationists have always been weary of such actions. But, given the ‘expert’ knowledge that hovers among many self-acclaimed authorities within the forest department, such imprudent decisions are not surprising. In the recent guidelines on managing human-leopard conflict by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, capture and translocation are last options in the case of leopards. It also clearly states that due to ‘homing instincts’ of large cats such as leopards, they should be released in the same place of capture. Tigers and leopards both belong to the genusPanthera and can be very well expected to home in, upon release at a new site. This was perhaps exactly what the tigress did when released in Navegaon.

The Maharashtra State Forest Department needs to realize that such unfounded capture-release activities will do more harm than good. Although with the best intentions, such decisions will cripple whatever little support tiger conservation has amassed in the recent years. No parks can survive without support from the local public living around them. If villagers are antagonized, retaliatory actions such as these shall follow. If not anything this incident should ring a bell about releasing captive cubs into reserves like Bor or Pench, which already have breeding populations of tigers.

“Risk varies inversely with knowledge”