Tigerpaper

Evaluating conservation areas in Thailand

Role of Nandankanan biological park, Orissa, in conservation of the Gharial (Gavialis gangeticus)

Appeal for stamps

Bangladesh protected areas: Wildlife

Primates in Assam - Status and conservation

Ladakh Urial verging on extinction

Women's indigenous knowledge and attitudes in wildlife conservation: A case study in Padampur Village Development Committee (VDC) royal national park Nepal

Ecotourism and tropical forests: Contributions. issues and training

Ichthyoecology, management and conservation of fish resources of lake Sone in Assam (India)

Tigerpaper

Evaluating conservation areas in Thailand

by John Parr

Thailand has several different categories of protected areas and each serves various functions according to its respective enabling legislature and operating objectives. National parks - both terrestrial and marine - are lands which are gazetted to preserve and protect the natural environment, especially for the purposes of education, recreation and tourism (Kasetsart University, 1987). As of 31 March 1996, there were 63 terrestrial national parks. These sites cover 36,519 km²* or 7.1% of the country (Terrestrial National Parks Division, 1996).

There were also 18 marine national parks, comprising six archipelagoes, a bay dominated by mangrove, nine coastal parks dominated by beaches, a site dominated by diverse wetland ecosystems, and a forested site dominated by Malayan evergreen forest. The 18 parks cover a total of 5,219 km² or 0.99%* of Thailand (Marine National Parks Division, 1996).

Wildlife sanctuaries are lands preserved and protected from human activity which may disturb wildlife (Kasetsart University, 1987). Apart from one site which protects the nation's only substantial remaining area of peatswamp forest, all the other sites encompass terrestrial forest areas. As of 31 March 1996, 38 areas had been gazetted, totaling 28,598 km²* or 5.56%* of the nation (Wildlife Conservation Division, 1996)

In addition, there were 48 non-hunting areas, comprising 20 wetland sites and 28 terrestrial areas. Non-hunting areas are smaller than wildlife so these areas prohibited The hunting of selected species, which were listed for each specific site. In 1992, the law was revised, forbidding destruction of vegetation and land tenure, as well as protecting all animal species within the designated areas.

Representativeness of the Protected Areas System

The protected areas network was comprehensively reviewed in 1987. The assessment concluded that the National Parks Division and Wildlife Conservation Division of the Royal Forest Department had included a good representation of the major habitats found within Thailand in the system. Notable exceptions included lowland evergreen forest, marshes, and mangrove/mudflats. A second review undertaken for the Thai Forestry Sector Master Plan (1993) stated that the terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems were well represented, with the exception of the Malayan mixed deciduous dipterocarp forest, wet seasonal evergreen forest confined to the southeast, peat forest, and mangrove forest. Evaluation of the status of mudflats has been largely overlooked, while some terrestrial ecosystems such as heathlands have been ignored.

The quality of the protected areas system is also reflected in its capacity to protect the nation's biodiversity. Lekagul and McNeely (1988), regarding the conservation of mammalian species, considered that "this system is a significant conservation achievement". Round (1988), in his review of Resident Forest Birds in Thailand, stated that "the wide geographical coverage of nature reserves, the proportion of remaining forest which is protected, and the large areas of many individual sites, forms a promising basis for future conservation efforts". More recently, Santisuk et al. (1991) stated that they were "impressed by the areas currently legislated for conservation. Overall, they form an adequate basis for conserving the most important botanical resources of the Kingdom". It is widely believed that the existing network of conservation areas in Thailand is one of the best in Southeast Asia.

Outside the parks, sanctuaries and other preserves, forest conservation has been a great deal less successful. Indeed, generally the forestry sector has been plagued by persistent deforestation; between 1961 - 1991 annual deforestation averaged 456,000 ha (100 ha=1 km²). Legal provisions for forest protection, including those in the Forest Act and the National Reserved Forest Act, have proved inadequate in the face of uncontrollable encroachment. Forest cover declined to only 26.7% in 1991.

In 1985, a National Forest Policy was promulgated, which stated that the country should have 40% of the land area under forest cover. Initially this policy stated that the country should have 15% conservation forest and 25% commercial forest. These targets were later interchanged, when it was decided that at least 25% should be conservation forest. This policy was reiterated in the Thai Forestry Sector Master Plan produced in 1993, a holistic review to improve forest management in the country. Within the Plan, defined specific policies were as follows:

All state forest lands will be allocated for management in the following sequence of priorities:

· Remaining natural forests for the conservation of biodiversity, protection of crucial watersheds and multipurpose forestry.

· Deforested lands outside protected areas for land reform and to be leased for agriculture.

· Conservation areas will be managed by the state in collaboration with communities already conserving parts of these forests; multipurpose areas by the local community; and deforested areas outside land reform by villagers, small farmers, and other land owners.

The Thai Forestry Sector Master Plan failed to clarify what the most appropriate designations for the remaining natural forest areas should be. As a result, the Royal Forest Department has interpreted the National Forest Policy and in turn, the Thai Forestry Sector Master Plan, to conserve the remaining forest areas by designating them either as national parks or wildlife sanctuaries. The reasoning for adopting this strategy is simply that it was widely believed that the National Parks Division and the Wildlife Conservation Division had the best track records for curtailing forest degradation, supported by their respective stringent laws.

Expansion of the Protected Areas Network

Expansion of the parks and sanctuaries system is being undertaken by the National Parks Division and the Wildlife Conservation Division. Accordingly, 42 areas have been identified for designation as new national parks, covering 2,308 million ha or 4.5% of the country. These include 24 sites in northern Thailand, covering 1.51 million ha of forested lands or 2.93% of the nation; 17 areas in the northeast encompassing 940,250 ha or 1.83% of Thailand; 11 areas in central Thailand covering 821,845 ha or 1.6%; and 10 sites in the south, protecting 384,614 ha or 0.73% (Terrestrial National Parks Division, 1996).

Six other areas are also under consideration as marine national parks, which collectively encompass 139,721 ha (Marine National Parks Division, 1996). The six parks that are proposed, as well as the four parks that have been declared since 1986, are coastal parks dominated by beaches. Further to this, five areas have been singled out for designation as non hunting areas, all but one - mangrove habitat being terrestrial forest habitat.

The Policy and the New Partnership

To the conservation community, both within Thailand and abroad, the prospect of almost doubling the number of national parks and wildlife sanctuaries sounds extremely impressive. But are these remaining areas truly suitable to become national parks or wildlife sanctuaries? Indeed, are these areas truly of national value? And, taking account of the local people, will adoption of this strategy lead towards sustainable forest management, the primary objective it set out to achieve?

The Thai Forestry Sector Master Plan pointed out that the Royal Forest Department could no longer shoulder the responsibility of protecting the remaining resources. The Plan indicated that a New Partnership was necessary, a partnership between the RFD and the local people. Locking up remaining forest blocks may not be the best solution.

Three alternatives exist for managing these undesignated areas:

· Continued management under Forest Protection Units: this causes rapid destruction of resources.

· Establishment of a new protected area category: this would take too long to be passed as law by the Thai Government.

· Gazettement of all remaining areas - that are not nationally important - as non-hunting areas, introducing increasing responsibility by local people for the resources.

Recommendations

Natural forest areas that are under consideration for designation as new protected areas must take account of the following aspects: i) representativeness of ecosystems, with regard to the area and location of similar habitat already protected within other sites in the region/big-unit; ii) population pressure on the resources.

Consideration should be given to declaring a policy of establishing these ungazetted forest areas as non-hunting areas. The adoption of this strategy proscribes the emplacement of a competent forest protection structure. This strategy should also permit substantial numbers of village communities to remain living in these areas. It would also facilitate a freer hand on villager utilization of the forest resources. Furthermore, the policy would not compromise the truly national/international value of the existing national parks and sanctuaries.

These designations would allow the government to proceed with small-scale, rural development initiatives in these areas such as road construction, school establishment, small irrigation reservoirs, etc., which would be banned from the nationally important areas - the national parks and wildlife sanctuaries. The strategy may necessitate that a new Division be established - the Non-hunting Area Division. The administration of forest parks, which are also of only provincial significance, should be placed within this Division.

The marine national parks and the wetland non-hunting areas should be combined, forming a Marine and Freshwater Reserves Division. This would facilitate: i) effective management of all wetland reserves under one discrete government agency; ii) the development of expertise in wetland ecosystem management; iii) the development of expertise in wetland-related infrastructural development; iv) effective liaison with national and international wetland organizations such as the Ramsar Bureau; v) funding for tourism development of key freshwater wetlands; and vi) stronger links with the other government agencies involved with wetlands.

A comprehensive Systems Plan should be conducted, re-evaluating the designation of all the protected areas.

References

Kasetsart University. 1987. Assessment of National Parks, Wildlife Sanctuaries and other Preserves Development in Thailand. Prepared by the Faculty of Forestry, Kasetsart University, in collaboration with the Royal Forest Department and the Office of the National Environment Board, supported by USAID. Bangkok, Thailand.

Lekagul, B. and J.A. McNeely. 1988 (Second Edition). Mammals of Thailand. Bangkok, Thailand.

Round, P.D. 1988. Resident Forest Birds in Thailand: their Status and Conservation. International Council for Bird Preservation, Monograph No.2. Cambridge, U.K. pp. 211.

Santisuk, T., Smitinand, T., Hoamuangkaew, W., Ashton, P., Sohmer, S.H. and J.R. Vincent. 1991. Plants for Our Future: Botanical Research and Conservation Needs in Thailand. Royal Forest Department, Bangkok, Thailand.

Royal Forest Department. 1993. Thai Forestry Sector Master Plan. Royal Forest Department, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives, Bangkok, Thailand.

Existing Structure for Conservation Divisions
		Existing Areas	Proposed Areas
National Parks Division	Terrestrial National Parks	63	42
Marine National Parks Division	Marine National Parks	18	6
Wildlife Conservation Division	Wildlife Sanctuaries	38	31
	Non-hunting Areas	28 ta: 20 wa	5 ta: 1 wa
Proposed Structure for Conservation Divisions
		Existing Areas	Proposed Areas
National Parks Division	Terrestrial National Parks	63	x
Marine & Freshwater Reserves Division	Marine National Parks	18	6
	Wetland Non-hunting Areas	20 wa	1 wa
Wildlife Conservation Division	Wildlife Sanctuaries	38	y
Non-hunting Area Division(Provincial Forest Management Division)	Terrestrial Non-hunting Areas	28 ta	5 ta+(42-x)+(31 - y)

Note: ta = terrestrial area, wa = wetland area; x and y are expected to be less than 5 in number

Author's address. 62/132 Apartment Block 2, Kehachumchon Raksi, Soi Chaeng Watthana 5, Don Muang 10210, Thailand.

Role of Nandankanan biological park, Orissa, in conservation of the Gharial (Gavialis gangeticus)

by L.N. Acharjyo, S.K Kar and S.K. Patnaik

Introduction

The preliminary survey report on the status of gharial (Gavialis gangeticus) in Orissa by an FAO/UNDP consultant, Dr. H.R. Bustard during June 1974, indicated that this species was on the verge of extinction. At that time there were only five gharials (two males and three females) in Orissa State's Satkosia Gorge Sanctuary, and three sub-adult gharials at the Nandankanan Biological Park (FAO, 1974). The report further suggested that as this species was rare in Orissa, every effort should be made to breed the species in captivity, utilizing the three existing sub-adult gharials of the park after constructing a suitable breeding enclosure. Accordingly, a scheme was prepared and implemented by the State Forest Department for captive breeding of the gharials, as well as the two other species of Indian crocodilians present in the park since 1975-76. The present paper is intended to highlight the role of the Nandankanan Biological Park, Orissa, in conservation of the gharial through its breeding in captivity and rehabilitation of the captive-bred specimens in their natural habitat.

Details of the gharial breeding enclosure, breeding population, breeding success and rehabilitation of the captive-bred young ones are also described.

Breeding Enclosure

An area measuring 71 x 51 m was utilized for the gharial breeding enclosure inside the park. A compound wall 2m high was erected all around the area, except for 30m on the viewer's side, where a dry moat and 0.5m high parapet was provided to prevent the escape of gharials and disturbance by visitors. An oval-shaped concrete pool measuring 60m long, 30m wide and 9.15m deep was constructed inside the enclosure. The pool has the capacity to hold 2.7 million liters of water. There is provision to fill this pool with water from the nearby lake with the help of a 40 horsepower electric pump. About 0.45 million liters of water is taken out every day, and the pool is refilled with fresh water; thus, a slow current of flowing water is maintained. There is a 2.40m high sandbank on one side of the pool with suitable riverine vegetation that gives the pool the appearance of a miniature Satkosia Gorge of the Mahanadi River, the ideal natural habitat of the gharials (Mohapatra et al., 1976). The enclosure was so constructed to fulfill the minimum requirements for breeding the species in captivity. During the breeding season, the enclosure was closed to visitors to minimize the disturbances. Special care was taken to always keep the water level of the breeding pool full to the brim to facilitate easy movement of the egg-laying females onto the sand bank.

Breeding Population

On February 13,1976, the three resident gharials in the park - a male (2.7m) and two females (2.5m and 2.65m), were introduced into the pool for breeding purposes (Mohapatra et al., 1976). At that time, the male was estimated to be about 16 years old, and the females about 12-13 years old (Bustard and Moharana, 1985). On February 20, 1979, a sub-adult female gharial from Trivandrum Zoo in Kerala, measuring 2.3m, was added into the pool. Subsequently, on January 4, 1979, three more sub-adult females born in 1975 (measuring 1.51.8m) were introduced. And finally, on January 11, 1980, an adult male measuring 3.7m, obtained as a breeding loan from the Frankfurt Zoological Society, Germany, was released into the pool (Bustard and Moharana, 1985).

The resident male suffered a prolapse of the genitals and cloaca for several minutes during the 1977 and 1978 breeding seasons, which were successfully treated both times (Mohanty et al., 1980). Unfortunately, during the 1980 breeding season (January-February), the Frankfurt male became dominant, frequently aggressively chasing the resident male, resulting in its death in February (Bustard and Moharana, 1981). Thus, the breeding population consisted of the adult male from Frankfurt zoo and six adult and sub-adult females.

Breeding Success

The first successful breeding in captivity of gharial was recorded in this park in 1980 (Acharjyo, 1981). Subsequently, regular breeding involving 1-5 out of the 6 female gharials in the breeding enclosure has been observed. Details of the breeding results recorded from 1980 to 1994 are given in the table below.

Month/Year	No of eggs laying females (No. of clutches)	Total no. of eggs laid (Range of clutch size)	Month of hatching	Total no. of hatchlings	% of hatchlings during the year
March/1980	1 (1)	25 (25)	May	24	96
March*/1981	1 (1)	5 (5+)	Eggs did not hatch	Nil	0
March/1982	2 (2)	55 (27-28)	May/June	25	45
March/1983	3 (3)	34 (5-15)	May	22	65
March/1984	4 (4)	117 (27-33)	May	107	91
March/1985	5 (5)	138 (12-35)	May	105	76
March/1986	5 (5)	157 (25-36)	May/June	118	75
March/1987	5 (5)	140 (15-37)	May/June	93	66
March/1988	5 (5)	118 (2-42)	May/June	101	86
March/1989	5 (5)	179 (32-46)	May/June	163	91
March/1990	4 (4)	155 (36-43)	May/June	75	48
March/1991	5 (5)	205 (36-50)	May/June	139	68
March/1992	5 (5)	207 (31-51)	May/June	155	75
March/1993	3 (3)	145 (47-51)	May	79	54
March/1994	4 (4)	152 (21-57)	May	29**	19
Total	57 clutches	1,832		1,235

*not recorded, but probably in March

**112 eggs were taken by predators

As can be seen from the Table above, a total of 1,872 eggs were laid in 57 clutches by six females over the 15-year period from 19801994. Each female laid one clutch of eggs per annum. The number of females that laid eggs during each breeding season were as follows: 1980 and 1981: 1; 1982: 2; 1983 and 1993: 3; 1984, 1990 and 1994: 4; 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, 1991 and 1992: 5. Although all six adult females were in the egg-laying stage, in no year did all six lay eggs at the same time. The clutch size varied from 2-57 eggs, with a mean of 32.14. The eggs were always laid during March and hatched in May or early June. Out of 1,832 eggs laid, 1,235 hatchlings were born, giving a hatching percentage of 67.41.

Rehabilitation Programme

So far, 331 captive-bred and reared gharials (yearlings/juveniles) from the park measuring over 1.0m in length have been released in different locations in Mahanadi River of Satkosia Gorge Sanctuary between October, 1986, to July, 1993 as detailed below:

Date of release	No. released
24.10.1996	35
07.01.1987	36
04.04.1987	60
04.10.1987	65
14.10.1987	03
06.11.1989	60
21.07.1993	72
Total	331

Besides serving the rehabilitation programme, the park was also able to meet the demands of different captive rearing facilities located in India, as well as abroad. So far, 74 captive-bred juvenile gharials have been supplied, either on a sale or exchange basis, to several places including the Forest Department, Tripura; Forest Department, Arunachal Pradesh; Madras Crocodile Bank; Madras Snake Park; and zoological parks at Vandalur (Madras), Baroda, Junagarh, Bombay, Mysore, Bokaro, Pune, Trivandrum, Trichur, Bhilai, and Singapore.

Discussion

Gharials have been successfully bred at the Nandankanan Biological Park since March, 1980, and continues to be an annual occurrence. The park's gharial breeding enclosure fulfills the requirements of three key factors found in the gharial's natural habitat, i.e. a deep pool, flowing water, and a high nesting bank (Bustard and Moharana, 1985). Proper day-to-day management and feeding practices, coupled with health care, have facilitated the successful breeding of the animal. Since the park lies within the range of distribution of the species, no special arrangements for control of climatic factors are needed.

The clutch size of the 12 nesting female gharials in the Chambal area ranged from 10-64, with an average of 42 (Whitaker and Basu, 1982). According to Daniel (1983), the clutch size of the species varies from 10-96, with an average of 40.

The percentage of hatching success of gharial eggs collected in Uttar Pradesh during 1975- 1980 varied from 55.3% to 88.8% (Whitaker and Basu, 1982), whereas at Tikarpada in Satkosia Gorge Sanctuary, the hatching success was 53% (Singh, 1976), against 67.41% in the present park study.

The first recorded release of into the wild of a captive-reared gharial hatched from an egg collected from the wild took place at Tikarpara in Satkosia Gorge Sanctuary (Orissa) in April, 1977 (Des, 1981). So far, 609 juvenile gharials have been released into the Mahanadi River of Satkosia Gorge Sanctuary, including 331 animals from the Nandankanan Biological Park.

Conclusion

The basic objective of gharial conservation through captive breeding and rehabilitation of the captive-bred specimens in their natural habitat, has been successfully achieved at the Nandankanan Biological Park, Orissa, as per the programme conceived by the State Forest Department in 1975-76.

Acknowledgements

The authors are highly thankful to Dr. C.R. Mohapatra, I.F.S., Principal Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife) & Chief Wildlife Warden, Orissa, Bhubaneswar, for his encouragement and valuable advice.

References

Acharjyo, L.N. 1981. Cited by Groombridge, B. (1982) in the IUCN Amphibia-Reptilia Red Data Book Part I, pp.405-413.

Bustard, H.R. and S. Moharana. 1981. Fatal male-male conflict in the Gharial, Gavialis gangeticus (Gmelin) (Reptilia, Crocodilia). 78(1): 171 173.

Bustard, H.R. and S. Moharana. 1985. Captive breeding of the Gharial (Gavialis gangeticus). Asra - The Journal of the Association for the study of Reptilia and Amphibia 2(4):23-45.

Daniel, J.C. 1983. The book of Indian Reptiles. Bombay Natural History Society. Bombay, pp.15- 16.

Das, G.M. 1981. Conservation and research on Gharial in Orissa. Indian Forester, 107(1):42-50.

FAO. 1974. A preliminary survey of the prospects for crocodile farming (based on the work of Dr. H.R. Bustard). FO:IND/74/04.

Mohapatra, S., Acharjyo, L.N. and B. Mishra. 1976. Catching and transferring adult Gharials (Gavialis gangeticus). Indian Forester, 102(9):636-637.

Mohanty, J., Tripathy, S.B., Acharjyo, L.N., Pradhan, P.C. and B. Mishra. 1980. Prolapse of the genitals, including prolapse of cloaca in male Gharial (Gavialis gangeticus): A clinical case report. Indian Vet. J. 57(4):347-349.

Singh, L.A.K. 1976. Rearing Gharial in captivity. Newsletter of the Madras Snake Park Trust and Conservation Centre, 1(2):5-6.

Whitaker, R. and D. Basu. 1982. The Gharial (Gavialis gangeticus) - A review. J. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc., 79(3):531548.

Authors' Addresses. Dr. L.N. Acharjyo, Ex-Senior Veterinary Officer, Nandankanan Biological Park, Orissa, House No. M-71, Housing Board Colony, Baramunda, Bhubaneswar - 751 003, India; Dr. S.K Kar, Research Officer (Wildlife) c/o The Chief Wildlife Warden, Orissa, 7-Saheed Nagar, Bhubaneswar- 751007, Orissa, India; Mr. S.K. Patnaik, Director, Nandankanan Biological Park, Mayur Bhawan, Janpath, Saheed Nagar, Bhubaneswar- 751007, India

Appeal for stamps

The Dr. Salim All Memorial Nature Club is appealing to institutions, nature lovers, and collectors of stamps of flora and fauna of the world to donate their extra collections to the Club to help educate the children residing within the operating area of the club.

For further information, please write to: Mr. Awadesh Sharma, Secretary, Dr. Salim Ali Memorial Nature Club, C/O SITA RAM SAHU, Bari Hatt Mahoba, P.O. Malhoba, (UP.) Mahoba - 210427, India.

Bangladesh protected areas: Wildlife

by Md. Khalilur Rahman

Bangladesh has a unique geographical position, being situated in the sub-tropical belt at the head of the world's largest gulf - the Bay of Bengal, at the apex of the most prominent monsoon current, and at the confluence of two mighty rivers - the Ganges (Padma) and the Brahmaputra (Jamuna). It is the largest deltaic plain in the world (Anon, 1981).

The climate of Bangladesh is characterized by hot, rainy, humid summers and dry, mild winters. The summer monsoon is preceded by a period of thunderstorms from March to May. In the early part of summer the monthly mean maximum temperatures hover around 37.7°C, while in the drier western part of the country, temperatures of 43°C and higher have been recorded. From November to March the climate is mild and dry, with occasional showers from the northeastern monsoon, followed by depressions in the Bay of Bengal during April-May.

Geologically, the rocks of Bangladesh date from the Pleistocene to Miocene epochs, (Tertiary period). UNDP/FAO (1971) recorded 20 types of soil from various parts of the country, which can be conveniently grouped under hill, terrace and flood plain areas. The hill areas comprise about 12% of the total area of the country. The high hill ranges are aligned north-south, with summits rising between 300 and 1,000 m above sea level. All the hill areas supporting forest of some kind can still be considered as suitable habitat for wild animals. The flood plain area covers 80% of Bangladesh. This flat alluvial plain is crisscrossed by rivers and their tributaries and distributaries. The southwestern extremity of the flood plain supports the Sundarbans mangrove forest, which is possibly the most suitable habitat for wild animals. The Madhupur and Barind tracts cover 8% of the country and form the terrace areas. With few exceptions, the whole of north Bangladesh has sparse vegetation and supports dry deciduous plants. Many areas have become barren and desertification is possibly setting in due to the denudation of forests and wood (Timm, 1981).

Wildlife Habitat

The total forested areas of Bangladesh cover less than 25% of the country's land area (Anon, 1981). However, the wildlife is not found only in the forests. Species which are truly forest-dwelling may not live outside it, but those with wild ecological preferences can adapt themselves well to the available habitats. So from the wildlife point of view, both forested and non-forested areas are equally important.

Present Status of Wildlife

Provisional data indicates some 806 wildlife species occurring in Bangladesh, which fall into the following categories:

Class	No. of Orders	No. of Families	Number of Genera	No. of Species
Mammalia	9	31	74	105
Aves	20	60	261	567
Reptilia	2	19	66	120
Amphibia	1	4	9	14
	32	114	410	806

This is a very conservative estimate. Although some field studies have been carried out in recent years which have given reasonably satisfactory data to make a general assessment, a thorough and long term study of the whole country has not yet been made. About 45 species have been added to our list in the last two decades or so, which are not clearly mentioned in the old literature. Further investigation may add a few more species to the present lists.

Protected Areas

Three types of protected areas are defined in the Bangladesh Wildlife Preservation Act, 1974:

· Wildlife Sanctuary: an area maintained as an undisturbed breeding ground for wild fauna and where the habitat is protected for the continued well-being of the resident or migratory fauna.

· National Park: a comparatively large area of natural beauty to which the members of the public have access for recreation, education and research, and in which the wildlife is protected.

· Game Reserve: normally comprises a relatively isolated area meant for protection of wildlife in general and to increase the population of specified species.

Wildlife conservation, including the management of wildlife sanctuaries, national parks, game reserves, etc., is at present the responsibility of the Forest Department. The Bangladesh Wildlife (Preservation) Act, 1974, provided for constitution of a Wildlife Advisory Board, which was established in 1976 under the chairmanship of the Minister for Agriculture. The function of this board is to advise the government on matters relating to the preservation, conservation, protection and management of wildlife in the country.

A separate wildlife circle, with specific responsibility for management of wildlife matters within the Forestry Department, was established initially with 112 staff members. Though this system was not very effective, it was a promising development in the conservation and management of wildlife. This system continued until June 1983, after which it was dismantled by the ENAM Committee report in the interest of economy. A Conservator of Forests is responsible for looking after the field of wildlife. His duty at present is advisory in nature.

During the Second Five Year Plan, a wildlife development scheme was in the pipeline, but due to funding constraints, this was abandoned in June 1982. Following the downgrading of wildlife conservation as a normal Forest Department activity, and abolition of the headquarters organization, wildlife conservation has now become the theoretical responsibility of the Forest Department. Under this system, practically no scientific wildlife management activity is being pursued in the country. Recently, a recommendation to the government was made for a national conservation policy in which a separate department for this purpose would be established.

References

Anonymous. 1981. Agriculture in Bangladesh. Agricultural Development Corporation for the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. Dhaka.

Husain, K.Z. 1986. Presidential Address. Eleventh Annual Bangladesh Science Conference. University of Rajshahi.

Khan, M.A.R. 1982. Wildlife of Bangladesh - A Checklist. University of Dhaka.

Timm, R.W. 1981. Forestry "development" and its impact on environment. Proceedings of the 3rd National Zoological Conference. Dhaka. pp.23-24.

UNDP/FAO. 1971. Soil Survey Project: Bangladesh Agricultural Development Possibilities. Technical Report No.2, Rome.

Table 1: List of Wildlife Sanctuaries (WS), National Parks (NP) and Game Reserves (GR) of Bangladesh (Husain, 1986)

Name	Area(ha)	Year established/Notification	Purpose
Sundarbans (WS)	16,065	--	To preserve breeding habitats
Sundarbans East (WS)	5,439	1960/1977	To preserve Bengal tiger (Panthera tigris) and its habitats
Sundarbans South	17,878	-/1977	-do-
Sundarbans West (WS)	9,069	-/1977	-do-
Rema-Kalenga (WS)	1,095	-/1981	To preserve existing fauna and flora in the area
Char Kukri-Mukri (WS)	40	-/1981	To preserve existing habitat used by local and migratory birds
Pablakhali (WS)	42,087	1962/1983	To preserve fauna and habitat for Whitewinged wood duck (Cairina scutulata)
Hail Haor (WS)	1,427	--	To preserve habitats for migratory ducks
Rampahar-Sitapahar (WS)	3,026	--	To preserve local fauna and habitats
Hazarikhal (WS)	2,909	--	-do-
Chunati, Chittagong (WS) (Proposed)	19,177 (acres)
Dulahazara, Cox's Bazar (WS) (Proposed)	3,950 (acres)
Khagrachari (WS) (Proposed)			Elephant
Himchuri (NP)	1,729	-/1980	To preserve fauna and habitats as well as to provide facilities for research, education and recreation
Bhawal (NP)	5,022	1974/1982	To preserve and develop the habitats and provide facilities for research, education and recreation
Madhupur (NP)	8,436	1962/1982	-do-
Ramsagar (NP)	52	1960/1974	-do-
Teknaf (GR)	11,615	1960/1983	To preserve Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) and its habitats

Table 2: Tentative List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife of Bangladesh

(C = Common; E = Endangered; FC = Fairly Common; T = Threatened; U = Uncertain; VC = Very Common)

English Name	Scientific Name	Past Status	Present Status
AMPHIBIA
Bull Frog	Rana tigrina	VC*	T
Green Frog	R. hexadactyla	U	T
REPTILIA
Salt Water/Estuarine Crocodile	Crocodylus porosus	C	E
Gharial	Gavialis gangeticus	C	E
Olive Ridley Turtle	Lepidochelys olivacea	C	E
Green Turtle	Chelonia mydas	C	E
Hawksbill Turtle	Eretmochelys imbricata	C	E
Loggerhead Turtle	Caretta caretta		C
Leatherback Turtle	Dermochelys coriacea	C	E
Batagur Turtle	Batagur baska	C	E
Bostami Turtle	Trionyx nigricans	C	E
Land Tortoise	Geochelone emys	C	E
Grey Lizard	Varanus bengalensis	C	T
Monitor/Ring Lizard	V. salvator	VC	T
Yellow Lizard	V. flaviscens	C	T
Clouded/Black Lizard	V. nebulosa	C	T
Rock Python	Python molurus	FC	E
King Cobra	Ophiophagus hannah	FC	E
Dogfaced Water Snake	Cerberus rhynchops	C	T
Hook-nosed Sea Snake	Enhydrina schitosa	VC	T
Annulated Sea Snake	Hydrophis cyanocinctus	U	T
Banded Sea Snake	H. fasciatus	C	T
Estuarine Sea Snake	H. obscurus	C	T
Common Narrowheaded Sea Snake	Microcephalophis gracilis	C	T
Cantor's Narrowheaded Sea Snake	M. cantoris	C	T
AVES
Little Grebe	Podiceps ruficollis	VC	T
Darter/Sunbird	Anhinga rufa	FC	T
Purple Heron	Ardea purpurea	C	E
Grey Heron	A. cinerea	C	T
Openbill Stork	Anastomus oscitans	C	E
Lesser Adjutant	Leptoptilos javanicus	FC	E
Whitenecked Stork	Ciconia episcopus	FC	E
Spoonbill	Platalea leucorodia	FC	E
Greater Whistling Teal	Dendrocygna bicolor	C	E
Whitewinged Wood Duck	Cairina scutulata	F	E
Comb Duck/Nukta	Sarkidiornis melanotos	F	E
Blackwinged Kite	Elanus caeruleus	C	E
Whitebellied Sea Eagle	Haliaeetus leucogaster	C	E
Pallas's Fishing Eagle	H. Ieucoryphus	FC	E
Greyheaded Fishing Eagle	Ichthyophaga ichthyaetus	C	E
Whitebacked Vulture	Gyps bengalensis	VC	T
Assam Black Partridge	Francolinus francolinus	FC	E
Rain Quail	Coturnix coromendelica	C	E
Common Peafowl	Provo cristatus	F	E
Pheasant-tailed Jacana	Hydrophasianus chirurgus	FC	T
Painted Snipe	Rostratula benghalensis	FC	T
Brown Fish Owl	Bubo zeylonensis	C	E
Hill Myna	Gracula religiosa	C	T
Paradise Flycatcher	Terpsiphone paradisi	FC	T
MAMMALIA
Slow Loris	Nycticebus coucang	FC	E
Common Macaque	Presbytis entellus	F	E
Crabeating Macaque	Macaca fascicularis	F	T
Hoolock Gibbon	Hylobates hoolock	C	E
Large Gibbon	Viverra zibetha	C	E
Fishing Cat	Felis viverrina	FC	E
Jungle Cat	F. chaus	FC	T
Tiger	Panthera tigris	FC	E
Leopard	P. pardus	C	T
Clouded Leopard	Neofelis nebulosa	FC	E
Asiatic Elephant	Elephas maximus	C	E
Barking Deer	Muntiacus muntjak	C	T
Sambar	Cervus unicolor	C	T
Serow	Capricornis sumatraensis	F	E
Hispid Hare	Caprolagus hispidus	C	E

Table 3: Wildlife species which are greatly endangered and which have not been seen during the last two decades

1.	Marbled Cat	Felis marmorata
2.	Golden Cat	F. temmincki
3.	Burmese Peafowl	Pavo muticus
4.	Greater Adjutant	Leptoptilos dubius
5.	King or Black Vulture	Sarcogyps calvus
6.	Bengal Florican	Euphodotis bengalensis

Table 4: Wildlife species which have become extinct from Bangladesh during the present century (Husain, 1986)

1.	Great One-horned Rhinoceros	Rhinoceros unicornis
2.	Lesser One-homed Rhinoceros	R. sondaicus
3.	Asiatic Two-horned Rhinoceros	Dicerorhinus sumatrensis
4.	Bluebull/Nilgai	Boselaphus tragocamelus
5.	Wild Buffalo	Bubalus arnee
6.	Gaur	Bos gaurus
7.	Banteng	B. javanicus
8.	Swamp Deer/Barasingha	Cervus duvauceli
9.	Hog Deer	Axis porcinus
10.	Wolf	Canis lupus
11.	Pinkheaded Duck	Rhodonessa caryophyllacea
12.	Marsh Crocodile	Crocodylus palustris

Author's address: c/o Dept. of Zoology, University of Dhaka, Dhaka-1000, Bangladesh.

Primates in Assam - Status and conservation

by Anwaruddin Chouldhury

Introduction

India's eastern state of Assam has an area of 78,523 km², with an estimated population of 23 million, distributed over 23 districts. Physiographically, most of Assam consists of plains, the most important of which is the Brahmaputra valley, covering more than 60% of the total area. Towards the south lie the smaller Cachar Plains, formed by the Barak river. The main hilly areas cover North Cachar Hills and parts of Cachar. The Barail range is the highest hill range in Assam, with some parts rising above 1,800m.

Assam has a tropical monsoon climate with a hot, wet summer and a cool, dry winter, with occasional winter rains. Annual rainfall ranges from less than 1,000mm to over 6,000mm. Temperatures range from a minimum of 7⁰C in winter to a maximum 35⁰C in summer.

The main vegetation types are tropical wet evergreen, tropical semi-evergreen, and tropical moist deciduous. Tropical wet evergreen rain forest occurs in eastern and southern Assam. Smaller patches are also found in the Bhabar zone of the Himalayan foothills. Tropical semi-evergreen forest occurs in central Assam, in the 'duar' region of the north, and also in the extreme south. In western Assam, the moist deciduous type is dominant. Along the Brahmaputra river bank and in the terse belt along the base of the Himalayas, patches of wet Savannah grassland (elephant grass, etc.) are found. In the higher areas of the Barails is found sub-tropical broadleaf hill forest. The only area where natural pine forest occurs is western Karbi Anglong.

Primate Distribution and Abundance

Of the 12 known primate families in the world, three occur in Assam, i.e. Lorisidae, Cercopithecidae and Hylobatidae. Species-wise accounts on the basis of field work carried since 1986 (Choudhury, 1989 and subsequent works) are given below:

Slow Loris (Nycticebus coucang): Found in the evergreen and semi-evergreen forests south of the Brahmaputra River. Also found in all districts south of the Brahmaputra from Tinsukia to Dhubri, and down to Hailakandi and Karimganj. A few have also been recorded from the north bank of the Brahmaputra in Bhairab Pahar (Bongaigaon district), Manas (Barpeta), Mazbat (Darrang), Charduar (Sonitpur), Kakoi Reserved Forest (RF) (Lakhimpur), and Subansiri RF (Dhemaji). The total suitable habitat available in the south bank areas is 7,000-8,000 km². Of these, about 4,500 km² are in good shape, the rest being degraded. Estimated population: 16,000-17,000 (south bank areas only).

Stumptailed Macaque (Macaca arctoides): Restricted to the south bank of the Brahmaputra River. Very rare and seldom seen, as it inhabits mostly dense hill forests. Main populations are confined to the Barail range of Cachar Hills and Cachar district, and the forests of Karbi Anglong. Some might also be present in the Innerline RF of Cachar and Hailakandi. It probably no longer occurs in the forests bordering Nagaland (Golaghat, Jorhat and Sibsagar districts). In the Barails, about 300 km² of good habitat and 200 km² of depleted habitat are available for the species. Estimated population: 700-1,200.

Assamese Macaque (M. assamensis): Although believed to be fairly common, the author's field surveys instead confirmed its rarity. Sparsely distributed in the dense forests on both banks of the Brahmaputra. It has been recorded in Golapara, Barail Range, Karbi Anglong, Innerline RF of Cachar and Hailakandi, and in the forests of Tinsukia district. Sightings are rare. About 10,000 km² of suitable habitat is available for the species, of which about 6,000 km² are in good shape. Estimated population: 8,000.

Rhesus Monkey (M. mulatta): Very common and well distributed all over the state. Besides forests and forest margins, it is also found in many village woodlands, temple surrounds, etc., often causing damage to crops in neighboring fields. Most village and urban populations have a discontinuous distribution with little possibility of troops meeting each other, due to barriers of human habitations. The most abundant primate in Assam, its estimated population is 160,000.

Pigtailed Macaque (M. nemestrina): Distribution is sympatric with the stumptailed macaque, being limited to areas south of the Brahmaputra River. Sightings in the wild are rare; however, population status is better than that of the stumptailed species. Recorded in the Barail range (North Cachar Hills and Cachar), Innerline RF (Cachar and Hailakandi), Nambor RF, Dhansiri RF, Disama RF and Garampani Sanctuary (all in Karbi Anglong), forests of Tinsukia district, Hollongapar RF (Jorhat), and Goalpara. Prefers dense forests in hills and plains. Once present along the Assam-Nagaland border, but may not still occur there. The present range of the pigtailed macaque in the south bank area covers about 5,000-6,000 km² of favorable habitat. Estimated population: 7,5009,000.

Silvered Leaf Monkey (Presbytis cristatus): Napier and Napier (1967) stated that it might be found in northeastern India. Ellerman and Morrison-Scott (1951) mentioned one specimen collected in Tipperah Hills (present Tripura). However, no sightings have been recorded so far, nor are any specimen records such as skull, skin, etc., available from anywhere in India.

During the field survey the author received many reports of the occurrence of 'long-tailed black monkeys' or 'black langurs' from different parts of Assam and neighboring Mizoram, especially in the evergreen rain forest areas. The most reliable reports came from the Innerline RF of Cachar and Hailakandi, Torani, Duarmara, Burhi-Dihing and Tipam RFs of Tinsukia, and Mizoram. The probable favorable habitat for this species is about 1,000 km² covering parts of Cachar, Hailakandi, Tinsukia, Dibrugarh and Sibsagar districts.

Hanuman Langur (P. entellus): Although it is the commonest primate in India (the rhesus is the next most common), its occurrence in Assam is doubtful. According to Roonwal and Mohnot (1977), its distribution extends up to the northern Shan states of Burma (Myanmar). Tikader (1983), however, maintained that the Teesta River in north Bengal was the eastern limit of its distribution. Two sightings have been reported, one each from Dhemaji and Lakhimpur districts. During the field survey the author did not observe any Hanuman langurs in any part of Assam.

Golden Langur (P. geei): Has perhaps the most limited distribution among the primates found in the region, being confined to western Assam and the adjoining areas of south-central Bhutan. In Assam, the distribution of the golden langur is limited to Kokrajhar, Bongaigaon and Dhubri districts, where the monkey is contained between the Sankosh and Manas rivers. Its main distribution range in Assam is the Manas Tiger Reserve (both core area and buffer zone). During winter, the langur population increases due to seasonal migration from Bhutan. Some unconfirmed sightings have also been reported from the Innerline RF (southern Cachar). About 1,000 km² of favorable habitat is available for the species in Assam. Estimated population: 500.

Phayre's Leaf Monkey (P. phayrei): Not previously recorded from Assam. First sighted by the author in March 1986, near Gharmura in Innerline RF of Hailakandi. Restricted to evergreen and semi-evergreen forests, and bamboo thickets of southern Cachar, Hailakandi and Karimganj districts. Some monkeys have also been sighted in the vicinity of villages near Gharmura. In the past it might have occurred up to the Barak River in the north, but there is no evidence of its occurrence in the north bank areas. About 1,000 km² of good habitat and 300-500 km² of degraded habitat are available in Assam. Estimated population: 800-900, which is more than the author's earlier estimate of less than 500 (Choudhury, 1988).

Capped Langur (P. pileatus): The most common langur found in Assam. Occurs on both banks of the Brahmaputra River. In forest areas it seems to be commoner than the rhesus monkey. Occupies a wide range of habitats, including the evergreen rain forests of Tinsukia and Cachar, deciduous forests of Manas, and bamboo thickets and plantations. On the north bank the known western limit of its distribution is the Manas River, but a few reports have been received from two pockets in Bongaigaon district. There is about 12,000 km² of suitable habitat for the species (2,000 km² on the north bank and the rest in the south), of which about 9,000 km² can be termed as good. Estimated population: 39,000.

Hoolock or White-browed Gibbon (Hylobates hoolock): The only ape found in the region, its distribution is limited to the south bank of the Brahmaputra. Lives mainly in the evergreen forests, but is also found in semi-evergreen brakes. It occurs in almost all districts south of the Brahmaputra River, from Tinsukia to Goalpara and then on to Cachar and Karimganj. In Hollongapar RF (Jorhat) and Dibru-Saikhowa Wildlife Sanctuary (Dibrugarh and Tinsukia) it occurs in the semi-evergreen forest on flat plains. Quite common in Innerline RF (Cachar and Hailakandi) and Dhansiri RF (Karbi Anglong). Although it still enjoys a wide distribution range, its numbers are few in most places. About 7,000-8,000 km² of suitable habitat is available for the gibbon in the south bank areas, of which about 4,500 km² is in good condition. Estimated population: 6,200-6,700.

Conservation

The major threats to the survival of primates in Assam are being hunted for food, and the destruction of their habitat by man.

Hunting is mainly done by various hill tribes. The situation is further exacerbated by regular hunting trips from the neighboring states of Nagaland, Mizoram, and, to some extent, Arunachal Pradesh (Choudhury, 1986). The main areas affected by hunting are the North Cachar Hills, Karbi Anglong, and the border areas of Assam-Nagaland, Assam-Mizoram, and Assam-Arunachal.

In Assam, except in areas of severe hunting pressure, habitat destruction is by far the most important factor contributing to the decline of populations of all the primate species, including the adaptive rhesus monkey. Most of the primates of Assam are forest dwellers; therefore, their survival depends upon the continued existence of the forest cover.

The forest cover in Assam is disappearing at the rate of 200-250 km² annually (Choudhury, 1989).The main causes of forest destruction are expansion of agriculture, slash-and-burn shifting cultivation, monoculture forest plantation, tree-felling for commercial use, demands for fuel, and various development activities such as construction, road building, railways, and large paper mills. The ultimate cause of forest destruction is, however, the very rapid population growth, which in Assam increases every year by 400,000-500,000. As a high percentage of the population lives in rural areas (89% in 1991) with agriculture as the main occupation, large-scale forest destruction seems inevitable.

Recommendations

Immediate steps should be taken to protect the habitats of the primates. These measures should include the establishment of new reserves and the expansion and effective management of existing ones. Four new national parks and 11 new wildlife sanctuaries should be set up. Expansion of the three existing reserves is also recommended.

Other measures recommended are control of slash-and-burn shifting cultivation, and checks on hunting. The Assamese, Pigtailed and Stumptailed macaques should be enlisted in Schedule I of the Indian Wild Life (Protection) Act.

References

Choudhury, A.U. 1986. Primate genocide in the North Cachar Hills. The Sentinel, 6 April. Guwahati.

Choudhury, A.U. 1988. Priority ratings for conservation of Indian primates. Oryx 22(2):89-94.

Choudhury, A.U. 1989. Primates of Assam: their distribution, habitat & status. Ph.D. thesis, Gauhati University. 300 pp.

Choudhury, A.U. 1992. Dhansiri Tiger Reserve. Unpublished report submitted to Govt. of India. 8pp.

Ellerman, J.R. and T.C.S. Morrison-Scott. 1951. Checklist of Palearctic and Indian Mammals, 1758 to 1946. British Museum, London.

Napier, J.R. and P.H. Napier. 1967. A handbook of living primates: morphology, ecology & behaviour of non-human primates. Academic Press, New York.

Roonwal, M.L. and S.M. Mohnot. 1977. Primates of South Asia: Ecology, Sociobiology and Behaviour. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, Mass.

Tikader, B.K. 1983. Threatened animals of India. Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta.

Author's address: Near Gate No.1 of Nehru Stadium, Islampur Road, Guwahati 781 007, Assam, India.

Ladakh Urial verging on extinction

by Ghulam Rasool

Introduction

The districts of Gilgit, Diamer, Skardu, Ghanchi and Ghizar constitute the Northern Areas of Pakistan. Most parts of the Northern Areas lie within the watershed of the Himalaya, Hindukush and Karakurum mountain ranges. High level plateau-deserts, utterly devoid of any kind of higher vegetation, are found along rivers and streams. The area lies between 71° and 75° east longitude and 32° and 37° north latitude. Human settlements lie only in the inner valleys along rivers, steams and on alluvial fans.

Climatically, the area falls in the dry temperate zone, located beyond the reach of the eastern monsoon; however, western climatic disturbances bring snow and rainfall in winter and spring. The annual rainfall is below 7 inches and the main precipitation is in the form of snow. Winters are severe and prolonged, and the temperature remains below freezing from December to February.

The area as a whole lies at the southern end of the palaearctic regions and the wildlife is of central Asian and Tibetan origin, which have adapted to the climatic and topographic conditions of the area. It is home to most of the Caprinae inhabiting the mountain deserts all along the rivers, streams and foothills up to the high alpine areas of the Himalayas. However, the Caprinae now survive only in small, scattered populations, and almost all face the same threats from illegal hunting and, indirectly, from an increasing human population with its demand for grazing lands and fuelwood.

Currently, three of the five Caprinae taxa in the Northern Areas are highly endangered, including the Ladakh urial (Ovis orientalis vignei vignei). Astore markhor (Capra falconeri falconeri) and Marco Polo sheep (Ovis ammon poloi) are also threatened with extinction, while the Siberian ibex (Capra ibex sibiriea) and Blue sheep (Pseudois nayaur nayaur) are somewhat common despite their scattered populations, and probably owing to the inaccessibility of their habitats. But this situation will probably change once the area is opened up to vehicular traffic. This state of affairs calls for immediate steps to save these valuable assets from complete extinction.

Ladakh urial (Ovis vignei vignei)

The Ladakh urial is listed by Hasper as having a recorded horn length of 39", a three-quarter horn curl, and standing 38" at the shoulder, which is equal to the size of the Alaskan white sheep. It has a wide ranging distribution in the Northern Areas, with a habitat that stretches across the desert steppes of the Indus Valley (between 1,000-1,800 m elevation) and extends along the river Indus and its tributaries until it reaches an elevation of 4,200 m in the alpine/snow field zone (Schaller, 1975). This tract includes the area between Thore and Raikot and Paratap Bridge (both sides of the Indus river), and from Ramghat Bridge to Harcho in Astore valley in Diamer District. The area from Talichi to Gahkuch along Gilgit river and from Gilgit to Chalt along the Hunza river in Gilgit District is traditionally urial habitat, but the animal is virtually extinct from most of its former habitat.

Being members of the sheep family, urials avoid rocky terrain and occupy the mountain deserts at the lower elevations in winter. In summer, they inhabit areas with gentle to steep slopes, but try to avoid precipices at the upper limits. Urials live in treeless habitats or sparsely covered areas with shrubs and herbs. At higher elevations they occupies the side slopes, always avoiding the glaciated places and moraine.

The Ladakh urial is endangered. Due to tremendous growth of the human population and the opening up of inaccessible areas by the construction of roads, much of the animal's habitat has been lost. Now only scattered and isolated populations of small herds are found within the remotest corners of their former habitats.

After the establishment of the Wildlife Organization of the Northern Areas ha 1974, regular wildlife censuses were carried out in the reserved areas. he 1974-75 the census reported 691 urial in the Shigar area (proposed national park), 90 in Danyore Game Reserve, 49 in Baltisan Game Sanctuary, and 220 in Satpara Game Sanctuary. According to the census of 1987, 7 urial were found in Danyore Game Reserve and 63 in Nar Nallah Game reserve. Since then, no regular counts of this species have been made.

Information collected from various reliable sources, personal communications, and sightings by the author reveal that there are probably 50-75 urial in the Bunji areas, 60 in Danyore Game Reserve, 20-30 in the area between Danyore and Jutal, 20-30 in the Harali Hills, 20-25 on Kharpocho Hill near Skardu, and 25-30 in Nar/Garo Game Reserve. In the Barldo Valley, the total population is estimated to be 100- 150. At lower elevations, the herd size is 5-10 animals, while at the higher altitudes it may be between 20-40. A herd of 150 animals was sighted by the author at Harali Hill, northwest of Gilgit town in 1960. About 500 urial are now left ha the whole of the Northern Areas, compared to the 1,000 animals estimated by Schaller in 1975. The future of this population is grim without proper protection and conservation of these animals.

Proposed Conservation Measures

The Northern Areas, Wildlife Preservation Act, 1975, gives full protection to the urial and other endangered species. The protection and conservation of wildlife in the Northern Areas rests with the Forest Department through the Wildlife Organization. However, enforcement of the laws is difficult with limited manpower and equipment. The Organization should have a separate service cadre, independent of the Forest Department with a staff invested with legal and administrative powers. Where possible, villagers living around the wildlife habitat should be involved in the conservation activities by giving them economic incentives, as has been done by WWF (Pakistan) in the Bar Valley Project. This can be done through a well planned education and awareness program. The participation of the neighboring communities in the protection, conservation and management of wildlife resources should be ensured.

Nine game reserves have been established, four of which are reserved areas containing isolated populations of urial. More areas with potential habitats for the preservation of the urial should be declared as protected areas. The IUCN/SSC Caprinae Specialist Group, in the Action Plan for Pakistan, further recommends that all hunting be banned and areas with populations of over 20 animals be rigorously protected. Karpocho Hill near Skardu may be an ideal place to begin a conservation program. Its close proximity to Skardu makes it easy to control and offers an opportunity to demonstrate wildlife protection techniques to the public (Hess, in press).

References

Schaller, G. 1975. Mountain Monarchs: Wild Sheep & Goats of the Himalaya. Chicago University, Chicago Press.

Schaller, G. 1975. Notes on Wildlife in Baltistan. World Wildlife Fund Pakistan. Lahore Newsletter.

Schaller G., and Khan. 1975. Pakistan Status of Wildlife and Research Needs. Ecological guidelines for the use of natural resources of the Middle East and South West Asia. IUCN, Switzerland.

The author is Regional Director, WWF (Pakistan), P. O. Box 501, Gilgit Northern Areas, Pakistan.

Women's indigenous knowledge and attitudes in wildlife conservation: A case study in Padampur Village Development Committee (VDC) royal national park Nepal

by R. Shrestha and G.R Kattel

Introduction

Nepal is famous for its wild flora and fauna, geographic diversity, and traditional and cultural values. However, Nepal is faced with various environmental problems such as soil erosion, deforestation, and destruction of wildlife species. According to the population census figures, women comprise more than 50% of the total population in Nepal. The interaction of people with forests is rapidly increasing, and the parks are also affected. Since women are the primary users of forest resources, their role in buffer zone management is important.

In the 1960s, the forests and forest dwelling animals suffered great pressure from people seeking land for settlement. The forest land declined from 6.5 million ha to 4.8 million ha between 1964 and 1974 (Upreti, 1991). The national parks and wildlife conservation technology governs the scientific management between the buffer zone and protected areas.

Royal Chitwan National Park (RCNP) was established in 1973 with the objective of protecting endangered wildlife species and their habitats. The interaction between women and the park has existed since the park was established. Women collect thatch grass, firewood, litter, and wild vegetables from RCNP, while wild animals from the park invade their crops. The relationship between the women and the park needs study, since the indigenous knowledge and attitudes of women in wildlife conservation would be of use to the scientists working in this field.

Study Area and Methodology

The study site was located in the Padampur Village Development Committee (VDC), inside RCNP. The climate is subtropical and dominated by the southeast monsoon. The average annual rainfall is 250 cm, and the average maximum and minimum temperatures are 24°C and 7°C respectively.

Five percent of the women from Padampur VDC were asked to complete various questionnaires regarding their indigenous knowledge and attitudes about wildlife conservation in RCNP. Other relevant data were collected through formal and informal interviews, and from published material from VDC and other related offices. The data analysis was done by using statistical tools of frequency, percentage, means, and Chi-square tests.

Results and Discussion

All the women in the village collected firewood from RCNP and were affected by firewood scarcity. The second major daily activity by women in the park was fodder collection. Although fuelwood and fodder collection is not the exclusive responsibility of women, the fact that they are the primary users provides them with better knowledge about the burning qualities of different varieties of fuelwood, and the nutrient values of various fodder species (Huskiness, 1 98 1; Chopart, 1 985; Shrestha, 1987).

Table 1: Relationship between women and the park

Activity	No. of women participating (out of total 85)	Percentage
Firewood collection	85	100
Fodder collection	70	82.3
Fruit collection	60	70.5
Leaves collection	50	58.8
Wild vegetable collection	45	52.9
Thatch grass collection	67	78.8

Women farmers told the researchers that the kind of crop cultivated determined the frequency of wild animal visits. Wild elephants are frequently seen when rice and corn are in the field; rhinos, wild boars and spotted deer could be seen during the cultivation of rice, wheat and corn. None of the respondents had ever informed park personnel about meeting any wild animals outside the park; 17% chased the animals and 82% showed no response against them.

All of the women were able to identify each of the wild animals and plants found in RCNP. In addition, about 80% of the women farmers were aware of wildlife and park values. Regarding the condition of RCNP, about 45% said that it was improving, while 25% said that it was degrading. Any degradation of conditions in RCNP might be due to the pressure of local people on the park. Over 81% of the women were interested in conserving wild animals in the RCNP area. This reveals that women would be an important group in conserving wild animals if they participated in the conservation movement.

Most of the women expressed positive attitudes about economic, ecological and ethical values of national parks. About 20% of the women had negative attitudes because their livestock and crops were destroyed by wild animals, and 8.23% were unhappy because of the decline of forest lands for collection of fuel, fodder, livestock grazing, and restrictions on the use of park resources.

The attitudes of women towards wildlife conservation were not influenced by ethnic group or marital status. However, significant factors that did affect women's attitudes in wildlife conservation were literacy, occupation, number of livestock, landholding, and age.

Conclusion

The women in the study area were knowledgeable about wild plants and animals, and they could easily identify them by applying their own indigenous knowledge. Women in general expressed positive attitudes towards wildlife values and their conservation. Hence, the study reveals that women are the key resource persons in the buffer zone area of RCNP, and their indigenous knowledge could play a major role in wildlife conservation.

Women have always been careful about utilizing available resources. They work in harmony with nature and try to keep ecological chains intact. This is one of the greatest contributions that women have made to the conservation process (Dhungel Achraya, 1991).

References

Dhungel Achraya, Kamala. 1991. The role of women in environmental conservation. In: World Conservation Union (IUCN) Nepal. Women and Environment. Kathmandu. pp.23-31.

Huskiness, M. 1981. Women in Forestry for local community development. Rural Development Participation Review, Vol.II, No.3.

Chopart, G. 1985. Social Forestry in 1985: Lessons learned and policies to be addressed. ODA, Social Forestry Network Paper.

Shrestha, N. 1987. Women's participation in community forestry. A case of two village panchayats in Kaski District of Nepal. Unpublished MSc. Thesis, UPLB, Philippines.

Upreti, Biswa N. 1991. Status of National Parks and Protected Areas in Nepal. Tigerpaper (18):2, p.27-32.

Authors's addresses: R. Shrestha, c/o Nepal-Australia Community Forestry Project, Kathmandu, Nepal; G.R Kattel, c/o Rajan Kattel, P.O. Box 3126, Thamel, Kathmandu, Nepal.

Ecotourism and tropical forests: Contributions. issues and training

by Daniel H. Henning

Contributions

Ecotourism, or nature-oriented tourism, is based on the use of natural resources, including scenery, topography, water features, plant life and wildlife, in a relatively undeveloped state. Ecotourism often combines elements of scientific investigation, education, recreation, and adventure. However, it is very difficult to specifically define ecotourism, particularly with the diversity, combinations, and degrees of orientations and interests involved. Laarman and Durst (1987) consider the hard and soft dimensions of ecotourism, with the first distinction being whether or not the interest in natural history is dedicated or casual.

Dedicated ecotourism and natural history travel is practiced by ornithologists, botanists, and other professionals, as well as by people with serious interests in natural history areas. This can be considered "hard core" natural history travel. On the other hand, "soft" ecotourism, or natural history tourism, combines nature-oriented travel with beaches, deep sea fishing, shopping, culture, etc. Tourists and trips in this category tend to try and combine a variety of motivations and activities in a single trip, e.g. viewing tropical forest scenery, watching birds and wildlife, visiting archaeological ruins, etc.

The second hard-soft distinction refers to the physical rigor of the experience. Will the visitor have to walk miles into undeveloped wilderness, sleep in a tent or crude shelter, and tolerate primitive sanitary conditions? Or will the visitor stay in quality accommodations, eat in good restaurants, and be conveyed in comfortable transport? Some hard tourism, from the standpoint of dedication to natural history, falls into the soft category of physical rigor. The inverse also occurs when casual devotees seek (or unwillingly endure) rigorous travel experiences.

It should be noted that there are varying degrees and overlapping of both hard and soft ecotourism in orientations and combinations. Both types may incorporate some ecological aspects and teachings. With the ecological and environmental interests today, ecological themes and aspects are growing more and more popular in tourism.

Ecotourism can make strong contributions to protecting tropical forests and in finding nonconsumptive uses that generate socioeconomic returns from protected areas, i.e. sustainable tourism development. The relationships between ecotourism and tropical forests (which are almost entirely located in developing countries where ecotourism is a growing phenomenon) are complex and require training and approaches based on environmental administration to ensure that strong contributions are made.

A primary reason for increasing ecotourism is its unique potential to generate an economic justification for the continued existence and expansion of national parks and nature reserves. Unless local residents recognize and share the socioeconomic benefits of these areas, they have no incentive not to poach the wildlife, log the forest, or destroy the vegetation through slash-and-burn agriculture within the park or reserve boundaries.

On a sustainable and long-term basis on the macro level, ecotourism can generate economic returns that supersede the potential revenue to the national treasury that is "lost" by foregoing timber harvesting or other exploitive uses on a short term basis. In Costa Rica, for example, an Organization of American States (OAS, 1987) study reported that even 10 years ago, a single national park, Corcovado, generated over US$1 million a year in foreign earnings. Prior to the recent social and political strife in Central Africa, over 6,000 people visited Rwanda's Parc National des Volcans each year, generating over a million dollars in much needed foreign currency through park entry and gorilla watching fees. It has also resulted in the government of Rwanda stopping the expropriation of gorilla habitat from the park to donate to native farmers, while the presence of tourists apparently drove off poachers who were making serious inroads in the gorilla population.

Durst (1988) states, "Public officials are often unsympathetic to environmentalists' concerns for protecting natural areas, but most government officials understand and act on economic information". He points out that data like the above need to be documented for more developing countries and used to educate decision-makers about the potential economic importance of ecotourism and the economic losses that could result from a failure to protect unique natural areas and their biodiversity. Besides stimulating the country's economy, revenue from ecotourism can be reinvested in improving the management and protection for the national parks, expanded services to visitors, and improved infrastructure.

Brockelman and Dearden (1990) vindicate that ecotourism, along with cultural and adventure tourism (which are often compatible and incorporated with ecotourism) can be considered one of the fastest growing areas of tourism today. It is estimated that US$25 billion per year flow from developed countries in the North to less developed countries in the South through ecotourism. Further, ecotourism is able to establish a more symbiotic (compatible and helpful) relationship with conservation than the more traditional forms of tourism.

However, the support of local residents is very critical to ensuring the protection and promotion of national parks and reserves. Support of this nature is best obtained by allowing local populations to share in the socioeconomic benefits derived from the protected areas and nature tourism. Residents can derive revenue from guiding tourists, providing food and services to visitors, and selling crafts.

With involvement by and returns for local people through ecotourism, it is generally observed that illegal logging, slash-and-burn activities, wildlife poaching and other destructive activities to the forests are greatly reduced in protected areas. A certain amount of this could be attributed to increased visitation to an area which discourages illegal operations. Also, with socio-economic benefits, local people are concerned about the protection of plant and wildlife resources which attract the ecotourism.

Thus, ecotourism could present itself as a very viable benefit with a great deal of potential for villages on the borders of national parks and, in some cases, reserves. Ecotourism could support local employment of villagers as guides, porters, construction workers, and merchants, as well as through food, lodging, and handicraft facilities in villages. A major problem of most development programs in developing countries is that few socioeconomic benefits actually reach the local people. Ecotourism presents the opportunity to directly benefit local populations.

Ecotourism in developing countries with tropical forests has become big business. The growing demands for ecotourism present numerous opportunities for increasing sustainable, rural and national development, while still protecting tropical forests and their biodiversity. On the other hand, the present deforestation and degradation patterns for tropical forests in Asian and other countries of the "South" may well remove these opportunities in the very near future.

Ecotourism is potentially one means by which local populations can obtain economic benefits from national parks and reserves, and, hence, reduce or terminate the above problems. Thus, ecotourism can be a way of sustainable development on a local and national scale, as well as a way of protecting tropical forests located in national parks and reserves.

Issues

Despite its positive potential, ecotourism is not without risks. Uncontrolled tourism development and impacts can destroy or degrade the sustainable and scenic resources of protected areas along with the cultural resources of nearby villages. Tourism can present as large a threat to the integrity of a natural area as do many of the more traditional resource industries like forestry and hunting. Much of this would, naturally, depend on the degree and scope of artificial disturbance to a natural or near-natural area of tropical forest which, in turn, can be considered very vulnerable with its fragile and complex ecology.

With large influxes of people associated with some tourist developments, and infrastructures such as accommodations, roads, parking lots, plus services such as water, water disposal, and power, there can be significant impacts on natural areas and their ecosystems. Such impacts may also include development of rural slums, excessive manmade structures, water, noise and air pollution, litter, vandalism, destruction and loss of habitat, disturbance to wildlife, etc.

MacKinnon and MacKinnon (1986) recommend that managers of protected areas should explain to tourism authorities what limits must be placed on visitor use so that carrying capacities are not exceeded. Unless carefully controlled, the volume of visitors can have a negative impact on the national parks and eventually destroy the very resources on which tourism depends. Low social and physical carrying capacities of many areas place constraints on ecotourism. Some ecotourists consider crowding to be a problem and will not tolerate large groups of other ecotourists. Thus, one of the key issues is that of control of tourist development and activities. Any tourist activity can become destructive if the number of tourists involved is out of proportion to the ability of the place to handle it (carrying capacity), or if the tourist behavior is inappropriate according to the norms of the community (Loukissas, 1978).

Another issue is that the tourism industry may not be attuned to ecotourism today on an environmental and socio-economic basis for sustainable development. In noting that tourism is not a new strategy for regional development in lesser-developed countries, Brockelman and Dearden (1990) point out that most of these countries have adopted a mode of tourism development that concentrates on large capital intensive resort developments which are usually financed by substantial overseas capital. Moreover, this model is increasingly being questioned in terms of benefits to local populations as well as the future of its demand side.

Ecotourism is small scale and dispersed in rural areas, while the kinds of tourists who are attracted to such activities are not as demanding of infrastructure and services. Further, a diversified, innovative and stable economy can emerge from the needs and interests associated with ecotourism in local areas. Thus, much less capital investment is usually required to promote nature tourism. Yet, much of tourism orientations remain in the older and more traditional mode of large hotels and developments which are limited in their contributions to sustainable development and local populations in contrast to ecotourism.

Another issue is the capabilities of lesser developing countries to adequately provide for ecotourism needs and demands while still balancing these developments with requirements of protected areas. The shortage of infrastructure and lack of tourist facilities in and around protected areas is particularly limiting for soft nature travel, which is generally thought to be the largest part of the market.

At the same time, future developments need to be planned and implemented in terms of protection of the area and its ecology, as well as of the recreation of present and future generations of visitors. This orientation particularly requires cooperation between tourism and protected areas decision-makers. Otherwise, a mass of uncontrolled developments and private concessions can emerge which will be destructive to both ecotourism interests and the protected areas.

Governments need to recognize the economic and sustainable development contributions of ecotourism and to provide adequate budgets for research and promotion. Almost all Asian countries have government Forest Research Institutes, yet most of these institutes have done little or nothing in the area of ecotourism and forests. Governments also need to provide larger budgets for funding adequate infrastructure and facilities to the agencies that are managing protected areas so that they can better meet the increasing demands of ecotourism.

Public and private sectors particularly need to cooperate in protecting the biodiversity of protected areas. This protection is essential if ecotourism is to succeed in the long run.

Local residents need to be more actively involved from the very beginning of any design, management, and implementation of any ecotourism projects. They need more participation in how benefits are to be shared.

Training

Proper training (and orientation) of public and private sectors associated with ecotourism planning, administration, and operations is vital. In fact, it is safe to say that the success and contributions of ecotourism to tropical forests and sustainable development are dependent on the quality, orientation, competence, and skills of the involved people and their training. This training can deal with a variety of concerns, of which two general areas are discussed below:

Environmental Administration Training

Basically, environmental administration can be defined as the process of directing and managing policies and activities in the realm of environmental affairs under broad government guidelines directed at protecting and promoting the public interest on a long term basis. It is concerned with using a holistic approach to manage the relationships between people, society, development, and living resources/development. It involves values and value judgments on the policy and decision making process under comprehensive and interdisciplinary orientations.

Decision makers who are operating in a fragile environment of tropical forests, protected areas, and ecotourism must deal with complex and varied values, interrelationships, and interdependencies. Environmental administration training can bring needed help for wiser decision making in this regard.

Naturalist (and ecological) Interpretive Training

Public and private sectors involved with ecotourism could greatly benefit from training programs dealing with interpreting natural history and ecology in the context of protected areas and tropical forests. The modern naturalist approach is based on ecology rather than information, which is only a partial aspect of it. Interpretation is basically the communication of ideas and values. Through a naturalist interpretive approach based on ecology (nature walks, self-guiding walks, slide programs, visitor center displays, etc.) an instrument of environmental education is provided for national park protection and conservation for promoting tropical forests and their biodiversity for present and future generations.

A challenge for ecotourism and tropical forests then becomes how to actually reach and promote real naturalist interpretive and ecological training to public and private sectors and individuals who will be using it in their visitor contacts.

Professional naturalist interpretive training programs are available through national park departments and conservation organizations, etc., particularly in developed countries. Naturalist (with ecology) interpretive training is needed and can do a great deal for enhancing ecotourism experiences and for protecting and promoting natural environments and the well being of the people involved by dealing with cultural understanding.

Conclusion

Ecotourism has a strong potential for socioeconomic benefits to rural populations as well as to the national economy. At the same time, it can be a powerful force for protecting and promoting national parks and reserves so that tropical forest and cultural heritages will remain intact. However, all of this requires cooperation between the public and private sectors, as well as adequate funding, planning, and innovative training.

References

Brockelman, Warren Y. and Phillip Dearden. 1990. The Role of Nature Trekking in Conservation: A Case Study in Thailand. Environmental Conservation, Vol.17, No.2 Summer. pp.141-148.

Durst, Patrick. 1988. Nature Tourism: Opportunities for Promoting Conservation and Economic Development. (unpublished paper) U.S. Agency for International Development.

Laarman, Jan G. and Patrick B. Durst. 1987. Nature travel in the tropics. Journal of Forestry 85(5):43-46.

Loukissas, Philippos J. 1978. Tourism and Environment in Conflict: The Case of the Greek Island of Myconos. In: Tourism and Economic Change. Williamsburg, Virginia, Studies in Third World Societies. pp.105-129.

MacKinnon, John and Kathy MacKinnon. 1986. Managing Protected Areas in the Tropics. IUCN, Gland.

OAS. 1987. Natural tourism attractions: their preservation and development. Presented at XV Inter-American Travel Congress, July 22-24, Kingston, Jamaica. 31 p.

Ichthyoecology, management and conservation of fish resources of lake Sone in Assam (India)

by Devashish Kar, S. C. Dey, Swarupa Kar, R. G. Michael and Madhav Gadgil

Introduction

Information on the hydrobiological conditions of any water body is of prime importance before endeavoring to utilize it as a productive fishery. Unfortunately, in the fisheries sector, there is an acute shortage of such data in the northeastern region of India, even though the region, particularly Assam, is gifted with a myriad of riverine and tectonic lakes (locally called 'beels') which constitute about 80% of the total lentic area (>0.12 x 10⁶ ha) in Assam. However, about 50% of the 'heel' area is in derelict condition, and the existing fish production rate in Assam is less than 50°/O of the total requirement based on a minimum consumption rate of 5 kg per person per year (Kar, 1990). Thus, in order to obtain a coherent picture, as well as improve the fisheries of the region, an intensive study of the limnology and fishery of Lake Sone, one of the biggest tectonic lakes of India, has been undertaken. Such a pioneering study in this biotope could help in the management and conservation of the fish resources of the lakes.

Study Area

Lake Sone is situated in Karimganj; district of Assam. The catchment of the lake has ravines, slopes and hilly terrains, with loamy, sandy or gravelly soil in the plains, and fine-grained sandstones in the hilly region.

The lake is 12.5 km long and 3.9 km wide, with a 35.4 km shoreline. The maximum depth is 5.9 m (mean depth 0.29m).

The major inflow to the lake is the Singla River, which originates from the Mizo Hills and drains a total catchment area of about 46,104 ha after flowing along a meandering course of about 63 km. The major outflow of the lake is the Kachua River out of the northernmost side of the lake, which drains the lake water into the Kushiyara River after a torturous path of about 19 km. The maximum rates of water discharge from the Singla and Kachua Rivers are 33.91 and X7.03 m3/sec respectively.

The study area has five well-defined seasons: summer (mid-April to mid-June), monsoon (mid-June to early October), autumn (October to mid-November), winter (mid-November to mid-February) and spring (mid-February to mid-April). Temperature varies from 7.7°C to 37.7°C, and rainfall from 0.0 to 76.0 mm (Kar, 1990).

Four fishing communities -- Kaibarta, Patni, Maimal and Namasudra -- constitute about 70% of the total population of the lake region, exploiting 0.32, 1.51, 1.81 and 4.53 ha of the fishing area of the lake per fisherman respectively.

Seventy fish species belonging to 49 genera under 24 families have been recorded in Sone. Of these, 84.2% belong to the primary freshwater group, while the rest belong to the peripheral class. On the basis of Indian and extra-lndian territorial distribution, the fish species of Sone include 20 widely distributed species and eight species native to northern India (Motwani et al., 1962).

The average per hectare fish yield from Sone has been estimated at about 97 kg., mostly made up of Puntius chola, which has an annual relative yield (ARY) of 24.6%. The major Indian carp species yielded an average ARY of 0.73%, out of which Labeo rohita accounted for 0.235%. Of the predators with ARYs between 1.75 and 4.83%, Wallago attu alone recorded an average ARY of 2.94% (Dey and Kar, 1990).

Management and Conservation

In view of fish being the principal aquatic animal resource and staple food of the region, and the burgeoning demand for good quality and higher quantities of fish for the health-conscious local people, efforts are being made towards sustaining these enormous freshwater habitats such as Lake Sone, and their bioresources. However, there are certain forms of environmental pressures which adversely affect fish such as habitat loss, water contamination, drought, competition, predation, fishing pressure and disease, which must be tackled to achieve sustainable growth of fish, which is a prerequisite for formulating effective management strategies and conservation.

Impact of Habitat Loss and Topographical Changes

The construction of embankments and roads along Lake Sone often destroys shoreline habitats, resulting in sedimentation which smothers large quantities of fish eggs and also increases turbidity. Under such circumstances, mollusks such as mussels can neither feed nor easily settle at the sediment-clogged lake bottom and, thus, can contribute less to the food chain. Furthermore, the Indian major carp species and the Indian shad (Hilsa ilisha) have been losing habitats due to the construction of the blind dam in the Kachua River and diversification of the waterways, thus registering a sharp decline in their population in the lake. (Kar, 1990). Prior to 1951, the Kachua River used to flow wild and free from the lake before emptying itself into the Kushiyara River. Both Hilsa (Dey and Kar, 1989b) and the Indian major carps (Kar et al., 1984) used to migrate long distances from Bangladesh to enter directly into the breeding grounds in Lake Sone. The blind dam in Kachua (constructed in 1951) was replaced by a lockgate in 1964, and the main outflow has since been diverted through the Khagra River. In addition, diversification of both the major inflow and outflow through a network of channels within the lake has recently become a common practice in Lake Sone, mainly for agricultural purposes. Consequently, unless fish ladders, fish elevators, etc. are provided in the dams and lockgates, the long term future of the depleting fish species is not optimistic because the migration paths have been seriously disrupted. The impact of offsite erosion on the lake fisheries is also very serious (La Roe, 1986).

Contamination of Lake Water

Lake Sone receives a huge amount of organic load in the form of sewage disposal which occasionally results in depletion of the dissolved oxygen in some sections of the lake (Dey and Kar, 1987).

Although pesticides are applied to the paddy cultivations at the draw-down level of the lake, there is no potential threat of industrial pollution in view of the absence of any big industry around the lake. As such, incidents of direct fish kills due to drastic reduction of dissolved oxygen, shifts in fish species (Wheeler, 1979), and the occurrence of fish with cancers that have been recorded in freshwater bodies elsewhere (Klee, 1991) have not been seen in Lake Sone (Kar and Dey, 1987).

Effects of drought

Sometimes Sone faces prolonged periods of drought. In early 1979, the water level of the lake was so low that the spawning ground of the larger sized fishes were practically non-existent. Also, occasional high water temperatures can reduce the production of minor carps (Dey and Kar, 1990).

Competition and predation

Introduction of exotic fish may be done only after examining the possible impact they might have on the autochthonous fish species of the lake. The introduction of Cyprinus carpio in Sone resulted in a substantive depletion of the population of endemic species by competition, predation or hybridization (Moyle, 1976), although such a practice has been suggested to be useful elsewhere.

Fishing pressure

Overfishing has placed heavy pressure on the lake's resources, with fishing operations carried out throughout the year. Both the quality of the fishing gear and frequency of operations should be regulated.

Remedial Measures

Lake Sone and its channels and associated rivers historically have been used for recreational and commercial fishing, navigation, mass transport, colonization, agricultural irrigation, water supply, and waste disposal (Kar, 1990). Therefore, in order to ensure a balanced development of the biota, and maintain the maximum sustained yield, the lake habitat might be altered to increase the competitive advantage of desirable species and, more importantly, to increase the total carrying capacity for maximum fish biomass production. In order to achieve positive effects through habitat manipulation, possible measures include: alteration of land, water, and vegetation; habitat construction; and biotic manipulation (Owen, 1985).

Alteration of land

This procedure covers many aspects. Primarily, lake shore and stream bank erosion could be stabilized through afforestation. Rock deflectors could be built to direct stream currents. Artificial spawning sites, which have been found to be useful elsewhere (Cooper, 1980), could be created with sand, gravel or nylon mats in those portions of the lake which are heavily mud-laden and do not serve as suitable natural spawning grounds.

Alteration Flake water

This is a difficult task for a lake the size of Sone. However, attempts could be made in this direction by controlling the water level, turbidity, aeration and fertility. Manipulation of the water level would be useful in controlling vegetation and spawning, and would thus affect predation. It could also be an effective way to eliminate undesirable species by lowering the water level to expose and isolate their eggs (Noble, 1980). Furthermore, when the prey species become over-abundant, lowering the water level could bring them out from the aquatic vegetation which serves as their cover, thus making them more susceptible to predators.

Turbidity

Turbidity is a menacing problem in this region and Lake Sone is subject to prolonged turbidity both during the monsoon (Dey and Kar, 1987) and dry seasons (Kar et al., 1994b). The latter is due to vigorous fishing at low water levels. Reasonably clear water is a prerequisite for the healthy growth of biota. Methods to reduce turbidity include: i) directly adding green or dry organic matter to the lake which, after decomposing, causes the particles in the water to precipitate; ii) establishing herbs on the lake bottom at dead storage level; and iii) adding alum or gypsum to the lake water.

Nutrients

Nutrients are an important factor in fish health, but Lake Sone is oligotrophic (Hutchinson, 1967) with a low nutrient status (Kar, 1990) which could be due to the characteristics of the surrounding watershed (Klee, 1991). The deficit could be improved by directly adding organic fertilizers to the lake water, thereby boosting phytoplankton production. Inorganic agricultural fertilizers may also be used, but with caution against too heavy doses which would lead to the fish being killed by phytoplankton bloom. Such measures have only met with limited success elsewhere (Klee, 1991).

Vegetation management

Lake Sone has a rich flora of aquatic macrophytes (Dey and Kar, 1 989a) which provide a higher biomass during the dry season than during the monsoon. The aquatic macrophytes are a source of oxygen, provide a cover for young fish from predators, and serve as a surface on which food organisms can attach themselves and grow. However, excess vegetational growth in the lake can be harmful to the fishery if it upsets the predator-prey relationship, and often leads to the stunting of fish growth due to over-population (Kar and Dey, 1993).

Concomitantly, a low phytoplankton biomass in the lake could also be due to less nutrients being made available to them due to excessive vegetational growth (Dey and Kar, 1994).

Elimination of excess aquatic macrophytes is essential and could be done mechanically by manipulating the water level and by the use of various types of cutting machines. The harvested vegetation could be used as a soil additive in the form of compost (Henderson and Markland, 1987). Spraying or dusting of algicides, herbicides and pesticides on the lake water could be tested to chemically control the growth of aquatic macrophytes, but repeated doses may prove disastrous by resulting in fish kills due to low dissolved oxygen and copper toxicity. Biological control of aquatic macrophyte growth in Sone could be attempted through the introduction of herbivorous fishes which would control a variety of weeds without interfering with other fish species. The ideal species which would be closest in meeting these requirements are grass carp and tilapia.

Biotic manipulation

Manipulating the fish population in the lake can be done by controlling predators, competitors, and through artificial propagation.

Lake Sone harbors a rich population of cormorants, herons and cranes that help keep the fish population from exceeding the carrying capacity of the lake. Thinning their population would likely increase the population of both desirable and undesirable species of fish.

Non-game fish species that are often considered useless (e.g. Chanda baculis, C. nama, Badis badis, Lepidocephalus guntea and Danio devario) may be removed by large-scale seine net operations and the lake restocked with more desirable species. However, seining may endanger rare native species, thus reducing the biodiversity and overall richness of the lake ecosystem.

Artificial propagation involves the stocking, aquaculture and breeding of pollution-resistant fish. Lake Sone has eight prominent fishing centers where intensive aquaculture can be practiced through polyculture and other techniques for raising frys and fingerlings of desired species in hatcheries for future stocking of the lake.

Habitat construction

In addition to improving the existing habitat of the lake, ponds and small reservoirs could be constructed adjacent to the lake, conforming to standard specifications with proper management procedures for maintaining the fish stocks (Owen, 1985). This could relieve fishing pressure in the lake.

Aquaculture and agriculture

In order to reduce capital investment, attempts are now being made to combine aquaculture with agriculture. An example of this being practiced in Lake Sone and its environs, particularly at dead storage level, is paddy-cum-fish culture, which results in high yields of both fish and rice.

Fish disease

Despite the high biotic potential of the fishes of Lake Sone, there have been heavy mortalities since 1988, affecting about 70% of the fish population (Kar and Dey, 1988b). The cause is a hitherto unknown fish epidemic, sometimes termed Epizootic Ulcerative Syndrome (EUS), which is said to be caused by an as yet unidentified virus. Investigations conducted in India (Kar and Dey, 1988a, 1988b, 1988c, 1990a, 1990b, 1990c; Karet al., 1990a, 1990b; Das et al., 1990; Jhingran, 1990) and elsewhere in the world (FAO, 1986; Roberts et al., 1990) have revealed that factors such as organic pollution of water and soil, and radioactive and heavy-metal contaminations are not responsible for the disease. Although opportunistic bacteria and fungi have been isolated from the diseased fishes, they are considered to be only secondary invaders. As such, a primary viral etiology has always been suspected. Recently, virus-like particles have been isolated in tissue culture from diseased Clarias batrachus in southern Assam (Kar et al., 1993, 1994) and attempts are being made to identify them. Viruses causing similar kinds of disease, isolated elsewhere (Frerichs et al., 1986; Ahne et al., 1988), are thought to belong to the rhabdovirus group. Furthermore, the outbreak of the disease has been found to be strongly correlated with changes in the environment in which the total alkalinity of the water has been found to act as a stress factor (Kar et al., 1991), enabling the virus to infect the fish body. Lime has been found to be useful to some extent in controlling the spread of EUS.

Conservation

A hardline approach to the management and conservation of the aquatic resources of Lake Sone is to impose bans or restrictions on angling activities such as closing a specific area to fishing, forbidding fishing during a particular season, restricting the number or size of fishes caught, restricting the types of fishing gear, promoting aquacultural practices, and supporting State and national legislations protecting particular endangered species.

While imposing restrictions, it is essential to be adaptable and take into consideration the full spectrum of users of the resource. Concomitant to administrative restrictions, encouraging results could be obtained through mass education of the lake-users (particularly the fisherfolk) by the NGOs regarding rational harvest and conservation and management of the lake resources.

The potential health hazard posed to the lake fishes by EUS is to be tackled through regular monitoring of the lake environment and fish health, and by adopting quarantine measures.

Conclusion

It is now gradually being realized that many of the management techniques would not be required if fishery habitats were properly protected, and that priority should be given to finding ways to prevent the problems from occurring in the first place, rather than relying on quick-fix solutions. Lake and stream improvement programmes should now begin to focus on the entire human-land relationship within a watershed. Financial incentives should be offered that would encourage farmers to practice good soil and water resource management. These are the problems that need to be addressed in order to find a lasting solution.

Selected References

Cooper, E.L. 1980. Fisheries Management in Streams. In: Robert T. Lackey & Larry A. Nielsen (Eds.) Fisheries Management. Blackwell Scientific (Boston). pp.297-322.

Das, M.K., Pal, R.N., Ghosh, A.K., Das, R.K., Joshi, H.C. Mukhopadhya, M., and A. Hajra. 1990. Epizootic Ulcerative Syndrome - a comprehensive account. The National Workshop on Ulcerative Disease Syndrome in Fish, 6-7 March, 1990, Calcutta (India.)

Dey, S.C. and D. Kar. 1987. Physico-chemical complexes of water and soil in Sone, an ichthyology potential tectonic lake of Assam. J. Assam Sci. Soc., Vol.30, Section 1, pp. l - 11.

Dey, S.C. and D. Kar. 1989a. Aquatic macrophytes of Lake Sone in Assam. Environment and Ecology, Vol.7, Section 1, pp.253-254.

Dey, S.C. and D. Kar. 1989b. An account of Hilsa ilisha from Lake Sone in Karimganj district of Assam. Bangladesh J. Zoology, Vol.17, Section 1, pp.69-73.

Dey, S.C. and D. Kar. 1990. Fish yield trend in Sone, a tectonic lake of Assam. Matsya, Vol.15- 16, pp.39-43.

Dey, S.C. and D. Karl 1994. Phytoplankton dynamics of Lake Sone in Assam. Bull. Life Sciences. Dibrugarh University. (in press)

Kar, D. and S.C. Dey. 1987. An account of the fish and fisheries of Sone beel in the Barak valley of Assam. Proc. Workshop on Development of Beel fishery in Assam, 1, pp. 13.

Kar, D. and S.C. Dey. 1988a. Preliminary electron microscopic studies on the diseased fish tissues from Barak valley of Assam. Proc. All-lndia Conference of Electron Microscopic Society of India, 18, pp.88.

Kar, D. and S.C. Dey. 1988b. A critical account of recent fish diseases in the Barak valley of Assam. Proc. Symposium on Recent Outbreak of Fish Diseases in North-Eastern India, 1, pp.8-9.

Kar, D., Dey, S.C. Michael, R.G., Kar, D. and S. Changkija. 1990b. Studies on the fish epidemics from Assam. J. Indian Fisheries Association, Vol.20, pp.73-75.

Kar, D., Dey, S.C., Kar, S., Bhattacharjee, N. and A. Roy. 1993. Virus-like particles in Epizootic Ulcerative Syndrome of fish. Proc. International Symposium on Virus-cell Interaction: Cellular and Molecular Responses, 1, pp.34.

Kar, D. 1990. Limnology and Fisheries of Lake Sone in the Cachar district of Assam (India). Matsya, Vol.15- 16, pp.209-213.

Klee, G.A. 1991. Conservation of Natural Resources. Prentice, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. (USA), pp.xvi+410.

LaRoe and T. Edwart. 1986. Instream impacts of soil erosion on fish and wildlife. In: Thomas E. Waddell (ed.) The offsite costs of soil erosion. Washington, D.C. (USA).

Moyle, P.B. 1976. Fish Introduction in California. History and Impact on native fishes. Biological Conservation, Vol.9, pp. 101-118.

Noble, R.L. 1980. Management of lakes, reservoirs and ponds. In: Robert T. Larkey and Larry A. Niellsen (eds.) Fisheries Management. Blackwell Scientific (Boston). pp.265-295.

Owen, W. 1985. Natural Resource Conservation: An ecological approach, 4th ed. Macmillan (New York).

Roberts, R.J., Frerichs, G.N., and S.D. Miller.1992. Epizootic Ulcerative Syndrome - the current position. In: I.M. Shariff, R.P. Subhasinghe and J.P. Arthur (eds.) Diseases in Asian Aquaculture. Asian Fisheries Society (Manila), pp.431 -436.

Wheeler, A. 1979. Fish in an Urban Environment. In: Ian C. Laurie (ed.) Nature in Cities. Wiley (New York).

Authors' addresses. c/o G.C. College, Assam University, Silchar, Assam, India.