Recovery planning towards doubling wild tiger Panthera tigris numbers: Detailing 18 recovery sites from across the range

Abstract

With less than 3200 wild tigers in 2010, the heads of 13 tiger-range countries committed to doubling the global population of wild tigers by 2022. This goal represents the highest level of ambition and commitment required to turn the tide for tigers in the wild. Yet, ensuring efficient and targeted implementation of conservation actions alongside systematic monitoring of progress towards this goal requires that we set site-specific recovery targets and timelines that are ecologically realistic. In this study, we assess the recovery potential of 18 sites identified under WWF’s Tigers Alive Initiative. We delineated recovery systems comprising a source, recovery site, and support region, which need to be managed synergistically to meet these targets. By using the best available data on tiger and prey numbers, and adapting existing species recovery frameworks, we show that these sites, which currently support 165 (118–277) tigers, have the potential to harbour 585 (454–739) individuals. This would constitute a 15% increase in the global population and represent over a three-fold increase within these specific sites, on an average. However, it may not be realistic to achieve this target by 2022, since tiger recovery in 15 of these 18 sites is contingent on the initial recovery of prey populations, which is a slow process. We conclude that while sustained conservation efforts can yield significant recoveries, it is critical that we commit our resources to achieving the biologically realistic targets for these sites even if the timelines are extended.

Occupancy‐based monitoring of ungulate prey species in Thailand indicates population stability, but limited recovery

“…2011). Sites like MWKL, where tiger populations are well below potential carrying capacity, could have a major role in this recovery, but only if prey populations can be increased (Harihar et al 2018). Thus, the recovery of ungulate prey species here, and the lessons learned while attempting to do so, is of global importance for recovery of tigers.…”

The Future of Wild Mammals in Oil Palm Landscapes in the Neotropics

“…The critically endangered Bornean orangutan (P. pygmaeus) have been decimated by up to 100,000 individuals in 16 years by logging, deforestation and industrialized plantations modeling (Voigt et al, 2018). Habitat loss from oil palm is yet another threat to the already dwindling tiger, currently reduced to surviving in protected areas and forest patches (Harihar et al, 2018). To thrive, tigers depend on the existence of large contiguous forest blocks (Sunarto et al, 2012).…”

How sampling‐based overdispersion reveals India's tiger monitoring orthodoxy

“…Recently, Harihar, Chanchani, Pariwakam, Noon, and Goodrich () analyzed these NTE survey results to show that an increase of sampled areas in tiger “source sites” among successive surveys led to decreases in tiger density and thereby supporting the proposals of Karanth et al () and Harihar et al (), that tiger population recovery rates will be far slower than expected.…”

“…Doubling the number of wild tigers by 2022 was proclaimed as the official goal in 2010 with financial commitments of about U.S. $ 330 million pledged at the 2010 Global Tiger Summit in St. Petersburg (Watts, ). We worry that such large financial investments to meet ecologically unrealistic goals (Harihar et al, ; Karanth et al, ) may have created social pressure or motivation bias (Darimont et al, ; Kahneman, ; Kunda, ) on tiger conservation and impacted NTE survey designs, inferences, or both. In this context, we argue that while claims about population changes of iconic mammals based on unreliable scientific evidence may assist in short term fund‐raising, they will be seriously detrimental in the longer term because they promote the most advertised conservation strategies in contrast to the most effective ones.…”

“…Instead, and despite a growing body of scientific evidence expressing concerns over India's claims of tiger population rise (Harihar et al, ; Harihar et al, ; Karanth et al, ), major international conservation agencies, such as the Global Tiger Forum (GTF), Global Tiger Initiative (GTI), and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), continued to endorse claims of India's success (WWF, ). Consequently, India's tiger conservation budget jumped from USD $70 million to $144 million in 2016 to reward this achievement (PTI, ).…”