Triage of Means: Options for Conserving Tiger Corridors beyond Designated Protected Lands in India

Mondal, Indranil; Habib, Bilal; Talukdar, Gautam; Nigam, Parag

doi:10.3389/fevo.2016.00133

Cited by 9 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The rapid rate at which landscapes are changing may compel wide‐ranging terrestrial mammals to adapt and change their movement patterns for long‐term survival. The PAs in India are small, isolated with compromised functional connectivity (Chundawat et al., 2016; Mondal et al., 2016) and wide‐ranging large carnivores need to move through areas with varying degrees of human activity to maintain healthy populations. However, they may be reluctant to cross certain habitat boundaries (Haddad, 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Not a cakewalk: Insights into movement of large carnivores in human‐dominated landscapes in India

Habib

Ghaskadbi

Khan

et al. 2021

Ecology and Evolution

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large carnivores play an important role in the functioning of ecosystems, yet their conservation remains a massive challenge across the world. Owing to wide‐ranging habits, they encounter various anthropogenic pressures, affecting their movement in different landscape. Therefore, studying how large carnivores adapt their movement to dynamic landscape conditions is vital for management and conservation policy. A total of 26 individuals across 4 species of large carnivores of different sex and age classes (14 Panthera tigris, 3 Panthera pardus, 5 Cuon alpinus, and 4 Canis lupus pallipes) were GPS collared and monitored from 2014–19. We quantified movement parameters (step length and net squared displacement) of four large carnivores in and outside protected areas in India. We tested the effects of human pressures such as human density, road network, and landuse types on the movement of the species. We also examined the configuration of core areas as a strategy to subsist in a human‐dominated landscape using BBMM. Mean displacement of large carnivores varied from 99.35 m/hr for leopards to 637.7 m/hr for wolves. Tigers outside PAs exhibited higher displacement than tigers inside PAs. Moreover, displacement during day–night was significantly different for tigers inside and outside PAs. Similarly, wolf also showed significant difference between day‐night movement. However, no difference in day–night movement was found for leopard and dholes. Anthropogenic factors such as road length and proportion of agriculture within the home range of tigers outside PAs were found to be significantly different. All the habitat variables in the home range showed significant difference between the social canids. The core area size for tiger outside PA and wolf was found greater than PAs. The study on movement of large carnivore species across landscapes is crucial for conservation planning. Our findings can be a starting point for interlinking animal movement and landscape management of large carnivore conservation in the current Anthropocene.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Not a cakewalk: Insights into movement of large carnivores in human‐dominated landscapes in India

Habib

Ghaskadbi

Khan

et al. 2021

Ecology and Evolution

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the potential for these activities to ameliorate the severity of resource limitation impacts on conservation, the availability of conservation resources may still be insufficient to distribute across species. Where possible, one potential option is to pursue a "triage of means" conservation strategy (Mondal et al, 2016). For example, in India, resources (funding) for conservation are diversified among several different government sectors that support activities that benefit biodiversity but for which conservation is not the principal objective.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, in India, resources (funding) for conservation are diversified among several different government sectors that support activities that benefit biodiversity but for which conservation is not the principal objective. Mondal et al (2016) advocate that such resources ("means to achieve conservation") could be leveraged to accomplish desired conservation objectives. In these authors' view, by prioritizing TABLE 1 | Applications of various approaches as conservation tools to help natural resource managers and conservation biologists identify at-risk populations in a time-efficient fashion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Physiological assays and endocrine panels Evaluate overall health and physiological status by conducting assays for stress hormones (glucocorticoids) in at-risk species to assess potential risk of population declines Janin et al, 2011Janin et al, , 2012Ellis et al, 2012;Gabor et al, 2013Gabor et al, , 2016Jeffrey et al, 2015;Madliger et al, 2016;Strong et al, 2017 Environmental DNA (eDNA) Monitor species' distribution to understand the temporal and spatial dynamics of populations in protected areas Bohmann et al, 2014;McKee et al, 2015;Stewart et al, 2017 Behavioral studies Predict dispersal and metapopulation connectivity from movement behavior and habitat preferences; capitalize on male calling behavior in an invasive toad to attract, capture, and remove conspecifics Brown et al, 2017;Muller and Schwarzkopf, 2017 Remote sensing and habitat connectivity models various means of accomplishing conservation, one avoids selectively assisting some species, populations, or localities at the expense of others (Mondal et al, 2016). In extreme cases, however, it may be inevitable that conservation prioritization, perhaps based on some quantification of a species' threat status (e.g., the Evolutionarily Distinct and Globally Endangered [EDGE] index: Washington et al, 2015), is the most viable option.…”

Section: Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Coping With Constraints: Achieving Effective Conservation With Limited Resources

Walls

2018

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Conservation resources have become increasingly limited and, along with social, cultural and political complexities, this shortfall frequently challenges effectiveness in conservation. Because conservation can be costly, efforts are often only initiated after a species has declined below a critical threshold and/or when statutory protection is mandated. However, implementing conservation proactively, rather than reactively, is predicted to be less costly and to decrease a species' risk of extinction. Despite these benefits, I document that the number of studies that have implemented proactive conservation around the world are far fewer than those that simply acknowledge the need for such action. I provide examples of proactive actions that can ameliorate shortfalls in funding and other assets, thus helping conservation practitioners and managers cope with the constraints that resource limitation imposes. Not all of these options are new; however, the timing of their implementation is critical for effective conservation, and the need for more proactive conservation is increasingly recognized. These actions are (1) strengthening and diversifying stakeholder involvement in conservation projects; (2) complementing time-consuming and labor-intensive demographic studies with alternative approaches of detecting declines and estimating extinction risk; and (3) minimizing future costly conservation and management by proactively keeping common species common. These approaches may not constitute a cure-all for every conservation crisis. However, given escalating rates of species' losses, perhaps a reminder that these proactive actions can reduce conservation costs, save time, and potentially thwart population declines is warranted.

show abstract

“…The rapid rate at which landscapes are changing may compel wide ranging terrestrial mammals to adapt and change their movement patterns for long term survival. The PAs and Reserves in India are small, isolated with compromised functional connectivity (Chundawat, Sharma, Gogate, Malik, & Vanak 2016;Mondal, Habib, Talukdar, & Nigam 2016) and wide-ranging large carnivores need to move through areas with varying degrees of human activity to maintain healthy populations. However, they may be reluctant to cross certain habitat boundaries (Haddad, 1999).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Not a cakewalk: Insights into movement of large carnivores in human dominated landscapes in India

Habib

Ghaskadbi²,

Khan

et al. 2020

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1.Large carnivore conservation is complex and remains a massive challenge across the world. Owing to their wide-ranging habits, large carnivores encounter various anthropogenic pressures which may potentially lead to conflict. Animal movement is linked with individual fitness as it is important for various biological processes. Therefore, studying how large carnivores adapt their movement to dynamic landscape conditions is vital for management and conservation policy. 2.We first quantified the movement parameters of four large carnivores in and outside protected-areas in India (tiger, leopard, dhole and wolf). We then tested the effects of human pressures like human density, road density and land use types on the movement of the species. Finally, we examined the configuration of core areas as a strategy to exploit human-dominated landscape. 3.Our findings suggest that the mean hourly displacement of 4 large carnivores differed across habitats. Mean displacement of large carnivores varied from 77.58m/h for leopards to 665.3m/h for wolves. Tigers outside PAs exhibited higher displacement as compared to tigers inside PAs. Displacement during day and night were significantly different for tigers inside and outside PAs (P=0.03), and wolf whereas no difference was found for leopard and dholes. The movement and ranging patterns of species outside PAs were influenced by anthropogenic factors such as human population, road network density, and landuse. All carnivores showed multiple areas of intensive use or cores in their home ranges. The range of the core area sizes was greater for species outside PAs (tiger and wolf) in human-altered landscapes. 4.Movement ecology of large carnivores has not been explored using such an exhaustive dataset in India. Our study attempts to extend theoretical concepts to applied management problems. This study can be a starting point for rigorous studies on interlinking animal movement and landscape management for large carnivore conservation and policy-making in the Anthropocene. BACKGROUND Across the globe, large carnivores are considered as the most charismatic yet vulnerable components of wild ecosystems (Miquelle et al., 2005). Positioned at the top of food chains, they influence all trophic levels thereby shaping entire ecosystems (Ripple et al., 2014). However, throughout their distributional range, large carnivore populations continue to decline rapidly due to anthropogenic pressures like habitat degradation and fragmentation, persecution, illicit commercial trade in body parts, depletion of wild prey and diseases (Weber & Rabinowitz, 1996).

show abstract

Triage of Means: Options for Conserving Tiger Corridors beyond Designated Protected Lands in India

Cited by 9 publications

References 35 publications

Not a cakewalk: Insights into movement of large carnivores in human‐dominated landscapes in India

Not a cakewalk: Insights into movement of large carnivores in human‐dominated landscapes in India

Coping With Constraints: Achieving Effective Conservation With Limited Resources

Not a cakewalk: Insights into movement of large carnivores in human dominated landscapes in India

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About