SerapungtigerHCVF - PDF 14112008 0954 29

SUMATRAN TIGER CONSERVATION PROGRAM & SUMATRAN TIGER TRUST
A Supplemental HCVF Assessment on the Sumatran Tiger (Panthera tigris sumatrae) in the Serapung Forest Management Unit of Riau Province, Indonesia
STCP 2005
Commissioned by:
Asia Pulp & Paper

Preliminary Report Submitted February 2005; Draft Report Submitted April 2005. Final Report Completed: June 2005.
FINAL REPORT
Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU
CONTENTS
1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 3 1.1 Rationale for a Tiger Supplemental Assessment ............................................ 3 1.2 Objectives of the Assessment......................................................................... 4 1.3 Assessment Approach .................................................................................... 4 1.4 Assessment Team and Expertise ................................................................... 5 1.5 Report Format and Availability ........................................................................ 6 Background and Context of Assessment........................................................... 7 2.1 Landscape Context of the FMU ...................................................................... 7 2.2 Description of the Serapung FMU................................................................... 8 2.3 Ecology of Peat Swamp Forests around the FMU ........................................ 13 2.4 Sumatran Tiger Status, Threats and Ecology ............................................... 15 2.4.1 Status of the Sumatran Tiger and threats ............................................. 15 2.4.2 Minimum viable population for Sumatran tigers .................................... 16 2.4.3 Habitat Utilisation by the Tiger .............................................................. 17 2.4.4 Social and community impacts in relation to tigers ............................... 17 2.4.5 The Siak-Pelalawan forests context for tiger conservation .................. 18 2.4.6 The Tiger as a High Conservation Value (HCV) ................................... 20 Assessment Methodology ................................................................................. 21 3.1 Background................................................................................................... 21 3.2 GIS Landscape and Habitat Analysis ........................................................... 22 3.3 Preliminary Ground Surveys and Field Orientation....................................... 22 3.4 Remote Camera Monitoring of Tigers and Prey Species.............................. 23 3.4.1 Theoretical and Technical Introduction ................................................. 23 3.4.2 Remote Camera Methodology in this Study.......................................... 24 3.5 Rapid assessment field surveys ................................................................... 24 3.6 Secondary Tiger Reports from Local People ................................................ 27 Results ................................................................................................................. 28 4.1 Remote Camera Monitoring of Tigers and Prey Species.............................. 28 4.2 Rapid Assessment Field Surveys based on Secondary Signs ..................... 32 4.3 Secondary Tiger Reports from Local People ................................................ 35 4.3.1 Direct Sightings and Human-Tiger Conflict ........................................... 35 4.3.2 Attitudes and Perceptions of Local People Regarding Tigers ............... 40 4.4 Landscape Analysis ...................................................................................... 41 4.4.1 Minimum area required for Sumatran tigers.......................................... 41 4.4.2 Past, Present, and Future Land-Use..................................................... 41 Discussion........................................................................................................... 45 5.1 Tiger Habitat and Prey .................................................................................. 45 5.2 Tiger Population in and around the FMU ...................................................... 45 5.3 Tiger Viability Issues in the FMU and Siak-Pelalawan Landscape ............... 47 5.4 Tiger-Human Conflict .................................................................................... 49 5.5 Conclusions Derived from this Assessment.................................................. 50 Interpretation of Results with Respect to HCVF .............................................. 52 6.1 Tiger HCVF at the Siak-Pelalawan Landscape Scale................................... 52 6.2 Identification of Tiger HCVF at the FMU Level.............................................. 52 6.3 Importance of Considering Future Landscape Context Scenarios................ 53 6.4 General Conclusions Relating to Tiger HCVF Delineation............................ 55 6.5 HCVF Recommendations for Tigers in the Serapung FMU .......................... 56 6.5.1 Option 1: Extension of Moratorium in Indicative HCVF Area ................ 56 6.5.2 Option 2: Phased Conversion of the Indicative HCVF Area.................. 57 6.6 Other Management Recommendations for the Tiger HCV ........................... 59 Overview .............................................................................................................. 60 Bibliography ........................................................................................................ 61 Appendices ......................................................................................................... 67
Pg 2/68
7 8 9
Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program
FINAL REPORT
Introduction
This report presents the findings of an independent study to assess the delineation of High Conservation Value Forest (HCVF) relating to the possible presence of the Sumatran tiger (Panthera tigris sumatrae) in an industrial timber plantation (HTI) and adjacent peat-swamp forests in Riau Province, Sumatra, Indonesia.
1.1
Rationale for a Tiger Supplemental Assessment
During November 2004 the Rainforest Alliances SmartWood program carried out a comprehensive HCVF analysis in the Serapung District (19,495 ha) forest management unit (FMU), an industrial timber plantation related by common ownership to Asia Pulp and Paper (APP), and managed by PT Arara Abadi, in Riau Province (Sumatra, Indonesia). The opportunity for this study arose from SmartWoods identification of the possible existence of tigers in the FMU. SmartWood received indications of presence during its interviews with local people, and decided that rather than declare HCVF immediately it would seek APPs agreement to conduct a supplementary study on Sumatran tigers within and surrounding the FMU in order to improve its information base. A HCVF precautionary principle was invoked and delineation of an indicative HCVF (temporary logging moratorium area) proposed. The logging moratorium over the remaining 5,884 ha natural forest area within the FMU was maintained during the tiger study and still remains in place subject to final determination of HCVF status. In its HCVF Report for the Serapung FMU, SmartWood recommended that the supplemental assessment be carried out by recognised tiger conservation experts with the five objectives: Determine the estimated size of this tiger population Evaluate habitat utilization and distribution of tigers within the study area. Evaluate the populations comparative utilization of different habitat types: peat swamp forest, coastal alluvial bench forests, secondary habitats and farmlands. Taking into account current and future land use of the wider area, determine the long-term viability of this population, and the area (and primary habitats) required to support it. Determine if the defined forest block within the FMU constitutes an integral part of the area and habitat required to support the tiger population in the long term.
Findings of the tiger supplemental assessment will form the basis for SmartWoods revision of the indicative HCVF area, in accordance with SmartWood guidelines that if the tiger is confirmed not to be present within the FMU, or the FMU does not constitute an integral portion of the habitat and range of the tiger population, then this HCVF will not exist within the FMU1. In December 2004, APP assigned the supplemental assessment (on a non-profit basis) to a team of 14 specialists, representing the Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program2 (STCP) through its UK partner organisation, the Sumatran Tiger Trust (STT). The resulting activities, described in this report, are an extension of the STCPs tiger status assessment work across Sumatra, its current focus on Riaus peat-swamp forests, and in line with its ongoing efforts to facilitate the development of additional protected areas for the tiger in Sumatra.
SmartWood, HCVF Report for Serapung FMU, p.39 A collaboration between the Directorate General of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation (Ministry of Forestry, RI) and the Sumatran Tiger Trust (UK).
2
Pg 3/68
FINAL REPORT
1.2
Objectives of the Assessment
SmartWood recommendations for the scope of the tiger supplemental assessment, summarised above, are included for completeness in Appendix I, page 67. Discussions between STCP and APP led to additional study objectives, fulfilling both the original scope as suggested by SmartWood, and also to maintain consistency with STCPs wider tiger conservation goals and its mission as an independent conservation organisation. Modifications were also necessary due to APP requirements that the assessment be completed by mid-February, allowing one month of field time. The assessment objectives within this adapted scope are summarised as follows: 1. To assess presence, distribution and viability of tigers in the indicative HCVF area of the FMU, and its relationship and contribution to the tiger population in the adjacent forest landscape. 2. To provide recommendations, if applicable, on the delineation of a tiger-specific HCVF based on findings in (1) and considerations relating to mitigation of tigerhuman conflict and minimisation of impact on the Siak-Pelalawan tiger population. 3. To provide management and monitoring recommendations for maintenance and future evaluation of identified HCVFs, and for maximisation of the FMUs general contribution to viability of the landscapes tiger population. The detailed scope of this assessment, incorporating suggestions as provided by SmartWood (summarised above in section 1.1), is included in Appendix II of this report. This supplemental assessment follows the guidance provided by the following key documents: 1. High Conservation Value Forest (HCVF) Assessment Report for Serapung Unit, PT Arara Abadi, Asia Pulp & Paper/Sinar Mas Group, Final Report, February 2005, Rainforest Alliances SmartWood Program; hereinafter referred to as the SmartWood report. 2. The High Conservation Value Forest Toolkit and Identifying High Conservation Value Forests A Guide for Forest Managers (part III), version 1, December 2003, ProForest; hereinafter referred to as the ProForest HCVF Toolkit. 3. Identifying, Managing, and Monitoring High Conservation Value Forests in Indonesia: A Toolkit for Forest Managers and other Stakeholders, Version 1, August 2003; hereinafter referred to as the Indonesian HCVF Toolkit. 4. A Sourcebook for Landscape Analysis of High Conservation Value Forests, Version 1, February 2004; hereinafter referred to as the Landscape HCVF Sourcebook. 5. Where Can Tigers Live In The Future? A Framework for Identifying High Priority Areas and Actions for the Conservation of Tigers in the Wild, 1999; hereinafter referred to as the TCU Framework. 6. Indonesian Sumatran Tiger Conservation Strategy, Ministry of Forestry, 1994.
1.3
Assessment Approach
The approach taken in this assessment was defined by current HCVF analysis framework and toolkits, by the SmartWood application of this framework during its comprehensive analysis of HCVF in the Serapung District, by the Indonesian national strategy for tiger conservation, by current global tiger conservation concepts, by current
Pg 4/68
FINAL REPORT
knowledge relating to the ecology and conservation of the Sumatran tiger, and in accordance with the expertise and experience of the assessment team. In responding to the key HCVF questions of whether tigers exist in the FMU and, if they do, whether these tigers contribute significantly to the viability of the wider landscape tiger population, the assessment team adopted an approach involving the following study components: 1. Rapid assessment surveys, to establish tiger presence, prey availability, habitat quality and threats, in the Serapung FMU and immediately adjacent forest habitat. 2. Remote camera monitoring, to confirm tiger and prey species presence and distribution across the FMU and adjacent forests, including identification of tiger individuals and estimation of abundance based on photo-capture frequencies. 3. Respondent data, derived from direct interviews with a wide cross-section of local people, to identify incidents of tiger sightings and human-tiger conflict, allowing interpretation of past and present tiger distribution within the Serapung FMU and adjacent forests. This component included an examination of tigerrelated culture and traditional belief systems exhibited by local communities. 4. Past, current and future land-use patterns in the Siak-Pelalawan forest block, including identification of current and future landscape relationships between the FMU and the wider Siak-Pelalawan block, and predictions relating to future availability of tiger habitat in this wider landscape. Data was primarily derived from central and provincial Government sources, from major forest and plantation industry stakeholders, and from GIS examination of satellite imagery. 5. Interpretation of the data collected, within the HCVF analysis framework, to provide recommendations to APP/SmartWood regarding tiger-related HCVF delineation, and provision of other general management recommendations at both the FMU and landscape level in support of tigers.
1.4
Assessment Team and Expertise
The Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program was selected by APP and SmartWood as possessing the necessary experience and technical competency to achieve the assessment objectives. STCP, through its UK partner the Sumatran Tiger Trust, accepted the assignment on a non-profit, non-consulting basis, following consultation with the Programs main collaborator, the Department of Forestry. STCP is a partnership of the Directorate General of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation Department of Forestry (RI) and Sumatran Tiger Trust (UK) The Program has operated since 2001 under a comprehensive, national-level MoU and local partnership agreements covering Jambi, Riau and Lampung provinces of Sumatra. Under a previous phase (1996-2001) the program pioneered the use of remote camera traps and rapid survey methods for assessing tiger status and, in so doing, provided the first detailed ecological study on the Sumatran tiger in the wild. The majority of the expert personnel from this early phase remain with the Program until today. Currently, in collaboration with the Directorate General Forest Protection and Nature Conservation, the Program focuses on tiger and general conservation management support, long-term monitoring of tiger populations in key regions, assessment of tiger status across Sumatra, tiger conservation action plans, collaborative development and management of new protected areas for tigers, development of policy relating to tiger conservation, and is one of the countries leaders in the development and management of field anti-poaching teams, intelligence and law enforcement relating to wildlife crime
Pg 5/68
FINAL REPORT
and illegal trade of tiger body-parts. STCP is active in mapping, prediction, policy and active mitigation relating to human-tiger conflict, and has pioneered techniques of capture and translocation of problem tigers under such conflict situations. Finally, STCP works closely with local communities in several areas of Sumatra, particularly with respect to forest stewardship and collaborative protection of tigers and ecosystems. STCPs in-house expertise and human resources are spread across several geographic areas. With respect to this assessment, personnel were selected from Lampung, Riau and Jambi teams, and from management and coordination staff based in Jakarta and Bogor. The assessment team members and their relevant expertise is summarised in Table 1 below:
Table 1. Assessment team personnel and their expertise relevant to this study. Name Waldemar Hasiholan Daniel Sinaga Neil Franklin Philip Wells Muhamed Yunus Bastoni Sumianto Apriawan Nuralim, Buhkari, Erwan, Hendri Muliadi, M. Fadhly, Sumarto Title Program Manager CITES Tiger Task Force Director STT Indonesia Technical Advisor Field Coordinator Field Coordinator Field Coordinator Field Coordinator Field technician Relevant Expertise Protected areas/strategic planning Law enforcement/Gov. liaison Team leader/tiger ecology Species Protection/GIS Camera survey/rapid assessment Tiger conflict mitigation/cameras Social & community conservation Camera survey General tiger conservation
1.5
Report Format and Availability
The intensive tiger study described here represents a direct recommendation of, and follow-up from, the Rainforest Alliances SmartWood HCVF assessment carried out in Serapung FMU during November 2004. As such the tiger supplemental assessment and this report should be considered as an intrinsic component of the overall HCVF process as commissioned by APP. With this in mind, and in order to facilitate the reader in understanding concepts described here, this document frequently draws closely upon background data and discussions as provided by SmartWood. In order to avoid repetition the reader is referred to the appropriate sections of the SmartWood report where appropriate. Upon completion, this assessment report will be made available to APP and SmartWood for its consideration in the process of final HCVF delineation in the Serapung District forest management unit. This assessment did not evaluate standards of APP general forest practices in relation to management of designated conservation or moratorium areas, or any aspect of APP operations other than those described herein. Evaluation of the presence or status of HCVs with no ecological significance for tigers was outside the scope of this study.
--------------------
Pg 6/68
FINAL REPORT
Background and Context of Assessment
This chapter provides background information of relevance to the tiger supplemental assessment, describing the landscape, ecological, sociological and conservation context within which the study has been conducted. Descriptions of both the Serapung FMU and the general surrounding landscape are provided here. The ecology of peat swamp forests, with particular emphasis on factors that are likely to affect the status of the tiger, are also described. Background information regarding the status and ecology of the Sumatran tiger including general threats to the species survival, and specific conservation efforts of relevance to this study, are also introduced here. Finally the study area in which this assessment takes place is discussed, placing it in the context of the Serapung FMU and wider habitat and conservation landscape frameworks. For more generalised descriptions of landscape context, peat swamp ecology and details of FMU management, the reader is encouraged to study the appropriate sections in SmartWoods HCVF assessment report for the Serapung District.
2.1
Landscape Context of the FMU
This assessment takes place within the Serapung District FMU (19,945 ha), located at the mouth of the Kampar river on the eastern apex of the Siak-Pelalawan forest block in Riau province, Sumatra, Indonesia (Figure 1). Bordered to the north and south by the Siak and Kampar rivers respectively, the Siak-Pelalawan block represents one of Riaus and Sumatras largest contiguous regions of peat-swamp forest (PSF) (560,000 ha in 2001; calculated by SmartWood as 425,000 ha in 2003/04). There are four wildlife reserves (total 37,000 Ha) centered around lakes within the Siak-Pelalawan block with the remaining areas being allocated as protection forest, production forest (Hak Pengusahan Hutan, HPH), or allocated for conversion to industrial timber (Hutan Tanaman Industri, HTI) and oil-palm plantations. This protection forest refers to areas previously identified as production forest, and can again be reassigned for exploitation at the Provincial level. Plantation development in the Serapung HTI concession represents less than a four percent reduction of the 2001 forest cover of the entire Siak-Pelalawan block. General habitat types in the Siak-Pelalawan block include primary tall PSF in central regions, particularly where previous logging efforts have been patchy. Tall PSF closer to the coast is, in general, more severely degraded. Short PSF habitat is associated with a central peat dome, situated some 60 km to the west of the Serapung FMU. These habitat types and associated ecosystems are described in more detail in section 1.1 and in the SmartWood HCVF report for Serapung. Other PSF blocks of eastern Sumatra include Kerumutan (directly to the south of SiakPelalawan separated by the Kampar River), Berbak, Giam Siak Kecil-Bukit Batu, Senepis and the Libo landscapes - collectively covering 1,885,000 ha. Of the total PSF landscapes in eastern Sumatra approximately 454,000 ha is currently protected (24%), although this includes only one national park (Berbak) and currently one proposed national park (Senepis Tiger Conservation Area). High rates of deforestation in the lowland forests of Riau province have been ongoing for decades and reported extensively elsewhere (Jarvie et al. 2003, Obidzinski 2004, Suyanto et al. 2004). The Kampar river basin and Siak-Pelalawan block, while subject to the effects of both licensed and unauthorized logging over many years, are currently experiencing an accelerated rate of conversion as more economically attractive dryland forests in other areas of Sumatra become exhausted. While observations suggest that the FMU landscape has experienced lower levels of exploitation than major river
Pg 7/68
FINAL REPORT
basins to the north and the south, it is predictable that the pressures on the landscape will increase dramatically as remaining forests and their intrinsic value is eroded.
Figure 1. Location of the FMU in relation to surrounding Siak-Pelalawan forest block derived from 2002 Landsat subsequently modified based on ground-truthing (Feb 2005).
2.2
Description of the Serapung FMU
The Serapung Forest Management Unit (19,945 Ha) is comprised of two industrial timber concessions, PT. Satria Perkasa Agung (SPA or Serapung I) and PT. Mitra Hutan Jaya (MHJ or Serapung II), managed as a single entity by PT. Arara Abadi. The management objective of both districts is to provide wood fibre, from mixed tropical hardwood forests, to supply the PT Indah Kiat Pulp & Paper (IKPP) mill in Perawang over the short term, while providing a land-base for Acacia plantations over the longer term. Relatively small volumes of sawlogs are also sent to nearby sawmills. The concessions were approved by the Head (Bupati) of Pelalawan District, with licenses that allow for land-clearing of forest, establishment of canals and drainage ditches, and planting of Acacia crassicarpa for pulpwood production. A six to seven-year growing cycle is assumed for future Acacia crassicarpa productivity in this area, based upon an estimated MAI of 25 m3/ha. The first harvest of Acacia in FMU Serapung is due in 2010. At the present time the majority of remaining un-cleared forest, destined for felling and conversion to plantation, is in the northern sections of the FMU. This study focuses on remaining natural forests situated in the northern half of the concession area within, and adjacent to, Serapung I district (11,404 ha). Acacia plantations occur in the HTI-designated production (Produksi) areas of the concession. Other designated forestland uses within the concession are for conservation (Konservasi), community livelihood (Kehidupan) and high-quality local tree species (Unggulan) collectively referred to as set-aside forests (see Figure 2).
Pg 8/68
FINAL REPORT
In Serapung I district, a total of 1,343 ha or 12% of the FMU area is designated for conservation (Konservasi). This conservation area consists of a wide strip running parallel to the coast, from the northern most corner of the concession, to approximately half way along its north-south length. As of September 2004 a total of 5,723 ha (50% of Serapung I district) remains under forest cover (data from SmartWood HCVF report; see Table 2 below). All of the remaining forest within the three land-use categories above suffer from illegal logging by local communities. The species of primary focus for these unauthorized loggers include Suntai (Palaquium burkii), Punah (Tetramerista glabra), Meranti bunga (Shorea teysmanniana) and Ramin (Gonystylus bancanus). During the 1980s, the FMU and adjacent forests were selectively logged under the Indonesian Selective Logging and Planting System (TPTI). Locomotive rail lines were used to extract logs until around 1995. As a result most natural forest areas within the FMU have experienced two previous logging cycles in addition to ongoing, unauthorised commercial hand-logging by villagers. Aerial surveys via helicopter, by both SmartWood and STCP assessment teams, confirmed that no areas of primary forest could be identified within the FMU. Degradation of habitat within the concession was classified by SmartWood (see Figure 3) from satellite imagery, described as either severely degraded (where little canopy remains) or less severely logged (where canopy is patchy but a nearly continuous under-story exists). Secondary forest and scrub vegetation, often the result of postagricultural regeneration, is characteristic in the FMU wherever it borders coastal farmland. An extensive network of canals covers the majority of both forested and non-forested production areas within the FMU. Ranging in size from primary canals of 12 metres width, to secondary canals of approximately 9 metres width, these function to optimise the water-table depth for plantation growth, for management access into the plantations, and for the easy passage of barges to log collection points. The FMU is adjacent to or overlapping the land area also claimed by each of four villages - Pulau Muda, Segamai, Gambut Mutiara and Serapung. However, none of these villages have permanent settlements on the north bank of the Kampar River near to the FMU. Exceptions to this are the scattering of simple dwellings, situated along a strip between the FMU and the coastline, which are associated with low intensity coconut farming. Another exception is the expanding pioneer settlement associated with the disused primary logging rail and canal of the previously active HPH concession belonging to PT. Yos Raya Timber. Situated on the northern boundary of Serapung I district, this settlement considers itself as an outpost of Pulau Serapung village. In STCPs opinion, land ownership disputes are likely to intensify in this region as the Yos sub-village continues to expand. Further clarification of these issues is included in the SmartWood HCVF report for Serapung District. All four of the definitive settlements represent historically poor muara river villages, where inhabitants tend to have a closer livelihood relationship with forests in contrast to the upstream pangkalan villages with their important role as staging grounds for estate crop commodities (Kuniyasu 2002). In recent times the replacement of river transport with roads, increased employment opportunities in downstream timber and oil palm plantations and, above all, greatly increased opportunities to sell timber from village forests, have caused a rise in economic importance of muara settlements relative to pangkalan villages. Farming is the primary livelihood for villagers (SmartWood reports more than 75% of all families rely on agriculture). The highest proportion of farmers can be found in the Yos sub-village, where subsistence reliance on farming is likely to feature strongly until their
Pg 9/68
FINAL REPORT
coconut palms are harvestable. Fishing ranks second as a means of livelihood in most communities around the FMU. Through interpretation of satellite imagery SmartWood has characterised agricultural land use patterns in and around the FMU. A total of 35 separate smallholder areas were identified, ranging in size from 3 to 238 ha (on average, 54 Ha/site), amounting to an area of 1,877 ha of agricultural small holdings in and around the FMU. However, only approximately half of these sites possessed simple dwellings for temporary living. Small-scale agriculture by local people appears to be fraught with difficulties, an example of this being the devastating predations of the rhinoceros beetle (Oryctes rhinoceros) on coconut plantations, resulting in the abandonment of a large proportion of plots adjacent to the FMU. SmartWood reports the high importance of small-scale timber harvesting and sawmilling for local people around the FMU, with as much as 70% of cash income generated by unlicensed logging and milling activities. Livelihood strategies however tend to be diversified, with most households utilising both farming and logging activities in order to meet their economic needs. Certainly the informal logging activities of all four villages described above are currently focused on the remaining forests within and adjacent to the FMU. Sustainable forestry practices do not appear to feature in the livelihood strategies of these local people, where forests are valued primarily as a source of timber at the lowest cost (regardless of whether or not the forest survives), or as a means to obtain land for agriculture. Oil palm cultivation is becoming an increasingly attractive concept amongst farmers living around the FMU, primarily due to newly arising cost-effective opportunities to sell fresh palm bunches to nearby palm-oil processing plants. Plans for a 100 ha oil palm plantation in the Yos area are indicative of likely future land-use trends around the FMU.
Table 2. Extent of natural and planted forests in the Serapung I forest management unit as of September 2004 (data from SmartWood report, November 2004). Concession Land Use Production (Produksi) - Natural - Cleared - Planted Community Livelihood (Kehidupan) Indigenous trees (Unggulan) Conservation (Konservasi) Infrastructure Informal agricultural smallholdings Total Natural Forest Total Other Uses Total Area (ha) 2,820 1,510 3,172 381 1,179 1,343 163 836 5,723 5,681 11,404 % of Total Area 25 13 28 3 10 12 1 7 50 50 100
Pg 10/68
FINAL REPORT
Figure 2. Location of Serapung I district and the planned land use of the Serapung FMU. SmartWood proposed indicative HCVF boundaries are also included here.
Figure 3. Forest cover within Serapung I in November 2004. The northern forest block within the FMU was defined by SmartWood as indicative HCVF and APP imposed a logging moratorium until completion of this tiger assessment.
Pg 11/68
FINAL REPORT
2.2.1 Study Area

The study area was based on recommendations provided by SmartWood as quoted here: The coastal strip between Tanjung Datuk at the mouth of the Kampar river to the next river channel entering the sea, at Pulau Tadi, extending 10 km inland from the coast. Contained within this area is a 5,884 ha block of forest within the FMU.
Based on STCPs expertise, the study area was modified slightly to that described above. The study area included the eastern sub-unit of the Serapung FMU (Serapung I; PT Satria Perkasa Agung) and its adjacent forests and surrounding local communities, with particular focus on the indicative HCVF area as delineated by SmartWood. The indicative HCVF area occupies the northern half of Serapung I. The indicative HCVF is 5,884 ha of which 3,267 ha was originally planned for plantation development. The remaining natural forest has been classified by the FMU management under various definitions of set-aside land in fulfilment of Ministry of Forestry regulations (see Figure 2 in the previous section). Forest areas outside the FMU were sampled in recognition of the paucity of regional tiger and landscape data, in accordance with the guidelines and assessment scope provided by SmartWood, and in line with the intrinsic HCVF requirement of establishing the contribution of FMU tigers, if present, to the viability of the population in the wider landscape. Sampling of forest habitat outside the FMU was also considered necessary in order to provide a context for comparison of habitat within the indicative HCVF area with habitat adjacent and in the wider landscape-level forest block.
Pg 12/68
FINAL REPORT
2.3
Ecology of Peat Swamp Forests around the FMU
The SmartWood HCVF report describes in detail the ecological characteristics and associated flora and fauna of the major habitat types found in the Siak-Pelalawan block. Five habitats are recognised in this landscape - tall PSF, mixed PSF, short PSF, secondary habitats, and mangrove/coastal habitats. Only short PSF was found to be absent from the FMU. Coastal peat-swamp forest, where peat accumulates on top of marine sediments (Reiley, Ahmad-Shah & Brady 1996), is predominant within the FMU presenting as Tall PSF across the majority of the FMU area. The FMU PSF abuts tidal rivers and coastline, providing an accumulation of freshwater in the peat soil which maintains sufficient hydrostatic pressure to repel tidal saltwater incursions into the inland soil profile. Relatively little terrestrial wildlife research has been carried out within PSF ecotypes in general, with most previous PSF wildlife studies limited to investigation of arboreal and aquatic animal species. This lack of ecological context has presented a challenge to the interpretation of results obtained during this assessment. Despite this paucity of data regarding terrestrial animals, some inferences can be made from general ecological studies within the PSF ecosystem. Low nutrient levels of soils in mature PSF almost certainly limit primary production. In such a habitat plants are expected to defend their leaves and other edible parts as fiercely as possible against potential herbivores (Whitten et al. 2000). Consistent with low productivity ecosystems, a number of studies have indicated that the density of primates is lower in PSF than in dry lowland systems (Galdikas 1978, Marsh and Wilson 1981, Mackinnon 1983) which decreases further still with increasing distance from rivers (MacKinnon et al. 1996). Many species of mammals and birds inhabiting PSF are the same as those in other lowland tropical rainforest (Medway 1977, Davies and Payne 1982; MacKinnon 1983; Wells 1985) although, for at least terrestrial mammals, these are found to live at much lower densities in PSF (Merton 1962, Janzen 1974). Extrapolated to the typical prey species of the tiger, PSF would be expected to have a lower carrying capacity and hence its habitat potential for tigers would be less optimal when compared to other lowland forest ecotypes. Other research has suggested that PSF has ecological attributes that increase its conservation value. While PSF is generally considered to have a relatively low floristic diversity (MacKinnon et al. 1996), recent studies have shown that tree diversity can be comparable to, and sometimes even greater than, that of forests on mineral soils (Hanum & Leprun 1999). PSF also provides a habitat for a number of endemic and rare tree species (Ibrahim 1997). Similarly, of the 57 mammal and 237 bird species recorded in PSF of peninsular Malaysia, 51% and 27% respectively are listed as globally threatened species (Sebastian 2002). In Sumatra, PSF constitutes the largest remaining area of low-level forest habitat and, as such, now represents a vital refuge for not only peat swamp specialists, but also a wider range of lowland specialist species (Sebastian 2002).
2.3.1 Habitat Modification of Peat Swamp Forest by Logging

The Siak-Pelalawan forest block represents a modified PSF ecosystem due to logging activities. The entire forest block has, in the recent past, been managed and exploited under HPH logging concessions (Figure 4). Inspection of satellite imagery (Landsat 2001, 2002 and SPOT 2004) reveals logging rails have been used widely across the forest block, and that severe degradation of forest is associated with the more accessible areas.
Pg 13/68
FINAL REPORT
Several studies have been conducted on the effects of logging on wildlife in the forests of Southeast Asia, though again PSF has suffered from relatively little attention. Comparisons between pre- and post-logging wildlife abundance have shown conflicting results between studies (Bennett & Dahaban 1995, Meijaard et al. 2005). Some of this variation may well have exposed a critical feature of postlogging ecological modification, that of the effect of microhabitat creation along newly opened logging roads (Bennett & Dahaban 1995, Johns 1989, 1992). Meijnaard et al. (2005), through an extensive literary review on the effects of logging, has suggested that almost as many mammal species declined in the aftermath of logging, as those that increased. The most tolerant, or advantaged, species were identified as herbivores and omnivores where diet consists of considerable secondary growth foliage. With respect to abundance of tiger prey species in the Siak-Pelalawan forest block, it is possible that the sub-optimal nature of climax stage PSF habitat has been somewhat improved relative to its original condition, if only temporarily, by the effects of widespread logging, rail creation and other causes of canopy disturbance that opens the forest to increased light levels and hence leads to increased productivity at ground-level.
Figure 4. Past and present HPH concessions in the Siak-Pelalawan forest block
Pg 14/68
FINAL REPORT
2.4
Sumatran Tiger Status, Threats and Ecology
Both the status and ecology of the Sumatran tiger in the wild remains poorly understood and this presents a serious constraint to effective conservation efforts (Tilson & Traylor-Holzer 1994, Tilson & Nyhus 1998). Conservation of the tiger in a constantly changing, human-dominated landscape requires an understanding of the species limits and capabilities (Sunquist et al. 1999). The tiger is clearly an adaptable species, persisting in a diversity of habitat types, tolerating a range of climatic and rainfall regimes. They are capable of rapidly increasing their numbers given suitable conditions. As a predator they are capable of capturing prey of widely differing sizes, altering their hunting strategies to accommodate the composition of the available prey base (Sunquist et al. 1999).
2.4.1 Status of the Sumatran Tiger and threats

Sumatran tigers, once numbering in the thousands, are today listed in Appendix I of CITES and designated as critically endangered by the IUCN. They represent the last of three Indonesian subspecies of tiger, with both the Bali (P. t. balica) and Javan (P. t. sondaicus) subspecies going extinct during the last 50 years. Within the last century Sumatra has been transformed from an island of extensive Dipterocarp-dominated forests, containing scattered agricultural settlements and small towns (Whitten et al. 1987, Collins et al. 1991, Jepson et al. 2001), to a region characterised by intense development led by the forestry, plantation, agriculture, and mining sectors. Since 1960 government sponsored transmigration programmes have facilitated the large-scale relocation of people to Sumatra from densely populated islands such as Java, Bali and Madura and, in so doing, significantly altered the distribution and status of the remaining biodiversity (Whitten 1987, Gillis 1988, Collins et al. 1991). By the time the need for additional protected areas was recognised much of the optimum habitat for conservation had already been converted (Collins et al. 1991, Fearnside 1997). In 1992 a Sumatra-wide population and habitat viability analysis (PHVA) was carried out for the wild Sumatran tiger (Seal et al. 1994, Tilson et al. 1994). The viability of any population depends on a number of parameters, which include intrinsic factors such as population size, reproductive rate, demographic structure; and extrinsic factors including prey density, habitat quality, and human impacts. Genetic factors, such as inbreeding, are also considered important. The interplay of these parameters with random chance events (stochasticity) can be modelled to predict how a population may increase or decline in the future. The stochastic population simulation programme VORTEX (Lacey 1993, Ellis & Seal 1995) was used to study the interaction of the multiple variables and to predict the effects of various management scenarios on the probability of tiger population viability (Seal et al. 1994, Wiese et al. 1994). Ecological parameters used in the model were derived from studies on the Bengal and other tiger subspecies, from unpublished data contributed by the workshop participants, from direct observations by Indonesian Forestry Department staff and from data extrapolated from Sumatran tiger captive-breeding studbooks. The results of the population simulations were combined with a landscape-level spatial model of Sumatran tiger distribution and potential habitat developed using GIS (Faust & Tilson 1994) to provide an overall population status assessment for the Sumatran tiger. A total of 26 protected areas were identified where tigers were present, representing 45,600 km2 and accounting for 9.6% of the total land area of Sumatra. Based on density estimates obtained for tigers in similar ecological settings, and direct sightings by Forestry Department staff, the population of wild Sumatran tigers was estimated at 500 individuals. Of these approximately 100
Pg 15/68
FINAL REPORT
individuals were identified to be living outside the protected area system, thus exposed to an immediate risk of local extermination. The largest contiguous subpopulations were identified within the four major national parks in Sumatra, ranging from 110 individuals in Gunung Leuser to 20 individuals in Way Kambas. Using the VORTEX model even the Gunung Leuser population was estimated to have a probability of extinction of 20% over 100 years, while in Way Kambas the population of 20 tigers was estimated to have a probability of extinction over 100 years of between 49-94% even when no artificial extraction of individuals (e.g. poaching) was assumed to occur. The remaining 22 areas were considered to contain small, isolated and fragmented tiger subpopulations, at high risk of extinction from the interaction of random and deterministic processes (Tanaka 2000), such as skewed sex ratio, disease, genetic drift, inbreeding depression, reduction in prey-base, poaching and environmental catastrophes (Fahrig & Merriam 1994, Crnocrak & Roff 1999, Karanth & Stith 1999, Franklin 2002). In the absence of more recent Sumatra-wide assessments, this 1992 PHVA estimation of 500 wild tigers continues to represent Indonesias official population estimate for the Sumatran tiger.
2.4.2 Minimum viable population for Sumatran tigers

From the results of the 1992 PHVA for the Sumatran tiger (Tilson et al. 1994) using VORTEX (summarised in Table 3), a population with a carrying capacity of 50 animals (ignoring the potential effects of inbreeding, poaching, and catastrophes) has a very low probability of extinction (Pe = 0.042), but for a carrying capacity of 25 animals there is a significant risk of extinction (Pe = 0.404). The probability of extinction in this case is purely due to random events, such as the number and sex of cubs per litter, and fluctuations in survival rates of the different age classes. The effect of inbreeding was also modelled, recognising that for populations with less than 100 individuals there is a greatly increased risk of extinction due to these genetic factors. Further modelling showed that the size of the starting population does not appear to have a major effect on extinction risk, primarily due to the high reproductive rate of tigers allowing populations to rapidly expand towards carrying capacity potential wherever opportunities arise. However the effects of even relatively small levels of poaching (2 individuals a year), on a population with a carrying capacity of 50 or less, significantly increased the overall probability of population extinction (Pe). A summary of results from this PHVA indicate that a population with a carrying capacity of 100 individuals is resilient to stochastic variations in demography and to the detrimental effects of inbreeding, and is less sensitive to low levels of poaching. A population with a carrying capacity of 50 individuals results in an acceptable probability of population persistence providing that periodic genetic supplementation is ensured and that the population is carefully protected against poaching. An optimal habitat for the Sumatran tiger should therefore possess a carrying capacity of 100 tigers, while the minimum carrying capacity of an independent tiger habitat (albeit requiring interventive genetic management and protection against poaching) should be sufficient to support 50 tiger individuals.
Pg 16/68
FINAL REPORT
Table 3 Selected population modelling results from Tilson et al. (1994) showing the probability of extinction (Pe) of tigers using different population sizes and carrying capacity with or without the effects of inbreeding (Inb H). Carrying capacity and inbreeding are shown to have major impacts on Pe. The expected population after one hundred years is the mean value of surviving populations. The results of the effects catastrophes and poaching are not shown. Starting Population 25 25 75 25 25 75 Carrying Capacity 25 50 100 25 50 100 Deterministic Growth Rate 0.086 0.086 0.086 0.086 0.086 0.086 Inb H No No No Yes Yes Yes Pe 100 yrs 0.404 0.042 0.004 0.944 0.324 0.000 Expected Population after 100 yrs 20 44 90 11 26 82
2.4.3 Habitat Utilisation by the Tiger

Providing certain conditions are met the tiger is capable of surviving within a wide range of habitat types - from coniferous-deciduous forests of Russia, tropical forests of Southeast Asia, to grassland habitats of India. The Sumatran subspecies is similarly adaptable, and found to be present in most major natural ecotypes occurring on the island of Sumatra, including peat-swamp forests. In addition the Sumatran tiger is also known to make use of low intensity agricultural systems, particularly where this is associated with a low density of people. On the other hand there is currently no evidence that the Sumatran tiger can utilize either industrial timber plantations or anything other than the forested peripheries of oilpalm estates. In light of this STCP has assumed, for the purposes of this assessment, that all natural forests (both degraded and intact) represent potential tiger habitat, and that HTI and oil-palm estates are non-tiger habitat. Karanth et al. (2004) found a functional relationship between abundances of tigers and their prey under a wide range of ecological conditions. This supports Johns (1983) statement that the congregation of browsing mammals that feed on the ground vegetation of recently logged forest causes an associated rise in the densities of tigers. Franklin (2002) found that although the Sumatran tiger showed a significant preference for closed canopy rather than open forest/grassland, both Franklin (2002) and Kawanishi (2002) noted that tigers will utilize abandoned roads and trails wherever they are available. Smith et al. (1989) found Bengal tigers marked along a network of trails, roads, dry streambeds and ridge tops that are used for travel through their territories. Franklin (2002) has suggested that the use of the roads and trails by tigers is for their ease of movement through difficult terrain and vegetation (which optimises efforts to defend territories and prey resources) and high visibility for hunting.
2.4.4
Social and community impacts in relation to tigers
In Sumatra, as the second most populated island in Indonesia after Java, and one of Indonesias biologically most diverse (Whitten et al. 1987), the conflict between people and wildlife is predictably intense. The Sumatran tiger has epitomised the nature of this conflict (Nyhus 1999, Tilson et al. 2001). Historically tiger-human conflict has been common in Sumatra. While some authors suggest tiger-attributed human deaths are rare (McDougal 1987) the earliest European explorers described tigers as numerous and dangerous,
Pg 17/68
FINAL REPORT
occasionally depopulating entire villages (Marsden 1966). Estimations of tigerattributed deaths of humans have ranged from a dozen per year for the entire island in the 1920s (McDougal 1987), to more than 100 people killed during 1951 in Bengkulu province alone (McNeely & Sochaczewski 1988). The relationship between traditional people and the Sumatran tiger is usually one of reverence and respect, and is often characterized by a delicate but generally harmonious coexistence. Occasionally this relationship breaks down, particularly where rural migrants dominate in place of traditional forest-dwelling communities, leading to localised and sporadic conflict events, resulting in human deaths and material losses from livestock predation. Estimations of tiger-attributed humans deaths have ranged from a dozen per year for the entire island of Sumatra in the 1920s, to more than 100 people killed during 1951 in Bengkulu province alone. More recently Nyhus (1999) has specifically addressed the history, manifestation and extent of tiger-human conflict in Sumatra. A review of media reports suggested that between 1978 and 1997 a total of 147 people were reported killed and 30 injured by wild tigers in Sumatra. The probability of conflict is highest in multiple-use forests where tigers and people are in close proximity. Conversely, conflicts are least frequent in more isolated protected areas where human intrusion is relatively low. However even low levels of conflict are recognised as capable of causing considerable hostility towards tigers (Nowell & Jackson 1996, Tilson & Nyhus 1998) and promoting tiger persecution. The resulting retribution for attacks by tigers may be a significant reason for the tigers decline (McDougal 1987, Ginsberg & Woodroffe 1998, Nyhus 1999, Woodroffe & Ginsberg 2000) and a failure to mitigate these conflicts has limited the effectiveness of conservation efforts that focus on protection and landscape-level management initiatives. Experiences from the Bali and Javan tiger provide a preview of the effects of these phenomena, where hunting and retribution for attacks on livestock and people have pushed small populations to their ultimate extinction (Seidensticker & Suyono 1980, Seidensticker 1987). At present the Indonesian Ministry of Forestry defines problem tigers as those which leave their natural habitat and come in contact with local villages, killing and eating livestock or people (Ministry of Forestry 1994). However, to date Indonesia does not possess a formal policy for the treatment of problem tigers or reducing tiger-human conflict where it arises. A failure to mitigate these conflicts where they exist has limited the effectiveness of conservation efforts that focus on protection and landscape-level management initiatives (Gadgil 1992, Forester & Machlis 1996, Decker & Chase 1997, Nyhus 1999).
2.4.5 The Siak-Pelalawan forests context for tiger conservation

Conservation efforts for the Sumatran tigers in the past have been focused within Sumatras national parks - including the development of Tiger Protection Units (TPU) and intensive ecological studies. More recently conservation initiatives have included efforts to combat illegal tiger trade, human-tiger conflict mitigation and looking beyond national parks by managing populations on a landscape scale. PSF is a known tiger habitat but has until recently gone unrecognised as contributing significantly to the overall viability of the Sumatran tiger subspecies. This is reflected by a lack of a basic ecological understanding of tigers in PSF, and by the continued low investment in protecting this habitat type and its tigers. The Tiger Conservation Unit framework (Dinerstein et al. 1997, Wikramanayake et al. 1999) represents a relatively recent global tiger conservation initiative which considers habitat integrity, poaching intensity and population status of tiger subspecies, using a landscape-ecology approach to identify and prioritise Asia into Tiger Conservation Units (TCU). Eleven TCUs have been identified in the
Pg 18/68
FINAL REPORT
tropical moist forests of Sumatra (Figure 5, inset). The Siak-Pelalawan forest block and the FMU is situated within TCU 150 (Kerumutan-Istana Sultan Siak; 1,181,600 ha in 1999; Figure 5) of this tiger conservation landscape, and as such has a particular global significance in its contribution to tiger conservation. Within the original TCU framework analysis, Sumatras forest cover was based on pre-1990 satellite imagery, and all forested areas were assumed to represent tiger habitat. TCU 150 was ranked as a level II TCU, defined as offering a medium probability of persistence of its tiger population over the long term, and offering a significant contribution to a bioregional tiger conservation strategy. The loss of a level II TCU would therefore be expected to have a significant impact on the probability of persistence of tigers in the bioregion. By 2001 the total forested area remaining (potential tiger habitat) within TCU 150 had been reduced to 1,061,966 ha, primarily due to timber extraction and forest conversion to oil-palm and industrial forestry plantations. Apart from outdated forest coverage data (at the time of its publication this data was already 7 years old; at the time of writing this report it is 15 years old) a lack of accurate on-the-ground tiger distribution and status data has been identified as a serious limitation in application of the TCU framework for most areas of Sumatra (Tilson et al. 2001). Unfortunately in Sumatra there have been few concerted efforts to update the TCU framework since its conception.
Figure 5. Location of the Siak-Palalawan forest block in relation to TCU 150 as per the TCU Framework and other TCUs in Sumatra inset.
Pg 19/68
FINAL REPORT
2.4.6 The Tiger as a High Conservation Value (HCV)

Central to the determination of High Conservation Value Forests within a forest management unit is the assessment and identification of High Conservation Values. The generic HCVF Global Toolkit, developed by ProForest, takes the six Forest Stewardship Council definitions of HCVs (FSC 2000), and describes a series of steps to conduct a systematic evaluation of conservation values in a forest area. HCVF delineation within any forest area is concerned with providing a rationale for its HCVF status, and developing management and monitoring steps for maintaining and/or enhancing identified HCVs. Under the Indonesian HCVF Toolkit the Sumatran tiger is assessed within the guidelines for HCV 1, defined as, Forest areas containing globally, regionally or nationally significant concentrations of biodiversity values (e.g. endemism, endangered species, refugia), and under the specific component threshold of HCV1.2 defined as, Critically Endangered Species - Any species listed as critically endangered by IUCN or on Appendix I of CITES that is actually or potentially present within the FMU is an HCV. The ProForest and Indonesian HCVF Toolkit defines HCVF as the area of forest required to maintain or enhance identified HCVs. The Toolkits state that any part of the FMU that has been identified as a priority site for threatened or endangered species, endemics or for maintaining significant temporal concentrations of species, will normally be considered as HCVF. In the absence of nationally-defined HCVF thresholds the identification of priority sites (hence HCVF according to the definition above), particularly for endangered, wide-ranging species such as the tiger, requires a value judgement on the part of the assessment team. For tigers specifically, recognising the intense threats to survival of the Sumatran subspecies across its current range, this value judgement should be made within the wider context of the current status and distribution of the subspecies as a whole. The Toolkits provide some examples, relevant to tigers, where HCVF delineation may be appropriate: the presence of any species of exceptional international concern where the existing legislation and the current protected area network does not provide sufficiently for their protection. the population size of the rare species, where for species of high conservation status the presence of a potentially breeding pair might be sufficient to warrant HCVF designation.
The SmartWood scope for this tiger assessment provided additional suggestions relating to the decision process for tiger HCVF delineation in the FMU: If the tiger is found to be present, an appropriate HCVF boundary will serve both the conservation needs of the tiger and the avoidance of a conflict situation. However, if the tiger is confirmed not to be present within the FMU, or the FMU does not constitute an integral portion of the habitat and range of the tiger population, then this HCVF will not exist within the FMU. Specifically for this assessment discussions between STCP and APP, prior to initiation of field work, identified the theoretical difficulties of reliably confirming species absence within the time available. Given this it was suggested that, for the purposes of this assessment, tigers should be assumed to exist within the FMU, and that decisions regarding delineation of HCVF should focus on assessing whether forests in the FMU constitute an integral portion of the habitat and range of the tiger population (SmartWood) and/or can be identified as priority sites for threatened or endangered species (Sumatran tigers in this case) as defined by the HCVF Toolkit (ProForest).
Pg 20/68
FINAL REPORT
3
3.1
Assessment Methodology
Background
Tigers are notoriously difficult to census and study in the wild due to their secretive nature and innate sensitivity to humans (Karanth 1987, Nowell & Jackson 1996, Franklin et al. 1999a). Direct observation and counts of tigers in tropical habitats is, for the most part, an impossibility (Karanth & Nichols 1998, 2000, Franklin et al. 1999a). In the past, study and census of wild tigers has relied on measurements of the abundance of tiger secondary signs in the field. Tiger census based on individual identification of pug-marks has been frequently used as a basis for population assessment and monitoring (Panwar 1979, 1987). However, subject to much criticism pugmark counts have been found reliable only in circumstances where field workers have a high level of familiarity with resident tigers over many years (Karanth 1987, 1988, 1995), as in Chitwan National Park of Nepal (McDougal 1977, 1999). Even under such ideal conditions the counts provide consistent underestimates of true tiger abundance (Miquelle et al. 1996, McDougal 1999). In tropical rainforests these methodological constraints are even more pronounced. Pug-marks and other secondary signs of tiger activity have a short persistence in the typical climate of such forests. Torrential rain and regular flooding quickly obliterates many tracks, while faeces and urine sprays are rapidly lost due to high humidity and rapid rates of decomposition (Franklin et al. 1999a). Minimum counts of individuals based on tracks and secondary signs, such as those used for the Siberian tiger (Smirnov & Miquelle 1999), are of little value in rainforest habitats except under the seasonally driest of field conditions. Transect-based census methods, relying on direct observation of individuals, are also impractical to implement in tropical rainforests. Limited visibility due to density of vegetation leads to prohibitively low probabilities of encountering wildlife directly. Similarly, census by aerial photography is also unfeasible due to the dense forest canopy preventing an unobstructed view to the forest floor. In recent years remote camera monitoring has been developed as a tool for general wildlife management (Foresman & Pearson 1998, Cutler & Swann 1999). Tigers, with their secretive nature and near complete avoidance of humans, have benefited considerably from technological developments in this field. Camera units are now commercially available which are at once cost-effective, reliable and resistant to the field conditions found throughout Asia. Recent studies have included a study of the size and population density of tiger populations in India (Karanth 1995, Karanth & Nichols 1998, 2000), tiger distribution census in Thailand and Malaysia (A. Lynam pers. comm., Kawanishi 2002), short-term (Griffiths & van Schaik 1993b, Griffiths 1994) and longterm monitoring studies on the Sumatran tiger (Franklin et al. 1999a). Identification of individual tigers has been an important component of these studies, facilitated by the individually unique pattern of stripes on the flank and face of tigers (Schaller 1967, McDougal 1977, Karanth 1995, Franklin et al. 1999b). Finally, a further constraint to the effective study of tigers in the wild is the marginal nature, remoteness and general hostility of the habitat in which the Sumatran tiger characteristically survives. For the field worker a serious challenge is presented by the combination of extreme topography, dense vegetation, lack of identifiable trails, difficult access, logistical limitations and sheer size of the forest habitat regions to be covered. The extended field periods required to generate scientifically robust data on wild tigers can only be achieved with the assistance of a strong supporting team and with adequate logistical planning. This is further exacerbated by the intrinsically low rate of data-acquisition associated with ecological study and status assessment of secretive, wide-ranging, low-density, solitary species such as the tiger.
Pg 21/68
FINAL REPORT
In combination these factors represent the main constraints for researchers hoping to study the Sumatran tiger, and present a significant obstacle for conservation managers attempting to assess population distribution and status, and for the in-situ conservation of the Sumatran tiger in general. With reference to this study in the Serapung FMU, the general constraints described above have been intensified by the limited time available for study completion, the logistically difficult nature of peat-swamp forest, and the lack of previous ecological, distribution or population status data regarding tigers in both peat-swamp forest in general, and in the Siak-Pelalawan region specifically. As such the satisfactory completion of the assessment in the time available necessitated a multi-disciplinary, coordinated and intense effort by an inevitably large team of personnel. Basic components of the assessment methodology employed here are summarised below and described in more detail in sections to follow:
3.2
GIS Landscape and Habitat Analysis
A non-field based but important component of this assessment was the collection of land-use data, future land conversion plans and general perspectives from a crosssection of Siak-Pelalawan forest block stakeholders. This data was incorporated into GIS maps of the TCU 150 region, specifically around the Serapung FMU, to demonstrate historic changes in available tiger habitat and forest cover, as well as general predictions on future status and forest coverage in the area. Providing a wider landscape context for Serapung FMU, this analysis focused on predicting the availability and extent of tiger habitat adjacent to the Serapung FMU in the near future given current land-conversion trends. On 6th January the assessment team flew over the Serapung FMU and adjacent forests by helicopter. Starting at the approximate centre of the Siak-Pelalawan forest block (close to the major peat dome) a 30 km west-east transect was covered, with photographs of habitat taken every 1 minute as the helicopter approached the FMU boundaries. Once over the FMU the team photographically recorded forest condition, canal layout and the locations of the major settlements and farmland in the region adjacent to the study area. These photos were used to interpret satellite imagery, and also provided a useful basis for orientation of field teams involved in ground surveys.
3.3
Preliminary Ground Surveys and Field Orientation
The assessment team arrived at Serapung FMU base camp on the 6th January. Between the 7th and 11th of January the teams concentrated on establishing basic knowledge of the FMU, and in particular the HCVF moratorium area, through a series of day-long field trips split into several teams. Goals of these field orientations were to identify access routes for future surveys, assess the transportation and logistical needs for these surveys, identify target areas for future rapid assessments and remote cameras, and conduct base-line interviews with local people regarding past interactions with tigers. The preliminary field orientations also provided an opportunity to identify optimal locations for remote forest base camps, develop a detailed field-work plan for the assessment period and purchase logistics and supplies in accordance with these plans. Field orientations were characterized by rapid movement of teams across and around the HCVF moratorium area in order to identify and establish areas where effort and allocation of survey team resources could most efficiently provide results in mind of time constraints of the assessment and in line with overall objectives. Following the completion of this orientation phase an assessment strategy and 1 month schedule was developed where camera sites, intensive survey objectives and target community groups were identified.
Pg 22/68
FINAL REPORT
3.4
Remote Camera Monitoring of Tigers and Prey Species
Intensive use of remote cameras represented a key methodology utilized in this assessment. The cameras were deployed to obtain definitive evidence of presence, general distribution and estimates of relative abundance for both tigers and their prey species across the study area. In section 3.4.1 a theoretical and technical background on use of remote cameras for Sumatran tiger monitoring is provided. A description of the specific remote camera methodology employed in this assessment forms the basis of the subsequent section 3.4.2.
3.4.1 Theoretical and Technical Introduction

Since their development in the early 1980s automatically-activated remote cameras (camera traps) have been an important tool for monitoring rare, cryptic species in a wide range of environments. Examples of such studies include the detection of scavengers at deer carcasses (Cutler & Swann 1999), estimation of grizzly-bear population size (Mace et al. 1994), activity patterns of Indonesian rainforest mammals (Griffiths & van Schaik 1993) and the characterisation of tiger populations in India (Karanth 1995, Karanth & Nichols 1998, 2000), and Indonesia (Franklin et al. 1999, Franklin 2002). Remote camera monitoring has proved particularly useful in the dense tropical forests of southeast Asia, where field conditions are inhospitable to the researcher and limit the applicability of many other techniques. The majority of wildlife species in tropical forests are characteristically sensitive to the presence of humans, thus making direct observation difficult. This is further compounded by dense vegetation, which can reduce line-of-sight visibility to between 5 and 20 metres. Remote cameras, on the other hand, are easily placed and hidden in the field, and most animals are oblivious, or rapidly adapt, to their presence. Remote cameras do not suffer from the same constraints as human observers, and the extended periods over which they can monitor in the field is very appropriate under conditions where animal encounter rates are so low. Evidence for the relative success of remote camera trapping of wildlife in tropical rainforests is provided by many anecdotal examples where species have only ever been recorded in this way, including the Sumatran rhinoceros (Dicerrorhinus sumatrensis) in Way Kambas National Park (Siswomartono et al. 1996, by the Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program). Remote camera monitoring has also been applied to tigers in order to assess population size and various aspects of the species ecology (Griffiths & van Schaik 1993b, Griffiths 1994, Karanth & Nichols 1998, 2000, Franklin et al. 1999a, Franklin 2002). The unique and highly contrasting stripe pattern found on the tigers flanks, legs, tail and head facilitates the distinguishing of individuals (Schaller 1967, McDougal 1977, Franklin et al. 1999b). Based on this, providing that clear and undistorted photographs are obtained, remote cameras enable the identification of tiger individuals (Karanth 1995) on condition that a systematic and careful approach to photographic comparison is employed. Considerable effort has been focused on the need to develop a robust statistical framework for remote camera monitoring, which is based on sampling of tiger populations as opposed to direct census of individuals. Approaches have included attempts to identify relationships between the number of camera days required to photographically capture a tiger, with independent estimates of the tigers density (Carbone et al. 2001 Jennelle et al. 2002), and the use of the capture-mark-recapture models (Seber 1982) to estimate population size and density (Karanth & Nichols 2000, Franklin 2002).
Pg 23/68
FINAL REPORT
3.4.2 Remote Camera Methodology in this Study

Adult tigers are known to habitually travel along specific routes, often well-worn animal trails, where they communicate with conspecifics by scent-marking (Sunquist 1981, Smith et al. 1987, Franklin 2002). Previous work has shown that this behavioural preference must be taken advantage of in the selection of remote camera sites if adequate photo-captures are to be achieved (Karanth & Nichols 1998, Franklin 2002). In this study the placement of remote cameras was based on identification of likely foci of localised tiger activity, as recorded during extensive preliminary field orientations, based on basic landscape analysis of habitat within and adjacent to the FMU, and in accordance with the need to distribute cameras as widely as possible across the target study area. Some camera sites were maintained throughout the assessment period, while others were moved and new sites chosen in response to changing field conditions and newly uncovered secondary evidence of tiger presence. With these constraints, commercially available TRAILMASTER (Goodson and Associates, Lenexa, Kansas, USA) infrared-activated camera traps (TR-1500 model) were placed at a height of 40-50 cm, on trees and/or temporary mountings. The distance across the camera trap gate, between the infrared transmitter and receiver, ranged from 4 to 6 metres. The camera trap units and data loggers were concealed as much as possible, and the monitors programmed to take successive shots at a time interval of one minute, thus minimising unnecessary wastage of film whenever groups of animals (e.g. macaques) were present. Sensitivity of the infrared monitor was programmed on a site-specific basis, adjusting to ambient light levels during the brightest part of the day, thus maximising sensitivity and minimising false activation of the camera. All cameras were programmed to be operational for 24 hours per day, where battery life of cameras and monitors would provide up to 7 and 10 days constant operation under normal conditions. Camera systems were regularly checked, serviced, and films and batteries changed in-situ. The data logging features of the TR-1500 monitor, in combination with the data-back feature of the cameras, allowed reliable identification of the time and date of all photographs obtained by remote cameras during this assessment. It was the aim of this study to keep an average of 10 cameras operational during the field assessment period of 30 days. Maintenance and checking of cameras necessitated a minimum field period of 4 days, covering approximately 55-80 km on foot between camera sites. Time available between field trips was used to develop and catalogue photographs obtained, and to allow teams to focus on other data collection components described below. Camera positioning was optimized to photograph tigers and programmed to be active for 24 hours per day. On average films were collected and cameras serviced every 7 days. Some cameras were moved to new sites according to results achieved and in line with overall assessment goals. Due to theft, fire and ongoing security concerns related to the large number of illegal logging groups within the moratorium area a total of 150 active camera-trap days were achieved during the 4-week study period.
3.5
Rapid assessment field surveys
Extensive ground-based surveys were a major component of the assessment methodology, requiring in excess of 150 person nights working from temporary forest camps set-up deep in the field. These surveys were carried out at two levels of intensity, serving different functions within the assessment methodology framework. Wide-ranging surveys, designed to maximize coverage of the study area, identifying
Pg 24/68
FINAL REPORT
and mapping evidence of tiger activity, high prey densities and specific vegetation and landscape features most likely to support tigers, accounted for 131 km of survey effort. An additional 106 km of survey transects were carried out under the more stringent and quantitative methodologies of a rapid assessment protocol developed by STCP to assess tiger distribution, prey abundance, habitat quality and levels of human disturbance. The routes of all surveys carried out during the assessment period were plotted by handheld GPS and later transferred to a geographical information system (GIS) map of the FMU and surrounding landscape. In order to assess distribution of survey effort across the study site an ArcGIS 8.1 (ESRI) GIS density function was utilised based on division of the study site into 1 km2 survey blocks. Total survey distance covered in each of these 1 km2 blocks was calculated to provide an index of survey intensity across the study site. This index of effort is graphically displayed below both for all surveys (Figure 6) and for rapid assessment surveys only (Figure 7). Samples of tiger faeces were collected whenever encountered by survey teams. The samples were later desiccated in order to facilitate the examination and characterisation of hairs, bone fragments and other indigestible remnants indicative of specific prey species.
Pg 25/68
FINAL REPORT
Figure 6. An index of relative effort of all surveys, including rapid assessments, in Serapung I and adjacent area. Maximum survey effort 5 is represented by dark blue shading. Areas for which no surveys were conducted are not shaded.
Figure 7. An index of relative effort of rapid assessments surveys only in Serapung I and adjacent area. Maximum survey effort 5 is represented by dark blue shading. Areas for which no surveys were conducted are not shaded.
Pg 26/68
FINAL REPORT
3.6
Secondary Tiger Reports from Local People
In support of the ecological work, other teams carried out over 20 field days of detailed questionnaire-based surveys of the local communities and groups living both in close proximity to the study area and in the wider forest block. The main aims of the sociological component of this assessment were to provide the following types of data: (1) Reports of tiger sightings relating to historic/current tiger presence and distribution; (2) Reports relating to past and recent tiger-human conflict events, including poaching and tiger attacks on humans and livestock; (3) General knowledge of local people relating to tigers, including perspectives and attitudes regarding tiger-human conflict. Conflict between tigers and humans is both clear evidence of tiger presence, and also a critical determinant of the likely viability of tigers in the future. Occurrences of conflict between humans and tigers, particularly where deaths of people or material losses occur (e.g. livestock) are, by their nature, events which are usually well remembered by local people. Tiger-human conflict events occurring in the FMU region during the recent past were identified by questioning of a wide range of local people, company employees and seasonal inhabitants of the local area. Reports of specific conflict events were treated as preliminary data until they had been confirmed by identification and follow-up interviews with direct eye-witnesses. For all data arising from local people considerable effort was expended in the process of confirming and cross-checking reports via multiple independent sources and the seeking of first-hand witnesses wherever possible. While hundreds of local people were interviewed during the assessment, detailed witness accounts and reliable respondent questionnaires were obtained from 49 individuals representative of the key adjacent regions (see Figure 8 below). Respondents were not randomly selected from the communities but were specifically targeted individuals considered most likely to represent their communities and/or likely to have a specific knowledge of tigers and their habitat.
Figure 8. Map of Serapung FMU area showing the main settlements and concentrations of local people interviewed during the assessment.
Pg 27/68
FINAL REPORT
4
4.1
Results
Remote Camera Monitoring of Tigers and Prey Species
A total of 150 camera-trap days were achieved at eleven locations within and around the FMU (Figure 9). Photographic results achieved during the remote camera monitoring are summarised in Table 4 below. A total of 14 tiger photographs were obtained at three locations (sites II, III and IV). Evidence from secondary signs indicated that tigers also passed through two further camera traps (sites I and VIII) but due to malfunction and theft of the cameras respectively no photographs were obtained. Overall a high rate of tiger photo-capture was achieved with an average of 0.093 photographs per camera trap day (10.7 camera trap days per tiger photograph). The photo-capture rates obtained in this assessment are compared with data from previous tiger studies in section 5.2. A problem associated with remote camera monitoring is the potential difficulty of matching independent left- and right-flank photographs from a single individual. While ideal, the use of double camera systems (simultaneous left- and right-side photocapture) was not used in this study due to the high risk of camera theft, the limited number of cameras available, and the time constraints relative to the risk of technical failure associated with these more complex camera system installations. However, the limited geographical extent of the assessment, and the numerically low number of tiger photographs obtained due to limited time available, ensured that this did not represent a concern. Ultimately, all tiger photographs obtained during the study could be accurately classified according to individual identity. Of the 14 tiger photographs obtained, 13 of these were of a single adult male (individual A; see Figure 10 and Figure 11 for right and left flank photographs respectively). A single left-flank photograph was obtained of a second adult male (individual B; see Figure 12). Identification of the sex of these individuals was confirmed by the visibility of external genitalia in the images obtained. As noted above, tigers were also observed to have passed cameras at sites (I) and (VIII), though no photographs were obtained due to malfunction and camera theft. Secondary tiger signs found at these two locations were interpreted in order to decide whether these tigers signs represented individuals A and/or B, or whether there was evidence that these signs represented previously unrecorded tiger individuals. In the case of the tiger that passed camera site (I), size of pug-marks were comparable to those from the similar sized adult males individuals A and B. However, at site (VIII) the pug-marks recorded were significantly smaller, representative of either a sub-adult or a young adult female. In confirmation of the latter, signs of scent-marking behaviour (urine sprayed high and to the rear of the animal) were observed and judged to be characteristic of an adult female individual. Six camera locations recorded tiger prey species (I, IV, V, VII, IX and X), which included pig-tail macaque (n=3), long-tail macaque (n=1), wild pig (n=1), and sun bear (n=1). The limited number of prey photographs obtained (6 photographic events; see Table 4) did not facilitate any further analysis of relative prey abundance between the FMU and non-FMU forests of the study area. Remote camera photographs of prey species recorded can be found in Figure 13, Figure 14 and Figure 15 below. Camera-trapping effort was not evenly distributed between the FMU and adjacent forests, with 50% more camera trap days achieved in forests outside the FMU. This difference was largely due to theft of cameras within the FMU, which not only led to loss of data but also restricted the diversity of locations where cameras could be safely deployed. Extensive forest fires, within and outside the FMU, also restricted locations where cameras could be placed and led to forced premature removal in one instance.
Pg 28/68
FINAL REPORT
Table 4. Summary of photographic results of remote camera monitoring carried out at 11 locations (sites I to XI) in peat swamp forests of the Serapung study area. Camera Site & Data-set I II (a) II (b) III (a) III (b) III (c) IV (a) IV (b) V VI VII VIII IX (a) IX (b) X XI Date of Camera Set-up 10/01/2005 14/01/2005 28/01/2005 10/01/2005 15/01/2005 28/01/2005 09/01/2005 14/01/2005 10/01/2005 10/01/2005 10/01/2005 10/01/2005 09/01/2005 26/01/2005 02/02/2005 14/01/2005 Total Total Camera Trap Days 18 14 10 4 13 10 5 14 5 22 4 0 17 10 4 0 150 No. of Photographs Obtained Tiger Pig-tail Macaque Long-tail Macaque Sun Bear 1 4 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 3 1 1 1 Wild Pig
Figure 9. Location of camera traps and number of tiger photographs obtained at each site. Evidence from secondary signs indicated that tigers also passed cameras I and VIII during the monitoring period, but photographs were not obtained due to technical malfunction and camera theft respectively.
Pg 29/68
FINAL REPORT
Figure 10. Tiger individual A (right flank) recorded by remote camera.
Figure 11. Tiger individual A (left flank) recorded by remote camera
Figure 12. Tiger individual B (left flank) recorded by remote camera.
Pg 30/68
FINAL REPORT
Figure 13. Macaca spp. recorded by remote camera.
Figure 14. Wild pig (Sus scrofa) recorded by remote camera.
Figure 15. Sun bear (Helarctos malayanus) recorded by remote camera.
Pg 31/68
FINAL REPORT
4.2
Rapid Assessment Field Surveys based on Secondary Signs
From a total field survey transect of 237 km, spread widely across the study area (of which 106 km used an intensive rapid assessment protocol) 354 tiger signs were recorded (Figure 16). These included pug-marks (paw prints), scrapes (a marking sign created by scraping back the hind legs after expelling faeces or urine), urine sprays (a scent-marking behaviour), faeces, and flattened resting sites. In order to estimate the ranges of all tiger individuals associated with the secondary signs recorded here, a buffer area of 3.55 km (equivalent to the radius of the mean home range size of male and female Sumatran tigers (Franklin 2002)) was delineated around these secondary sign data-points (Figure 16). Mobility of survey teams was facilitated when travelling along canal-side pathways, though this was offset by a contrasting slow rate of progress in the interstitial areas of PSF where no canals were present. The need to maximise coverage of the study area during the limited time available required that the survey teams travelled along the majority of primary and secondary canal-side pathways within the FMU moratorium area during this phase. In order to sample deep into the PSF, as distant from the canal system as possible, survey routes were designed to cut across the PSF blocks by selecting routes perpendicular to, and between, the secondary canals. Calculation of survey effort per unit area both for all surveys, and for rapid assessment surveys specifically, has been described previously in section 3.5, page 24. Figure 6 and Figure 7 in section 3.5 graphically demonstrate that survey effort was highest in the north of the FMU, along the primary canal within the moratorium area, and also along the Yos trail on the FMUs northern boundary. Rapid assessment surveys rigorously and consistently record all secondary signs and direct observations of tigers and prey species observed by field teams. Double counting of signs by different field teams was avoided by marking signs on the ground as they were recorded, and by geographic separation of survey teams respective efforts. Data-points representing observations resulting from these surveys were rectified in accordance with survey effort per 1 km2 unit as described in section 3.5 and incorporated into GIS maps using an ArcGIS (ESRI) density function. The resulting GIS maps (Figure 18 and Figure 19 below) graphically represent an index of abundance for tiger and prey secondary signs per unit of survey effort (at a 1 km2 resolution). The highest density of tiger sign per unit of survey effort was found along the Yos Trail (Figure 18) consistent with findings obtained by remote camera monitoring described in section 4.1. Tiger sign was also found within the moratorium area at a number of locations, including positive evidence of the presence of an adult female individual (see section 4.1 above). No tiger signs were found at Tandjung Datuk, situated at the southeastern corner of the FMU, either inside the small area of HCVF forest delineated there (see map in Figure 3, page 11; area partially designated as HCV4 by SmartWood) or in the adjacent forests, secondary habitat, scrub and agricultural land along the coast. Secondary signs and direct observations of tiger prey species indicated prey was distributed widely across the study area both within and outside the FMU (Figure 19). Lower prey levels, even absence, were observed in areas planted with acacia. Prey species identified from secondary signs (primarily pug-marks) but not recorded by remote cameras were the Sambar deer (Cervus unicolor), the Muntjak deer (Muntiacus muntjak) and the mouse-deer (Tragulus spp.). Coarse analysis of the animal hairs (and also bones, claws and other indigestible remnants of prey) found in the tiger faecal samples collected by field teams allowed identification of prey species consumed by tigers. From a total of 11 faecal samples the dominant prey species contained in each of the samples included wild pig (n = 6), Macaca spp. (n = 1), sambar deer (n = 1) and sun-bear (n = 3).
Pg 32/68
FINAL REPORT
The trapping of various tiger prey species (Muntjak, sambar, mouse-deer and wild pig) for bush meat appears to be common in the FMU, both by local communities and by company contractors as evidenced by the abundance of animal traps found within the FMU, and by the ready availability of deer meat in local markets and eating-houses. In general prey abundance levels and prey species composition were found to be broadly representative of other lowland forest habitats in Sumatra which are known to support tigers.
Figure 16. Locations of tiger sign found during surveys in the study area. A buffer of 3.55 km (equivalent to the radius of an average tiger home range) was plotted around the tiger signs to estimate a likely area over which the tigers detected are likely to range.
Figure 17. Tiger pug-mark recorded during ground surveys in the FMU moratorium area.
Pg 33/68
FINAL REPORT
Figure 18 Relative density index of tiger secondary signs per unit effort in the study area, based on observations from all ground surveys (maximum density per unit effort bright red; minimum density in green). Areas that were surveyed and no sign found are grey and areas where there no surveys were conducted are shown in white.
Figure 19 Relative density index of prey species signs per unit effort in the study area, based on observations from all rapid assessment surveys (maximum density per unit effort bright red; minimum density in green). Areas that were surveyed and no sign found are grey and areas where there no surveys were conducted are shown in white.
Pg 34/68
FINAL REPORT
4.3
Secondary Tiger Reports from Local People 4.3.1 Direct Sightings and Human-Tiger Conflict
A total of 49 respondent interviews were obtained in the process of identifying and verifying secondary reports relating to tiger-human interactions in and around the FMU (summarised in Table 5). From these interviews a total of 12 cases of human tiger conflict, and a further 14 direct sightings of tigers (not resulting in conflict, material loss or injury to humans), were identified as having occurred within or in the vicinity of the FMU and the geographic location and date of these events was noted (Figure 20). Each of these 26 cases of tiger-human interaction events was corroborated by at least one independent witness (Table 5). Detailed descriptions and information relating to the nature of these human-tiger events are summarised in Table 6. Of the 12 cases of human-tiger conflict, loss of human life occurred in three cases, serious injury in two cases, while the conflict events themselves were linked to the death of a minimum of three tigers. Temporal-spatial consideration of conflict events suggests that some multiple conflict events were associated with single tiger individuals. Of note is the detailed description and chronology of conflict events occurring along the Yos Trail during 2002 (case No. 6, 7, 8, & 9), ultimately resulting in human casualties, material loss and death of the tiger. This same series of conflict led to the serious mauling of an APP company employee. One of the most recent examples of human-tiger conflict involved the death of an APP contract worker (and the serious injury of another) while clearing an area of the Serapung FMU (October 2004). While some first-hand witnesses believe that this attack occurred due to inappropriate behaviour by workers (in contravention of cultural adat law and inline with local superstitions). Other reports suggest that this attack (by an adult female tiger) occurred subsequent to the death of a tiger cub at the hands of workers. Concentrations of tiger sightings were observed along the northern and southern boundaries of Serapung I FMU, both of which are associated with the presence of long-term and established human settlements. Reliable reports were also obtained regarding direct sightings of tigers in a number of widely separated locations across the Siak-Pelalawan forest block, including in the forests immediately adjacent to the FMU. These included two separate occasions where female adults with cubs were observed, one occasion where 2 cubs were reported, and one case where a female tiger was caught in a snare trap. Finally tigers have been observed by numerous witnesses as recently as late 2004 in the vicinity of the south-eastern isthmus of the FMU (at Tandjung Datuk) both within and outside the indicative HCVF area as currently delineated. Despite the reliability and recent nature of these secondary reports, the teams found no direct evidence (remote camera photographs or secondary signs) confirming tiger presence in this area (see sections 4.1 and 4.2).
Pg 35/68
FINAL REPORT
Figure 20. The location and approximate date of human-tiger observations and events occurring in and around the FMU, as reliably reported by respondents. Data here includes cases of human-tiger conflict (represented by star symbol), and direct sightings of tigers where conflict did not occur (represented by circle symbol).
Pg 36/68
FINAL REPORT
Table 5. List of all people formally interviewed with a key showing which case of conflict or tiger sighting they were witness to. The * donates them as the primary eye-witness.
No Name Location Status Age Years at site 9 8 3 8 5 3 7 4 2 4 1 1 4 4 4 3 5 4 3 10 30 20 15 70 20 15 1* 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* Conflict/Sighting Event Reported by Respondent (ref. Table 6 below) 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 1* 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Siman Asori Hamid Ibrahim Jamil Syahrudin Zaenal Simun Jai Alimudin Ishak Rizal Roni Harahap Ahmad Muhammad Edi Tatan Areva Zauzar Amid Aki Jabar Suwarman Muhammad Jais Endan
Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Jl. Yos Ds. Serapung Ds. Serapung Ds. Serapung Ds. Serapung Ds. Serapung Ds. Serapung Ds. Serapung
Pt. Yos staff Pt. Yos guard Villager Tiger shaman Head of RW Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Village sec. Head of RW III Tiger shaman Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager
48 60 45 70 60 45 40 50 25 35 30 30 36 40 40 45 39 41 43 35 49 60 40 70 39 35
Pg 37/68
FINAL REPORT
No
Name
Location
Status
Age
Years at site 15 4 3 2 3 1 4 5 2 45 33 6 10 30 10 3 12 8 3 3 5 3
Conflict/Sighting Event Reported by Respondent (ref. Table 6 below) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 1 1 1* 1* 1* 1* 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49
Samsuar Mulyanto E. Sitompul Acok Sinaga Atan Bukri Ijun Mursidin Isam Muis Danten Sitinjak Erna Suma Zailani Suparlan Maelaki Djuki Khairul Ahmad Rusyidi Ahmad
Ds. Serapung SPA SPA SPA SPA SPA SPA Teluk Meranti Teluk Meranti Teluk Meranti Teluk Meranti Teluk Meranti Teluk Meranti Teluk Meranti Tanjung Datuk Tanjung Datuk Tanjung Datuk Tanjung Datuk Tanjung Datuk Tanjung Datuk Tanjung Datuk Tanjung Datuk
Staff SPA Contractor Staff SPA Staff SPA Tiger shaman Villager Contractor Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager Villager
40 27 30 30 40 39 60 25 22 45 33 35 32 74 55 40 50 52 28 60 56 38
1 1 1 1 1 1 1* 1 1 1 1* 1 1* 1 1 1 1* 1 1
Pg 38/68
FINAL REPORT
Table 6 List of human-tiger conflict and tiger sightings since 1982 to the present day with approximate locations and brief descriptions of each event. The case of a tiger being being snared in the vicinity of Teluk Meranti was excluded from the results being not in the vicinity of the FMU.
No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Type Conflict Conflict Sighting Sighting Sighting Conflict Conflict Conflict Conflict Conflict Conflict Sighting Sighting Sighting Sighting Conflict Sighting Conflict Conflict Sighting Sighting Sighting Sighting Conflict Sighting Sighting Year 1982 2000 2001 2001 2001 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2003 2003 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2005 2005 2005 Location Tanjung Datuk Tanjung Datuk Km 6 PT Yos Km 7 PT. Yos Km 7 PT. Yos PT. SPA Km. 4 Yos Km 3 Yos Km 3 Yos Km 7 Yos Pulau Muda Base camp SPA Parit 3 Tj. Datuk Km 12 PT Yos PT. SPA Km 7 Yos Km 3 PT Yos Km 5 Yos PT. SPA PT. SPA PT. SPA Km 4 PT Yos Tanjung Datuk Jl. Pemda Km 8 Tlk. Meranti Km 7 PT. Yos Km 3 PT Yos Person(s) reporting Jabar, Ahmad dan Amid Suparlan (Parit 3) Hamit Khaerul and father Jais 20 people 30 people Simun, Rizal, Jamil, Tatan Tatan, 15 people Roni (Yos) Suwarman (Ds.Serapung) Mulyadi Maelaki Zaenal Edwin Sitompul Edi (Yos) Alimudin Ishak (Yos) Pak Ijun (Kepala rombong penanaman PT.SPA) Sinaga Areva Jay Djuki 5 people Muhamad Ali Roni In SPA area? Possibly No Possible No No Yes Yes No No No No Yes Possibly No Yes No No No Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No No Description of Event A man by the name of Jusri was killed by a tiger whilst logging; the partial remains of one leg was later found by the local people A tiger was caught in a deer trap set by Pak Zaelani close to the edge of the mouth of the Kampar river, Tj Datuk, the tiger eventually died and was left there. Whilst sitting in his hut on Km 6 he saw one tiger passing by below it. Close to sunset whilst cooking deer meat, suddenly a tiger passed close by Whilst resting in his hut at late afternoon, a tiger was seen sitting below hut from 17:00 and 19:00 before leaving A surveyor working for APP/Serapung by the name of Edi, originally from Bandung,was attacked and mauled by a tiger and his face was badly damaged A teenager aged 16 by the name of Muzambi was attacked and killed by a tiger whilst resting at night in a hut. Contract worker for APP/Serapung. A tiger attacked and killed a number of chickens owned by Pak Tatan in the vicinity of Km 3 Yos Trail A female tiger was snared close to the back of Pak Tatan's house, which was killed by pouring petrol over it and lighting it. The remains were then buryed. Secondary reports confirmed tiger was shot using homemade rifle. Together with Pak Nur the set a deer trap close to Km 7 Yos Trail which caught a tiger. The tiger released itself. One adult tiger was caught in a deer trap and died in the vicinity of Pulau Muda Village. While he and his friends were making a volleyball pitch saw a tiger the size of goat passing nearby He saw an adult tiger passing by the front of his house in the twilight Whilst driving the logging train on the PT Yos rail, a tiger jumped on to the train at which point he ran off Whilst working on the main road in the vicinity of the Serapung I base camp he saw one tiger cross the road Whilst still working for PT Yos, and asleep in his hut he was badly scatched on the legs by a tiger. At about 19:00 after dark, he saw an adult tiger moving from Km 4 in the direction of the sea. Three chickens were eaten by a tiger in their enclosure at the back of his house. A female cook was killed by a tiger beside canal 40. Pak Iujun explained that "Datuk" killed the female as she carried out improper activities with her boyfriend. He and his friends saw 2 young tigers (cubs?) walking along close to the bank of the Kampar river between the harbour of Serapung I and canal 3 Tanjung Datuk Whilst coming home from hauling timber he came across a tiger near by. In the late afternoon he saw 3 tigers, one adult and two young ones together June 2004 at 1700hrs, direct sighting of tiger outside house in Parit III. Moved to get between the tiger and his young child who was washing outside. Tiger reported to walk along trails in area for hours before and after. One tiger was caught in a deer snare set by Pak Isam not far from Teluk Meranti and later it released itself. He and his wife nearly every week see a tiger pass by or resting near to their house At the time there was a fire on the Yos Trail and in the near by forest, he saw 3 tigers travelling from Km 4 to Km 3 which eventually turned off in to the forest on the north side in the direction of the Apung river.
Pg 39/68
FINAL REPORT
4.3.2 Attitudes and Perceptions of Local People Regarding Tigers

During the respondent interviews a set of formal questions were posed in order to examine basic knowledge, experience, attitudes and perceptions of local people regarding Sumatran tigers and the root causes of human-tiger conflict. Results derived from these questionnaires (summarised in Table 7 and Table 8 below) show that only 30% of respondents had ever seen tigers directly while 37% of respondents had encountered their tracks. Despite this, 81% of people believe tigers are present in the vicinity of where they live, and 91% perceive tigers to be living in the wider Siak-Pelalawan forest block. Culturally the tiger is important to the local communities in this area, with 51% of people actively involved in performing traditional rituals believed to protect themselves from the tiger. The local belief system which links tiger attacks with breaches of local adat law by the victim, remains widely adopted (44% of respondents perceived this as the primary cause of conflict). A further 22% thought that conflict was caused by a mixture of forest clearance and breaches of adat. Forest clearance alone was perceived to be the primary cause of humantiger conflict by 17% of all respondents interviewed. Incursions by non-resident tigers (harimau pendatang), upsetting the generally harmonious co-existence between resident tigers (harimau penunggu) and villagers was perceived by 13% of the respondents as a primary cause of humantiger conflict. During the limited time available neither the field teams nor local respondent teams obtained any evidence of tiger poaching (driven by illegal trade in skins, bones or other tiger body parts) by local people in the vicinity of the FMU. However, the bones of one tiger opportunistically trapped along the Yos Trail in response to intense human-tiger conflict in 2002 were, in early 2004, sold on to a travelling trader from Medan via neighbouring HPH company contractors. However, local knowledge regarding the economic rewards to be accrued through poaching and illegal trade of tigers is prevalent in the region, facilitated by the high mobility and constantly changing composition of migrant workers, fishermen and sea-faring traders. Evidence for the threat presented by ongoing poaching and illegal trade was obtained during this assessment, where a recently caught tiger skin and bones were identified by the team as for sale at the nearby port island of Penyalai.
Table 7. Tiger-related questions posed to respondents (n = 49) and percentage of affirmative responses received. Respondent Question Q1. Q2. Q3. Q4. Q5. Q6. Q7. Q8. Q9. Q10. Are there tigers present in the area in which you live? Have you ever seen a tiger? Have you ever heard the sound of a tiger? Have you ever seen tiger paw prints? Have you ever heard of someone being attacked by a tiger? Are there any tigers in Serapung I forest concession? Are there any tigers in the forests in the Siak-Pelalawan forest? Have you ever partaken in a tiger blessing ceremony? Is the number of signs of tigers increasing? Is the number of cases of conflict increasing? % Yes 81 30 65 37 88 77 91 51 28 38
Pg 40/68
FINAL REPORT
Table 8. Identification of primary causes of human-tiger conflict as perceived by local community respondents (n = 49). Cause of Human-Tiger Conflict Due to incursions by non-resident tigers (harimau pendatang) Due to forest clearance Due to forest clearance and breaches of adat law Due to local peoples' breaches of adat law Due to the need for more effective local tiger blessing ceremonies % 13 17 22 44 4 100
4.4
Landscape Analysis 4.4.1 Minimum area required for Sumatran tigers

Results of the 1992 Population and Habitat Viability Analysis (PHVA) for the Sumatran tiger indicate that the size of area required to support a Sumatran tiger population should be sufficiently large enough to provide a minimum carrying capacity of 50 tigers, and optimally at least 100 tigers (see section 2.4.2). The population density of tigers that any forest area is able to support, and hence its carrying capacity, is in turn dependant upon prey density (see section 2.4.3). In Sumatra a best estimate for densities of tigers is between 1 and 4 tigers per 10,000 ha (See: Franklin et al. 1999, Griffiths 1994, Carbone et al. 2001, Franklin 2002) where 4 tigers per 10,000 ha reflects high prey densities such as those found in the highly productive lowland forests of Way Kambas National Park. A conservation area designed for Sumatran tigers should therefore possess an area of between 250,000 ha and 1,000,000 ha in order to fulfil optimal population viability criteria of the PHVA models described above, assuming that only limited management intervention is possible. A smaller area (equivalent to the lower range of 50 adult tiger individuals recommended by PHVA models) is sufficient where effective conservation management and strong protection can be implemented. Dependent upon tiger density, to achieve a carrying capacity of 50 individuals an area of between 125,000 and 500,000 ha is required.
4.4.2 Past, Present, and Future Land-Use

Tiger Conservation Unit (TCU) 150 consists of the Siak-Pelalawan and Kerumutan forest blocks, separated by the Kampar River, but considered for the tiger to constitute a single population. The combined area of these two blocks in 2001 was 1,060,000 ha. In the recent past practically the entire extent of TCU 150 has been selectively logged. Aerial flyovers and inspection of satellite imagery for the remaining forest areas in the Siak-Pelalawan forest block show a relatively intact forest canopy in the more remote regions, but widespread existence of both previously active and active logging rails. Patches of high levels of disturbance and forest clearing were mostly associated with easily accessible regions along major rivers and the coast. In Riau province the post-productive phase of many logging concessions (HPH) is characterised by conversion to other land types such as industrial timber (HTI) or oil-palm plantations (FWI/GFW 2002). In the Siak-Pelalawan block all the previously active HPH concessions have now ceased logging operations. All but one of these HPH concession areas have now been totally, or in part, converted
Pg 41/68
FINAL REPORT
to HTI (Figure 21). It is anticipated that remaining HPH concession areas will change to HTI in the near future. Significantly, a HTI application has been submitted to the MoF for conversion of the remaining areas of what was once the PT. Alam Wana Sakti HPH area (Serapung I and II districts are also situated within this HPH). This will result in the adjacent forests immediately to the west and north of Serapung I district being clear-felled and planted with industrial forestry timber species. The status and progress of this concession application is yet to be confirmed, but for the purposes of this report the granting of this HTI licence is considered a forgone conclusion. If this HTI application is successful then the Serapung FMU could potentially loose all habitat connectivity with the greater Siak-Pelalawan forest block. In addition to this several other HTI concessions are at the application stage for ex-HPH areas situated adjacent to the Kampar river (to the south) and the Selat Panjang strait (to the north). Since 1990 the natural forest cover in TCU 150 has been greatly reduced due to forest conversion for oil-palm and industrial timber plantations (Figure 22). The total natural forest remaining in TCU 150 as of 2001 was 1,060,000 ha and by 2007 is predicted, based on GIS analysis of current land-status and ongoing concession applications, to represent a maximum of 625,000 ha (see Table 9). A maximum of 305,000 ha of remaining forest in TCU 150s will exist within the northern Siak-Pelalawan block by this time, based on current best knowledge regarding future conversion plans in the region. The remaining forests in the Siak-Pelalawan block is estimated to be primarily comprised of all of the area managed under the HPH logging concession belonging to PT. The Best One Uni Timber, and most of the forests contained within the HPH concessions owned by PT. Yos and PT. Triomas FDI. A predicted forest area of 305,000 ha in the SiakPelalawan block by 2007 should be considered an optimistic analysis of future forest conversion trends since it does not account for what are likely to be numerous concession applications at both the provincial and central government level for smaller scale HTI and other land-uses. There are four protected areas listed in the Siak-Pelalawan forest block. The largest of these - Danau Pulau Besar (29,000 ha) - has already been gazetted as a protected area, while the three smaller areas (total 11,000 Ha) are still only proposed status (Figure 21). The Riau BKSDA office has informally expressed an interest in creating a further protected area around Tasik Pinang, a small lake 2 km to the west of the Serapung. Outside and to the south of the Siak-Pelalawan block, but within TCU 150, the Kerumutan Wildlife Reserve (100,000 ha) represents the only other protected area in this region.
Table 9. Area of natural forest cover from 1990 to expected future forest cover. The Siak-Pelalawan and Kerumutan blocks constitute TCU 150. The forest cover in 1990 but the total area for TCU 150 per the TCU framework is used. Forest Block Forest Cover in 1990 (Ha) Forest Cover in 2001 (Ha) 560,000 500,000 1,181,600 1,060,000 Predicted Forest Cover in 2007 (Ha) 305,000 320,000 625,000 Forest Area Currently Protected (Ha) 40,000 100,000 140,000
Siak-Pelalawan Kerumutan TCU 150
Pg 42/68
FINAL REPORT
Figure 21. The Siak-Pelalawan-Kerumutan (TCU 150) landscape showing (a) HPH concessions in 1997 (Source: MoF) and (b) current HTI and HPH concessions (Source: Peta IUPHHK-HT, dan IUPHHK-HA Propinsi Riau). All HPH concessions shown here are now inactive even though licences may not have expired. Ex-HPH areas that currently have indeterminate status are not shown.
Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program Pg 43/68
FINAL REPORT
Figure 22. The Siak-Pelalawan-Kerumutan (TCU 150) landscape showing natural forest cover c.1990 (represented here by false-colour Landsat image, c.1990), forest cover in 2001 (derived from Landsat 2001), maximum expected natural forest cover in 2007 and current protected areas. The maximum expected forest cover in 2007 was estimated by subtracting from 2001 forest cover areas that are currently, or proposed as, industrial timber or oil palm plantations.
Pg 44/68
FINAL REPORT
5
5.1
Discussion
Tiger Habitat and Prey
The forest remaining within the indicative HCVF moratorium area is structurally degraded; many of the larger commercial trees have already been removed and the water table has been lowered through an intensive system of primary and secondary canals leading to the FMUs central log-collection point. However the moratorium area remains contiguous with the wider Siak-Pelalawan forest landscape. Despite this degradation and the effects of ongoing illegal logging it was found, through photographs, secondary signs, tiger faeces and direct sightings, to contain all of the common prey species of tigers (i.e. sambar deer, muntjak deer, wild boar, and macaque). The number of secondary signs and frequency of photographs obtained by camera traps, for prey species both inside and outside the FMU, approximates to that which is observed in other Sumatran lowland forests where tigers are known to exist. In some areas of the FMU (e.g. in the Tandjung Datuk peninsular) there was evidence for prey species abundance being markedly higher than that found in many other comparable lowland forests. This widespread, high abundance of prey and non-prey species is contrary to expectations based on previous studies in PSF (see: MacKinnon et al. 1996, Whitten et al. 2000). However, the PSF habitat within the FMU is highly modified and possibly temporarily improved with respect to herbivores, due to increased secondary growth as a result of logging and forest clearance (see Section 2.3.1: Habitat Modification of PSF by Logging). Three of the 11 samples of tiger faeces examined were found to contain sun bear (Helarctos malayanus). Sun bear is not considered a preferred prey species although predation on sun bears has been occasionally observed in Way Kambas (Franklin pers. obs.) and in Malaysia (Kawanishi 2002). While it might be hypothesised that preyselection on sun bear is a response to paucity of the other preferred prey species, it may also be a reflection of the high density of sun bear in these forests as confirmed by local people. Prey abundance was found to be much reduced, or prey species were entirely absent, in areas of the FMU that had already been cleared and planted with Acacia. Considering that industrial timber plantations are likely to be a longer term feature of the landscape, further study should be conducted on this point, examining prey species abundance (as a measure of suitability as tiger habitat) in relation to age of stands, density of planted trees and spatial position relative to remaining natural forest areas.
5.2
Tiger Population in and around the FMU
Two adult male tigers were identified from remote camera photographs and the presence of an adult female was detected from secondary signs. A female tiger with 2 juveniles was reliably sighted in late 2004, confirming that a breeding population of tigers is present in and around the FMU. The wide distribution of tiger sign suggests that tigers utilise the majority of the moratorium area in the FMU, although activity was more concentrated in areas further from the coast. Although the density of tiger sign within the FMU was found to be equivalent to that expected in other lowland forest habitats, it was considerably less than that found along the Yos Trail to the north-west of the FMU. The habitat around the Yos Trail, despite its association with human settlement, is likely to have an increased importance for tigers, representing a favoured micro-habitat. Tigers make use of trails to facilitate efficient coverage of their home range (Franklin 2002), while scent-marking with particular intensity at territorial boundaries between individuals
Pg 45/68
FINAL REPORT
(Smith et al. 1989). In PSF the localised concentration of tiger activity as suggested by secondary signs and scent-marking may be accentuated as undisturbed PSF is more restricting in terms of ease-of-movement in comparison to other lowland forest types. The paths along the canals within the FMU offer the same ease-of-movement but, being newly developed and subject to intense disturbance from illegal logging, may not yet be fully exploited by tigers. Previous studies have shown some species, including tigers, become more nocturnal in their activity in order to avoid encounters with humans (Ojasti 1991, Griffiths and van Schaik 1993, Guggisberg 1975) and Kawanishi (2002). The relative abundance of tiger sign found within and outside the FMU was also reflected in the number of remote camera photographs obtained, with all 14 photographs taken along the Yos Trail. However, it should be noted that the number of camera trap days was 50% greater along the Yos Trail in comparison to the FMU, due to theft of cameras within the FMU and a limited number of locations where cameras could be placed due to illegal logging activities. The rate of photo-capture for all cameras both inside and outside the FMU was 0.093 tiger photographs per camera day (10.7 days/photograph). Comparison with other studies (Figure 23) identifies this as the highest rate achieved by any published study on the Sumatran tiger in Indonesia, greater than capture rates from the high-density tiger population in Way Kambas NP (0.025 photographs/camera day, 39.9 days/photograph) and comparable to capture rates achieved in the exceptionally high tiger density areas of India and Nepals flagship national parks (including Kaziranga, Nagarahole and Chitwan). Although photographic capture rates of tigers have been shown to be correlated with their density (Carbone et al. 2001), due to limitations of study time and camera coverage, no attempt is made here to relate results to such estimates of density. An accepted minimum level of sampling effort for such an extrapolation is considered to be 1,000 camera trap days (Carbone et al. 2001) which, under the study conditions of this assessment, would require extension of field time by a factor of 9. However, photographic capture rates were qualitatively similar to rates found in other quality habitats of Sumatra, at least suggesting that tiger density in Serapung is not outside the range of density previously observed elsewhere. If the high frequency of tiger secondary signs and photo-captures is considered alongside the frequent reports of tiger sightings by local people, it is clear that tigers are exceptionally active around the Serapung FMU and particularly within the immediate vicinity of the Yos Trail. Further study is required to confirm that these high levels of tiger activity relate to a corresponding high tiger density, or whether this abundance of data is a result of the geographically restricted ranging of a smaller number of individuals. However, during the time available this assessment could find no evidence in support of the latter hypothesis, where no obvious boundaries to tiger movement were observed, and where no qualitative differences in habitat could be identified between the Yos Trail and adjacent areas. Given the overwhelming weight of evidence collected during this assessment, it appears that the peat swamp forests of Serapung and Siak-Pelalawan provide tiger habitat at least comparable to other optimal lowland forests sites in Sumatra. Further work should be conducted as a matter of urgency to accurately measure the carrying-capacity of PSF in relation to the Sumatran tiger. Evidence collected during this assessment, in contrast to previous studies, suggests that PSF should not be considered suboptimal habitat for tigers as a general rule. If tigers are confirmed to be capable of living at high densities in PSF then this will have a significant impact on future Sumatra-wide conservation strategies for the species.
Pg 46/68
FINAL REPORT
No evidence of tiger secondary signs were encountered in the FMU outside of the forested moratorium area (i.e. in cleared areas or within plots planted with Acacia). However, in the small forested area to the south-east of the FMU (Tandjung Datuk) credible eye-witness accounts indicated tiger presence up through and including late 2004. Given this it must be assumed that tigers continue to traverse the strip of forest (designated Unggulan and Konservasi by APP) along the south-eastern boundary of the FMU. Similar reliable accounts of recent sightings were received for northern areas of the FMU which have only recently been clear-felled, including reliable reports of a company contract employee being killed, and one other injured, due to tiger attacks occurring as recently as October 2004.
Serapung Indonesia Kerinci Seblat Indonesia Bukit Barisan Selatan Indonesia Gunung Leuser Indonesia Way Kambas Indonesia Taman Negara Malaysia Ulu Temaing Forest Malaysia Gunung Tebu Forest Malaysia Bintang Hijau Forest Malaysia Temenggor Forest Malaysia Khao Yai National Thailand Phu Khieo Wildlife Thailand Queen Sirikit Reserve Thailand Halabala Thailand Chitwan Nepal Bandhavgarh India Pench India Nagarahole India Kaziranga India Kanha India
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
No. of photos per camera day
Figure 23. The number of tiger photographs per camera day in Serapung compared to other previous field studies (Carbone et al. 2001). The photo-capture rate in Serapung is greater than all other studies on the Sumatran tiger (shown in red), and is comparable to data collected for the Bengal tiger in locations where they are known to live at high densities.
5.3
Tiger Viability Issues in the FMU and Siak-Pelalawan Landscape
An evaluation of the future potential and viability of the tiger population inhabiting the FMU and the Siak-Pelalawan block necessitates consideration of habitat availability in the wider landscape. For the purposes of this analysis all natural forest in the SiakPelalawan block is considered to represent habitat currently utilised by tigers. In contrast HTI plantations are not assumed to provide any significant contribution to maintenance of tigers except in the case where large conservation areas have been set-aside. Oil-palm estates, at least in the first years of growth and when located adjacent to natural forest, do support an elevated density of ungulates and wild pigs when compared to natural forests. However, evidence currently suggests that tigers only utilise the fringes of these oil-palm plantations while hunting, relying on adjacent forests for all other aspects of their behaviour and ecology. For this reason, and for the
FINAL REPORT
purposes of population viability assessment, oil-palm estates are also assumed not to represent tiger habitat. Many historical and recent reports from local people indicate tigers are present in and around the FMU and widespread across the Siak-Pelalawan forest block which, along with the Kerumutan forest block to the south, represents the area identified as Tiger Conservation Unit (TCU) 150. GIS analysis based on currently-known concession holdings indicates that by 2007 TCU 150 will be separated into two isolated and much reduced constituent blocks. This optimistic approach, ignoring applications for additional concessions at the provincial and district level, estimates that a maximum of 305,000 ha of natural forest will remain within the Siak-Pelalawan block by 2007. However, given recent conversion trends witnessed across Riau and throughout Sumatra (see: FWI/GFW 2002) a realistic prediction for future habitat availability in the Siak-Pelalawan block is that only the currently protected areas of forest (approximately 40,000 ha) will remain in the medium-term. Some additional natural forest will be provided by mandatory set-aside areas within forest concessions, although these are considered to provide a very limited contribution to maintenance of the tiger population due to their characteristic lack of connectivity and small size. With respect to the landscape context of the FMU, currently available information relating to other concession applications suggests that adjacent forest areas to the north and west of the FMU will, in the near-term, be clear-felled and developed as plantations. This will lead to a total loss of connectivity between the FMU and the wider Siak-Pelalawan forest block unless (1) extensive habitat corridors are maintained by the neighbouring estate or (2) the area in the vicinity of Tasik Pinang Lake is gazetted as a protected area. This loss of connectivity would mean that, even despite vigilant management and effective protection by the FMU, tigers will not persist in the moratorium area in the medium to long-term. By extrapolation of tiger densities (1-4 tigers/100 km2) obtained from other studies in Sumatra, the maximum expected forest habitat expected to remain in the SiakPelalawan block by 2007 would be sufficient to sustain a population of between 30 and 120 adult individuals. Photo-capture frequencies recorded during this study suggest that the upper range of previously recorded Sumatran tiger density is more likely to be an appropriate estimator for forests adjacent to the Serapung FMU. However, over the wider Siak-Pelalawan landscape a conservative estimator of density is suggested to be between 2 and 3 individuals per 100 km2. Such densities provide a cautious estimate for the tiger population in the Siak-Pelalawan landscape of between 60 and 90 individuals. A single contiguous population of 60-90 tigers, in comparison to the current global population estimate of 500 Sumatran tiger individuals, represents a significant contribution to the survival of the subspecies (12-18% of total numbers) and promotes Siak-Pelalawan as a key landscape component of the Indonesian Sumatran Tiger Conservation Strategy. If however only approximately 40,000 ha of fragmented and isolated tiger habitat were to remain, as is likely in the medium-term given no immediate conservation intervention, then the tiger is predicted to rapidly become extinct in the Siak-Pelalawan region. The TCU Framework and the PHVA process are in agreement that the greater the tiger carrying capacity of habitat the greater the probability of persistence of the tiger population. Previous PHVA analyses have shown that a contiguous habitat block with a carrying capacity of 100 tigers will be viable over the long-term given limited negative influence from external factors such as poaching. Therefore to maintain the independent and long-term viability (>100 individuals) of the existing tiger population in the Siak-Pelalawan forest block a minimum of 250,000 ha of contiguous forest habitat
Pg 48/68
FINAL REPORT
is recommended provided that densities can be maintained at 4 tigers/100 km2. A population of 50 individuals, offering a minimum acceptable level of viability given that effective management and intensive protection can be implemented, would require at least 125,000 ha of habitat to be maintained area. Not all of this area would have to be strictly protected forest but components of it could represent contributions from production forest areas managed under sustainable forestry schemes where clearfelling is prohibited. The controlled disturbance caused by logging in such areas will enhance the habitat for tigers through encouraging secondary growth and an associated increase in density of the primary tiger prey species (Heydon 1994, Johns 1997). The strictly protected core areas would serve as a refuge for tigers during periods of active logging in the adjacent production forest buffer zones. In addition to this, planning and spatial organisation of regulatory set-aside areas within adjacent HTI/oil-palm estates should be carried out in a manner that enhances and protects this conservation area (e.g. from fires, from disruption to hydrology, etc.) acting as, or supplementing, habitat corridors between essential landscape components. The adjacent plantations and estates themselves can, through proper design, provide a further positive contribution by serving as a barrier against intrusion by illegal loggers into the conservation area. It should be noted, however, that a poorly managed estate will actually facilitate illegal logging if its road, rail and canal systems are inadequately guarded. However, given that this aspect can be managed effectively, coastal areas would (all other factors being equal) be of more utility as a developed and managed buffer between settlers and core areas, than they would as components of the protected forest. The cost-benefits of attempting to conserve these coastal zones, due to the proximity of settlers and ease of access for illegal loggers, will always be greater than for core areas further inland. An immediate priority for the Siak-Pelalawan block is the implementation of intensive ground surveys and associated landscape analysis in order to establish (1) tiger status, distribution and density, (2) habitat availability and condition, (3) intrinsic threats to the habitat and its tiger population and (4) future land-use planning and conversion trends. The overall objective of these surveys should be the identification of core and peripheral areas for inclusion within a landscape-level tiger conservation area, through provision of base-line data, identification of landscape constraints and socio-political limitations, and through assessment of general levels of stakeholder support. Ideally no further licences for clearance of forest in the Siak-Pelalawan block should be granted until a landscape conservation strategy and protected area network has been developed and implemented.
5.4
Tiger-Human Conflict
Tiger-human conflict is not only important from a human perspective, with injury and death of both people and their livestock - leading to significant material loss, but the resulting death of the problem tiger through retribution is a major contributor to the tigers overall decline (McDougal 1987, Nowell & Jackson 1996, Tilson & Nyhus 1998, Tilson et al. 2001, Nyhus & Tilson 2004). The specific causal factors behind recent tiger-human conflict in and around the FMU, resulting in 11 conflict events during the last 5 years, could not be ascertained during this study. Forest clearance and/or intensive disturbance by logging are the most likely causes when we consider the evidence from human-tiger conflict observed in other areas of Sumatra. However, this and previous studies have been plagued by the difficulties of identifying direct causal relationship, due to the acts of forest clearance and logging being confounded by the increased probability of encounters between tigers and humans due to high density of people in the forest. Nyhus & Tilson (2004) have described in detail similar findings in intermediate disturbance areas such as
Pg 49/68
FINAL REPORT
multipleuse forests where tigers and people co-exist. In the Sundarbans, where 100150 people are killed each year by tigers, the frequency of human deaths is highest in areas, and at times, when large numbers of people are present in the forest (Helalsiddiqui 1998). Ecologically, if forest is cleared or in some other way made suboptimal for tigers (such as over-harvesting of prey species) tigers may be forced to prey on humans or their livestock. Whatever the specific underlying causes, surveys carried out as a component of this assessment indicate that a high proportion (39%) of local communities perceive land-clearing to be a primary factor leading to conflict, making it important that positive steps are taken by the FMU management to mitigate conflict wherever possible. With respect to this in the Serapung FMU it is recommended that a habitat corridor be maintained between the wider forested landscape (to the west of the FMU) and the setaside forests within the FMU - enabling tigers to continue to hunt in set-aside and coastal areas without having to pass close to human settlements (including those of FMU employees/contractors). Additionally the corridor should not be directly adjacent to human-inhabited areas, both to reduce the likelihood of human tiger encounters and to lessen the exploitation of the forested corridor by the local community. The rate and direction of forest clearance and the width of the harvesting-front, are factors that should also be considered by FMU managers concerned about tigerhuman conflict. Tigers and other wildlife can be driven away from the advancing front of clearance without the opportunity to assimilate into a new habitat range. If the direction of travel of the harvesting-front is in line with, or advancing towards, human settlements (such as the village along the Yos Trail) tigers will be driven into conflict situations. Despite prevailing Indonesian laws and regulations to the contrary, the use of snaretraps and hunting of ungulates is common in the study area. Such hunting reduces the prey biomass available for tigers which could impact on the sustainability of the habitat for the current population level (see: Karanth & Stith 1999) and may eventually cause a reduced population level, even local extinction, in line with reduced carrying capacity. At the very least significantly reduced prey-abundance in the local area will increase the probability of tigers preying upon livestock and people. An additional threat to the tiger population is that tigers can be killed or injured by such snares. On three occasions since 2000 tigers have been caught in deer snares within the FMU, leading to the confirmed death of two of these tigers after they were unable to release themselves. Without active measures to prevent such illegal activities it is expected that more tigers will be killed in this manner in the future. No strong evidence was found regarding specific poaching of tiger for trade in body-parts, although in 2003 a conflict tiger was killed by Yos Trail villagers in defence against further attacks and its bones later sold to travelling traders. The low levels of tiger poaching in this region are possibly linked to the strong local belief system, which centres around the tigers revered position as a community and social guardian.
5.5
Conclusions Derived from this Assessment
The constraints of time and the extensive area over which this study was conducted limited the scope of conclusions that could be drawn. Forest fires and theft of remote cameras from within and around the FMU also presented unforeseeable limitations on the intensity of camera monitoring which could be achieved. Despite these factors, the data collected was sufficient to draw conclusions relating to key aspects of tiger population status within and around the FMU and provide further conclusions relating to the interaction of the FMU tiger population with that in the wider forest landscape. The main conclusions, summarised below, are further developed in Section 6 with respect to the HCVF delineation process.
Pg 50/68
FINAL REPORT
The PSF in and around the FMU, although modified by canals, previous HPH logging operations and ongoing illegal logging, provides an excellent habitat for tigers, with abundance of prey and tiger secondary signs at least comparable to other lowland forest types. A breeding population of tigers exists in and around the FMU, and these tigers utilise the majority of the indicative HCVF (logging moratorium) area and other areas with forest cover within the FMU. Evidence suggests that tigers still utilise (particularly for hunting) the remaining forests of the Tandjung Datuk area in the south-east of the FMU. The current utilisation of habitat by tigers is higher in the forested areas outside the FMU (even although immediately adjacent) rather than inside. This is likely to be related to the high levels of ongoing human disturbance inside the FMU. Further work to measure the density of tigers in PSF over a wide area is urgently required to provide more extensive base-line data. Tigers present in the FMU are a component of an extensive and contiguous tiger population existing in the Siak-Pelalawan forest block which, collectively, represent one of the largest populations of tigers remaining in Sumatra. The tigers utilising FMU forests are threatened with becoming isolated from the wider landscape, due to ongoing conversion of forests in areas adjacent to the FMU, unless forests surrounding Tasik Pinang lake are protected. By 2007 TCU 150 is predicted to have become separated into two isolated and much reduced constituent blocks, with a maximum of 305,000 ha of natural forest remaining in the Siak-Pelalawan block. In a forest block of this size the potential exists for maintaining a tiger population of up to 90 individuals (independently viable over the long-term providing effective protection and conservation management is implemented). However, given historic and current forest conversion trends in this particular region (where all HPH areas are progressively converted to HTI and/or oil-palm) it is reasonable to assume that only forest within areas which are currently protected ((~40,000 ha) will be maintained beyond 2009. None of these areas are large enough to maintain viable tiger populations, and extinction of all tigers in the Siak-Pelalawan forest block is therefore inevitable given current land-use planning. In recent years tiger conflict has led to the death or serious injury of at least five people (11 total conflict events) in and around the FMU. It is anticipated that this problem will be intensified by further land clearance. As a preventative measure forest connectivity should be maintained between the set-aside forests in the FMU and the greater Siak-Pelalawan forest block. Land clearance methods should be modified to ensure that tigers are not driven into regions inhabited by humans. In order to ensure the long-term viability of tigers in the Siak-Pelalawan forest block there is an immediate need for the creation of an extensive, landscapelevel conservation area. Preliminary analysis of tiger status in the region dictates that 250,000 ha of contiguous Peat Swamp Forest would provide the minimal area required to ensure independent, long-term conservation of tigers here. Without such intervention, tigers are doomed to local extinction in the medium-term across the Siak-Pelalawan area.
Pg 51/68
FINAL REPORT
Interpretation of Results with Respect to HCVF
In order to facilitate the process of delineating tiger HCVF for the Serapung FMU, the results of this assessment are interpreted within the HCVF framework. Both landscapelevel and FMU-level approaches are considered, and the specific outcomes for HCV1.2 under the two approaches are integrated in order to identify appropriate options for HCVF delineation in the FMU. Landscape-level considerations are emphasised where these are recognised as of critical importance for FMU-level HCVF delineation. Finally, management recommendations are identified for enhancement and maintenance of the tiger HCV both within the FMU and across the wider Siak-Pelalawan landscape.
6.1
Tiger HCVF at the Siak-Pelalawan Landscape Scale
Peat swamp forest is a recognised but poorly understood Sumatran tiger habitat, and is the dominant ecotype found across the Siak-Pelalawan landscape. Given this, and in accordance with guidelines provided by ProForests Sourcebook for Landscape Analysis of High Conservation Value Forests, the entire forested area of the SiakPelalawan block should be assumed to support the Sumatran tiger HCV in the absence of data to the contrary. A landscape of this scale (425,000 ha) is potentially able to support between 42 and 160 individuals (based on Sumatran tiger densities established for other habitat types), is independently viable given appropriate conservation management, and should be considered to contribute significantly to the viability of the Sumatran tiger subspecies as a whole. In this precautionary approach to HCVF analysis the landscape is therefore classified as HCVF based on HCV 1.2. This assessment represents the first published field study of the Sumatran tiger within the Siak-Pelalawan forest block and, more generally, in the PSF habitat type. It confirms that tigers are present in the landscape. Furthermore, prey abundance and prey species composition were found to be similar to that found in other lowland habitat types of Sumatra and, if extrapolated widely across the Siak-Pelalawan Block, suggests that the Siak-Pelalawan block is capable of supporting high densities of tigers. Given these assumptions, the Siak-Pelalawan block maintains one of the largest remaining contiguous populations of the Sumatran tiger (12-18% of total wild Sumatran tigers), representing a vital contribution to viability of the sub-species, further confirming the classification of the entire Siak-Pelalawan forest block as HCVF when considered at the landscape-level. The preliminary landscape-level HCVF analysis carried out during this assessment highlights the need for a more comprehensive study across the Siak-Pelalawan block. While HCVF landscape-level analysis may provide an appropriate framework for such a study, it is essential that sufficient time be invested in fieldwork in order that geographically widespread and robust data regarding tiger distribution, density, prey abundance and habitat quality can be achieved.
6.2
Identification of Tiger HCVF at the FMU Level
Within the FMU the moratorium area is utilised to at least some extent by a minimum of one tiger (HCV 1.2 is therefore present), while a minimum of two additional tiger individuals were identified in forests adjacent to the moratorium area, but likely to utilise forests within the FMU for substantial proportions of their ecological and home-ranging requirements. No significant concentrations of tigers were found within the moratorium area (HCV 1.3 not present) and there is a strong contrast in the relative abundance of tigers observed from forests within the FMU (low) and those forests outside and adjacent to the FMU (high). Incontrovertible secondary reports also confirm that tigers continue to inhabit the Tanjung Datuk peninsula, and that the eastern Konservasi and
Pg 52/68
FINAL REPORT
Unggulan zones of the FMU continue to be traversed by tigers as they travel from Tandjung Datuk to the inland forests adjacent and to the west of the FMU. In relation to the tigers habitat within the FMU the prey abundance in the moratorium area is sufficient for tigers, though not qualitatively different to prey abundance in the wider adjacent forests. Prey species extraction through snaring and hunting by local people in the recently opened moratorium area is ongoing and is predicted, over the near-term, to further reduce the prey biomass available and increase the risk of accidental trapping of tigers. Other types of human disturbance are also expected to continue to be high in this coastal and easily accessible region, further reducing its suitability for tigers without a much higher investment in conservation management and protection. The tiger HCV present is therefore also considered at risk due to human activities facilitated by easy access from the coastline. The ProForest HCVF Toolkit defines High Conservation Value Forests as the area required to maintain or enhance an HCV within the FMU. At the FMU-level the Toolkit states that any part of an assessment area that has been identified as a priority site for threatened or critically endangered species (HCV1.2) will normally be considered as HCVF. However, at the FMU-level such definitions are not well suited to considerations of coarse-grained, wide-ranging species such as the Sumatran tiger whose existence and ranging patterns, even for single individuals, extend well beyond the geographical confines of any particular FMU or FMU sub-unit. As a guideline for delineation of tiger HCVF in the Serapung FMU the SmartWood HCVF report suggests that if If confirmed not to be present within the FMU, or the FMU does not constitute an integral portion of the habitat and range of the tiger population, then this HCVF will not exist within the FMU. The findings of this assessment confirm that the moratorium area, in terms of its size (i.e., less than 2% of the total Siak-Pelalawan forest block) and its location (i.e., it is not a corridor or area vital for connectivity), cannot be considered to currently represent an integral portion (a critically important or essential component) of the Siak-Pelalawan tiger habitat landscape and therefore HCVF cannot be declared on this basis. Under such guidelines only a very large FMU, or one which provides essential habitat connectivity, could be considered to represent a critical component of the wider tiger landscape and therefore be recognised as HCVF. Under such guidelines a series of HCVF assessments, carried out in several different FMU sub-components of a tiger habitat landscape, would consistently find no strong justification for delineation of tiger HCVF on the FMU scale - even though at a landscape level HCVF status is clearly appropriate. Viable landscape-level tiger populations run the risk of being iteratively lost to forest conversion through successive HCVF assessments at the FMU level. Clearly more stringent criteria are required in order to appropriately address the HCVF requirements for tigers when assessed at the FMU level. Currently this is not facilitated by Indonesian and generic HCVF Toolkits which recommend the identification of priority sites for endangered or threatened species as the basis for HCVF delineation, where measures of the FMUs contribution to population survival in the adjacent landscape often becomes the threshold for HCVF decisions.
6.3
Importance of Considering Future Landscape Context Scenarios
A further limitation regarding the FMU-scale HCVF process for tigers arises from the limited amount of data relating to future tiger viability and habitat availability in the wider landscape. For the Sumatran tiger in the Siak-Pelalawan block an outcome of this is that it is impossible to assess a FMUs future contribution to tiger viability given such uncertainty in the wider landscape. While the FMU may not currently present an integral or critical contribution to wider landscape tiger viability (see section 6.2 above),
Pg 53/68
FINAL REPORT
it is by no means obvious that in the future this will remain the case. In this section the importance of considering future Siak-Pelalawan tiger conservation landscape scenarios is introduced. The authors consider the future status and condition of the Siak-Pelalawan block to be a critical determinant of whether delineation of HCVF in the Serapung FMU is appropriate. Based on currently known land conversion plans in the Siak-Pelalawan forest block it is predicted that a maximum 305,000 ha of PSF tiger habitat will remain by 2007, sufficient to support a viable tiger population over the medium to long-term of between 30 and 90 individuals. However, the current extent of protected forest in this block (about 40,000 ha) represents the only area certain to remain in 2007 given current rates of forest conversion. By itself this predicted area of remaining forest is inadequate to maintain a viable population of tigers. Three scenarios are proposed here as descriptions of likely future habitat trends affecting the FMUs potential contribution to maintaining a viable tiger population in the wider landscape: 1. The first of these scenarios is the conversion of forest habitat immediately adjacent to the FMU, leading to isolation of the moratorium area from the wider landscape. Even if the moratorium forests remain fully intact, the limited size and isolation of this remaining habitat would not support a viable tiger population on its own, and local extinction in the FMU is assured. The moratorium area cannot be considered as HCV 1.2 if this scenario is regarded as a likely future outcome. 2. A second scenario assumes the gradual conversion of the Siak-Pelalawan block resulting in a progressively diminishing total area of habitat available for tigers, but where connectivity between the FMU and the wider landscape is maintained. Under such conditions the contribution and significance of the moratorium area for tigers will increase with time as the wider landscape diminishes, from its currently low relative contribution to a point in time where it may become critical for survival and viability of the wider population. Under these circumstances the moratorium area would certainly represent HCV 1.2 in the future, and would therefore need to be declared now as such. 3. A third scenario for the Siak-Pelalawan block relates to multi-stakeholder support in the development of an extensive, landscape level conservation area which is sufficient to support a viable population of Sumatran tigers within the SiakPelalawan block. If the scale and protection of such a conservation area was sufficient to sustain a viable tiger population then the habitat contribution of the FMU, which are considered sub-optimal presently, would not have the same relative value as they do under scenario 2 above. Under this scenario the current FMU forests would not contribute significantly to maintenance of the future tiger HCV population in the wider landscape. With or without connectivity to the wider landscape, under this scenario the conservation objectives of the HCV would be satisfied in neighbouring protected forests. In summary, the current decision as to whether HCV 1.2 for tigers is present within the FMU is dependent upon which of the above scenarios most accurately describes the future landscape context. Under such circumstances, where there is uncertainty whether the moratorium area indeed plays an integral role within this future landscape, the appropriate HCVF response is to invoke a precautionary approach and declare the moratorium area as HCVF (where the future status of HCV 1.2 in the wider landscape remains uncertain). This declaration should be subject to periodic review and could be revoked if the area is demonstrated to no longer enhance or maintain the HCV. Finally, the limitations of HCVF process relating to the evaluation of critically endangered, wide-ranging and low-density species at the FMU scale further highlight the need to develop tiger-specific HCV thresholds and HCVF delineation protocol for use across Sumatra.
Pg 54/68
FINAL REPORT
6.4
General Conclusions Relating to Tiger HCVF Delineation
For a fine-grained HCV species, where the habitat within the FMU is sufficient to maintain a viable population independent of external landscape influences, FMU level analysis becomes a powerful tool that facilitates the FMU to manage and enhance that HCV. However, for a wide-ranging, low population density, coarse-grained species such as the Sumatran tiger, where the habitat needs of a viable population (or even a single individual) are often likely to be greater than that provided by any particular FMU, consideration of the wider landscape is essential in determining whether FMUlevel HCVF is appropriate. Population viability of a coarse-grained species is highly dependent upon the condition of a large-area landscape. As such, delineation of HCVF at the FMU-level cannot be made with certainty in the absence of predictability regarding future land-use and habitat availability in this wider landscape. Under such circumstances where no landscape-level HCVF has been carried out and/or where uncertainty regarding future landscape and HCV viability exists, it may be tempting to invoke the precautionary principle. However the unpredictability of the future landscape context implicit in the use of the precautionary approach cannot guarantee conservation benefits in return for the financial and/or management investments incurred. A preferable approach for all parties is that which seeks to minimise uncertainty, avoids the use of the precautionary principle, and provides a realistic and achievable set of conservation goals for a discrete level of investment. By contrast, a landscape-level HCVF analysis will generally provide more appropriate guidelines for conservation enhancement of a coarse-grained species. FMU-level HCVF assessments can then be implemented within the overall context provided by these landscape-level, base-line assessments, thus ensuring that FMU-level management decisions defer to the landscape-level template wherever appropriate. However, there is currently no legal mechanism in Indonesia that requires an FMU to abide by the results of a landscape-level HCVF. In return, it is rarely possible for an environmentally responsible FMU to be able to influence conservation efforts in the wider landscape. Despite these obvious limitations there are still opportunities for FMUs and their corporate owners to be proactive in the processes that determine the future land-use and status of landscape level forests. The line of argument above has considerable relevance for the Siak-Pelalawan forest block described in this report. Given the extent of remaining habitat, the maintenance of a sustainable tiger population in the Siak-Pelalawan block is not incompatible with further forest conversion providing a rational approach to land conversion and habitat conservation is enforced. A first step in the process of rationalising land-use should be a short-term moratorium on the granting of further licences for forest exploitation across this forest block. A second step should be the implementation of a comprehensive study to assess the tigers (and other biodiversity targets) status, distribution and threats in the landscape leading to the delineation of a conservation area independently sufficient to maintain a viable population of tigers. Recommended to be at least 250,000 ha in size, the conservation area should consist of at least 100,000 ha of strictly protected core forests. The remaining habitat components of the conservation area (approximately 150,000 ha) could either be assigned production forest status (but devoted to sustainable forestry activities with regulatory limitations against clear-felling), or may represent conservation set-aside areas within the FMUs of adjacent industrial forestry concessions. Given the results of the landscape- and FMU-level analyses described here it is recommended that the current logging moratorium within the Serapung FMU should be
Pg 55/68
FINAL REPORT
maintained until such a time that a comprehensive HCVF (or similarly detailed habitat and population viability) assessment has been conducted within the Siak-Pelalawan landscape, and a formal declaration has been made by local government and other stakeholders to create a PSF conservation area in this landscape which is capable of supporting an independently viable population of tigers. With reference to Serapung district, due to the FMUs location on the coastline, easily accessible by people, resulting in high levels of human disturbance (facilitating tiger poaching and prey-species harvesting by local communities) and habitat degradation (due to illegal logging), the costs of maintaining the tiger in the Serapung habitat will always be high relative to the limited conservation benefits accrued. Furthermore, the position of the FMU on the periphery of the Siak-Pelalawan landscape, therefore not vital for habitat connectivity, makes it a low priority candidate for inclusion in any future conservation area network.
6.5
HCVF Recommendations for Tigers in the Serapung FMU
The findings presented in this report form the basis for recommendations relating to HCVF delineation options for tigers in the Serapung FMU. The final SmartWood/APP decision regarding delineation of HCVF should, for reasons outlined in previous sections, be dependent upon the best available data regarding future tiger habitat status in the wider landscape. A follow-up landscape-level HCVF assessment, as proposed in section 6.1 above, would assist this decision-making process. However, given the need for immediate management action, the two HCVF options recommended here are designed to be implemented sequentially, moving from Option 1 to Option 2 in accordance with changing conditions and as a response to increasing future certainty regarding viability of tigers in the wider landscape. Option 1 below (section 6.5.1) represents an instant response to current conditions in the FMU, requiring extension of the current logging moratorium in the indicative HCVF area as previously defined by SmartWood. Some additional areas of FMU priority tiger habitat are incorporated into this option. Option 2 (described in section 6.5.2) is recommended as a replacement for HCVF Option 1, but appropriate only after a viable tiger population has been secured in the Siak-Pelalawan forest block, or when the FMU can be confirmed to have a low contribution (relative to other available habitat areas) to the overall viability of tigers in this wider landscape. HCVF in Option 2, where partial conversion of the current moratorium area is permitted, is primarily focused on mitigating conflict between remaining tigers and adjacent human communities.
6.5.1 Option 1: Extension of Moratorium in Indicative HCVF Area

This HCVF option is recommended for immediate adoption as a temporary tiger HCVF in advance of the completion of a landscape-level assessment and development of an independent tiger conservation area in the wider SiakPelalawan forest block. If a viable population of tigers in the Siak-Pelalawan block can not be achieved in this way, or in the event that a landscape-level assessment of the wider landscape concludes that the Serapung moratorium area provides a critical contribution to long-term, regional tiger population viability, then this HCVF delineation option is also considered to be the most appropriate for long-term implementation. Delineation of the HCVF follows the boundaries of the current SmartWood logging moratorium (indicative HCVF area) and includes set-aside forests on the eastern side of the FMU. Forests in Tandjung Datuk are also included as part of this HCVF for tigers (see Figure 24). Long-term adoption of this HCVF option will necessitate that the canals within the moratorium area are filled in order to
Pg 56/68
FINAL REPORT
preserve the forest as close as possible to its natural state and to reduce accessibility for exploitation by local communities. The success of implementation of this HCVF is sensitive to ongoing social conflicts between the company and inhabitants of the Yos Trail village. Any conservation area of natural forests developed in close proximity to these people will not succeed while these land disputes remain unresolved.
Figure 24. Option 1: Proposed HCVF delineation for tigers as an extension of the logging moratorium area defined by SmartWood; including the designation of forests in the Tandjung Datuk area as HCVF for tigers.
6.5.2 Option 2: Phased Conversion of the Indicative HCVF Area

If clearing of the current moratorium area was to occur then habitat connectivity will be lost between the wider forested landscape to the west, and the FMU conservation areas and coastal scrub-lands of Tandjung Datuk to the east/southeast. Spatial consideration of remaining habitat suggests that tigers, as they continue to attempt to reach the prey-rich secondary forests of Tandjung Datuk, will either travel directly across the production areas of the FMU, or they will utilise the scrub-land fringes associated with the Yos village to the north. Both scenarios will promote increased probabilities of contact between tigers, FMU employees and adjacent villagers. Local perceptions of villagers, and the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence related to tiger-human conflict, suggests that this close proximity will be associated with increasing levels of human-tiger conflict in the near future. It is therefore critical to maintain a corridor within the FMU, parallel to but at some distance from the moratorium areas northern boundary and Yos village, which can serve as an east-west corridor for tigers moving between these two regions (Figure 25).
Pg 57/68
FINAL REPORT
It is recommended that the corridor be situated such that it allows connectivity to the forest surrounding Lake Tasik Pinang as this forest is most likely to be allocated protected status in the future, therefore maximising the likelihood that connectivity can be maintained between the eastern forest fringe within the FMU and the greater Siak-Pelalawan forest block. It is further recommended that the corridor be 1.5 km wide; sufficient width for the tiger to utilise naturally, while offering some resilience to edge-effects, human disturbance and extensive damage due to fire. The tiger-related needs and conservation status of this HCVF area should be reviewed periodically (2 year intervals is recommended), reverting to production forest if tigers cease to exist in the eastern set-aside forests and Tanjung Datuk region to the south. The successful implementation of such a habitat corridor is sensitive to ongoing social conflicts between the company and inhabitants of the Yos Trail village. Any corridor, buffer zone or conservation area of natural forests developed in close proximity to these people will not succeed while these disputes remain unresolved, and while the risks of illegal logging remain high. Ideally the tiger corridor and tiger-human conflict buffer zone areas should be planned and implemented in tandem with the resolution of the Yos village land disputes.
Figure 25. Option 2: Proposed HCVF delineation where partial clearance of the moratorium area is permitted. This HCVF provides a 1.5 km wide corridor which allows for tigers to continue utilising set-aside forests to the east of the FMU and the prey-rich forests at Tandjung Datuk, while minimising likelihood of human-tiger conflict. Forests around Tasik Pinang Lake are most likely to achieve protected status in the future, thus the likelihood of preserving habitat connectivity between FMU and the wider Siak-Pelalawan forest is maximised.
Pg 58/68
FINAL REPORT
6.6
Other Management Recommendations for the Tiger HCV

Where tiger HCVF is delineated within the FMU, a small-scale grassroots community awareness program should be implemented to facilitate local communities understanding and support for tiger conservation. This could form part of the FMU/local community human-tiger conflict resolution process. Active measures should be taken to patrol the HCVF forest areas, in cooperation with forestry police, to ensure that the tiger, its prey, and habitat are protected. Land clearance practices within the FMU, carried out in relation to future conversion of the non-HCVF remnants of the original moratorium area, should be implemented in recognition of the need to avoid conflict between tigers and people - by clearing in the direction away from centres of human population density. In the event of tiger-human conflict occurring, either within the FMU or in villages and forests immediately adjacent to it, an expert team should be assigned to evaluate and implement a course of follow-up action in line with the provincially approved Human-Tiger Conflict Protocol. Land-clearing activities should be immediately suspended while the assessment is carried out. Avoidance of human casualties, and the minimisation of conflict between the company and local communities, should be the primary motivation for this approach.
Pg 59/68
FINAL REPORT
Overview
The Sumatran tiger is critically endangered and threatened with extinction due to restricted and increasingly fragmented habitat, and poaching across its range. PSF is an important component of the remaining habitat available for the Sumatran tiger. The Siak-Pelalawan forest block represents one the largest areas of contiguous lowland forest in Sumatra. The results of this study suggest that PSF in the Siak-Pelalawan forest, as tiger habitat, is at least equivalent to other lowland forest types. The results of this study support the assumption that all areas of the remaining natural forest within this block, including that within the FMU, form part of a very significant tiger population whose loss would significantly impact on the overall viability of the sub-species. Large sections of the PSF within the Siak-Pelalawan forest will be converted to acacia and oil-palm plantations in the next few years. Given the past trends of converting logging concessions into industrial timber plantations it appears likely that only designated conservation areas will remain in the future. At present only a few poorly protected, spatially separated, protected areas exist within this forest block in isolation - insufficient to maintain a viable tiger population in the long-term. HCVF analysis, which can be carried out at a landscape or FMU-level, is a systematic process to identify forests that have biological, physical, and/or sociological values This study was commissioned as a supplement to an FMU level HCVF assessment. However, as the Sumatran tiger is a wide-ranging, coarsegrained species, living at low densities over large areas, it was found essential to conduct a preliminary landscape level HCVF analysis in order to provide a context for HCVF decisions at the FMU level. The preliminary landscape-level analysis found that there was a strong justification for development of a conservation area network of protected and production forests in order to ensure survival of the tiger in the Siak-Pelalawan forest block. However, a further landscape level assessment is a necessary pre-cursor in this process. The FMU-level analysis could not provide a definitive answer as to whether the moratorium area within the FMU should be classified as HCVF, primarily due to the uncertainty of future land-use within the greater Siak-Pelalawan block and the forested areas immediately adjacent to the FMU. However, it is recommended that the SmartWood recommended logging moratorium remain in place until such time that a comprehensive landscape-level assessment has been conducted, and a multi-stakeholder declaration of intent made in relation to the creation of a conservation area network in the wider Siak-Pelalawan block. The moratorium area represents only a fraction of the remaining available habitat in the landscape, and is not critical for overall landscape connectivity. As such the moratorium area is unlikely to represent a significant contribution to the viability of a tiger population in a future landscape-level conservation network. However, in the absence of certainty regarding the future condition of the Siak-Pelalawan block, all habitat components of the current landscape should be considered, for the timebeing, to provide potentially critical contributions to future tiger survival. Ultimately, a tiger-related HCVF in the Serapung FMU should be delineated with reference to the likely habitat scenarios of the future landscape. Decisions made in reference to this tiger HCVF will set a precedent for environmentally responsible production forestry, for the application of HCVF analysis to wide-ranging, critically endangered species, and for the future of wild tigers in both the Siak-Pelalawan forest block and in other industrial forestry dominated landscapes across Sumatra.
Pg 60/68
FINAL REPORT
Bibliography
Bennett, E. Dahaban, Z. (1995) Wildlife responses to disturbances in Sarawak and their implications for forest management. Ecology, Conservation, and Management of South Asian Rainforests (eds. R. Primack, T. Lovejoy) pp. 66-86. Yale University Press, New Haven and London. Brook, B. OGrady, J. Chapman, A. Burgman, M. Akcakaya, R. & Frankham, R. (2000) Predictive accuracy of population viability analysis in conservation biology. Nature. 404 385-387 Carbone, C., Christie, S., Conforti, K., Coulson, T., Franklin, N., Ginsberg, J. R., Griffiths, M., Holden, J., Kawanishi, K., Kinnaird, M., Laidlaw, R., Lynam, A., Macdonald, D. W., Martyr, D., McDougal, C., Nath, L., OBrien, T., Seidensticker, J., Smith, D. J. L., Sunquist, M., Tilson, R. & Wan Shahruddin, W. N. (2001) The use of photographic rates to estimate densities of tigers and other cryptic mammals. Animal Conservation 4, 75-79. Collins, M., Sayer, J. A. & Whitmore, T. C. (ed.) (1991) The conservation atlas of tropical forests: Asia and the Pacific. New York: Simon and Schuster. Coulson, T. Mace, G. Hudson, E. & Possingham, H. (2001) The use and abuse of population viability analysis. TRENDS in Ecology & Evolution. 16 (5) 220-221 Crnokrak, P. & Roff, D. A. 1999 Inbreeding depression in the wild. Heredity 83 260-270. Cutler, T. L. & Swann, D. E. (1999) Using remote photography in wildlife ecology: A review. Wildlife Society Bulletin 27 571-581. Davies,G. & Payne, J. (1982) A faunal survey of Sabah. WWF Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur. Decker, K. J. & Chase, L. C. (1997) Human dimensions of living with wildlife a management challenge for the 21st century. Wildlife Society Bulletin 25 788-795. Dinerstein, E., Wikramanayake, E., Robinson, J., Karanth, U. K., Rabinowitz, A., Olson, D., Mathew, T., Hedao, P., Connor, M., Hemley, G. & Bolze, D. (1997) A framework for identifying high priority areas and actions for the conservation of tigers in the wild. Part 1. World Wildlife Fund-US and Wildlife Conservation Society, Washington DC. Ellis, S. & Seal, U. S. 1995 Tools of the trade to aid decision making for species survival. Biodiversity Conservation 4 553-572. Fahrig, L. & Merriam, G. 1994 Conservation of fragmented populations. Conservation Biology 8 50-59. Faust, T. & Tilson, R. L. (1994) Estimating how many tigers are in Sumatra: A beginning. In Sumatran tiger population and habitat viability analysis report (ed. R. L. Tilson, K. Soemarna, W. Ramono, S. Lusli, K. Traylor-Holzer, & U. S. Seal), pp. 11-38. Apple Valley, Minnesota: Indonesian Directorate of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation and IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group. Fearnside, P. (1997) Transmigration in Indonesia: Lessons from its environmental and social impacts. Environmental Management 21 553-570. Forester, D. J. & Machlis, G. E. (1996) Modeling human factors that affect the loss of biodiversity. Conservation Biology 10 1253-1263. Foresman, K. & Pearson, D. E. (1998) Comparison of proposed survey procedures for detection of forest carnivores. Journal of Wildlife Management 62 1217-1226. Franklin, N. (2002) Conservation biology of the Sumatran tiger in Way Kambas National Park, Sumatra, Indonesia. PhD. Thesis, University of York, UK.
Pg 61/68
FINAL REPORT
Franklin, N., Bastoni, Sriyanto, Siswomartono, D., Manansang, J. & Tilson, R. (1999a) Last of the Indonesian tigers: A cause for optimism. In Riding the tiger: Tiger conservation in human-dominated landscapes (ed. J. Seidensticker, S. Christie, & P. Jackson), pp. 130147. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Franklin, N., Bastoni, Sriyanto, Siswomartono, D., Manansang, J. & Tilson, R. (1999b) Using tiger stripes to identify individual tigers. In Riding the tiger: Tiger conservation in human-dominated landscapes (ed. J. Seidensticker, S. Christie, & P. Jackson), pp. 138139. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. FSC, Forest Stewardship Council (2001) FSC Principles and Criteria. Forest Stewardship Council. FWI/GFW. (2002) The State of the Forest: Indonesia. Forest Watch Indonesia, Bogor, Indonesia and: Global Forest Watch, Washington DC. Gadgil, M. V. (1992) Conserving biodiversity as if people mattered: Case study from India. Ambio 12 266-279. Galdikas, B. (1978) Orang Hutan adaptation at Tanjung Putting Reserve, Central Borneo. Ph.D. Thesis,University of California, Los Angeles. Gillis, M. (1988) Indonesia: Public policies, resource management and the tropical forest. In Public policies and the misuse of forest resources (ed. R. Repetton & M. Gillis). World Resources Institute/Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Ginsberg, J. & Woodroffe, R. (1998) Edge effects and the extinction of populations inside protected areas. Science 280 2126-2128. Guggisberg, C. (1975) Wild cats of the world. Taplinger Publishing Co., New York, USA. Griffiths, M. (1994) Population density of Sumatran tigers in Gunung Leuser National Park. In Sumatran tiger population and habitat viability analysis report (ed. R. Tilson, K. Soemarna, W. Ramono, S. Lusli, K. Traylor-Holzer, & U. Seal), pp. 93-102. Apple Valley, Minnesota: Indonesian Directorate of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation and IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group. Griffiths, M. & van Schaik, C. P. (1993a) Camera-trapping: a new tool for the study of elusive rain forest animals. Tropical Biodiversity 1 131- 135. Griffiths, M. & van Schaik, C. P. (1993b) The impact of human traffic on the abundance and activity periods of Sumatran rain forest wildlife. Conservation Biology 7 623-626. Hanum, I. & Lepun, P. (1999) Tree species composition of Kuala Langat North peat swampforest, Selangor. International Symposium on Tropical Peatlands Safeguarding a Global Natural Resource. Universiti Sains Malaysia,Penang. Helalsiddiqui, A. (1998) Present status of wildlife, human casualties by tiger, and wildlife conservation in the Sundarbans of Bangladesh. Tigerpaper. 25 (2) 28-32 Heydon, M. (1994) The ecology and management of rain-forest ungulates in Sabah, Malaysia: implications of forest disturbance. Institute of South-east Asian Biology, University of Aberdeen. Ibrahim, S 1997. Diversity of tree species in Peat Swamp Forest in Peninsular Malaysia. In Biodiversity and Sustainability of Tropical Peatlands (ed. J. Rieley & S. Page), Samara Publishing, Cardigan. Jennelle, C. S., Runge, M. C. & MacKenzie, D. I. (2002) The use of photographic rates to estimate densities of tigers and other cryptic mammals: a comment on misleading conclusions. Animal Conservation 5 119-120. Janzen, D. (1974) Tropical blackwater rivers, animals and mast fruiting by the Dipterocarpaceae. Biotropica 6 69-103.
FINAL REPORT
Jepson, P., Jarvie, J. K., MacKinnon, K. & Monk, K. 2001 The end for Indonesias lowland forests? Science 292 859-861. Johns, A. (1983) Ecological effects of selective logging in a West Malaysian rain-forest. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Cambridge, Cambridge. Johns, A. (1989) Timber, the environment and wildlife in Malaysian rain forests. Final report to Institute of South-east Asian Biology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK. Johns, A. D. 1992. Species conservation in managed forests. In Tropical deforestation and species extinction (Ed. T. C. Whitmore, and A. J. Sayer) pp.15-53. Chapman and Hall, London, U.K. Johns, A. (1997) Timber Production and Biodiversity in Tropical Rain Forests. Cambridge University Press. Karanth, U. & Sunquist, M. (1995) Prey selection by tiger, leopard and dhole in tropical forests. Journal of Animal Ecology 64, 439-50. Karanth, K. U. (1987) Tigers in India: A critical review of field censuses. In Tigers of the world: The biology, biopolitics, management and conservation of an endangered species (ed. R. L. Tilson & U. S. Seal), pp. 118-132. Noyes Publications, Park Ridge, New Jersey. Karanth, K. U. 1988 Analysis of predator-prey balance in Bandipur Tiger Reserve with reference to census reports. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 85 1-8. Karanth, K. U. 1995 Estimating tiger Panthera tigris populations from camera-trap data using capture-recapture models. Biological Conservation 71 333-338. Karanth, K. U. & Nichols, J. D. (1998) Estimation of tiger densities in India using photographic captures and recaptures. Ecology 79, 2852-2862 Karanth, K. U. & Stith, B. M. (1999) Prey depletion as a critical determinant of tiger population viability. In Riding the tiger: Tiger conservation in human dominated landscapes (ed. J. Seidensticker, S. Christie, & P. Jackson), pp. 100-113. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Karanth, U. Nichols, J. Kumar, S. Link, W. Hines, J (2004) Tigers and their prey: Predicting carnivore densities from prey abundance. PNAS 101 (14) 48544858 Kawanishi, K. (2002) Population status of tigers (panthera tigris) in a primary rainforest of peninsular Malaysia. PhD. Thesis, University of Florida, USA. Lacey, R. C. 1993 VORTEX a computer simulation model for population viability analysis. Wildlife Research 20 45-65. Lindenmayer, D. Possingham, H. Lacy, R. McCarthy, M., & Pope, M. (2003) How accurate are population models? Lessons from landscape-scale tests in a fragmented system. Ecology Letters. 6 4147. Mace, R. D., Minta, S. C., Manley, T. L. & Aune, K. E. (1994) Estimating grizzly bear population size using camera sightings. Wildlife Society Bulletin 22 74-83. MacKinnon, K. (1983) Report of a WHO consultancy to Indonesia to determine population estimates of the cynomolgus or long-tailed macaque Macaca fascicularis (and other primates) and feasibility of semi-wild breeding projects of this species. WHO Primate Resources Programme Feasibility Study: Phase II. MacKinnon, J. (1983) Tanjung Putting National Park. Management plan for development. WWF/PPA, Bogor, Indonesia. MacKinnon, K. Hatta, G. Halim, H, Mangalik, A. (1996) The Ecology of Kalimantan. Periplus Editions.
Pg 63/68
FINAL REPORT
Marsden, W. (1966) The history of Sumatra (originally published in 1783). Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Oxford University Press. Marsh, C. Wilson, W. (1981) A survey of primates in Peninsular Malaysia forests. Universiti Kebangsaan, Malaysia and University of Cambridge, UK. McDougal, C. (1977) The face of the tiger. Rivington Books, London. McDougal, C. (1987) The man-eating tiger in geographic and historical perspective. In Tigers of the world: The biology, biopolitics, management and conservation of an endangered species (ed. R. L. Tilson & U. S. Seal), pp. 435-448. Noyes Publications, Park Ridge, New Jersey. McDougal, C. (1999) You can tell some tigers by their tracks with confidence. In Riding the tiger: Tiger conservation in human-dominated landscapes (ed. J. Seidensticker, S. Christie, & P. Jackson), pp. 190-191. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. McNeely, J. A. & Miller, K. R. (ed.) (1984) National parks, conservation and development: The role of protected areas in sustaining society. Smithsonian Press, Washington DC. Medway, Lord (1977) Mammals of Borneo. Field keys and an annotated checklist. Monograph of the Royal Asiatic Soceity, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Meijaard, E. Sheil, D. Nasi, R. Augeri, D. Rosenbaum, B. Iskandar, J. Setyawati, T. Lammertink, M. Rachmatika, I. Wong, A. Soehartono, T. Stanley, S. OBrien, T. (2005) Indonesia Life after logging: Reconciling wildlife conservation and production forestry in Indonesian Borneo. CIFOR, Bogor Merton, F. (1962) A visit to the Tasek Bera. Malay Nat. J. 16 103-110. Ministry of Forestry (1994) Indonesian Sumatran Tiger Conservation Strategy. Ministry of Forestry, Directorate General of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation, Bogor, Indonesia. Miquelle, D. G., Smirnov, E. N., Quigley, H. G., Hornocker, M. G., Nikolaev, I. G. & Matyushkin, E. N. (1996) Food habits of Amur tigers in Sikhote-Alin Zapovednik and the Russian Far East, and implications for conservation. Journal of Wildlife Research 1, 138-147 Nowell, K & Jackson, P. (1996) Wild cats: Status survey and conservation action plan. Cat Specialist Group, World Conservation Union/Species Survival Commission, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. Nyhus, P. (1999) Elephants, tigers and transmigrants: Conflict and conservation at Way Kambas National Park, Sumatra, Indonesia. Ph.D. Thesis. University of WisconsinMadison, Madison, Wisconsin. Nyhus, P. Tilson, R. (2004) Charecterizing human-tiger conflict in Sumatra, Indonesia: implications for conservation, Oryx. 38 (1) 68-73 Nyhus,P. Tilson, R. (in press) Agroforestry, elephants, and tigers: balancing conservation theory and practice in human-dominated landscapes of Southeast Asia. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment. Ojasti, J. (1991) Human exploitation of capybara. In Neotropical wildlife use and conservation (Ed. J. G. Robinson and K. H. Redford)pp. 236-252. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, USA. Panwar, H. S. (1979) A note on tiger census technique based on pugmark tracings. Indian Forester, special issue, 18-36. Panwar, H. S. (1987) Project Tiger: The reserves, the tigers and their future. In Tigers of the world: The biology, biopolitics, management and conservation of an endangered species
Pg 64/68
FINAL REPORT
(ed. R. L. Tilson & U. S. Seal), pp. 110-117. Park Ridge, New Jersey: Noyes Publications. ProForest (2004) A Sourcebook for Landscape Analysis of High Conservation Value Forests, Version 1. ProForest, Oxford, UK. Rainforest Alliance & ProForest (2003) Identifying, Managing, and Monitoring High Conservation Value Forests in Indonesia: A Toolkit for Forest Managers and other Stakeholders, Version 1. Rainforest Alliance, New York and ProForest, Oxford, UK. Rieley, J.O., Ahmad-Shah, A.A. & Brady,M.A. (1996) The Extent and Nature of Tropical Peat Swamps. In Tropical Lowland Peatlands of Southeast Asia (Ed. Maltby, E., Immirzi, C.P. & Safford, R.J), pp. 17-53. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. Schaller, G. B. (1967) The deer and the tiger. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Seal, U. S., Soemarna, K. & Tilson, R. (1994) Population biology and analysis for Sumatran tigers. In Sumatran tiger population and habitat viability analysis report (ed. R. L. Tilson, K. Soemarna, W. Ramono, S. Lusli, K. Traylor-Holzer, & U. S. Seal), pp. 45-70. Apple Valley, Minnesota: Indonesian Directorate of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation and IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group. Sebastian, A. (2002) Globally Threatened Mammal and Bird Species in Malaysian Peat Swamp Forests. In Peatlands for People: Natural Resource Functions and Sustainable Management, Proceedings of the International Symposium on Tropical Peatlands (Ed. J. Reiley, S. Page, B. Setiadi) pp. 23-28. BPPT and Indonesian Peat Association. Seber, G. A. F. (1982) The estimation of animal abundance and related parameters. 2nd edition. Macmillan, New York. Seidensticker, J. (1987) Bearing witness: Observations on the extinction of Panthera tigris balica and Panthera tigris sondaica. In Tigers of the world: The biology, biopolitics, management and conservation of an endangered species (ed. R. L. Tilson & U. S. Seal), pp. 1-8. Park Ridge, New Jersey: Noyes Publications. Seidensticker, J. & Suyono. (1980) The Javan tiger and the Meru-Betiri reserve: A plan for management. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. Siswomartono, D., Reddy, S., Ramono, W., Manansang, J., Tilson, R., Franklin, N. & Foose, T. (1996) The Sumatran rhino in Way Kambas National Park, Sumatra, Indonesia. Pachyderm 21 13-14. SmartWood (2005) High Conservation Value Forest (HCVF) Assessment Report for Serapung Unit, PT Arara Abadi, Asia Pulp & Paper/Sinar Mas Group, Final Report. Rainforest Alliances SmartWood Program, Jakarta. Smirnov, E. N. & Miquelle, D. G. (1999) Population dynamics of the Amur tiger in Sikhote-Alin Zapovednik, Russia. In Riding the tiger: Tiger conservation in humandominated landscapes (ed. J. Seidensticker, S. Christie, & P. Jackson), pp. 61-70. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Smith, J. (1993) The role of dispersal in structuring Behaviour. 124 165-195 the Chitwan tiger population.
Smith, J. Mcdougal, C. Miquelle, D. (1989) Scent marking in free-ranging tigers, Panthera tigris. Anim. Behav. 37 1-10. Sunquist, M., Karanth, K. U. & Sunquist, F. 1999 Ecology, behaviour and resilience of the tiger and its conservation needs. In Riding the tiger: Tiger conservation in humandominated landscapes (ed. J. Seidensticker, S. Christie, & P. Jackson), pp. 5-18. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pg 65/68
FINAL REPORT
Tanaka, Y. (2000) Extinction of populations by inbreeding depression and stochastic environments. Population Ecology 42 55-62. Tilson, R., Soemarna, K., Ramona, W., Lusli, S. Traylor-Holzer, K. & U. S. Seal. (ed.) (1994) Sumatran Tiger population and habitat viability analysis report Apple Valley, Minnesota: Indonesian Directorate of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation and IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group. Tilson, R. L. & Traylor-Holzer, K. (1994) Estimating poaching and removal rates of tigers in Sumatra. In Sumatran Tiger population and habitat viability analysis report (ed. R. L. Tilson, K. Soemarna, W. Ramono, S. Lusli, K. Traylor-Holzer, & U. Seal), pp. 75-76. Apple Valley, Minnesota: Indonesian Directorate of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation and IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group. Tilson, R. L. & Nyhus, P. (1998) Keeping problem tigers from becoming a problem species. Conservation Biology 12, 261-262. Tilson, R. L., Nyhus, P., Franklin, N., Bastoni, Yunus, M. & Sumianto (2001) Tiger and large mammal restoration in Asia: Ecological theory & sociological reality. In Large mammal restoration: Ecological and sociological challenges in the 21st century (ed. D. S. Maehr, R. F. Noss & J. L. Larkin), pp. 148-165. Ithica: Island Press. Whitten, A. Damanik, S. Anwar, J. Hisyam, N. (2000) The Ecology of Sumatra. Periplus Editions. Wiese, R., Wildt, D., Byers, A. & Johnston, L. 1994 Tiger population management. In Sumatran tiger population and habitat viability analysis report (ed. R. L. Tilson, K. Soemarna, W. Ramono, S. Lusli, K. Traylor-Holzer, & U. S. Seal), pp. 71-74. Apple Valley, Minnesota: Indonesian Directorate of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation and IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group. Wikramanayake, E. D., Dinerstein, E., Robinson, J. G., Karanth, U., Rabinowitz, A., Olson, D., Mathew, T., Hedao, P., Conner, M., Hemley, G. & Bolze, D. (1999) Where can tigers live in the future? A framework for identifying high-priority areas for the conservation of tigers in the wild. In Riding the tiger: Tiger conservation in humandominated landscapes (ed. J. Seidensticker, S. Christie, & P. Jackson), pp. 256-272. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wells, D. (1985) Forest avifauna of West Malesia and its conservation. In Conservation of tropical forest birds (eds. A. Diamond and T. Lovejoy), pp. 213-232. ICBP Technical PublicationNo.4, Cambridge. Woodroffe, R. & Ginsberg, J. R. (2000) Ranging behaviour and vulnerability to extinction in carnivores. In Behaviour and conservation (ed. M. L. Gosling & W. J. Sutherland), pp. 125140. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pg 66/68
FINAL REPORT
Appendices
Appendix I - SmartWood Scope for Tiger Supplemental Assessment

The following suggested scope for the tiger supplemental assessment is taken from page 64 of the SmartWood HCVF Assessment Report for the Serapung FMU.
Supplemental study to determine the contribution of the indicative HCVF area to the survival and long-term viability of a tiger population in the area.
Objective: 5 To evaluate the contribution of the defined area of forest within the Serapung unit towards maintenance of a tiger population in the wider area. Study Area: 5 The coastal strip between Tanjung Datuk at the mouth of the Kampar river to the next river channel entering the sea, at Pulau Tadi (Refer map), extending 10 km inland from the coast. 5 Contained within this study area is a 5,884 ha block of forest within the FMU. Implementation: 5 The study will be conducted by an independent specialist team, lead by a recognized expert in tiger ecology and rapid survey techniques. Scope of Work: 5 Determine the estimated size of this tiger population 5 Evaluate the habitat utilization and distribution of the population within the study area. 5 Evaluate the populations comparative utilization of different habitat types: peat swamp forest, coastal alluvial bench forests, secondary habitats and farmlands. 5 Taking into account current and future land use of the wider area, determine the long term viability of this population, and the area (and primary habitats) required to support it. 5 Determine if the defined forest block within the FMU constitutes an integral part of the area and habitat required to support the tiger population in the long term. Outputs: 5 A report detailing the findings of the study Timeframe: 5 3 6 months Budget: 5 To be developed with identified specialist team.
Pg 67/68
FINAL REPORT
Appendix II APP/STCP Scope for Tiger Supplemental Assessment Tiger HCVF, Landscape Analysis and Conservation Management Options in Serapung FMU of the Kampar-Pelalawan Forest Block Project Details
Period: 5th January to 17th February 2005. Aim: Provide a definitive response, according to HCVF criteria, as to whether an HCVF is justified in the Serapung District FMU given the working assumption that tigers are present. In addition provide a first draft (not subject to the 15th February project deadline) of a tiger-specific add-on for the Indonesian HCVF toolkit. Study area: Serapung FMU and adjacent forests with a preliminary GIS and landscape overview of the Siak-Pelalawan forest block. Objectives: 1. Conduct a rapid assessment of tigers, prey, habitat and threats in the Serapung FMU and immediately adjacent forest habitat. 2. Provision of a definitive response to the SmartWood study recommendation relating to whether there is an HCVF for tigers in the Serapung FMU. Define the boundaries of the HCVF, if present, for tigers. Intrinsic within this component is a consideration of whether the loss of this area would have a serious impact on the local (TCU 150) and regional long term viability of tigers. 3. Through foot surveys, remote camera monitoring and respondent questionnaires, provision of data relating to historic and current tiger distribution and status within the Serapung FMU and adjacent habitat. 4. Provision of preliminary management options for minimizing impact on, and maximizing long-term viability of, tigers inhabiting the Serapung FMU and adjacent habitat, including the mitigation/resolution of conflict between tigers and humans. 5. Investigation of the historic, current and future land use in the TCU, specifically in the FMU and adjacent habitat, to provide a preliminary assessment of the landscape relationship between the FMU and wider Kampar-Pelalawan forest block. Data to be utilized includes: Concession boundaries, identification of contiguous habitat, past trends of habitat exploitation, provincial land-use plans and probably future habitat availability. Predictions about the landscape, history of fragmentation and isolation of habitat in past, present and future will be an integral component of this aspect, relying strongly on GIS and satellite imagery, in conjunction with ground-truthing and local liaison with appropriate departments and stakeholders (not subject to 17th February deadline). 6. Development of a decision matrix for tigers and a draft tiger-specific add-on for the ProForest/SmartWood HCVF toolkit, to be used in future FMU analyses where critically endangered, wide-ranging species are encountered (not subject to 17th Feb deadline). 7. Provision of supporting evidence to enable a definitive decision to be made with regards to future focus and need for further landscape analysis, additional HCVF-related data, and continuation of tiger-related activities in Serapung and the wider Kampar-Pelalawan forest block during Phase II (not subject to 17th February deadline).
Pg 68/68

SerapungtigerHCVF - PDF 14112008 0954 29

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SerapungtigerHCVF - PDF 14112008 0954 29

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SUMATRAN TIGER CONSERVATION PROGRAM & SUMATRAN TIGER TRUST

Asia Pulp & Paper

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

Rationale for a Tiger Supplemental Assessment

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

Objectives of the Assessment

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

Assessment Team and Expertise

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

Report Format and Availability

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

Background and Context of Assessment

Landscape Context of the FMU

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

Description of the Serapung FMU

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

2.2.1 Study Area

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

Ecology of Peat Swamp Forests around the FMU

2.3.1 Habitat Modification of Peat Swamp Forest by Logging

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

Sumatran Tiger Status, Threats and Ecology

2.4.1 Status of the Sumatran Tiger and threats

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

2.4.2 Minimum viable population for Sumatran tigers

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

2.4.3 Habitat Utilisation by the Tiger

Social and community impacts in relation to tigers

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

2.4.5 The Siak-Pelalawan forests context for tiger conservation

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

2.4.6 The Tiger as a High Conservation Value (HCV)

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program

Tiger HCVF Supplemental Assessment Serapung FMU

GIS Landscape and Habitat Analysis

Preliminary Ground Surveys and Field Orientation

Sumatran Tiger Conservation Program