Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 June
2019 | 11(8): 14051–14055
First
camera trap documentation of the Crab-eating Mongoose Herpestes
urva (Hodgson, 1836) (Carnivora: Feliformia: Herpestidae) in Barandabhar Corridor Forest in Chitwan, Nepal
Trishna Rayamajhi 1,
Saneer
Lamichhane 2, Aashish Gurung 3, Pramod Raj Regmi
4, Chiranjibi
Prasad Pokheral 5 & Babu Ram
Lamichhane 6
1–6
National Trust for Nature Conservation, P.O. Box 3712, Khumaltar,
Lalitpur 44600, Nepal.
1
trishna.rmj1@gmail.com (corresponding author), 2 saneerlamichhane@gmail.com,
3 asis_grg@hotmail.com,
4 pokheralchiran2017@gmail.com,
5 regmiprr11@gmail.com, 6 baburam@ntnc.org.np
doi: https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.4567.11.8.14051-14055 | ZooBank: urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:66F52D31-7C1C-4CD2-A557-155A21BB515F
Editor:
S.S. Talmale,
Zoological Survey of India, Pune, India. Date of
publication: 26 June 2019 (online & print)
Manuscript
details: #4567 | Received 09
December 2018 | Final received 02 June 2019 | Finally accepted 12 June 2019
Citation: Rayamajhi, T., S. Lamichhane,
A. Gurung, P.R. Regmi, C.P. Pokheral
& B.R. Lamichhane (2019). First
camera trap documentation of the Crab-eating Mongoose Herpestes
urva (Hodgson, 1836) (Carnivora: Feliformia: Herpestidae) in Barandabhar Corridor Forest in Chitwan, Nepal. Journal
of Threatened Taxa
11(8): 14051–14055. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.4567.11.8.14051-14055
Copyright: © Rayamajhi et al. 2019. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
License. JoTT
allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and distribution of this article in any
medium by adequate credit to the author(s) and the source of publication.
Funding: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS).
Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.
Acknowledgements: We would like to
acknowledge the Government of Nepal (GoN), Ministry
of Forest and Environment (MoFE), Department of
National Park and Wildlife Conservation (DNPWC), Chitwan National Park (CNP),
National Trust for Nature Conservation (NTNC), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) - Grant F13AP00825. We
are thankful to Mr Ram Kumar Aryal, acting
officer-in-charge (NTNC-BCC) and all the wildlife technicians of NTNC-BCC who
helped to accomplish the objective of this study.
Abstract: The
systematic study in 2015 and 2016 documented the first camera trap image of the
Crab-eating Mongoose Herpestes urva in Barandabhar Corridor
Forest in Chitwan, Nepal. The corridor
was divided into 88 grids, each of 1km by 1km.
A pair of cameras was placed for 15 nights in each grid and the total
camera trap night effort was 2,640.
There were two separate events capturing three independent images and
five separate events capturing seven independent images of the Crab-eating
Mongoose in 2015 and 2016, respectively.
Photo capture rate in camera traps were 0.01 and 0.03 respectively in
2015 and 2016. The presence of this species
opens new scope for wildlife professionals and scientific communities to take
further steps for its conservation.
Keywords: Camera
trap ratio, camera trap survey, carnivore.
A mongoose is an agile and resilient carnivore with a
long pointed face with small rounded ears, a tubular body with short legs, and
a tapering bushy tail (Yonzon 2005). Four species of mongoose, namely the Small
Indian Mongoose, the Indian Grey Mongoose, the Crab-eating Mongoose, and the
Ruddy Mongoose, are found in Nepal (Sharma & Lamichhane
2017). The Crab-eating Mongoose Herpestes urva is
characterized by a white stripe on its neck that runs from its cheeks to the
chest (De & Chakraborty 1995). According
to the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, the population trend of this
species is decreasing. It is categorized
as Vulnerable in Nepal’s National Red List (Jnawali
et al. 2011).
The current status of the Crab-eating Mongoose within
Nepal is poorly known as only a few records have been published on the species
historically or recently (Thapa 2013). Jnawali et al. 2011 mentioned that the species occurs
between 100m and 1300m in regions including the protected areas of the Terai and in the lowland forests of eastern Nepal; however,
none of these is associated with specific detail records. Hodgson (1836) mentioned that the Crab-eating
Mongoose was first reported as ‘Gulourva’ in
the central and northern regions of Nepal.
Fry (1925) was the first to publish the record of the mongoose with its
specific locality. Additionally, Thapa
(2013) confirmed the image-validated direct sighting of the Crab-eating
Mongoose in eastern Sankhuwasabha District in
Nepal. Further, the camera trap image of
the Crab-eating Mongoose was recorded in Parsa
National Park in 2017 (Sharma & Lamichhane
2017). The recent findings of Thapa
(2013) and Sharma & Lamichhane (2017) validate
the details mentioned by Jnawali et al. (2011).
Sharma & Lamichhane
(2017) mentioned that the priority species for camera traps are large
charismatic species like the Tiger Panthera
tigris and the Leopard P. pardus
in comparison to smaller carnivores. In Barandabhar Corridor Forest (BCF), a camera trap survey was
carried out as ‘Tiger and prey base monitoring in Barandabhar
Corridor Forest’, focusing particularly on the Bengal Tiger Panthera
tigris tigris. The camera trap, however, also worked as a
means to disclose the photographic proof for the existence of many species
including smaller carnivores like the Crab-eating Mongoose. This study presents the first image
documentation of the Crab-eating Mongoose using a systematic camera trap
technique. Since corridors are the
cornerstones of modern conservation and act as a linear strip of habitat to
facilitate the movement of species through the landscape (Puth
& Wilson 2001), the presence of the Crab-eating Mongoose in BCF represents
its healthy functionality. The study
also supports managers and researchers for future conservation actions in BCF.
Study area
BCF (87.9km2) is the only remaining forest
patch of Chitwan that joins Chitwan National Park in the south with the
Mahabharat range in the north (Bhattarai &
Basnet 2004). Though continuous,
it is in two parts, the south and the north, from the existing Mahendra Highway.
The southern part is a buffer zone and the northern part lies in the
district forest area. The southern part
is guarded by the Nepal Army and is enlisted as a Ramsar
Site (site number 1313), as Beeshazar and associated
lakes. The aim of the corridor is to
mitigate the effects of local communities on conservation and vice versa (Axelsson & Andersson 2012). There are heavy populated municipalities
around the corridor, namely Ratnagar Municipality in
the east, Kalika in the northeast, and Bharatpur Metropolitan City in the west.
Methods
BCF was divided into 88 grids of 1km by 1km. Camera traps were systematically placed in
each grid. The whole operation was
completed in two shifts due to limited resources, i.e., the southern part of
the corridor (59 grids) was covered in the first deployment and the northern
part (29 grids) in the second deployment.
In each grid, one pair of cameras was installed locating a suitable
place on each side at a distance of about 4–5 m from the midline of the trail,
and the installation details with GPS points were recorded. Four models of cameras, namely Reconyx 550, Moultrie 40D, Bushnell HD, and Cuddeback, were used.
Each camera was checked on alternate days to ensure its
functionality. The cameras were left for
15 nights in each grid (Karanth & Nicholas 2002; Pokheral 2002; Wang
& MacDonald 2009; Thapa 2013; Lamichhane et al.
2014) with a sampling effort of 1,320 trap nights. The monitoring was conducted in two
consecutive years, i.e., from March to April 2015 and from January to February
2016. The same method was used in both
the years and the total sampling effort was doubled from 1,320 to 2,640 trap
nights. All camera trap images were
downloaded. The images were considered
independent events if they were 30 minutes or more apart (Silver et al. 2004;
Thapa 2013). The trapping rate was calculated
as the number of independent images per total number of captured images per 100
trap nights (Karanth & Nicholas 2002).
Results
From a total of 44,783 camera trap images from 88
camera trap locations, we obtained seven separate events capturing 10
independent images of the Crab-eating Mongoose in BCF in two consecutive years,
i.e., 2015 and 2016 (Images 1–4). In
2015, two separate events capturing three independent images of the species
were recorded. One event was captured
towards the south of the highway and the other was captured towards the north
of the highway. Similarly, in 2016, five
separate events capturing seven independent images of the species were recorded
towards the north of the highway. The
image was confirmed by experts in the National Trust for Nature Conservation
and through the digital image archive of the Smithsonian Institute. This is the first camera trap photographic
evidence of the Crab-eating Mongoose in this protected corridor. The species was captured in five different grids
(Fig. 1). Seventy per cent of the total
capture was from 08.00h to 12.00h, after which no camera trap images were
captured (Fig. 2). The trapping ratio of
2015 was 0.01 and of 2016 was 0.03 per 100 trap nights.
Discussion
The Crab-eating Mongoose is common in southeastern Asia except for Nepal (Than Zaw et al. 2008).
The primary reason for this rarity in the country remains unclear (Thapa
2013), but it has affected the study and data of the species. Sharma & Lamichhane
(2017) referred to camera traps focusing only on large charismatic mammals as
the apparent reason for the mongoose species being rare and localized. Wildlife research in southeastern
Asia is largely donor-dependent and the probability of the acceptance of a
proposal on small carnivores like Crab-eating Mongoose is low and in the case
of high budget research null and void.
It is the charismatic species that receive attention from the government
and the media and have higher chances of acceptance in high budget
proposals. Therefore, it is obvious
that the selected proposal will determine the focus of camera trap studies, as
mentioned by Sharma & Lamichhane (2017).
Jnawali et al. (2011) mentioned that the mongoose species
inhabits tropical, subtropical, evergreen, and moist deciduous forests and the
record of the Crab-eating Mongoose from the subtropical BCF in this study
supports the finding. The Crab-eating
Mongooses were mostly camera-trapped during morning hours, which is typical in southeastern Asia (Than Zaw et
al. 2008; Thapa 2013). The species was
captured only on sunny days. Chuang
& Lee (1997) mentioned fishes, reptiles, amphibians, and crustaceans as the
prey species of the Crab-eating Mongoose.
These are all cold-blooded species and hence are active on sunny
days. We do not have a single camera
trap image of the Crab-eating Mongoose at night. Therefore, we may hypothesize that the
activities of the predator depends on that of the prey. This may be because the predator saves energy
according to the foraging theory, i.e., to minimize energy for capturing and
searching for food.
Habitat destruction and poaching of the mongoose for
fur trade are considered the major threats of the species in Nepal (Yonzon 2005; Jnawali et al. 2011;
Thapa 2013; Sharma & Lamichhane 2017). No evidence of poaching, however, was found
in Chitwan District. Other possible
threats to the species in this region are overfishing, habitat loss, and the
poisoning of waterholes (a method of illegal fishing). In BCF, the result showed an increase in
camera trap ratio in consecutive years.
This has spread a positive message on the success of conservation and
management in the BCF.
This study reveals the presence of the Crab-eating
Mongoose in both the southern and the northern parts of the highway and
presents the first camera trap distribution documentation of the species in BCF. It extended the present range of this species
and highlights the value of the corridor in its conservation. Publication of similar records is essential
for the updated status of the distribution of the species in Nepal. This data opens a new scope and base for
wildlife professionals and scientific communities to take further steps for the
conservation of the Crab-eating Mongoose to maintain a healthy ecosystem in
BCF.
For images
& figures – click here
References
Axelsson, E.P. & J. Andersson (2012). A case study of termite mound occurrence in
relation to forest edges and canopy cover within the Barandabhar
Forest Corridor in Nepal. International Journal of Biodiversity and
Conservation 4(15): 633–641.
Bhattarai, B.F. & K. Basnet
(2004). Assessment of crop damage by wild
ungulates in the eastern side of Barandabhar Corridor
Forest, Chitwan. Proceedings of IV National Conference on Science and
Technology, March 23–26.
Chuang, S.A. & L.L. Lee
(1997). Food habits of three carnivore
species (Viverricula indica,
Herpestes urva,
and Melogale moschata)
in Fushan Forest ecosystem, northern Taiwan. Journal
of Zoology 243(1): 71–79.
De, J.K. & R. Chakraborty
(1995). Structure and pattern of guard
hairs of Crab-eating Mongoose, Herpestes urva (Hodgson) (Mammalia: Carnivora: Herpestidae). Proceeding of the Zoological Society,
Calcutta 48: 33–36.
Fry, T.B. (1925). Report No. 37a: Nepal. Bombay Natural History
Society’s Mammal Survey of India, Burma, and Ceylon. Journal of the Bombay
Natural History Society 30: 525–530.
Hodgson, B.H. (1836). Synoptical description
of sundry new animals, enumerated in the Catalogue of Nepalese Mammals. Journal
of the Asiatic Society of Bengal 5: 231–238.
Jnawali, S.R., H.S. Baral, S. Lee,
K.P. Acharya, G.P. Upadhyay, M. Pandey, R. Shrestha, D. Joshi, B.R. Lamichhane, J. Griffiths, A. Khatiwada
& R. Amin (compilers) (2011). The
Status of Nepal Mammals: The National Red List Series. Department of National
Parks and Wildlife Conservation, Kathmandu, Nepal, viii+81pp.
Karanth, K.U. & J.D. Nichols (2002). Monitoring tigers and their prey: a manual for
researchers, managers, and conservationists in tropical Asia. Centre for
Wildlife Studies, Bangalore, India.
Lamichhane, B.R., M. Dhakal, N. Subedi & C.P. Pokheral
(2014). Clouded Leopard co-exist with
other five felids in Chitwan National Park, Nepal. Cat News 61:
30–32.
Pokharel, C.P. (2002). Censusing tigers by camera trapping: testing the
method and estimating the population in Karnali
floodplain of Royal Bardia National Park, Nepal.
M.Sc. Thesis. Agriculture University of Norway.
Puth, L.M. & K.A. Wilson (2001). Boundaries and corridors as a continuum of ecological
flow control: lessons from rivers and streams. Conservation Biology 15:
21–30.
Silver, S., L. Ostro,
L. Marsh, L. Maffei, A. Noss, M. Kelly & G. Ayala
(2004). The use of camera traps for
estimating Jaguar Panthera onca abundance and density using capture/recapture
analysis. Oryx 38(2): 148–154. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605304000286
Sharma, B. & B.R. Lamichhane (2017). Record of Crab-eating Mongoose Herpestes
urva from Parsa
Wildlife Reserve, central Nepal. Small Carnivore Conservation 55:
97–103.
Thapa, S. (2013). Observations of Crab-eating Mongoose Herpestes urva in
eastern Nepal. Small Carnivore Conservation 49: 31–33.
Than Zaw,
Saw Htun, Saw Htoo Tha Po, Myint Maung,
A.J. Lynam, Kyaw Thinn Latt
& J.W. Duckworth (2008). Status and
distribution of small carnivores in Myanmar. Small Carnivore Conservation
38: 2–28.
Wang, S.W. & D.W. MacDonald
(2009). Feeding habits and niche
partitioning in a predator guild composed of tigers, leopards and Dholes in a
temperate ecosystem in central Bhutan. Journal of Zoology 277(4): 275–283.
Yonzon, P. (2005). Mongoose trade in Nepal. Tiger Paper: Regional
Quarterly Bulletin on Wildlife and National Parks Management 32(2):
14–16.