1

FOREST MANAGEMENT AND CONSERVATION PROGRAMME

A Rapid Participatory Assessment of WildlifeDiversity in the Dong Sithouane Production Forest

byRamesh Boonratana, Ph.D.

with assistance fromVannalack Sengsavanh and Khongsavanh Chounlamounty

February 2000

2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A rapid participatory wildlife diversity assessment, focusing on large mammals, was conducted

in Dong Sithouane State Production Forest, in Savannakhet Province. Dong Sithouane SPF is

one of the two production forests in Lao PDR where FOMACOP’s forest management sub-

program is piloting a ‘village forestry’ program. A program which aims at sustainably managing

forests within traditional village territories to benefit the villagers and the national community. A

planned forest certification for the SPF, however, requires compliance with certain criteria, that

includes adequate protection for endangered wildlife. Hence, this study was carried out to

determine the wildlife diversity values of the SPF, and to propose mitigation measures

appropriate for their conservation.

Semi-structured interviews conducted through village-based participatory wildlife assessments

in 20 villages, and field-based PWAs yielded a provisional list of at least 47 mammal species.

Besides mammals, 26 birds, 8 reptiles and 6 amphibians were recorded from the area. Of the

wildlife reported/recorded, 13 are Globally Threatened species, namely pygmy loris, pig-tailed

macaque, Douc langur, dhole, Asiatic black bear, clouded leopard, tiger, large-antlered muntjac,

gaur, banteng, serow, east Asian porcupine, and the Siamese crocodile. However, if the Asian

elephant, which might occasionally use the extreme eastern part of the SPF be included, then

there would be 14 Globally Threatened species in Dong Sithouane SPF.

Hence, the biodiversity value of Dong Sithouane SPF, at least in terms of mammal diversity and

the number of species having conservation significance is probably at par to the protected areas

in the province. Apparently, however, the density of wildlife population and amount of viable

wildlife habitat available in the SPF are most likely much lower than those in the protected areas.

Furthermore, most, if not all the Globally Threatened species in Dong Sithouane SPF are

reported rare in the area, and may represent remnant populations. Thus, mammal diversity found

in the SPF have better representation in the protected areas located in the province and the

adjoining provinces.

Nevertheless, the presence of several species of conservation significance imply that

conservation measures must be taken to ensure their adequate protection. Their conservation

may, in the long-term, be beneficial to the greater biodiversity conservation efforts, as the

wildlife population in Dong Sithouane SPF might serve as an important gene pool. Main

3

measures needed include setting aside an area, a special ‘conservation management zone’ within

the SPF for their conservation, and establishing feasible and practicable ‘rules and regulations’

with regard to the zone and outside the zone.

Dong Sithouane SPF, because of its location, is theoretically a ‘land corridor’ linking Dong Phou

Vieng NBCA with Xe Bang Nouan NBCA. However, with more than 60 villages in and around

it, with numerous access roads throughout the SPF, and most wildlife restricted to the eastern

part of the SPF, it cannot realistically function as a ‘land corridor’. But with enormous benefits

to be gained by the SPF’s residents, Savannakhet Province and Lao PDR from the forestry

sector, the area justifiably should remain a state production forest.

Biodiversity in Dong Sithouane SPF too, can benefit from ‘village forestry’. There is little doubt

that villagers will actively ensure the protection of biodiversity, if the villagers’ continued

benefits will partly depend on their commitment towards addressing the conservation needs of

biodiversity in the SPF. Looking at the greater picture of biodiversity conservation in Lao PDR,

it might be worth looking at ‘village forestry’ as one possible solution in protecting protected

areas and preventing biodiversity loss in Lao PDR. Hence, ‘village forestry’ in Dong Sithouane

SPF can play an important role as a test case for the ‘Integrated Conservation and Development’

concept. If ‘village forestry’ is unable to address the conservation needs in Dong Sithouane SPF,

then it is obvious that ICAD is not a solution to protecting and managing protected areas. Other

alternatives must be sought. However, if ‘village forestry’ is able to provide adequate protection

to the wild fauna and their habitats, then this is one approach towards protected area

management worth seriously looking into.

4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The team wishes to acknowledge Mr. Bouahong Phanthanousy (Director), Mr. Bouaphahn

Phantavong (Deputy Director), Dr. Marko Katila (Chief Technical Adviser), Dr. Manuel Bonita,

Mr. Edwin V. Payuan, and Ms. Vaneska Litz ( FOMACOP Advisers), and the FOMACOP staff

based in Vientiane and Savannakhet, PAFO Savannakhet, and DAFO Thapanthong for

facilitating this study. None the least, acknowledgments are due to the villagers whose

information on wildlife and other assistance have made this report possible. Mr. Bryan L. Stuart

(WCS) kindly identified the amphibians and reptiles recorded.

Ramesh Boonratana, Ph.D. Vannalack Sengsavanh Khongsavanh Chounlamounty

(Consultant) (FOMACOP Adviser) (PAFO Savannakhet)

5

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................. 1ACKNOWLEDGMENTS............................................................................................................... 3CONTENTS .................................................................................................................................... 41. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................... 5

1.1 BACKGROUND................................................................................................................... 51.2 AIMS, ACTIVITIES & OUTPUTS...................................................................................... 6

1.2.1 Aims ............................................................................................................................... 61.2.2 Activities ........................................................................................................................ 61.2.3 Outputs ........................................................................................................................... 6

2. METHODS.................................................................................................................................. 92.1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 92.2 INITIAL PREPARATIONS ................................................................................................. 92.3 VILLAGE-BASED PWA ................................................................................................... 102.4 FIELD-BASED PWA ......................................................................................................... 11

3. RESULTS.................................................................................................................................. 143.1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................... 143.2 OBSERVATIONS .............................................................................................................. 14

4. DISCUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................... 224.1 DISCUSSIONS ................................................................................................................... 224.2 RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................... 244.3 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................... 26

REFERENCES.............................................................................................................................. 28APPENDIX I: List of Wildlife Reported and/or Recorded at Dong Sithouane SPF, and TheirLocal Names.................................................................................................................................. 29APPENDIX II: Villages Interviewed and Animals Reported....................................................... 33APPENDIX III: Conservation Significance of Wildlife Recorded/Reported at Dong SithouaneSPF ................................................................................................................................................ 36APPENDIX IV: Wildlife Data Recording Format........................................................................ 38APPENDIX V: Human/Habitat Impact Data Recording Format.................................................. 39APPENDIX VI: Brief Discussion on Methodology ..................................................................... 40APPENDIX VII: Study’s Itinerary ............................................................................................... 42

6

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUNDDong1 Sithouane State Production Forest (figure 1), covering an area about 212,000 ha, is

located in Songkhone and Thapanthong Districts of Savannakhet Province, between 15°56.5’ -

16°19.5’N and 105°16’ - 106°11.5’E. The area primarily comprise dry dipterocarp, dry

evergreen, and mixed deciduous forests that has been extensively logged in the past. Since 1995,

the Forest Management and Conservation Project through its Forest Management Sub-program,

has been piloting a ‘village forestry’ project in 47 villages in the area.

‘Village forestry’ is a partnership between the government and organized villages in the co-

management of all forests within the traditional village territories, which aims to sustainably

manage the forested land for the benefit of the villagers and the entire national community

(Phanthanousy & Katila, 1999). This has resulted in the formation of 31 villages into 23 Village

Forestry Associations. These associations have now prepared land-use and forest management

plans covering 77,000 ha of forest in Dong Sithouane SPF2. These plans, with emphasis on

sustainable forest production, cover the management of all forest types and resources, and

address production, conservation and protection of forest resources.

Albeit Dong Sithouane SPF have been identified as a production forest, it is nevertheless,

important to make biodiversity conservation a more integral part of village forest management,

to minimize adverse impacts on biodiversity. Furthermore, the planned forest certification

assessment also requires compliance with certain criteria, that includes the protection of

endangered species and ecologically important ecosystems, as well as monitoring their stability.

To the northeast and south of Dong Sithouane SPF, and partly adjoining it, respectively lie the

1,990 km² Dong Phou3 Vieng (16°07’ - 16°44’N/105°51’ - 106°32’E) and the 1,300 km² Xe4

Bang Nouan (15°44’ - 16°01’N/105°36’ - 106°17’E) National Biodiversity Conservation Areas.

Further north of Dong Sithouane SPF, lies the 1,060 km² Phou Xang He (16°42’ - 17°04’N/105°

19’ - 106°06’E) NBCA5. Both Dong Phou Vieng and Phou Xang He NBCAs are located in

1Dong = forest2SPF = State Production Forest.3Phou = hill or mountain4Xe = river5NBCA = National Biodiversity Conservation Area

7

Savannakhet Province, whereas only part of Xe Bang Nouan NBCA lies in Savannakhet

Province, and the remainder in Salavan Province. Hence, at least 29% of the land area of

Savannakhet Province have been demarcated for conservation and protection, and this partly

addresses the conservation needs of the province (Marko Katila, pers. comm.).

1.2 AIMS, ACTIVITIES & OUTPUTS6

1.2.1 AimsThe main aims of the study are:

• to determine the biodiversity value of Dong Sithouane SPF, and the main threats to it;

• to propose concrete actions for addressing priority conservation needs in the area, including

monitoring changes in biodiversity, and linking information to management decision-

making.

1.2.2 ActivitiesThe activities of this study can broadly be organized into:

• Desk research and preparation for field work;

• Rapid participatory biodiversity assessment;

• Documentation of findings.

1.2.3 OutputsThe main outputs expected from this study include:

• A concise statement:

a) indicating the biodiversity value of Dong Sithouane SPF, in relation to conservation

measures already taken in the province;

b) clarifying the status of Dong Sithouane as a state production forest.

• Potential high conservation value forest areas and rare, threatened, or endangered species of

national or regional importance identified, and where possible mapped;

6The study’s aims, activities and expected outputs form RB’s Terms of Reference.

8

• A concrete, implementable proposal for conservation management interventions including a

simple, village-based monitoring system for monitoring possible changes in valuable

ecosystems/habitats, and presence of endangered species (if applicable), or changes in related

indicators.

9

Figure 1: Dong Sithouane State Production Forest and main wildlife area (highlighted)

10

2. METHODS

2.1 INTRODUCTIONAs Dong Sithouane is a State Production Forest that has been logged over several times, it was

not regarded as an important area for biodiversity when a national system for protected areas for

Lao PDR7 was being established in the early 1990s, and that biodiversity values of the region

have better representation in the three NBCAs located near it. Hence, a rapid ‘minimalist’

approach was used for assess the biodiversity values of Dong Sithouane SPF. Furthermore, time

and monetary constraints do not allow detailed and elaborate efforts.

Albeit the study was carried out within a short period, it was nevertheless intensive. The methods

comprised the initial preparations, village-based participatory wildlife assessment and field-

based PWA8,. As ‘village forestry’ is meant to be a partnership between the government and the

villagers in the co-management of all forested areas within traditional village territories, hence it

was necessary to involve the villagers in all activities carried out in the area.

2.2 INITIAL PREPARATIONSThis primarily involved the gathering of verbal and written information about Dong Sithouane

SPF, and the three NBCAs located nearby. Verbal information was initially gathered through

discussions with wildlife experts based in Vientiane, and almost all the literature on wildlife

diversity and distribution were obtained from the libraries of FOMACOP, IUCN9 and WCS10,

similarly based in Vientiane. These information, reinforced with relevant verbal and written

information from the FOMACOP office in Savannakhet Province, and DAFO11 office in

Thapanthong District, were reviewed along with existing aerial photographs, land use and

topographic maps of Dong Sithouane SPF. Through this preparatory process, areas with potential

biodiversity conservation values, and proposed villages and sites where PWA will be carried out

were identified. Also, this exercise allowed the activities to be planned in a manner to be most

efficient with regard to the limited time available.

7PDR = People’s Democratic Republic8PBA = Participatory Biodiversity Assessment9IUCN = The World Conservation Union10WCS = Wildlife Conservation Society11DAFO = District Agricultural and Forestry Office

11

2.3 VILLAGE-BASED PWAIn this study, village-based PWA refers to the process of gathering information on wildlife and

key wildlife habitats from knowledgeable villagers. Interviews were semi-structured, conducted

in a conversational manner, and in a relaxed atmosphere. This frequently involved initially

making ‘small talk’ to make the respondents feel at ease. Care was also taken by team members

to respect the local customs and culture. All members of the assessment team were conversant in

the Lao language, therefore, an important factor to the verbal data gathering process.

Questions with regard to wildlife presence primarily focused on species of conservation

significance, followed by distinctive and/or easily distinguishable animals. The latter was to

avoid unnecessary confusion over species’ names and descriptions (see appendix VI). With this

in mind, a simple list of potential wildlife possibly present in Dong Sithouane SPF was

developed during the pre-PWA exercise. Inquiries regarding wildlife, however, were not limited

only to those listed in the questionnaire, but included other species as and when opportunities

presented themselves. The list merely serves to guide in the data gathering process.

Besides gathering information about a species presence, information was also gathered about the

species’ locality, and when its evidence was last observed. The species’ general location on map

was extrapolated from the area’s general direction from the village concerned, and the area’s

walking distance (in hours) from the village. It should be noted that the villagers’ average hiking

speed in forested areas range from 15-20 minutes to a kilometer. In addition, villagers were

asked about the presence of mineral licks known to them.

Illustrations of wildlife, those found and not found in Lao PDR, were also shown to the

respondents. This was to gather additional information that the villagers might have to offer, i.e.,

information that was not offered during the interviews, and to cross-check information gathered

during the interviews.

2.4 FIELD-BASED PWAVillage-based PWA was supplemented by short expeditions to the main wildlife area, and to

potential key wildlife habitats. This was to assess the information gathered through village-based

PWA, and to conduct a brief wildlife and human impact surveys. Also, it provided an ‘image’ to

12

the names of places mentioned by respondents. The team, accompanied by two Ban12

Khoktheuleu residents (Lung Nooat and Lung Samien) and a Ban Nalavieng resident (Thao Piu),

established a camp at ‘Daan Falang Thim Khueang’ (16°07’41”N/105°55’36”E), in the eastern

part of Dong Sithouane SPF. Diurnal surveys and a short nocturnal survey were carried from this

campsite. Besides the area around the ‘Daan Falang Thim Khueang’, surveys were also carried

along the eastern boundary of the SPF, and along the dirt tracks joining different villages.

Diurnal survey routes were pre-determined from 1:100,000 topographic maps and/or based on

villagers’ information. Routes normally took the shape of irregular loops, originating and

terminating at the campsite. This allowed greater coverage of an area. Surveys were carried out

on foot, along existing tracks and trails. The chances of encountering an animal or its signs are

higher when surveys are carried out along existing animal trails. Furthermore, using animal trails

have been observed to be effective in covering large areas in tropical rainforests (Boonratana,

1997). Through the field-based PWA, wildlife presence was recorded based on sightings and/or

other evidence (tracks, scats, vocalizations, etc.).

12Ban = village/settlement

13

Plates 1 & 2: Village-based PWA

Participatory wildlife assessment at Ban Nadokthong

Old and young (including this hard-smoking five-year old girl) frequently participated in the PWAs

14

Plates 3 & 4: Field-based PWA

Recording gaur signs at Dong Aa Chien

Checking for wildlife signs at a mineral lick

15

3. RESULTS

3.1 INTRODUCTIONIn the strictest sense, it must be emphasized here that all species reported present in Dong

Sithouane SPF during the PWAs should be regarded as ‘provisional’, until more conclusive

evidence are obtained. However, for biodiversity conservation purposes, the species reported

present should be regarded as still being extant, and their conservation and protection needs must

be incorporated into the management plans and activities of the SPF. Otherwise, there would

inevitably be a further loss of biodiversity. Furthermore, there is a strong reason to believe,

based on unanimous findings, that most, if not all species reported are still extant.

Although the primary objective was to assess wildlife diversity in Dong Sithouane SPF, the team

nevertheless recorded information on human activities, useful in assessing impacts on both

wildlife and habitats, hence identifying threats to their long-term viability. Field PWA was

achieved in a much shorter duration than expected primarily because being the dry season and

free from rice-growing activities, most villagers could be found in their respective villages.

3.2 OBSERVATIONSMammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians reported and recorded in Dong Sithouane SPF during

the village-based and field-based PWAs are listed in Appendix I. It should also be noted that

several indeterminate species whose Lao names were reported are also included here. Some of

these names might possibly represent species that are different from those whose scientific

names are listed. Conversely, some of these names might be different local names for those

whose scientific names are already listed.

Wildlife reported by different villages during PWAs are listed in Appendix II. This is to allow a

better understanding of the species listed in Appendix I, and to those accounted below. Reports

of wildlife presence were not limited to those found in the respective village areas, but included

all areas within the SPF. Based on this information, and those gathered during the preparatory

exercise and field PWA, wildlife in Dong Sithouane SPF are apparently mainly found towards

the eastern part of the SPF (figure 1). Some wildlife are also reported in other parts of the SPF,

mainly in the forested hill range that runs east-west (almost dividing the SPF into the northern

16

and southern halves). In the eastern part of the SPF, wildlife are reported mainly in ‘Dong Aa

Chien’ (the area south of Phou Mali), along the Phou Mali escarpment, and in ‘Dong Phali’ (in

the central part of Dong Sithouane SPF’s eastern boundary, along Highway No. 2313).

Among the species reported and/or recorded in Dong Sithouane SPF (see Appendix III), there

are 14 Globally Threatened species (IUCN, 1996), 31 species threatened and potentially

threatened by trade (WCMC, 1998), and 26 species at risk or potentially at risk in Lao PDR

(Duckworth et al., 1999). It should be noted that this list also included the Asian elephant,

although extirpated from the area, might occasionally use the SPF. Information regarding these

Globally Threatened species are briefly summarized in table 1. Most of these species are mainly

found in the eastern forested area of Dong Sithouane SPF.

The main threats to biodiversity in Dong Sithouane SPF include forest fire, wildlife hunting,

unregulated NTFP harvesting, and livestock grazing. Forest fire, both human induced and natural

is a common feature in the SPF, and is expected to increase in the future with expectedly

devastating results. One village was reportedly razed down as a result of this forest fire. Wildlife

hunting using muzzle-loading guns (in spite of such guns being already handed over to the

province), crossbows, hunting dogs and snares are not uncommon. Trophies and remains of

wildlife were frequently observed in the villages. There is a tendency among the villagers to

‘over harvest’ NTFP, e.g., two or more ‘wells’ in the extraction of ‘yaang’ oil. Sometimes, trees

are chopped down to capture wild animals. Some of the domestic cattle were observed suffering

from ‘foot and mouth’ disease, which could potentially spread to the wild cattle population, as

these domestic cattle ranged far and deep into the main forested areas.

Dong Sithouane SPF, located between Dong Phou Vieng NBCA and Xe Bang Nouan NBCA is

theoretically a ‘land corridor’ linking the two NBCAs. There is, however, very little contiguous

forest cover to directly link the SPF with the two NBCAs. Furthermore, there are more than 60

villages in the SPF, and more around it. With settlements at such a scale and with numerous

access roads throughout the SPF, it is not a realistic ‘land corridor’.

13Highway No. 23 forms part of the historically famous Ho Chi Minh trail. Much of the road and bridges have beenbombed out, making bomb craters a prominent feature along the route.

17

Table 1: Summarized account of the Globally Threatened species in Dong Sithouane SPF.

Species GTCategory

Location in SPF Threats Distribution in LaoPDR

Pygmy loris Vulnerable EW Hill Range;Dong Aa Chien

Fire;Loss of habitat;Possibly hunting

Provisionallylocalized to certainareas

Pig-tailedmacaque

Vulnerable EW Hill Range;Dong Aa Chien

Fire;Loss of habitat;Hunting

Common to mostareas

Douc langur Endangered Dong Aa Chien Fire;Loss of habitat;Hunting

Common in remoteareas of good habitat

Dhole Vulnerable EW Hill Range;Dong Aa Chien

Fire;Loss of habitat;Loss of prey

Common to mostareas

Asiatic blackbear

Vulnerable EW Hill Range?Dong Aa Chien

Fire;Loss of habitat

Possibly uncommonto most areas

Clouded leopard Vulnerable Dong Aa Chien Fire;Loss of habitat;Loss of prey

Uncertain

Tiger Endangered EW Hill Range;Dong Aa Chien

Fire;Loss of habitat;Loss of prey;

Common to mostareas, but possibly inlow numbers

Elephant Endangered Dong Aa Chien? Fire;Loss of habitat

Possibly restricted todense and hilly forestin some areas

Large-antleredmuntjac

Vulnerable Dong Aa Chien Fire;Loss of habitat;Hunting

Restricted to someareas

Gaur Vulnerable Dong Aa Chien Fire;Loss of habitat;Possibly hunting;Possible transferof diseases fromdomestic cattle

Possibly restricted tosome areas

Banteng Endangered Dong Aa Chien Fire;Loss of habitat;Possibly hunting;Possible transferof diseases fromdomestic cattle

Rare in most areas

Serow Vulnerable EW Hill Range;Dong Aa Chien

Possibly hunting Restricted to steepkarst mountains

East Asianporcupine

Vulnerable EW Hill Range;Dong Aa Chien

Fire;Loss of habitat;Hunting

Common to all areas

18

Siamesecrocodile

CriticallyEndangered

Xe Pa-em Loss of habitat Rare, if any found.

Note:EW Hills = the hill range running east west in the central part of Dong Sithouane SPF.Dong Aa Chien = main forest bloc in the eastern part of Dong Sithouane SPF, andinclude Dong Phali and Phou Mali areas.Xe Pa-em = a river in the eastern part of Dong Sithouane SPF. Crocodiles are supposedlyrestricted to the upper reaches of this riverDistribution in Lao PDR primarily with respect to protected areas

19

Plates 5 & 6: Captive primates in Dong Sithouane SPF

A young pig-tailed macaque at Ban Khoktheuleu

A young rhesus macaque at Ban Xeku

20

Plates 7 & 8: Evidence of wildlife presence

Thao Piu observing fresh droppings of sambar deer

KC with quills of recently poached Asiatic brush-tailed porcupine

21

Plates 9 & 10: Threats to wildlife in Dong Sithouane SPF

KC with an active snare of a 500 m long snareline.

A Phayre’s flying squirrel shot

with a muzzle-loading gun.

22

Plates 11 & 12: Impacts on habitat in Dong Sithouane SPF

‘Yaang ‘ oil extraction

This tree was apparently chopped

down to capture pangolins.

23

4. DISCUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 DISCUSSIONSAssuming that all wildlife reported does indeed occur in Dong Sithouane SPF, then there exist

several species of low to high conservation significance. The wildlife population in Dong

Sithouane SPF, possibly representing a remnant population, is likely to be low and might not be

viable in the long-term. This will, however, require intensive field biological surveys before any

statements can be made regarding their density and viability. Furthermore, all the wildlife

reported have better representation in the Lao PDR’s system of protected areas within the

province and in other provinces.

Nevertheless, the species reported/recorded in Dong Sithouane SPF, by virtue of their existence

and conservation significance, and possibly representing an important gene pool, need active

protection and conservation efforts throughout their range. However, there is no further need to

establish Dong Sithouane SPF as an NBCA. Conservation needs of biodiversity in Dong

Sithouane SPF can, however, be addressed by setting aside a special conservation management

zone within the SPF, and establishing rules and regulations with regard to wildlife and NTFP

harvesting, habitat use and other practices, both inside and outside this special zone. The benefits

from ‘village forestry’ are already excellent incentives for the village forestry associations to

include a small component of biodiversity conservation and monitoring in the existing program.

Hence, continued benefits alone can ensure the villagers’ commitment towards biodiversity

conservation.

As mentioned in section 1.1, the biodiversity conservation needs in Savannakhet Province have

partly been addressed by the establishment of Phou Xang He and Xe Bang Nouan NBCAs.

Although realistically, however, setting aside areas for protection in Lao PDR have done very

little for biodiversity conservation and habitat protection in the country, as almost all these areas

receive little or no active management, or in most cases management have been obstacled by

bureaucratic and political issues. Furthermore, even with the establishment of NBCAs,

biodiversity loss is still proceeding at an alarming rate. Biodiversity conservation is currently not

the Government of Lao PDR’s top priority, whereas livelihood improvement is. This is

understandable, given that much of the population are living at subsistence level, and dependent

on the forest resources. However, current livelihood improvement activities would mean very

24

little once Lao PDR loses its biodiversity and natural resources. Then, if that should occur, the

majority would find it difficult even to live at subsistence level.

If FOMACOP’s ‘village forestry’ program can be true to its theory, then ‘village forestry’

program might possibly be one solution towards biodiversity conservation and habitat protection

in Lao PDR. Hence, the concept of ‘low impact and sustainable village forestry’ might actually

prevent the loss of biodiversity and habitats, and improve livelihoods at the same time. Hence, it

might be worth considering introducing ‘village forestry’ as one possible solution in managing

protected areas and preventing biodiversity loss in Lao PDR.

Thus, ‘village forestry’ in Dong Sithouane SPF can actually be a test case for the ‘Integrated

Conservation and Development’ concept. If ‘village forestry’ is unable to address the

conservation needs in Dong Sithouane SPF, even after following the implementation of

measures recommended, then the current ‘Integrated Conservation and Development’ approach

is obviously not the solution to protecting and managing protected areas. Conversely, if ‘village

forestry’ is able to address the biodiversity conservation needs in Dong Sithouane SPF, then the

application of this approach should be seriously considered as one possible option towards

biodiversity conservation in protected area.

Caution should be taken, if there comes a time when ‘village forestry’ should be considered for

introduction in protected areas. It is imperative that forestry activities be limited to restricted

parts of the NBCA’s Controlled Use Zone and forested ‘buffer zone’ areas outside the NBCA.

Nevertheless, even such ‘low impact and sustainable village forestry’ will have some impact on

wildlife and habitat. But this is probably more desirable than the current situation with most

NBCAs, where log and wildlife poaching, forest clearance, and other damaging activities go

unchecked. It must, however, be emphasized that such a program should not be attempted in the

NBCAs, until and unless, such a program has proven true to its theory and has successfully

provided adequate protection and conservation to biodiversity. Furthermore, it should not be

regarded as the only possible solution to the protection of NBCAs, but considered as one of the

possible options.

4.2 RECOMMENDATIONS1. Establish a zone for biodiversity conservation in Dong Sithouane SPF:

25

Areas within the east-west hill range and Dong Aa Chien need to be identified and

demarcated as a special conservation management zone within the Dong Sithouane

SPF for biodiversity conservation purposes. Criteria needed for inclusion into this

zone are adequate forest cover, the presence of permanent water bodies and mineral

licks, and information on the distribution and range of wildlife. Wildlife distribution

and range can only be determined from field biological surveys. Such surveys would

also confirm wildlife presence in Dong Sithouane SPF, provide information on their

relative abundance, and provide baseline information for monitoring purposes. Also,

all known mineral licks should be visited, mapped and assessed for their viability

during these surveys.

2. Develop and establish conservation ‘rules and regulations’:

Rules and regulations with regard to wildlife and NTFP harvesting, and the special

conservation management zone, must be developed and established to prevent the

loss of biodiversity. This should be carried out in consultation with the stakeholders

in good faith, therefore ensuring commitment from them. A general ‘rules and

regulations’ with regard to this zone and NTFP harvest in the SPF should be

incorporated into the Village Forest Management Contract (FOMACOP, 1998), and

making appropriate amendments to the contract. A village-specific ‘rules and

regulations’ may also have to be developed for villages with key features (e.g.,

mineral licks).

Ideally, no harvest of wildlife whatsoever should be allowed in this special conservation

management zone. Outside this zone, wildlife harvest can be allowed only for those

species not listed as Globally Threatened by IUCN, in CITES Appendix I, and as At

Risk in Lao PDR. Also, harvest of wildlife outside the special management

conservation zone should be regulated. For example, frogs should not be harvested

during spawning period (see B.L. Stuart in Duckworth et al., 1999). Wildlife harvest

regulation would hopefully ensure a continued supply of protein to the SPF’s

residents.

3. Conservation awareness program in Dong Sithouane SPF:

The on-going conservation awareness program in the SPF should also include listing out

Lao PDR’s protected species to the residents, and laws and penalties with regard to

26

capturing or killing them. Rules and regulations with regard to wildlife and NTFP

harvesting within and outside the proposed special conservation management zone

should also be a priority of the conservation awareness program. This is, however,

possible once those rules and regulations, and the zone are established.

4. Initiate biodiversity monitoring activities for Dong Sithouane SPF:

Biodiversity monitoring can easily be an ‘add-on’ component to the VFA’s other

monitoring activities. Although focus should be on key wildlife species, observations

of other wildlife and human activities should also be recorded. A simple data

recording format currently in use in five NBCAs (appendices IV & V) in Lao PDR

can be used or adapted for use by the VFAs.

Biodiversity monitoring must be carried out regularly on a monthly basis, to observe

trends, if any. Monitoring patrols should focus on main existing wildlife trails, along

waterways, and at mineral licks. These are areas of wildlife concentration.

Information gathering should not, however, be restricted during the monitoring

activity alone. Information should also be gathered opportunistically i.e., when

carrying out other activities or when reported by fellow residents of Dong Sithouane

SPF. A ‘record book’ could be maintained in the villages, where such information

can be recorded and later disseminated. Information to be included can comprise date

of observation, species, evidence, location, name of person/persons reporting, and

remarks/comments.

Imperative to this village-based monitoring system, is to carry out a short training course

for members of the VFAs, both in the ‘classroom’ and in the field, translating theory

to practice. Even with simple data recording formats, training is needed to ensure

legibility and consistency of data recorded, lest the very idea of monitoring is

defeated. Training of village-based monitoring can follow that implemented for three

villages in Nakai - Nam Theun NBCA (Boonratana, 1998). After a year following the

implementation of biodiversity monitoring activities, another short training course is

needed to interpret the data collected, assessing trends in wildlife records and threats.

Training activities should also include the DAFO staff, as they similarly need to

understand the activities carried out by the VFAs. This ‘data interpretation’ training

can follow that carried out for Dong Hua Sao and Phou Xiang Thong NBCAs

(Boonratana, 1999).

27

5. Mitigate threats to wildlife and habitats:

Currently recognizable threats to biodiversity conservation in Dong Sithouane SPF are

forest fires, wildlife hunting and the possible transfer of diseases from domestic cattle

to the wild cattle population. To address forest fires, a comprehensive study on fire

ecology should be carried out. Following that, feasible and practicable management

plan and activities based on mitigation measures needed must be drawn up and

implemented. Also, it may be desirable to train villagers in fire prevention and

control. Guns, other than those issued to the militia, should be handed over to the

provincial authorities. Also, the militia should use their guns only for enforcing

security, and not for hunting. Current practices allow domestic cattle to graze far into

the proposed special conservation management zone. These cattle, some of which

have been observed suffering from ‘mouth and foot’ disease, may potentially transfer

it to the wild cattle.

6. Extend ‘village forestry’ program to totally cover Dong Sithouane SPF:

FOMACOP should extend its activities to include the villages in the eastern part of

the Dong Sithouane SPF. This is an important preliminary activity to ensure

biodiversity conservation needs are addressed, and benefits of village forestry in the

SPF are shared with those villages whose areas should fall partly or totally within the

proposed ‘special conservation management zone’. For those villages that cannot, by

default of the zone’s establishment, harvest timber and NTFP, should earn their share

of shared benefits through their commitment to patrolling and monitoring.

4.3 CONCLUSIONA rapid participatory wildlife diversity assessment in Dong Sithouane SPF has resulted in a

provisional list of at least 87 species, of which 13 are Globally Threatened species. The mammal

diversity value of the SPF is probably at par to the designated protected areas in the province,

although the density of wildlife population and amount of viable wildlife habitat available in the

SPF are very likely much lower than those in the protected areas. Mammal diversity found in the

SPF are, therefore, better represented in the established NBCAs. Thus, at the national level,

Dong Sithouane SPF does not rank high as a conservation priority area. Nevertheless,

biodiversity conservation in Dong Sithouane SPF can be addressed by establishing a ‘special

28

conservation management zone’ and ‘ conservation rules and regulations’. Known and clear

benefits from ‘village forestry’ are important incentives that will ensure the villagers’

commitment towards addressing the conservation needs of biodiversity in the SPF. If

conservation of biodiversity in Dong Sithouane SPF can be successfully achieved, then it might

be worth applying the ‘village forestry’ concept to Lao PDR’s protected areas.

29

REFERENCES

Boonratana, R. 1998. Nakai – Nam Theun Conservation Project [Phase 2]: Wildlife monitoringtechniques and participatory conservation at Nakai – Nam Theun NBCA. Vientiane:IUCN/WCS.

Boonratana, R. 1999. Biodiversity Conservation Project: Training in Field Techniques and DataAnalysis. Vientiane: IUCN/BCP.

Corbet, G.B. and J.E. Hill.1992. Mammals of the Indomalayan Region: a systematic review.London and Oxford: Natural History Museum Publications and Oxford University Press.

Duckworth, J.W., R.E. Salter, and K. Khounboline (comps). 1999. Wildlife in Lao PDR: 1999Status Report. Vientiane: IUCN/WCS/CPAWM.

FOMACOP. 1998. Training Course on Procedures for Registering Village ForestryAssociations, Approving Village Forest Management Plans, and Signing Village ForestManagement Contracts. Savannakhet: FOMACOP.

Inskipp, T.P., N. Lindsey and W. Duckworth. 1996. An annonated checklist of the birds of theOriental Region. Sandy: Oriental Bird Club.

IUCN. 1996. 1996 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. Gland and Cambridge: IUCN.Phanthanousy, B. and M. Katila. 1999. Village Forestry in Laos: Towards Sustainable Forest

Management. Unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting of the Forest, Trees andPeople Program in Lao PDR from Oct. 22 - Dec. 3, 1999.

Thewlis, R.M, R.J. Timmins, T.D. Evans, and J.W. Duckworth. 1998. The conservation status ofbirds in Laos: a review of key species. Bird Conserv. Internat. 8 (suppl): 1-159.

WCMC. 1998. Checklist of CITES species. Cambridge: CITES and WCMC.

30

APPENDIX I: List of Wildlife Reported and/or Recorded at Dong Sithouane SPF, and

Their Local Names.

Evidence:1 = Sighting (including captive animals,carcasses, trophies & other remains)

6 = Scrapes/Claw Marks

2 = Tracks 7 = Feeding Signs3 = Vocalization 8 = Other (e.g., wallows, bathing pools, mud

smears, antler & horn marks, etc.)4 = Scat/Dung 9 = Verbal report5 = Nests

Mammals14:Common name Scientific name Lao name15 Katang name16 EvidencePangolin spp. Manis spp. Lin Maan-juel 9Chinese pangolin(?) Manis pendactyla(?) Lin ngoua Maan-juel 9Sunda pangolin(?) Manis javanica(?) Lin khwaai Maan-juel 9Northern treeshrew Tupaia belangeri Kachon Se-luay; Se-

lueh1,9

Primate spp. Ling Tamirr 9Loris spp. Nyticebus spp. Ling lom Tamirr kujaal 9Slow loris(?) Nycticebus coucang(?) Ling lom Tamirr kujaal 9Pygmy loris(?) Nycticebus pygmaeus(?) Ling lom Tamirr kujaal 9Macaque spp. Macaca spp. Ling Tamirr 9Pig-tailed macaque Macaca nemestrina Khamut; ling

haang san;ling houa taap

Tamirrkhamut;Tamirr choup;Tamirr khamit

1,9

Rhesus macaque Macaca mulatta Ling haangnyao

Tamirr ratoi 1,9

Silvered langur Semnopithecus cristatus Talung Talung 9Douc langur Pygathrix nemaeus Khadaeng;

Khaeng daengSab-lai; Soy-blai

9

Gibbon spp. Hylobates spp. Thanee Kouan 9White-cheekedcrested gibbon(?)

Hylobates leucogenys(?) Thanee Kouan 9

Golden jackal Canis aureus Ma chok Chi-chor 9Dhole Cuon alpinus Ma nai Se-kong 9Bear sp. Ursus sp. Mi 9Asiatic black bear Ursus thibetanus Meauy Se-kaow 9Sun bear Ursus malayanus Mi Se-koup; Te-

sai9

14 Sequence and names of species follow Corbett and Hill (1992), comparable to Duckworth et al., (1999).15It must be emphasized here that the Lao names for species recorded/reported are correct (unless stated otherwise)only for the Dong Sithouane SPF, and may differ with other areas of Lao PDR. [Note: see text in section 4.2.1]16The predominant Lao Theung ethnic group in Dong Sithouane SPF. [Note: some names vary between villages.]

31

Yellow throatedmarten(?)

Martes flavigula Haen khreua Sampiak pong-kroh?

9

Hog badger Arctonyx collaris Mou lung Paruul 9Ferret badger sp.(?) Melogale sp.(?) Haen kapoo Sampiak

ariang9

Otter spp. Naak Pa haer 9Civet spp. Haen Sampiak 9Large Indian civet(?)

Viverra zibetha(?) Haen haangkaan

Sampiak haangkaan

9

Common palm civet Paradoxurushermaphrodatus

Haen om Sampiak om 9

?? Haen dok lao 9?? Haen daang 9?? Haen phaeng Sampiak

phaeng9

?? Haen i-tan Sampiakariang

9

?? Haen houbaang

9

?? Haen song 9?? Haen jong 9?? Haen khimin 9Binturong Arctictis binturong Haen khaw;

Haen haangkhut

Te-nyu 9

Mongoose spp. Herpestes spp. Chon phon Soon-puon 9Small Asianmongoose

Herpestes javanicus Chon phon Soon-puon tiah 9

Crab-eatingmongoose

Herpestes urva Chon phon Soon-puontreung

9

Leopard cat Prionailurus bengalensis Seua nok;Seua meo

Meo treung;Kola meo;Kola chaem

9

Marbled cat? Pardofelis marmorata? Seua mungmang

9

Asian golden cat? Catopuma temmincki? Seua faai;Seua leuang

Asang 9

Clouded leopard(?) Pardofelis nebulosa(?) Seua kaloot 9Leopard Panthera pardus Seua dao Asang 9Tiger Panthera tigris Seua nyai;

Seua krongAsang; Kolapeut

9

Asian elephant? Elephas maximus? Saang Aa-chiang 9Wild pig(?) Sus scrofa(?) Mou paa Alik krouang 2,4,7,8,9Lesser orientalchevrotain

Tragulus javanicus Kai Se-ang koi 9

Sambar deer Cervus unicolor Kouang Yert; Yourt 2,4,8,9Muntjac spp. Muntiacus spp. Faan Poih 4,9Red muntjac Muntiacus muntjak Faan; Faan Poih tia 1,9

32

thamada; Faankadow

Large-antleredmuntjac

Muntiacus vuquangensis Faan dong;Faan nawa

Poih treung 9

Gaur Bos gaurus Meauy;Khouay paa

Sa-ngorr 2,4,9

Banteng Bos javanicus Ngoua paa;ngoua kathing

Ta-keng; Ta-keng krouang

9

Serow Naemorhedus sumatrensis Nyeuang Keh 9Squirrel spp. Kahok ProokBlack giant squirrel Ratufa bicolor Kahok mo;

Khadaang;Kahok daang

Te-song 9

Variable squirrel(?) Callosciurus finlaysonii(?) Kerhok daeng Prook 9Striped squirrel Tamiops sp. Kalaen Te-lia 9Berdmore’s squirrel Menetes berdmorei Katae Kraaih 9Flying squirrel sp. Baang 9(Larger type) flyingsquirrel sp.

Petaurista philippensis(?) Baang loua;Baang nyai

Te-jurr 9

Phayre’ flyingsquirrel

Hylopetes phayrei Baang tong;Baang noi

Te-liang 1,9

East Asianporcupine

Hystrix brachyura Min Se-keay 1,9

Asiatic brush-tailedporcupine

Atherurus macrourus Hon Se-kai 1,9

Siamese hare(?) Lepus peguensis(?) Katai Te-sai 4,9

Birds17:Common name Scientific name Local Lao name EvidenceChinese francolin Fracolinus pintadeanus Nok katha dong 1,9Scaly-breasted partridge Arborophilia charltonii Nok khaw 1,3,9Red junglefowl Gallus gallus Kai pa 1,3,9Black-headed woodpecker Picus erythropygius Nok sai 1Lineated barbet Megalaima lineata Nok kondok 1,3Oriental pied hornbill Anthracoceros albirostris Nok kaeng 1,9Hornbill sp. Nok kok 9Common hoopoe Upupa epops Nok sai hon kuan 1Indian roller Coracias benghalensis Nok khaochao 1White-throated kingfisher Halcyon pileata Nok kataen 1Greater coucal Centropus sinensis Nok kapoot 1,9Lesser coucal Centropus bengalensis Nok kapoot 1Red-breasted parakeet Psittacula alexandri Nok khaek 1Spotted dove Streptopelia tranquebarica Nok khao 1Red-wattled lapwing Vanellus vanellus Nok tae-tae 1,3Chinese pond heron Ardeola bacchus Nok nyaang 1Red-billed blue magpie Urocissa erythrorhyncha Nok khangkhaet 1 17 Sequence and names follow Inskipp et al. (1996), comparable to Duckworth et al., (1999).

33

Large-billed crow Corvus macrorhynchos Nok kaa 1Black drongo Dicrurus macrocerus Nok saew 1Greater racket-tailed drongo Dicrurus paradiseus Nok saew 1Oriental magpie robin Copsychus saularis 1Black collared starling Sturnus nugricollis Nok ieang mong 1Common myna Acridotheres tristis Nok ieang 1White-vented myna Acridotheres javanicus Nok ieang 1Hill myna Gracula religiosa Nok sieang kaa 1White-crestedlaughingthrush

Garrulax leucolophus Nok kathoua 1

White wagtail Motacilla alba Nok kadaep dau 1Yellow wagtail Motacilla flava Nok kadaep dau 1

Reptiles and Amphibians18:Common name Scientific name Local Lao name Evidence

Rana nigrovittata Khiat 1Rana limnocharis Khiat 1Hoplobatrachus rugulosa Kob 1Microhyla ornata Khiat 1Microhyla berdmorei Khiat 1Microhyla pulchra Khiat 1Mabuya multifasciata Ki-ko 1Calotes versicolor Kapom 1

Water dragon Physignathus cocincinus Kathang 9Bengal monitor Varanus bengalensis Laan 9Water monitor Varanus salvator Hiea 3,9Python sp. Python sp. Ngou leam 9King cobra Ophiophagus hannah Chong-ang 9Siamese crocodile Crocodylus siamensis Khae 9

Note:(?) = animal recorded/reported most likely belongs to the species listed; e.g., Chinese

pangolin? = provisional; subject to confirmation; e.g., Asian golden cat?? = indeterminate

18See Bryan L. Stuart in Duckworth et al., (1999).

34

APPENDIX II: Villages Interviewed and Animals Reported

1. Ban Nasano[16บ 02’20”N/105บ 43’15”E]

8. Ban Kamep Noy[16บ 06’57”N/106บ 08’22”E]

15. Ban Lavang Gnai[16บ 14’30”N/105บ 55’35”E]

2. Ban Napheu[16บ 07’56”N/105บ 49’13”E]

9. Ban Mai Xe[16บ 02’05”N/105บ 49’16”E]

16. Ban Mai No.23[16บ 11’30”N/106บ 00’05”E]

3. Ban Khoktheuleu[16บ 08’40”N/105บ 48’44”E]

10. Ban Napasat[15บ 59’29”N/105บ 57’02”E]

17. Ban Bakkhoumkham[16บ 09’55”N/105บ 41’38”E]

4. Ban Houay Lai[16บ 12’33”N/105บ 52’49”E]

11. Ban Phoumali[16บ 01’53”N/105บ 58’37”E]

18. Ban Nathamou[16บ 10’13”N/105บ 35’53”E]

5. Ban Padong (Lanong)[16บ 10’53”N/105บ 59’28”E]

12. Ban Xe Ku[16บ 02’22”N/106บ 02’45”E]

19. Ban Naklung[16บ 11’35”N/105บ 30’59”E]

6. Ban Nahangkhae[16บ 01’52”N/105บ 30’56”E]

13. Ban Hintangkhok[16บ 11’06”N/105บ 47’07”E]

20. Ban Nongkhone[16บ 05’32”N/105บ 26’32”E]

7. Ban Naxuak[16บ 01’00”N/105บ 40’10”E]

14. Ban Nadokthong[16บ 12’17”N/105บ 49’35”E]

Species/Village 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.Pangolin sp. ! + + x + # + + + + + + +Chinese pangolin(?) + + + + + + +Sunda pangolin(?) + + + + + + +Northern treeshrew + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Loris sp. + + + + + + + + + +Slow loris(?) + + + + + + + + + +Pygmy loris(?) + + + + + + - + + +Pig-tailed macaque + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Rhesus macaque + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Silvered langur + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Douc langur + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +White-cheekedcrested gibbon(?)

+ + + + + + x + + - + + + + - + + + + x

Golden jackal + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Dhole + + + + + + + + + + + + - + + + + + - +Bear sp. ! ! + + ! + + -Asiatic black bear + + ! ! ! + + x + ! ! !Sun bear + + + + + + + + + + + +Haen khreua[Yellow throatedmarten(?)]

- + + - + - ! - + + + + + - - + - - - -

Hog badger + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + x +Haen kapoo [Ferretbadger(?)]

- - - - + + + + - - - + - - + - - + + +

Otter sp. - - x # # - - # # x - # - - # # - - - -Large Indian civet(?) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Common palm civet + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Haen phaeng?? - + + - + + - + + + + + - + - + + + - +Haen daang?? - + + - + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Haen dok lao?? + + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + + -

35

Haen i-tan?? - - + - + - - - + + - - + - - - - + - +Haen khimin?? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - -Haen hou baang?? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +Haen song?? - - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - - - -Haen jong?? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + -Binturong ! + + + + + + + + + + + - - + + + + - -Small Asianmongoose

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Crab-eatingmongoose

- - - - - - + - + + - - - x - - + - + +

Leopard cat + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Seua mung-mang[Marbled cat?]

- - - - - - - + - - - - - + - + - - - -

Seua leuang [Asiangolden cat?]

- + + + + - - - + - - + - - - + - - - -

Seua kaloot[Clouded leopard(?)]

- + + # + + # + - + ! + - + + + - - - -

Leopard ! ! + # + ! # + x # # + # + # + ! - # !Tiger + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + - + !Seua cham-lod?? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - - - -Asian elephant? x x x x c x x x x x x x x x x c x x x xWild pig + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Lesser orientalchevrotain

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Sambar deer - + + + + + x + + + + + + + + + + + + xRed muntjac + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Large-antleredmuntjac

- - + - + + + - + - - + - - + - - - -

Gaur ! + + + + x x + + + + + + + + + + + x xBanteng ! ! + + + + + + + + - + + + + + x x x xSerow - # + - # - ! + - + - + - ! + - - - - -Black giant squirrel ! + + # + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Variable squirrel(?) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Striped squirrel + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Berdmore’s squirrel + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +(Larger type) flyingsquirrel

+ + + # + + + - + + + + + + + + + + -

Phayre’ flyingsquirrel

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

East Asianporcupine

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Asiatic brush-tailedporcupine

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Siamese hare(?) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Green peafowl x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xLarge hornbill sp. - - - - ! ! x + x + + + - + + x + x x xOriental piedhornbill

+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Water dragon + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Bengal monitor + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Water monitor + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Python sp. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

36

King cobra + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Siamese crocodile(?) - - - - # - - # - - - + - - + x - - - -

Key:+ = reported extant, with evidence encountered in recent years (c. 5 yrs)# = reported extant, but no evidence encountered in recent yearsx = none reported in recent years and/or locally extirpated- = not reported! = uncertain (either respondents were uncertain or team was uncertain of respondents’

answers)

Note:(?) = animal recorded/reported most likely belongs to the species listed; e.g., Chinese

pangolin? = provisional; subject to confirmation; e.g., Asian golden cat?? = indeterminate

37

APPENDIX III: Conservation Significance of Wildlife Recorded/Reported at Dong

Sithouane SPF

Mammals:Common name Scientific name IUCN19 CITES20 Lao PDR21

Chinese pangolin(?) Manis pendactyla(?) NT II RSunda pangolin(?) Manis javanica(?) NT II RNorthern treeshrew Tupaia belangeri IISlow loris(?) Nycticebus coucang(?) II LKPygmy loris(?) Nycticebus pygmaeus(?) V II LKPig-tailed macaque Macaca nemestrina V II PRRhesus macaque Macaca mulatta II RSilvered langur Semnopithecus cristatus NT II RDouc langur Pygathrix nemaeus E I RWhite-cheeked crestedgibbon(?)

Hylobates leucogenys(?) DD I PR

Golden jackal Canis aureus LKDhole Cuon alpinus V II RAsiatic black bear Ursus thibetanus V I RSun bear Ursus malayanus DD I RHog badger Arctonyx collaris LKFerret badger sp. Melogale sp. LKOtter sp. I/II CR/RBinturong Arctictis binturong RLeopard cat Prionailurus bengalensis IIAsian golden cat? Catopuma temmincki? NT I LKMarbled cat? Pardofelis marmorata? DD I LKClouded leopard(?) Pardofelis nebulosa(?) V I RLeopard Panthera pardus I RTiger Panthera tigris E I RAsian elephant? Elephas maximus E I RWild pig Sus scrofa(?) LKSambar deer Cervus unicolor RLarge-antlered muntjac Muntiacus vuquangensis V I PRGaur Bos gaurus V I RBanteng Bos javanicus E RSerow Naemorhedus sumatrensis V I PRBlack giant squirrel Ratufa bicolor II PRPhayre’ flying squirrel Hylopetes phayrei LKEast Asian porcupine Hystrix brachyura V NRWater dragon Physignathus cocincinus PR

19 1996 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals (IUCN, 1996).20 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (WCMC, 1998).21 Lao PDR Risk Categories (Thewlis et al.,1998 & Duckworth et al., 1999)

38

Bengal monitor Varanus bengalensis I PRWater monitor Varanus salvator II PRPython sp. Python sp. NT II PRKing cobra Ophiophagus hannah II PRSiamese crocodile Crocodylus siamensis C I R

Hoplobatrachus rugulosa II

Conservation Significance:IUCN C = Globally threatened - Critical (the species faces an extremely high risk of

extinction in the wild in the immediate future).E = Globally threatened - Endangered (the taxon is facing a very high risk of

extinction in the wild in the near future).V = Globally threatened - Vulnerable (the taxon is facing a high risk of extinction in

the wild in the medium-term future).NT = Near Threatened (the taxon is close to qualifying for Vulnerable).DD = Data Deficient (a taxon for which there is inadequate information to make a

direct or indirect assessment of its risk of global extinction in the wild).CITES I = Appendix I (Species threatened with extinction which are or may be affected by

trade. Trade in specimens between parties is only authorised in exceptionalcircustances, although import and export for scientific purposes may bepermitted.)

II = Appendix II (Species which although not necessarily now threatened withextinction may become so unless trade in specimens is subject to strict regulationin order to avoid overutilisation. Species may also be listed in Appendix IIbecause of their similarity to more threatened species, as an aid to enforcement.Commercial trade in wild specimens listed in Appendix II is permitted betweenmembers of the convention, but is controlled and monitored through a licensingsystem.)

Lao PDR R = at Risk (Species approximately equivalent to the Globally Threatened species ofIUCN.)

PR = Potentially at Risk (Species suspected to be at Risk, but lacking informationon threats and status, or almost at Risk.)

CR = Conditionally at Risk (Globally Threatened species of IUCN that mightpossibly be present.)

LK = Little Known (Species whose conservation status cannot currently beassessed.)

NR = Not at Risk.

Note:(?) = animal recorded/reported most likely belongs to the species listed; e.g., Chinese

pangolin? = provisional; subject to confirmation; e.g., Asian golden cat

39

APPENDIX IV: Wildlife Data Recording Format

Location:...........................………………………………….......................... Date:………………...Time Start:….......……… Time End:....…................. Distance Covered:...........................................Personnel:.............................................................……….…….......……………......................……Evidence:1.Sighting2.Tracks3.Vocalization4.Scat/Dung5.Nests6.Scrapes/Claw Marks

7.Feeding Signs8.Other:- Wallows- Bathing Pools- Mud Smears- Antler/Horn marks9.Reliable Report

Time Species Location Evidence Remarks

40

APPENDIX V: Human/Habitat Impact Data Recording Format

Location:...........................…………………………..................……… Date:…………..............….Time Start:……….....… Time End:............…......... Distance Covered:.............................................Personnel:.......................................................................……….………………..................………A: Hunting Activities1. Traps/Snares2. Guns/Crossbows3. Fishing gear4. Hunting dogs5. Camps6. Wildlife7. Other

B: Non-Hunting Activities1. Forest clearance2. Timber-cutting3. Huts4. NTFP collection5. Livestock grazing6. House construction7. Other

Time Activity Location* Active/Non-active Remarks**

*Latitude and longitude, if possible**To also include information on the number of persons, their ethnic group, purpose, residence,names, etc.

41

APPENDIX VI: Brief Discussion on Methodology

Given that time was a constraint, and the main objective was to obtain an assessment of the

biodiversity values of Dong Sithouane SPF, the methodology used was hence apt. Furthermore,

local knowledge is an important source of information about wildlife presence in any area, and is

essential towards the planning of field surveys. Village-based PWA is not, however, without its

limitations. Hence, it should not be used as substitute to field biological surveys.

The main limitation encountered during this study was with regard to the Lao names for wildlife

species. There are several wildlife species with no ‘official’ Lao names. Many of the ‘official’

Lao names currently in use by the Department of Forestry and conservation non-governmental

organizations are borrowed from the Thai language, therefore, unfamiliar to the general Lao

public. For example, “seua laai maek” in Thai means clouded leopard, but “seua laai maek” is

not known to the general Lao public. To overcome this, respondents were requested to name and

describe all cat species known to be present in Dong Sithouane SPF.

Likewise, as many species in the Lao language have a common generic name, but no specific

name, it was adequate to refer to their taxonomic group. Following that, if that taxonomic group

was present, further inquiries were made. For example, the crab-eating mongoose and the small

Asian mongoose are both known as “chon-phon” in Lao. Thus, respondents were asked to

describe the mongoose/mongooses present.

Also, although some species’ names are both there in Lao and Thai, they do not necessarily refer

to the same species. “Kathing” in Thai refers to gaur, but “ngoua kathing” in some parts of Lao

PDR refers to banteng, although the more common name in Lao for banteng is “ngoua paa”.

Furthermore, within the Lao language, the same name can refer to different species. “Khouay

paa” in Lao usually refer to wild water buffalo, but in many parts of Lao, it is synonymously

used to refer to gaur, which otherwise is commonly known as “meauy”. Frequently, common

Lao names for a species may locally refer to another species in the absence of the former. Long-

tailed macaque is widely referred to as “ling haang nyao”, but in the absence of long-tailed

macaques, the same Lao name can refer to any other ‘long-tailed’ macaques, such as rhesus or

Assamese macaques. In Dong Sithouane SPF, “ling haang nyao” refers to rhesus macaques.

42

Thus, in conducting interviews, it is important to treat Thai and Lao languages as two distinct

languages to avoid errors in species identification. Secondly, the interviewer must have had

some training in wildlife biology, familiar with species description, behavior and ecology, to

assist in correct identification. Finally, as there is currently no Lao wildlife biologist, it is

therefore important that interviewers must be proficient in the usage of the Lao language, to

avoid misinterpretation of information.

Based on past experiences in Indochina, Thailand and Borneo, respondents were not asked to

identify species from illustrations (drawings, photographs, etc.) at the start of the PWA. It was

observed that in many parts of the region, experienced hunters could not identify common

species or misidentified many species illustrated. This is primarily because these simple

communities have little exposure to such illustrations, hence are not able to discern the size and

shape of those wildlife illustrated, unless it is highly distinguishable (e.g., tiger and elephant).

Nevertheless, illustrations were used during this study, but only at the end of the main semi-

structured interviews.

Although the interviews were primarily addressed to village elders and individuals with forest

experience, children and the women frequently participated, and most often than not frequently

contributed useful information. This sort of participation may likely lay the groundwork for

future conservation awareness and education.

43

APPENDIX VII: Study’s Itinerary

Date Location Activity

9/1/00 Travel RB arrives Vientiane.

10-11/1/00 Vientiane Primary preparations

10/1/00 Vientiane RB meets Bouahong Phanthanousy (FOMACOP NationalDirector), Bouaphanh, Marko Katila (CTA for ForestManagement), Vannalack Sengsavanh. Introductions & briefingby FOMACOP staff/advisers.

Gather & review existing & relevant literature, information &maps.

11/1/00 Vientiane Preliminary preparation for study (review materials & purchaseadditional topographic maps)

12/1/00 Travel RB & VS arrive Savannakhet.

13-14/1/00 Savannakhet Secondary preparations

13/1/00 Savannakhet RB & VS meet Somsakoune (Project Coordinator). Briefintroductions & briefing.

RB & VS meet Dr. Manuel Bonita (Village Forestry Adviser),Edwin Payuan (Village Forestry Adviser), Vaneska Litz andKongsavanh Chounlamonty. Introductions & briefing byFOMACOP staff/advisers.

Gather further information & materials.

RB & VS review aerial maps, land use maps and topographicmaps of DSSPF.

RB, VS & KC (team) discuss appropriate plan of field activities,logistics, & methodology.

14/1/00 Savannakhet RB & VS meet Boonyot Namsena & Puthavong Sitthidet(Deputiesto the Project Coordinator). Introductions & briefing.

RB gathers more information from FOMACOP advisers.

RB & KC meet Sengpaseut Southammavong (Deputy ForestySection of PAFO). Introductions & briefing.

VS & KC prepare travel documents, equipment, supplies and otherlogistics.

15-30/1/00 DSSPF Field work

15/1/00 Travel RB, VS & KC arrive Muang Thapanthong (after losing more thanhalf a day in Savannakhet repairing an apparently ‘repaired and

44

serviced’ vehicle.

16/1/00 DSSPF Team meets Kongsawaeng Buttawong (Deputy DAFO).Introductions, briefing & registration with police.

Village PWA at Ban Nasano, Ban Napheu, & Ban Khoktheuleu.

17-19/1/00 DSSPF Field PWA at Dong Aa Chien

20/1/00 DSSPF Village PWA at Ban Houay Lai & Ban Padong.

21/1/00 DSSPF Village PWA at Ban Nahangkhae & Ban Naxuat

22/1/00 DSSPF Village PWA at Ban Kamep Noy (Tumlan District, SalavanProvince).

Field PWA along southern section of Highway No. 23

23/1/00 DSSPF Village PWA at Ban Mai Xe, Ban Napasat & Ban Phoumali

24/1/00 DSSPF Village PWA at Ban Xe Ku

25/1/00 DSSPF Village PWA at Ban Hintangkhok, Ban Nadokthong & BanLavang Gnai.

Field PWA along northern section of Highway No. 23

26/1/00 DSSPF Village PWA at Ban Mai No.23 (Ban Padong Noy)

Field PWA along central section of Highway No. 23

27/1/00 DSSPF PWA at Ban Bakkhoumkham, Ban Nathamou, Ban Nakalung, &Ban Nongkhone.

28/1/00 Savannakhet Team debrief Sikeo (Head Forestry Section, PAFO Savannakhet)

29/1/00 Travel RB & VS return to Vientiane.

30/1-9/2/00 Vientiane Documentation of findings

31/1/00 Vientiane RB & VS debrief Marko Katila

10/2/00 Travel RB departs Vientiane.