Training in Wildlife Survey and Data Analysis For The National Biodiversity Conservation Areas Dong Hua Sao and Phou Xiang Thong

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION PROJECT (75170)
Training in Wildlife Survey and Data Analysis for the

National Biodiversity Conservation Areas
Dong Hua Sao and Phou Xiang Thong
Ramesh Boonratana, PhD.

September 1999
IUCN/BCP
0
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Two levels of training were conducted for the patrolling staff of Dong Hua Sao and Phou
Xiang Thong NBCAs. The focus of the first training was on field craft, basic map reading and
compass use, observing and recording evidence of impacts and wildlife in the field. The main
objective was to able all patrolling staff to plan patrolling trips, orient themselves in the field,
indicate their position on a map and collect/record usable data. This training also served as a
refresher for the senior staff, who had received a similar training 20 months earlier.
This training was achieved fairly quickly and well, as it was a refresher for the senior staff,
and because the senior staff assisted the new staff through the learning process, occasionally
acting as instructor assistants. Both the new and senior staff, however, need to continuously
apply this knowledge while on the job to further improve themselves and the quality of their
work.
The second training focused on data analysis and its use in monitoring. The staff of both
Dong Hua Sao and Phou Xiang Thong NBCAs has systematically compiled records over
several years. Hence, this training aimed at the senior staff being able to produce informative
reports cross referenced to sector maps. They also learnt and practiced searching sector data
for a specific information and presented it in the form of graphs and thematic maps.
Although this exercise proceeded rather slowly, being a totally new an unfamiliar topic, it was
nevertheless successfully achieved. The staff can now be expected to summarize, analyze and
interpret by themselves. Occasional guidance, would, however, ensure the quality of
interpretation.
The need for continuously building the capacity and capability of protected area staff was
further observed through this training program. Only through continuous support and regular
reinforcements, can one hope to produce qualified protected area staff. Most importantly,
relevant district and provincial officials need to take interest and provide support to the
protected area staff. Otherwise, all efforts at capacity building will be defeated.
1
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I sincerely acknowledge Mr. Bounsay Saphangthong, Head of Forestry Division, Champassak
Province, and Mr. Klaus Berkmuller, Field Adviser of IUCN - Biodiversity Conservation
Project, for giving me this opportunity to follow up on a earlier training exercise, and to
provide the senior staff of Dong Hua Sao and Phou Xiang Thong NBCAs with a more
advanced training. Credit is also due to the staff themselves, both old and new, for their
continued efforts and interests. My personal thanks to Klaus for commenting on this
manuscript, and both Klaus and Oonchai for putting me up and keeping me well fed during
the write-up period.
Ramesh Boonratana, Ph.D.
a.k.a. Zimbo
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................... 1

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................................................................... 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................................................................................................... 3
1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. 4
1. 1 Background..........................................................................................................4
1.2 Aims and Objectives .............................................................................................5
1.3 Dong Hua Sao and Phou Xiang Thong NBCAs.....................................................5
2. TRAINING A: FIELD TECHNIQUES .............................................................................. 6
2.1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................6
2.2 Theory Training ....................................................................................................6
2.3 Field Training .......................................................................................................7
2.4 Observations and Assessment ...............................................................................8
2.5 Survey Findings ..................................................................................................10
Table 2.1: List of Participants ...................................................................................12
Table 2.2: Topics of theory training ..........................................................................13
Table 2.3: List of Wildlife Recorded.........................................................................14
3. TRAINING B: ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION ........................................................ 15
3.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................15
3.2 Observations .......................................................................................................16
3.3 Outputs ...............................................................................................................16
3.4 Results ................................................................................................................17
Table 3.1: Number of records by sector and month for Dong Hua Sao NBCA in 1996
.................................................................................................................................21
.................................................................................................................................23
.................................................................................................................................25
Table 3.5 Summarized sector records for Dong Hua Sao NBCA for 1996.................29
Table 3.8 Summarized sector records for Dong Hua Sao NBCA for 1999 (until August
1999) ........................................................................................................................32
Table 3.9 Summarized sector records for Dong Hua Sao NBCA for 1996 - 1999 (until
August 1999) ............................................................................................................33
4. CONCLUDING DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATIONS............................................ 35
4.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................35
4.2 Discussion...........................................................................................................35
4.3 Recommendations...............................................................................................36
4.4 Conclusion..........................................................................................................38
LITERATURE CITED......................................................................................................... 39
Appendix I: Terms of Reference........................................................................................... 40
Appendix II: Consultant’s Itinerary ...................................................................................... 42
3
1. INTRODUCTION
1. 1 Background
An information gathering system has been developed and established in both Dong Hua Sao
and Phou Xiang Thong NBCAs1. Systematically and regularly gathering information is an
important element of the management strategy pursued under the Biodiversity Conservation
Project (75710) at both the protected areas (K. Berkmuller, pers. comm.). The system is meant
to provide information on the presence and distribution of wildlife species and habitats, and
on the use of natural resources by people. This information will then provide a ‘picture’
highlighting the NBCAs’ values and potentials in terms of the distribution and concentration
of their biodiversity and natural resources. Furthermore, the ‘picture’ will similarly highlight
the type, severity, and distribution of impacts and threats to the integrity of the NBCAs. This
information, gathered over time will further allow the status of wildlife and habitat to be
monitored. Thus, there is a major need for a continuing improvement of the data gathering
process, and the quality and quantity of the data.
Some of the current patrolling and monitoring staff of both NBCAs have previously received
training in field techniques (Boonratana, 1988), which resulted in a marked improvement of
data collecting. The training2 was carried out in both Dong Hua Sao and Phou Xiang Thong
NBCAs from November 1997 to January 1998.
The training was conducted both in the classroom and in the field. The classroom training
comprised two theory sessions totaling six days. The initial theory training prepared the
trainees for the field, and comprised fundamentals on conservation biology, wildlife ecology
and animal behavior; the use of maps and compass; wildlife survey and data collection
techniques; and report-writing. The second theory session, held at the end of the exercise
allowed the topics learnt during the initial theory training and the training in the field to be
reviewed. Both theory sessions were conducted at the field station of Dong Hua Sao NBCA.
The field training comprised four field trips of about 7-8 days each, three to Dong Hua Sao
NBCA and one to Phou Xiang Thong NBCA. In the field, trainees carried out ‘on-the-job’
surveys for wildlife and impacts, applying techniques learnt during the initial theory training.
By the end of the 97/98 training session, trainees were able to independently plan and carry
out wildlife surveys and observations, but were still in need of frequent reinforcement and
supervision to maximize their efforts in the field, and be able to collect quality data. Topics
learnt during the exercise that still needed strengthening and continued practice include the
use of map and compass, wildlife observations and surveys, and data reporting. It was
recommended then that similar on the job training should be conducted at least once a year,
preferably twice, for three consecutive years in order to produce fully qualified and effective
patrolling team.
Thus, ‘trained’ staff would, however, benefit from a refresher training course to maintain that
improvement. Also, there is a need for the newly employed staff to receive a similar training,
as the senior staff could not pass on much of the skills. Furthermore, there is an equally
important need to train the staff at another level - training in data analysis and interpretation,
hence preparing them towards management planning and decision-making (see appendix I for
Terms of Reference).
1NBCA = National Biodiversity Conservation Area

2From hereon referred to as the 97/98 training program.
4
1.2 Aims and Objectives
To provide training to the staff of Dong Hua Sao and Phou Xiang Thong NBCAs in:
• use of map and compass, wildlife and impact survey, data recording, and field craft;
• data management, analysis, and interpretation, followed by using the findings to draw
conclusions and future management plans.
1.3 Dong Hua Sao and Phou Xiang Thong NBCAs

Dong Hua Sao NBCA covering an area of 1,100 km², is located within Bachieng, Pakxong
and Pathoumphon Districts in Champassak Province, between 14°50’-15°11’N and 105°55’-
106°18’E. The vegetation comprises mainly of evergreen forest, mixed deciduous forest, and
dry dipterocarp forest. The drainage is westwards into the Mekong River. Lakes, ponds and
wetlands are important features in the lowland of the NBCA. The NBCA have elevations
mainly ranging from 200 - 1000 m, and much of the upland areas form a part of the southern
Bolavens plateau (Berkmuller et al., 1995).
Phou Xiang Thong NBCA, covering 1,200 km², is located between 15°19’-15°52’N and 106°
29’-106°47’E. The upper two-thirds of the NBCA is in Salavan Province and its lower one-
third in Champassak Province, within the districts of Lakhonpheng, Khongxedon, and
Xanasombun. The main habitat types comprise mixed deciduous forest, evergreen forest, and
rocky flats. The drainage is similarly westwards into the Mekong River, but much of the
NBCA’s elevations lie below 500 m (Berkmuller et al., 1995).
5
2. TRAINING A: FIELD TECHNIQUES
2.1 Introduction
Training in field techniques primarily focused on familiarizing the new staff at basic skills in
map reading and compass use, observing and recording wildlife presence and impacts, and on
field craft. This training also served as a refresher for staff who had received a similar, but
more intensive training about 20 months earlier (Boonratana, 1998). With this training, it is
expected that the staff will be able to organize and plan field trips, orient themselves in the
field, indicate important locations/evidence on a map, and record significant data. Training in
field techniques was carried out both in the ‘theory’ and in the field, putting the theories learnt
into practice.
2.2 Theory Training

Theory training was conducted for three days, from September 2-4, at the field station of
Dong Hua Sao NBCA at Ban3 Houay4 Bangliang in Pathumphon District. Besides the staff of
Dong Hua Sao and Phou Xiang Thong NBCAs, participants (table 2.1) also included three
military personnel from military camps close to Dong Hua Sao NBCA. Their participation
was to provide them with a better understanding of the workings and objectives of a protected
area, and the tasks and duties of the NBCA’s patrolling and monitoring unit. They, however,
left early, as the training was inappropriate for personnel at the rank of senior officers.
Theory training began with an introduction to the basics of conservation and protected areas.
Topics that followed included map reading and compass use, surveys for wildlife and impact,
camping and field equipment, note-taking and recording techniques, and report-writing (table
2.2).
Summarizing, the training was designed to assist the patrolling and monitoring staff in
planning their field trips efficiently, to make accurate observations and record these
accurately, and to clearly report their findings in a simple but detailed format.
The theory training topics comprise the following:
• Basics of Conservation: These included brief lectures and discussions on protected areas
and protected area management, conservation of natural resources, conservation biology,
and wildlife ecology and behavior. This was to give the trainees a better understanding the
objectives of the protected area, and the need of reliable and relevant information towards
effectively managing species and protected areas. This topic also served to generate
interest and provided some insight to the necessity and purpose of acquiring the basic
skills in field techniques. In addition, a fundamental understanding of wildlife ecology and
behavior was to assist them in recording observations in the field.
• Map and Compass: This was followed by lessons in the use of maps and compasses.
Lessons in map reading included understanding the map’s description, details, directions,
distances and designations. Lessons in compass use were mainly on taking accurate
bearings and determining back-bearings, followed by the use of compass together with
3
Ban = Village or settlement.
4
Houay = River or stream.
6
maps. Trainees were also given exercises and assignments to improve their map and
compass skills. Basic use of GPS5 and altimeter were also explained.
• Note-taking and Recording Techniques: Lessons in making observations and recording
evidence in the field, including identifying tracks and other wildlife signs were then
imparted to the trainees. Detailed note-taking was emphasized throughout the training.
Trainees were instructed to sketch unidentified wildlife species, tracks, etc., and take
measurements or estimate their sizes in the case of wildlife species sighting. This was to
assist them in species identification.
• Wildlife Surveys and Observations: Only a single method of wildlife survey was
introduced. This method primarily emphasized on diurnal surveys along existing trails. It
yields information on species presence through actual sighting and indirect evidence
(tracks, scats, etc.). Using existing trails have been observed to be effective in covering
large areas in tropical rainforests (Boonratana, 1997). The chances of encountering an
animal or its signs are higher when patrols are carried out along existing animal trails. The
method is practical - simple to understand and carry out, and less time-consuming than
others are. To improve the quality of data collected during wildlife surveys, trainees were
taught how to identify species and cross-refer to field guides.
• Camping and Field Equipment: Preparation and location of campsites, essential field
equipment, and suggested food items for the field was discussed. Without proper planning
and adequate preparation, much field time can be wasted.
• Reporting: The process and format of reporting was described. The report comprised a
one-page written summary highlighting significant finds, the data recording sheets, and
map/maps for locations of key wildlife and wildlife habitats, significant impacts, and
routes traveled. Mammal identifications were referred to Lekagul & McNeely (1977), and
bird identifications were referred to Lekagul & Round (1991) and King et al., (1991).
Although several trainees could not read in English, they nevertheless found the
illustrations useful.
• Monitoring: The concept and purpose of monitoring was explained. This comprised steps
and methods to summarize and evaluate information that primarily include key species,
impacts and effort. Discussions were made on what constitutes a base line information,
then on how to detect changes or trends, followed by the interpretation and use of the
monitoring results.
2.3 Field Training

A six-day ‘on-the-job’ field trip based at Houay Namphak (15°02’21”N/106°02’17”E) in
Dong Hua Sao NBCA, was carried out from September 25-30. The field training could not
immediately follow the theory training due to severe rains, and only one trip was possible due
to a delay caused by human error during Training B (section 3).
Field training primarily focused on developing the staff’s capacity and capability in:
• field surveys for wildlife and key wildlife habitats;
• observing and assessing human and habitat impacts;
• mapping trails and recording locations of wildlife, and evidence of human/habitat impacts;
5
GPS = Global Positioning System
7
• note-taking and recording and reporting information correctly;
• field craft.
Activities carried out related to field training comprised:
• Logistics Preparations and Allocation of Responsibilities: Participants were divided
into four teams of three participants to each team. Care was taken to ascertain that teams
were of similar, if not equal, strengths. Pre- and post-survey briefings were held before
and after the field trip. Responsibilities were issued and objectives were clarified during
the pre-survey briefing. Supply coordinators were responsible for purchasing, preparing,
and maintaining food and equipment. Team leaders were responsible for the team’s and
team members’ equipment, and planning survey routes.
• Daily Trip Preparations: Survey routes were pre-determined from 1:100,000
topographic maps (enlarged sector-wise). Routes normally took the shape of irregular
loops, originating and terminating at campsites. On a rotational basis, one team stayed
back at camp and was given the tasks of maintaining camps, preparing food, gathering
firewood, etc.
• Observations and Recording: Wildlife presence was recorded based on sightings or
other evidence (tracks, scats, vocalizations, etc.). No trapping was carried out. Surveys
were carried out on foot, mainly along existing trails. Team members would
simultaneously search for evidence of wildlife and impact. Speed of travel when carrying
out surveys was maintained between 40 to 60 minutes for every kilometer, with regular
pauses of at least a minute, to observe the general surroundings. This was to avoid missing
cryptic animals or animal signs. Thus, up to an average of eight kilometers per day was
covered on each route by each team. Surveys usually began between 0730h to 0800h and
teams returned to camp between 1530h to 1700h. Type of evidence was recorded, along
with date, time, species, and location. Evidence such as tracks and scats were aged,
described, sketched and measured. Locations of key wildlife evidence and habitats, and
impacts were determined using maps and compass, and where feasible, a GPS unit was
used.
• Daily Debriefing: Debriefing was conducted nightly after meals. This was to review the
day’s findings and plan surveys for the next day. Teams would report the results of
surveys, highlighting their main findings. Team members would alternate on a daily basis
in reporting their findings, to encourage participation by all. Comments and suggestions
were offered to improve their field performance and skills. Discussions were also held on
issues raised by the trainees themselves and by the instructor, hence encouraging
analytical thinking.
2.4 Observations and Assessment

The trainees can be categorized into two major groups, those who had earlier participated in
the 97/98 training and those6 who had not. Both groups comprised NBCA staff with forestry
college training and, project staff7 of variable background. At the start of this training, the first
group had trainees who were fairly good in most topics and those who were still weak in
some topics, particularly map and compass, and data recording. The latter group had an
assortment of those who were totally unfamiliar with all topics to those who were familiar
6
Staff who joined the NBCAs after the 97/98 training program.
7
Villagers from key settlements in or around the NBCAs.
8
with some, but nevertheless still weak. Hence, it was often quite collectively or categorically
difficult to assess the trainees. Nevertheless, at the end of the training, there were individuals
from both groups that were fairly good in most topics and those who were still weak in some
topics. The presence of previously trained staff greatly assisted the new staff learning abilities.
In the field, all trainees worked together quite well, showing good cooperation and division of
labor. Briefings carried out every night in the field improved their performance. Having the
instructor with the different teams on a rotational basis served to reinforce their training. Also,
it allowed doubts and questions that usually arose during the surveys to be immediately
resolved. Furthermore, several field techniques such as detecting and correctly identifying
and/or measuring wildlife signs, and orienteering could only be clarified under field
conditions. Findings made during the ‘on-the-job’ training are presented in section 2.5.
General observations and assessment made during both the theory and field training can
briefly be described as follows:
• Basics of Conservation: Initially, some old staff and most new staff do not fully
understand the concept of conservation of natural resources, protected areas and protected
area management, in particular why conservation is needed and what management is all
about. All, however, knew that ‘conservation was future generations’ as often aired by the
media and coined by the leaders, but never understanding what that phrase actually meant.
Understanding gradually improved through the training. Although made much clearer by
the end of the training program, regular reinforcement is needed, possibly through talks by
visiting conservationists, through nature-related videos and magazines8, lest they fall back
to just ‘parroting’ the phrase again.
• Map and Compass: Not all aspects of map and compass use could be covered. Only
skills needed for them to perform their tasks well were imparted. Both groups showed
variable knowledge and aptitude in the use of map and compass. For some this training
served as a refresher, reinforcing previously acquired skills, for the rest it was a newly
acquired knowledge. The instruction of this topic proceeded fairly well and quickly,
resulting from the presence of the better trainees who assisted the new or weaker trainees.
Some of the previously trained staff was occasionally called upon to assist in the
instruction of this topic. Trainees generally became better at distinguishing landform
features only under field conditions. Most of the trainees could navigate fairly well in the
field. This was because either they had already put their skills to practice after the 97/98
training or they had become familiar with most of the trail network of the NBCA. In most
cases, it was a combination of the two. Nevertheless, major achievement have been made
with regard to the use of map and compass under field conditions compared to the staff’s
initial condition during the 97/98 training - when most were not willing to walk through
the forest without a village guide.
• Note-taking and Data Recording: The quality of note-taking and data recording has
slightly deteriorated from the post 97/98 training program. This was apparent during data
analysis training, where it was observed that the quality of records was maintained for not
more than some months after the 97/98 training. From thereon, records began to lack
certain information that was nevertheless significant. Through the current training, the
quality of note-taking and data recording was again reinforced. Two of the better trainees
8
At present there are no ‘nature’ magazines in the Lao language, but inexpensive magazines in the Thai language (legible to
the NBCA staff) on related subject matter are available.
9
from, one from each NBCA, have now been appointed to check all field reports and
records before they are filed, ensuring that quality of reports/records will be maintained.
• Wildlife and Wildlife Signs: Most trainees could identify key wildlife species, and were
able to distinguish similar-looking mammals and birds fairly well, usually in consultation
with each other and using the field guides. Track and scat identifications were still limited
only to major taxonomic groups. The project staff were generally better at detecting and
identifying wildlife and wildlife signs.
• Equipment Use: Some of the staff was already familiar with taking locations using a GPS
unit. They, however, had difficulties in initializing and setting up the unit after long
periods of disuse, resulting from dead batteries. Hence, step-wise instructions were issued
for ‘first-time’ use of the unit. Also, the senior staff apparently ‘forgot’ that it was
necessary to correctly set the altimeter before taking altitudinal readings, although they
were previously instructed in the 97/98 training program. Many of the new staff did nit
know how to use binoculars, although some have joined the NBCAs for a year or more.
The blame entirely lies with the senior staff, for not having instructed the new staff in their
correct usage.
• Equipment Care: Although all the staff had previously been issued basic field gear such
as machetes and flashlights, most were without them. Also, there has been no
improvement with regard to care and maintenance of field equipment and vehicles. Damp
or wet binoculars, tents and sleeping bags were usually kept in their cases until the next
field trip. GPS units were left with dead and leaking non-alkaline batteries, causing rust in
some units. The only likely explanation is that the staff generally lacks responsibility
towards items that do not personally belong to them. Again, this time around, specific
instructions were issued for the staff to dry and air their tents, sleeping bags and
backpacks immediately on return from the field. One person from each NBCA has been
appointed to maintain binoculars, compasses, altimeters and GPS units. That person will
also have the responsibility of recording the names of the personnel when these equipment
are issued, and their condition on issue and on return.
2.5 Survey Findings

Both intensive and extensive surveys carried out while ‘on-the-job’ yielded very little
information on wildlife but more information on impacts. Wildlife recorded from the area
surveyed (sectors 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10) are presented in table 2.3. In spite of a major concentrated
effort (52 man-days), evidence of large mammals was generally rare, and no primates were
encountered. Only two sets of sambar deer tracks and one set of wild pig tracks were
encountered south of Houay Namphak. Several fresh tracks and dung of gaur were however
observed at a mineral lick in sector 5, north of Houay Namphak. The only mammal that was
sighted with slightly greater frequency was the variable squirrel. Leeches, good indicators of
the terrestrial mammal density, were similarly rare, in spite of the wet ground and daily rains.
This low mammal density was undoubtedly a direct impact of excessive human activities in
the area.
Human intrusion was observed throughout most of the areas surveyed. Old and recent
temporary shelters and campfires were occasionally encountered. The survey teams
collectively recorded encountering an average 20 persons everyday, and every team would
daily encounter at least one active snare line ranging from 300 to 500 meters long. Gunshots
from automatic rifles were heard almost daily, generally from sector 10. Empty shells of
bullets used with AK-47 and M-16 automatic rifles were found on eight occasions, suggesting
10
poaching by members of the security force. Human activities in the area at the time of survey
can broadly be categorized into fishing, hunting, rattan extraction and cultivation. Other
negative impacts observed were the presence of buffaloes and domestic dogs. Most dog scats
were observed to contain rodent hairs and bones, and some were recognized to be those of the
variable squirrel.
One very disappointing observation made during the field trip was that the people
encountered had no regard whatsoever to the patrolling and monitoring staff and to the
NBCA’s rules. Some, particularly from Ban Houay Namphak, even taunted the staff during
the encounters, challenging the staff to take their names and photographs. This attitude was
directly a result of non-action by the district authorities when cases were reported to them by
the patrolling and monitoring staff.
11
Table 2.1: List of Participants
Participant Unit Agency Theory Field (6 Data analysis

training (3 days) training (17
days) days)
Khamviset Patrolling & Monitoring DHS 2 6 14
Nouphone Patrolling & Monitoring DHS 3 6 15
Bounlith Patrolling & Monitoring DHS 3 2
Phonesay Patrolling & Monitoring DHS 3 6 16
Kongkeo Patrolling & Monitoring DHS 3 6 17
Khamkingkeo Patrolling & Monitoring DHS 3 6 15
Samly Patrolling & Monitoring DHS 3 6 17
Bounnpheng Patrolling & Monitoring DHS 3 6 17
Kamtan Extension DHS 3 13
Douangvilay Patrolling & Monitoring PXT 3 6 11
Souksakhone Patrolling & Monitoring PXT 3 6 5
Sayya Patrolling & Monitoring PXT 3 6 16
Sopha Patrolling & Monitoring PXT 3 6 17
Sangvorn Patrolling & Monitoring PXT 3 6 17
Note:
1. Columns 4 to 6 represent the number of days trainees attended the training.
2. Some trainees had valid reasons to be absent from the training for some days, but not for
all days.
12
Table 2.2: Topics of theory training
MAJOR TOPICS SKILLS/SUB-TOPICS
Conservation Basics - protected areas & protected area management;
- conservation of natural resources;
- conservation biology;
- wildlife ecology & animal behavior.
Map & Compass - types and purposes of maps;
- information from maps: description, details, directions, distances &
designations;
- description: map no., edition & location;
- details: colors, vegetation types, drainage & landform features;
- directions: bearings & location determination;
- distances: map scale, linear & non-linear distances;
- designations: names & significance;
- best routes of travel & feasible camp locations;
- types & purposes of compasses;
- taking compass bearings & determining back-bearings;
- altimeter & GPS use;
- assignments & exercises.
Recording Techniques - note-taking, sketches & measurements;
- wildlife & human activity data recording sheets;
- hunter/villager interviews;
- photography;
- specimen collection: scat, skull & skin collection, specimen record
book;
- assignments & exercises.
Wildlife Observation - presence/absence;
- survey routes;
- identifying species & using field guides;
- indirect evidence: tracks & scat (sketch & measure), vocalization,
scrapes, etc.;
- speed of travel & precautionary measures.
Camping & Field - ideal locations & set-up;
Equipment - field equipment list & significance;
- pre-survey preparations.
Data compilation & - tabulation of human activities & wildlife data;
Report-writing - maps for routes traveled, important sightings: wildlife, human
activities, mineral licks, etc.
- scat analysis;
- highlights of significant finds.
Monitoring - purpose;
- methods;
- focus on key species and habitats;
- interpretation.
13
Table 2.3: List of Wildlife Recorded
Evidence:
1.Sighting 7.Feeding Signs
2.Tracks 8.Other:
3.Vocalization - Wallows/Bathing Pools
4.Scat/Dung - Mud Smears
5.Nests - Antler/Horn marks
6.Scrapes/Claw Marks 9.Reliable Report
Common Name Scientific Name Evidence

Gaur Bos gaurus 2, 4
Sambar deer Cervus unicolor 2
Common muntjak Muntiacus muntjak 2
Wild pig Sus scrofa 2
Smooth Otter 2
Civet spp. 4
Leopard cat Felis bengalensis 2
Variable squirrel Callosciurus finlaysonii 1, 2
Indochinese ground squirrel Menetes berdmorei 1
Cambodian striped tree squirrel Tamiops rodolphi 1
Northern treeshrew Tupaia belangeri 1
Pitta spp. 1
Pied hornbill Anthracoceros albirostris 1
Drongo spp. 1
Greater racket-tailed drongo Dicrurus paradiseus 1
Ashy drongo Dicrurus leucophaeus 1
Scaly breasted partridge Aborophilia charltonii 1
Olive-backed woodpecker (?) Dinopium rafflesii 1
Hill Myna Gracula religiosa 1
Green-billed malkoha Phaenicophaeus tristis 1
Chestnut-headed bee-eater Merops leschenaulti 1
Purple heron Ardea purpurea 1
Jungle fowl Gallus gallus 1
Yellow wagtail Motacilla flava 1
Orange-breasted trogon Harpactes oreskios 1
Greater flameback Chrysocolaptes lucidus 1
Puff-throated bulbul (?) Criniger pallidus 1
Yellow-vented bulbul (?) Pycnonotus goiavier 1
Blue whistling thrush Myiophoneus caeruleus 1
Thick-billed pigeon Treron ciuvirostra 1
Chinese pond heron Ardeola bacchus 1
White-rumped shama Copsychus malabaricus 1
Siamese fireback Lophura diardi 1
Blue-eared kingfisher Alcedo meninting 1
Leafbird sp. 1
Reticulated python 1
White-lipped pit viper Trimerusurus albolabris 1
Cobra sp. (?) 1
Indochinese rat snake 1
14
3. TRAINING B: ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION
3.1 Introduction
An advanced-level training session, focusing on data compilation, quality, analysis and
interpretation using actual patrolling and monitoring data collected from March 1996 until
August 1999. This is the first instance in the history of protected areas in Lao PDR where
staff has compiled records systematically over several years. In both Dong Hua Sao and Phou
Xiang Thong NBCAs, there already exist a system whereby field records are:
• gathered in a standard format;
• filed chronologically and by sector;
• accompanied by A3-size map to record survey route, camps and note worthy information
on wildlife and impacts;
• accompanied by a summary on impacts and wildlife observations.
The target trainees were primarily the senior staff of both NBCAs, therefore carrying forward
the process initiated in November 1997 (Boonratana, 1998). Besides data compilation and
analysis, staff was encouraged to discuss the results and draw tentative conclusions, using the
findings towards planning management activities.
The major steps involved in Training B comprised:
• Checking the accuracy and completeness of existing records;
• Compiling a table on wildlife presence by year and sector;
• Compiling a table on impacts by year and sector;
• Compiling the number of records for each key wildlife species by year and sector;
• Compiling a cumulative number of records for key wildlife species for each sector;
• Compiling the number of records for impacts by year and sector;
• Compiling a summarized information on patrolling and monitoring activities by year and
sector;
• Preparing a yearly assessment of coverage in terms of time and space;
• Preparing a trail map for each sector;
• Updating the trail map for the NBCA;
• Preparing a thematic map for key wildlife evidence for each sector by year;
• Preparing a thematic map for key wildlife evidence for the whole NBCA until date;
• Preparing a thematic map for agricultural activities until date for each sector;
• Reviewing and discussing all summarized information and thematic maps;
• Drawing tentative conclusions.
15
3.2 Observations
The first step was more time-consuming than anticipated because many records lacked
important details such as names of personnel, dates, locations of area surveyed, and
accompanying maps. Also, many records were filed wrongly and several were missing. The
problems, however, did not end there. It was discovered that some individuals had apparently
decided upon themselves that ‘organizing records chronologically and sector-wise’ did NOT
mean placing the records where they ought to be, BUT instead meant making ‘corrections’ to
those records. These erroneous ‘corrections’ included changing the time, date and sector
number of those records. This meant that the ‘corrections’ had to be undone, and the records
reorganized again, and all the summarized information on wildlife, impacts, and sectors had
to be completely redone.
This exercise, with the activities listed in section 3.1 and the outputs listed in section 3.3,
allowed a closer scrutiny of the quality of records collected by the staff. Although many
reports had shortcomings, they nevertheless contained usable information and could be
retained.
Examples of incorrect or missing information include:
• The date as ‘31/9/98’ when there’s only 30 days in September, or ‘17/10/99’ whereas the
records collected until date were only until August 1999;
• Missing names of personnel, dates of record, sector number, survey site, location of
sighting or signs of key wildlife species and impacts, and accompanying maps of surveyed
area;
• Incomplete or no measurements, and descriptions of wildlife or their evidence;
• Wrong species identification, occasionally including species not found in Dong Hua Sao
NBCA or in Lao PDR;
• Two overlapping records, instead of one, for a two-man team doing a survey together.
Nevertheless, this exercise provided valuable training to the staff. The staff can now be
expected to repeat this exercise unaided, although there is still that element of carelessness.
Furthermore, there is a strong tendency among staff not to check, double-check, and cross-
check information without being told or guided to do so. Thus, unless they overcome this
attitude and be more responsible towards their commitment, there is every likelihood that
most errors made during this exercise will be repeated.
3.3 Outputs
Outputs that resulted from this exercise comprised the following:
• Annual Report: All sector reports from 1996 to 1998 were arranged chronologically and
organized separately for each year. Each annual report has a cover page listing out the
number of records, assessment of coverage in terms of time and space (tables 3.1 - 3.3;
figures 3.1 - 3.12). Also included were noteworthy observations on wildlife and impact,
and some tentative conclusions. The number of records, assessment of coverage,
noteworthy observations on wildlife and impact, and some tentative conclusions were also
prepared for the year 1999, up to August. (table 3.4; figures 3.13 - 3.15).
• Current Sector Records: All sector records for the current year were arranged
chronologically and organized into separate folders for each sector.
16
• Wildlife Summary: All evidence of wildlife for each sector was summarized into tabular
format and organized separately for each year, and one cumulative.
• Impact Summary: All evidence of impacts for each sector was summarized into tabular
format and organized separately for each year, and one cumulative.
• Sector Summary: All evidence of key wildlife and impacts for each sector was
summarized into tabular format and organized separately for each year (tables 3.5 - 3.8),
and one cumulative (table 3.9).
• Trail Maps: One complete ‘master’ set of enlarged maps of all sectors on A3 format,
each map marked with all known trails and one enlarged map of the protected area on A0
format, and several on A3 format marked with all known trails.
• Wildlife Maps: Four complete sets of enlarged maps of all sectors on A3 format, one set
for each year, and each map marked with all known locations of key wildlife evidence.
Also, one enlarged map of the protected area on A0 format marked with all known
locations of key wildlife evidence.
• Cultivation Maps: One ‘complete’ set of all enlarged sector maps on A3 format, with
each map marked with all known agricultural areas, by year of establishment.
3.4 Results
From the outputs (section 3.3) above, there emerged several findings with regard to the data
collected by the patrolling and monitoring unit of the Dong Hua Sao NBCA. Briefly, the
following observations and tentative conclusions were made for each year, and for the
cumulative records.
1996 (tables 3.1 & 3.5, figures 3.1 - 3.4):
• 16 field trips comprising 22 field days were made resulting in 22 records, averaging 1.38
records per field trip and 1 record per field day. This was achieved in 53 man-days of
effort, averaging 2.41 man-days needed for each record.
• Data was collected in 11 out of the 27 sectors in only 5 months, resulting in an average of
2 records (range = 1 - 7) for each sector surveyed.
• Significant wildlife observations included the presence of gaur in sectors 3 and 5 and the
presence of gibbon in sectors 5 and 6.
• Significant impact observations included fishing signs and people encountered in more
than half the sectors surveyed.
• No conclusions can be drawn due to scanty data, except there was a major need for more
data and wider coverage, and the number of man-days per record should be reduced.
1997 (tables 3.2 & 3.6, figures 3.5 - 3.8):

• 64 field trips comprising 101 field days were made resulting in 107 records, averaging
1.67 records per field trip and 1.06 record per field day. This was achieved in 340 man-
days of effort, averaging 3.17 man-days needed for each record.
17
• Compared to 1996, there is an improvement in the number of records per field trip and per
field day, although more effort was expended (number of man-days) per record. This was
mainly due to the fact that most of the records were obtained during by 3-4 person survey
teams.
• Only three sectors were not surveyed, and surveys were carried out in all months. This
resulted in an average of 4.46 records (range = 1 - 20) for each sector surveyed.
• Significant wildlife observations included the presence of gaur in sectors 5 and 23, tiger in
sector 5, leopard in sector 11, silvered langur in sectors 5 and 11, and peafowl in sector
20. Also, bear species was recorded in almost 40% of the sectors surveyed, gibbon 25%,
and other primates (primarily macaques) in at least 30% of the sectors surveyed. Sector 5,
however, had more key wildlife records, likely due to the abandonment of rice cultivation
near the mineral lick.
• Significant impact observations included hunting and fishing signs, new clearance and
people encountered in more than half the sectors surveyed.
• Although there was better coverage in time and space, it was unevenly distributed, and
hence there was still a need for more records.
1998 (tables 3.3 & 3.7, figures 3.9 - 3.12):

2.05 records per field trip and .91 record per field day. This was achieved in 937 man-days
of effort, averaging 2.71 man-days needed for each record.
• Compared to previous years, there is vast improvement in the number of records per field
trip, but a disappointing number of records per day and the number of man-days per
record. These were primarily because many records were missing from the files (section 3.
2) and could not be accounted for, and because there were possibly more persons than
required on a daily recording trip.
• Only one sector, sector 22, was not surveyed, but surveys were carried out in all months.
This resulted in an average of 13.31 records (range = 3 - 33) for each sector surveyed,
with nine sectors having more than 15 records.
• Significant wildlife observations included new records of gaur presence in seven
previously unrecorded sectors. Similarly, tiger, bear species, and gibbon were respectively
recorded in six, seven and ten previously unrecorded sectors. In ratio to the total records
there were significant decreases in the number of gaur and bear records compared to 1997.
Previously unrecorded Douc langur were reported in sectors 6 and 12. Sambar deer, wild
pig, common muntjak and macaques were recorded in over 80% of the sectors surveyed.
Although the distribution of sambar deer, wild pig, common muntjak, and macaques are
widespread, their records are nevertheless less than half of the total, possibly implying a
low to moderate relative density.
• Every sector surveyed recorded one form of impact or the other. There was generally a
significant increase in the number of impact records compared to 1997, but only hunting,
agriculture, rattan/damar harvesting, and people encountered had showed a true increase
in activity, in ratio to the total number of records. In a similar manner, it was observed that
there was a decrease in fishing, and timber extraction.
18
• New clearance was recorded in less than half the sectors, and there was a significant
decrease compared to 1997.
• There was indeed better coverage compared to previous years, although still unevenly
distributed across sectors and across months. Main conclusion drawn with regard to data
collection is that there should be minimum number of records, possibly six for all sectors
in general, and 12 for the core sectors (sectors with key or denser wildlife, and/or key
habitats, and/or major threats and impacts).
• With regard to data, frequent and regular data collection is needed to provide a better
picture of wildlife presence and distribution, and the threats and impacts to wildlife and
habitats.
1999 (until August; tables 3.4 & 3.8, figures 3.13 - 3.16):
2.01 records per field trip and .97 record per field day. This was achieved in 468 man-days
of effort, averaging 2.59 man-days needed for each record.
• Compared to the previous year, there is a minor drop in the number of records per field
trip, but an improved number of records per field day and a reduction in effort needed per
record.
• Three sectors, sectors 16, 17 and 22, were not surveyed, and surveys have now been
planned for these three sectors before the year-end. Surveys were, however, carried out in
all months. This resulted in an average of 7.54 records (range = 1 - 17) for each sector
surveyed, with five sectors having more than 15 records.
• Significant wildlife observations included one new record of gaur in sector 15, but no
records of gaur presence in sector 59. Not much more information could be drawn due to
insufficient records.
• Most sectors surveyed recorded one form of impact or the other. More information is,
however, needed.
• Many more records are needed to provide adequate coverage. Hence, patrolling and
monitoring activities should increase threefold for the remaining months of 1999.
1996-1999 (table 3.9; figures 3.17 - 3.20):

• A total of 339 field trips comprising 689 field days were made, resulting in 656 records,
averaging 1.94 records per field trip and .95 record per field day. This was achieved in
1798 man-days of effort, averaging 2.74 man-days needed for each record.
• More records need to be collected to achieve an average of two records per field trip and
one record per field day. Also, the effort taken to obtain one record should be reduced - it
should not take more than two persons to produce a record on any given field day.
• More attention, in terms of data collection, needs to be focused on sectors 4, 6, 12, 13, 16,
19, 22 and 27.
9
Gaur presence in sector 5 was, however, recorded during the field training A in September-end.
19
• The distribution of most key wildlife species is generally restricted, whereas most of the
larger prey species are widespread, although density appears low to moderate.
• Activities deleterious to wildlife and habitats are widespread.
Monitoring
The data gathering method currently in use at Dong Hua Sao and Phou Xiang Thong NBCAs
have been useful in indicating the presence and distribution of species, particularly key
species. It has also been useful in recording the type and location of impacts. To a limited
extent, if the records are adequate, it has been able to suggest the relative density (e.g., rare,
common, abundant, etc.) of selected species, and the relative intensity of impacts.
If the minimum number of records per annum can be maintained and there is an adequate
coverage in time and space, then it is possible to tell the relative density of species or the
relative intensity of impacts with more certainty. Also, more importantly, it can show changes
and trends in population size and human activities. Furthermore, if there was a minimum of
one record per week for all sectors, then it might be possible to tell the seasonal movements of
wide-ranging species. This, however, will most likely not be possible at the moment, due to
lack of manpower.
Nevertheless, the current data recording system should aim to provide information on
presence, distribution and trends. The main improvement needed is to correctly identify
evidence of key species, and correctly determine their locations, therefore preventing valuable
information from being discarded. Hence, staff must put in every effort to be good at wildlife
surveys and observations, and the use of map and compass.
Under the current set-up, the minimum requirements for monitoring should include a
minimum of one record per field day; a minimum of sixteen records per annum for the
proposed ‘core zone’ sectors (sectors 3, 4, 5, 6, 11, 21, 22, 23, and 27), and a minimum of
eight records per annum for the other sectors, totaling a minimum of 288 records per annum.
The number of records in 1988 has shown that this is possible. Also to provide adequate
coverage over time. Monthly, there should be at least two records for the core sectors, and one
record for the other sectors, totaling 432 records per annum. This is again possible, if the
number of man-days per record is reduced to two.
20
Sector Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
1
2
3 2 2
4
5 4 2 1 7
6 2 2
7 1 2 3
8 1 1
9 1 1
10 1 1 2
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18 1 1
19
20
21
22
23 1 1
24 1 1
25
26 1 1
27
Total 6 1 2 5 8 22
21
Figure 3.1 No. of Field Trips/Sector in 1996
No. of Trips
3
2
1
0
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector
Figure 3. 2 No. of Records/Sector in 1996

No. of Records
8
6
4
2
0
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector
Figure 3.3 No. of Field Days/Sector in 1996
10
No. of Days
0
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector
Figure 3. 4 No. of Man Days/Sector in 1996
20
No. of Man Days
15
10
5
0
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector
22
1 1 1 2
2 1 1 2
3 2 2
4 2 2 4
5 2 18 20
6
7 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 13
8 2 1 3 1 7
9 1 1 2
10 1 1 1 3
11 1 7 8
12 1 1
13 2 1 3
14 1 2 3
15 3 3
16
17 1 1 2
18 1 2 1 4
19
20 3 3
21 2 2
22 1 1
23 1 1 2 4
24 1 1 2 4
25 1 1 1 3
26 1 1 3 2 7
27 4 4
Total 1 7 8 10 15 8 1 6 4 3 24 20 107
23
15
No. of Trips
10
5
0
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
1
3
5
7
9
Sector
Figure 3.6 No. of Records/Sector in 1997

No. of Records
30
20
10
0
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector
15
No. of Days
10
5
0
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector
Figure 3.8 No. of Man-Days/Sector in 1997
150
No. of Man-Days
100
50
0
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector
24
1 1 2 1 6 10
2 1 4 3 3 6 17
3 2 4 5 2 2 15
4 4 1 2 7
5 2 4 2 2 4 3 2 4 2 5 30
6 1 2 4 7
7 4 3 3 6 3 1 9 2 2 33
8 2 4 3 7 1 2 19
9 1 2 3 1 1 8
10 1 2 1 3 7
11 3 2 3 8
12 2 1 1 3 2 9
13 2 2 4
14 2 2 1 3 2 2 12
15 1 1 1 3
16 1 3 4
17 3 3 3 4 3 16
18 2 1 7 2 2 14
19 2 5 7
20 5 1 3 5 1 2 17
21 1 3 4 6 14
22
23 1 2 2 2 4 4 7 5 27
24 5 5 3 3 1 6 7 30
25 2 1 1 5 3 2 4 18
26 3 3 6
27 4 4
Total 8 23 26 7 19 14 25 42 36 57 51 38 346
25
30
No. of Trips
20
10
0
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector
Figure 3. 10 No. of Records/Sector in 1998

No. of Records
40
30
20
10
0
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector

40
No. of Days
30
20
10
0
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector
Figure 3.12 No. of Man-Days/Sector in 1998
100
No. of Man-Days
80
60
40
20
0
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector
26
Table 3.4 Number of records by sector and month for Dong Hua Sao NBCA in 1999 (until
August 1999)
Sector Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Total
1 1 1 3 1 4 10
2 1 1 1 3
3 2 3 5
4 2 2
5 2 2 4
6 3 1 4
7 2 1 2 5 2 5 17
8 2 1 1 4 2 5 15
9 4 3 3 3 2 2 17
10 2 1 2 2 2 9
11 1 3 5 9
12 1 1
13 2 2
14 4 4
15 10 10
16
17
18 1 6 7
19 1 3 4
20 4 8 3 2 17
21 1 2 6 9
22
23 6 1 5 4 16
24 1 2 2 1 6
25 2 2 4
26 2 2
27 4 4
Total 39 28 12 19 21 25 10 27 181
27
Figure 3.13 No. of Field Trips/Sector in 1999;until
Aug. '99
15
No. of Trips
10
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector
Figure 3.14 No. of Records/Sector in 1999; until

Aug. '99
20
No. of Records
15
10
5
0
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector
Figure 3. 15 No. of Field Days/Sector in 1999; until

Aug. '99
20
No.of Days
15
10
5
0
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector
Figure 3.16 No. of Man Days/Sector in 1999; until

Aug' 99
60
No. of Man Days
40
20
0
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector
28
Table 3.5 Summarized sector records for Dong Hua Sao NBCA for 1996
Summarized sector records for 1996

Sector 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 27 Total
Total No. of records 2 7 2 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 22
Elephant
Gaur 2 3 5
Serow
Sambar deer 1 1 1 1 4
Tiger
Leopard
Small cat spp. 1 1
Bear spp.
Dhole
Red-cheeked gibbon 1 1 2
Douc langur
Silvered langur
Other primate spp. 1 1 2
Wild pig 1 2 3
Muntjak 2 2
Peafowl
Anhinga/Stork spp.
Hornbill spp. 1 1
Water dragon
Varanus spp.
Crocodile
Python
Cobra spp.
Hunting signs 2 1 1 4
Destructive hunting
Fishing signs 2 3 3 1 1 1 11
Destructive fishing
Tree-cutting 1 1 1 3
Livestock grazing
New clearance
Agriculture 1 1 2
Road construction
Irrigation canals
Malva extraction
Rattan/Damar 1 2 1 4
Yaang oil
Gaharu wood 1 1
People encountered 1 4 2 1 1 1 1 11
29

Sector 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 27 Total
Total No. of records 2 2 2 4 20 13 7 2 3 8 1 3 3 3 2 4 3 2 1 4 4 3 7 4 107
Elephant
Gaur 10 1 11
Serow 1 1 1 3
Sambar deer 9 1 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 22
Tiger 5 5
Leopard 1 1
Small cat spp. 1 1
Bear spp. 1 5 1 3 1 1 2 1 3 18
Dhole 1 1
Red-cheeked gibbon 1 3 1 1 1 3 10
Douc langur
Silvered langur 1 1 2
Other primate spp. 1 1 3 1 2 1 1 1 11
Wild pig 1 15 1 1 3 1 1 3 2 28
Muntjak 12 1 1 1 1 2 18
Peafowl 1 1
Anhinga/Stork spp. 1 1 1 3
Hornbill spp.
Water dragon 3 3
Varanus spp. 1 1
Crocodile
Python
Cobra spp.
Hunting signs 2 1 1 5 1
2 1 1 1 1 1 17
Destructive hunting 5 3 1 1 10
Fishing signs 2 2 4 3 5 5 1 3 1 1 1 2 2 1 33
Destructive fishing 1 1
Tree-cutting 2 1 3 1 1 1 2 4 2 17
Livestock grazing 1 1 1 3
New clearance 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 15
Agriculture 1 2 7 7 17
Road construction
Irrigation canals
Malva extraction 1 1
Rattan/Damar 1 3 1 2 1 8
Yaang oil
Gaharu wood 1 2 3
People encountered 1 1 2 3 4 8 5 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 4 3 2 42
30

Sector 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 27 Total
Total No. of records 10 17 15 7 30 7 33 19 8 7 8 9 4 12 3 4 16 14 7 17 14 27 30 18 6 4 346
Elephant
Gaur 1 2 7
2 1 2 1 3 19
Serow 1 22 4 1 4 14
Sambar deer 8 5 21
2 4 3 2 4 7 1 1 11 1 1 6 4 2 7 6 15 15 4 130
Tiger 1 26 3 1 2 1 16
Leopard 1 1
Small cat spp. 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 3 3 3 1 24
Bear spp. 2 3 1 5 3 2 1 2 3 2 1 1 26
Dhole 3 3
Red-cheeked gibbon 3 1 2 4 5 1 4 4 1 2 3 2 2 1 1 36
Douc langur 1 1 2
Silvered langur 1 1
Other primate spp. 1 3 5 2 7 4 1 1 2 3 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 3 1 45
Wild pig 2 6 3 3 22 7 7 5 2 2 5 7 2 7 2 1 6 5 1 10 6 15 14 14 6 2 162
Muntjak 1 5 6 20 2 6 2 2 1 2 1 7 1 2 3 6 3 10 4 5 11 5 2 2 109
Peafowl 1 1 2
Anhinga/Stork spp. 4 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 13
Hornbill spp. 1 1 3 2 1 8
Water dragon 1 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 15
Varanus spp. 1 2 7 2 1 13
Crocodile
Python 1 1 2
Cobra spp. 1 1 1 3
Hunting signs 5 3 7 6 1 5 2 3 1 1 2 1 3 5 1 5 7 2 2 1 1 64
Destructive hunting 2 4 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 16
Fishing signs 2 2 3 2 5 10 3 2 2 2 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 44
Destructive fishing 1 1 1 3
Tree-cutting 2 2 1 2 5 1 1 1 3 6 5 1 1 1 32
Livestock grazing 4 2 1 1 5 3 1 17
New clearance 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 16
Agriculture 20 25 13 9 3 70
Road construction 2 2 1 5
Irrigation canals
Malva extraction 1 1 1 3
Rattan/Damar 1 2 8 3 9 1 17 3 3 1 2 8 1 59
Yaang oil 0
Gaharu wood 1 3 1 5
People encountered 8 5 5 13 2 24 10 6 3 4 1 4 2 1 9 10 4 12 15 12 11 3 2 3 169
31
Table 3.8 Summarized sector records for Dong Hua Sao NBCA for 1999 (until August
1999)
Summarized sector records for 1999 (until Aug. 1999)

Sector 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 27 Total
Total No. of records 10 3 5 2 4 4 17 15 17 9 9 1 2 4 10 7 4 17 9 16 6 4 2 4 181
Elephant
Gaur 1 1 2
Serow 1 1
Sambar deer 3 1 1 1 1 4 8 4 6 1 2 7 1 2 5 12 1 60
Tiger 1 2 1 4
Leopard 1 1
Small cat spp. 1 1 3 1 2 8
Bear spp. 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 11
Dhole 1 1
Red-cheeked gibbon 1 1 2 1 3 1 2 11
Douc langur
Silvered langur
Other primate spp. 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 3 2 1 21
Wild pig 1 1 1 2 1 5 5 1 2 1 2 1 5 5 2 3 1 2 41
Muntjak 3 1 1 3 2 2 2 1 2 2 3 1 1 24
Peafowl 3 3
Anhinga/Stork spp. 1 1 5 7
Hornbill spp. 1 1 1 3
Water dragon 1 1 2
Varanus spp. 1 2 3
Crocodile
Python 1 1
Cobra spp. 1 1 2 4
Hunting signs 2 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 4 1 2 2 1 22
Destructive hunting 1 2 1 2 1 1 8
Fishing signs 1 1 2 1 6 4 1 1 1 3 5 1 27
Destructive fishing 1 1 2
Tree-cutting 3 1 2 6 1 1 1 15
Livestock grazing 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 10
New clearance 2 2 4 2 1 1 1 2 3 18
Agriculture 14 3 2 4 23
Road construction
Irrigation canals
Malva extraction 1 1
Rattan/Damar 4 1 2 1 11 5 6 5 2 1 2 40
Yaang oil
Gaharu wood
People encountered 5 2 1 2 1 15 9 5 4 5 1 1 2 5 13 6 3 2 3 2 4 91
32
Table 3.9 Summarized sector records for Dong Hua Sao NBCA for 1996 - 1999 (until
August 1999)
Summarized sector records for 1996-999 (until Aug. 1999)

Sector 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 27 Total
Total No. of records 22 22 24 13 61 13 66 42 28 21 25 11 9 19 16 4 18 26 11 37 25 1 48 41 25 16 12 656
Elephant
Gaur 1 2 2 20 2 1 2 2 1 3 1 37
Serow 2 2 3 4 1 1 4 1 18
Sambar deer 3 8 7 1 32 3 5 7 10 10 19 1 2 14 9 1 6 5 2 9 12 29 17 4 216
Tiger 1 2 2 7 6 3 1 2 1 25
Leopard 1 2 3
Small cat spp. 1 2 2 2 1 1 2 2 1 6 1 3 3 4 3 34
Bear spp. 2 3 3 11 4 3 2 1 6 1 1 6 2 1 2 1 1 1 4 55
Dhole 1 4 5
Red-cheeked gibbon 4 2 4 7 8 2 5 4 0 1 4 2 3 1 3 2 4 3 59
Douc langur 1 1 2
Silvered langur 1 1 1 3
Other primate spp. 1 3 10 3 12 5 2 1 2 3 6 6 1 4 4 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 3 79
Wild pig 3 8 4 3 40 9 9 10 7 4 10 7 2 8 4 1 6 6 1 16 6 1 23 16 17 7 6 234
Muntjak 4 6 6 1 34 5 7 4 4 1 5 1 8 3 2 3 6 5 14 5 5 12 5 2 5 153
Peafowl 1 5 6
Anhinga/Stork spp. 5 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 7 1 23
Hornbill spp. 1 2 1 3 1 2 1 1 12
Water dragon 1 2 4 2 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 20
Varanus spp. 1 2 1 8 2 2 1 17
Crocodile
Python 1 1 1 3
Cobra spp. 1 2 2 1 1 7
Hunting signs 9 4 7 1 10 1 11 3 6 3 3 1 2 3 1 3 6 2 10 8 4 6 1 1 1 107
Destructive hunting 1 2 9 5 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 34
Fishing signs 5 3 7 6 13 1 24 9 8 4 3 4 3 8 1 3 1 5 4 1 1 1 115
Destructive fishing 1 1 1 1 1 1 6
Tree-cutting 7 3 2 3 10 1 6 1 1 1 2 1 5 11 6 3 1 1 1 1 67
Livestock grazing 6 4 1 1 1 2 6 5 1 1 2 30
New clearance 2 1 5 4 5 3 1 1 1 1 3 1 3 2 2 6 5 2 1 49
Agriculture 1 35 27 16 19 14 112
Road construction 2 2 1 5
Irrigation canals
Malva extraction 2 1 1 1 5
Rattan/Damar 5 2 10 4 13 2 31 10 9 7 3 4 10 1 111
Yaang oil
Gaharu wood 1 4 1 1 2 9
People encountered 14 8 9 3 23 3 49 25 12 7 10 2 2 6 4 1 9 18 4 25 21 1 17 17 6 8 9 313
33
Figure 3.17 Total No. of Field Trips/Sector
(1996-1999)
60
No. of Trips
40
20
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sectors
Figure 3.18 Total No. of Records/Sector

(1996-1999)
80
No. of Records
60
40
20
0
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector
Figure 3.20 Total No. of Man-Days/Sector

(1996-1999)
250
No. of Man-Days
200
150
100
1196
50
0
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector
Figure 3.19 Total no. of Field Days/Sector

(1996-1999)
80
No. of Days
60
40
20
0
1
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
Sector
34
4. CONCLUDING DISCUSSION & RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 Introduction
Prolonged and repeated on-the-job field training is possibly the only way to equip protected
area and associated conservation staff with the basic skills and experience required to
implement field management activities. Training A was designed to provide the most basic of
field techniques; easily understood and practical, yet essential for protected area management.
Furthermore, these techniques require a minimal of monetary input. The primary aim of this
training was to strengthen the capacity of the staff in gathering quality data towards the
management and protection of the reserve through the collection of basic information on the
wildlife and impact. Training B was designed to carry forward the processes initiated in the
97/98 training, with the aim of advancing their capacity towards analyzing, interpreting all
data gathered until date and using the results to draw tentative conclusions and plan activities
accordingly.
4.2 Discussion
An important feature of all training programs, be it in field techniques or analysis, there must
be a component of ‘on-the-job’, carrying out actual activities. It is only in this manner that
one can hope to build the capacity of the protected area staff. Observations made during this
training exercise and earlier ones showed that training and capacity building of protected area
staff could only be achieved through intensive long-term support accompanied by applied
training with refresher sessions. Such training and capacity building are likely to be
significantly more effective when provided systematically over a period of several years
within each protected area, rather than delivered in a centralized ‘one-off’ training event,
which may not be adequately absorbed or acted on. However, given the short duration of this
follow-up exercise, it now depends on the head of the NBCAs to provide the necessary
leadership and motivation. Likewise, it is equally important that the staff translate the skills
acquired into meaningful activities, carrying forward the processes initiated during this and
the earlier exercise.
Also, it is imperative that the Heads of the NBCAs, relevant district and provincial authorities
seriously regard the efforts of the patrolling and monitoring staff, lest all efforts at capacity
building and conservation are defeated. The district authorities should immediately act upon
the offenses referred to them by the NBCA. That is, the district authorities must fulfill their
part in maintaining the integrity of the NBCA, and carry out the responsibilities bestowed
upon them.
Observations made and results obtained during Training A and B have shown that a single
training session alone cannot guarantee that staff will be proficient at the skills acquired.
Regular reinforcement and supervision is needed to allow the staff to further improve their
skills and to ensure that the quality of data gathered is maintained. Although a follow-up
training exercise was planned for February 1999, approximately a year after the 97/98
training, it wasn’t until September 1999 that it could be carried out. This was due to
bureaucratic problems. As a result, the deterioration in the quality of data collected could not
be arrested earlier, hence losing much important information essential towards the
management of the NBCA.
With regard to data collection, 1998 has shown that it was possible to achieve 346 records in
12 months of patrolling and monitoring activity. Thus, at least 29 records per month, and at
least one record per sector per month, or 13 records per sector per annum can be expected. In
1996 it was possible to collect one record for every field day, therefore using 1988 as a
35
yardstick, it should be possible to gather at least 380 records for 1998. Also, aiming for an
effort of not more than two man-days per record, it should theoretically be possible to gather
469 records for 1998, or 39 records per month, or 17 records per sector per annum.
Thus, based on these observations and assumptions, there should be between 13 to 17 records
per sector per annum. However, as there is a need to focus on the proposed core sectors and
sectors with key and/or abundant wildlife and habitat, and facing serious threats and impacts,
then it is estimated that there should be at least 8 records for other sectors, and at least 16
records for the core/key sectors. Furthermore, with a patrolling and monitoring staff of nine
(in DHS), each member should spend at least eight days a month in the field, but should aim
for 15 days a month to be truly productive.
4.3 Recommendations
Training & Training Needs:
• Whenever possible, training should be carried out in the Lao language without an
interpreter. Rapport between the instructor and the trainees cannot be easily and quickly
achieved with the use of an interpreter. Much information would also be ‘lost’ during
interpretation or misinterpreted, and in even worse situations, misinterpretation could lead
to animosity towards the instructor.
• Instructors should partake in the activities that follow any training program, to guide the
process of translating skills acquired by the trainees into meaningful activities, and to
allow any queries to be resolved on the spot.
• Future training programs and activities should be carried out along similar lines, and
repeated annually for three continuous years. This will not only reinforce the staff’s
capability, but will also allow them to learn other skills still unfamiliar to them and/or
needed for the changing needs of the NBCAs. Furthermore, repetitive ‘on-the-job’
training will allow wildlife, habitats, impact and data gathered to be monitored and
assessed, besides maintaining some continuity in developing skills of protected area staff.
• It is important that all members of the NBCA, including the Heads and the extension unit,
participate in all training and occasionally field activities carried out in the NBCA, to give
them a better understanding of the NBCA’s objectives and assist them in managing the
NBCA better.
• Training programs could be extended to include staff of PAFO10 and DAFOs11, and
instructors and students from Lao institutions of tertiary learning. Exposure of this type
would provide a better understanding of the NBCA, the NBCA’s objectives, and the
activities needed to achieve those objectives. Also, it will assist the PAFO and DAFO
staff in their day to day duties. It will prepare students from relevant fields for future
conservation work in the country, and provide ‘materials’ for instructors to introduce
conservation-related courses in the institutions.
• There must be an obligation among the senior staff to train newly employed staff or
reinforce weaker ones. A formal training could be carried out with the staff of Dong Hua
Sao and Phou Xiang Thong NBCAs, whereby one or two selected senior staff can take the
lead in instructions. Topics need be limited to map and compass use, wildlife and impact
10
PAFO = Provincial Agricultural and Forestry Office.
11
DAFO = District Agricultural and Forestry Office.
36
survey, data recording and field craft. This could be carried out with three days in the
classroom and five nights in the field, particularly in areas those lack adequate
information. Such exercise can be repeated every quarterly, or at least twice a year. As a
test case, an exercise along these lines should be carried out before the year-end.
Patrols:
• Patrolling activities should be carried out regularly but randomly in both time and space,
so as not to familiarize poachers with the patrolling schedule and routes.
• Patrolling teams should submit their reports including data recording sheets immediately
on return to the NBCA’s headquarters, so that actions, if needed, could be followed up
and the reports properly filed.
• The appointed persons should scrutinize all reports to ensure that details are not lacking
and to ensure the continuity in quality.
• Patrols should focus in proposed core zone sectors and sectors having key wildlife species
and habitats, and major human impact.
Monitoring:
• Monitoring should be carried out throughout the NBCA to provide an overall assessment,
but focus in proposed core zone sectors and sectors having key wildlife species and
habitats, and major human impact.
• There should be a minimum of 16 records per sector per annum for the core sectors, and a
minimum of eight records per sector per annum for the remainder sectors. Data collecting
should, however, aim for two records per sector per month for core/key sectors and one
record per sector per month for other sectors.
• Records should be reviewed on a quarterly basis to observe changes or trends on selected
criteria, and appropriate plans should be made and activities implemented.
Enforcement:
• The offices of the district governors and DAFOs must fulfill their commitments in
arresting the rapid loss of biodiversity and natural resources by taking immediate action
on the offenders, setting examples to would-be offenders. Also, severe punishment should
be taken against members of government agencies who indulge in such offenses.
• Extension assistance to Ban Houay Namphak should be suspended with immediate effect
until the villagers stop committing further acts of destruction towards the integrity of the
NBCA. Similar actions should be taken against other settlements receiving extension
assistance if they are not able to abide by the ‘mutually-agreed upon’ village rules and
regulations, and the protected area’s laws.
37
4.4 Conclusion
The management needs of the Dong Hua Sao and Phou Xiang Thong NBCAs, not unlike
many other protected areas in the region have to address and satisfy the needs of the people
using the NBCA. This is not an easy task to accomplish, given the fact that human
communities living in and around the protected areas are often socio-economically
backwards. Their limited options to generate income, and low, declining agricultural
productivity have resulted in an unsustainable exploitation of forest resources. Nevertheless,
only though a joint and concentrated effort, involving all the stakeholders, and through an
integrated conservation and development program, can possible solutions be found to prevent
further loss of natural resources. These settlements, however, upon receiving extension
assistance must comply to the mutually-agreed-upon village regulations, and adhere to the
protected area’s rules in exchange for the assistance received.
Even with extension assistance, the reserve must still carry out traditional protected area
activities - patrols, monitoring and law enforcement, which are important and very much
needed. These activities should preferably be carried out jointly with the stakeholder
communities, hence encouraging and ultimately achieving participatory management of the
reserve.
Equally important is to continue building the staff’s capacity and capability to continue
whatever positive processes initiated by past, present and future conservation and
development activities.
38
LITERATURE CITED
Berkmuller, K., S. Southammakoth and V. Vongphet. 1995. Protected Area System Planning
and Management in Lao PDR: Status Report to mid-1995. IUCN/LSFP, Vientiane.
Boonratana, R. 1997. A state-wide survey to estimate the density of the Sumatran rhinoceros,
Asian elephant and banteng in Sabah. Wildlife Conservation Society, New York.
Boonratana, R. 1998. Wildlife survey training at Dong Hua Sao and Phou Xiang Thong
National Biodiversity Conservation Areas. IUCN/BCP, Vientiane/Pakse.
King, B, M. Woodcock, and E.C. Dickinson. 1991. A Field Guide to the Birds of South-East
Asia. Collins, London.
Lekagul, B. and J. A. McNeely. 1977. Mammals of Thailand. Saha Karn Bhaet Co., Ltd.,
Bangkok.
Lekagul, B. and P.D. Round. 1991. A Guide to the Birds of Thailand. Saha Karn Bhaet Co.,
Ltd., Bangkok.
39
Appendix I: Terms of Reference
Background
Gathering information from within the protected area regularly and systematically is an
important element of the management strategy pursued under the Biodiversity Conservation
Project at the protected areas Dong Hua Sao (DHS) and Phou Xiang Thong (PXT).
An information gathering system has been established for the sector-wise collection and filing
of data. The system is meant to provide information on presence/absence of key wildlife
species and evidence of land and resource use by people. The information allows us to take a
more differentiated view on type, severity and distribution of problems.
If collected with sufficient rigor, the data would further allow us to monitor habitat condition
and the continued presence of selected key species. In the future it may even be possible to
infer population trends. Towards this end, the continuing improvement of the data gathering
process and increasing the quality and quantity of the data has high priority.
Patrolling staff has had training in field craft and wildlife survey techniques, which resulted in
a marked improvement of data collecting. These staff would benefit greatly from refresher
training while newly employed staff need training in field craft, and map and compass use.
Most training will take place in the field in DHS.
Expectations
The instructor will design and conduct two types of training.
The focus of the first training is on field craft, on basic map reading and compass use, on
observing and recording evidence of impacts and wildlife in the field. As a result all patrolling
staff will be able to plan a patrolling trip, orient themselves in the field, indicate their position
on a map and collect/record usable data.
The second training will focus on data analysis and its use in monitoring. As a result, the
senior staff in the patrolling units will be able to produce informative reports cross referenced
to sector maps. They will have learned and practiced to search sector data for a specific
information and present it in the form of graphs and thematic maps.
Lastly we expect the instructor to recommend minimum requirements regarding quality and
quantity of data with respect to drawing conclusions about key species for use in the
monitoring system.
Assignment Details
We are seeking the services of trainers from the region for a period of 6 weeks to organize
and conduct two training events (training A and B) as outlined below and listed in the
attached assignment schedule.
Training A: is mainly for new patrolling staff. It concentrates on field craft, using map and
compass, and recording observations. Senior patrolling staff will function as instructor
assistants for training A. There are two periods of field work from a base camp.
Training B: is meant for the senior patrolling staff and it focuses on sector data analysis, data
quality, data presentation, and the use of findings in management planning and monitoring.
The senior patrolling staff, field directors and other selected staff will participate. The second
40
training will be immediately followed by a 7 day period for supervised review of old reports
and preparation of data summaries also presented on maps.
The trainees will begin each field work period with a clear understanding of what they are
expected to learn and how. The trainer will brief trainees daily and give a critique of each
day’s work. He/she will ensure that each trainee has specific responsibilities and provide
individual feedback on how the respective training is doing. The instructor will keep notes on
progress, strengths and weaknesses of each trainee.
The assignment will conclude with a final training session reflecting on the work done and a
briefing for officials from the province. Selected trainees are expected to give short
presentations about their experience and what they learned. The final report should, apart
from a general review of the training, offer constructive criticism of the established data
gathering procedures and their suitability for the monitoring of selected key species and
habitat condition, preferably by the local people. A confidential report must be submitted
separately giving an assessment of individual trainee performance.
Qualifications
The previous wildlife survey training has had very satisfactory results. We recommend to
contact the instructor for this training, Dr. Ramesh Boonratana, to undertake this follow-up
assignment.
• Bachelor degree or higher in relevant natural science subject.
• Several years of experience in wildlife survey work preferably in Lao PDR and in the
region.
• Familiarity with wildlife survey techniques and the application of survey information to
management.
• Extensive experience in conducting wildlife and habitat survey training.
• Fluency in Lao/Thai
• Familiarity with mammals and birds is a decided advantage.
• Willingness to work in the field under difficult conditions.
41
Appendix II: Consultant’s Itinerary
Date Activities
Aug. 29 PM: Arrive Vientiane.
Aug. 30 Initial preparations at IUCN office [Note: Flight for Pakse fully booked for
the day].
Aug. 31 AM: Arrive Pakse. Discussions with Padith (Head of DHS NBCA).
PM: Proceeded to DHS field station. Introductions to some trainees, and
preliminary preparatory discussions.
Sep. 1 Training delayed due to late arrival of PXT staff.
Sep. 2-4 Training A
Sep. 5 Brief review of sector data & station clean-up. [Note: trainees rest day]
Sep. 6-24 Training B
Sep. 6 PM: Introductory meeting Mr. On Keo (Head of PAFO)
Sep. 12 Review organized and compiled data. [Note: trainees rest day]
Sep. 19 Review analyzed data [Note: trainees rest day]
Sep. 20 AM: First briefing for field trip
Sep. 24 Debriefing for Training B: Discussions, final analysis, tentative conclusions,
& tentative plans for future patrolling & monitoring activities
Sep. 25-30 Field training A to DHS.
Sep. 30-Oct. 9 Report write-up in Pakse.
Oct. 7 Presentation at PAFO.
Oct. 9 Assignment terminates. Depart for Vientiane.
42

Training in Wildlife Survey and Data Analysis For The National Biodiversity Conservation Areas Dong Hua Sao and Phou Xiang Thong

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Training in Wildlife Survey and Data Analysis For The National Biodiversity Conservation Areas Dong Hua Sao and Phou Xiang Thong

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION PROJECT (75170)

Training in Wildlife Survey and Data Analysis for the

Ramesh Boonratana, PhD.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................... 1

1NBCA = National Biodiversity Conservation Area

1.3 Dong Hua Sao and Phou Xiang Thong NBCAs

2.2 Theory Training

2.3 Field Training

2.4 Observations and Assessment

2.5 Survey Findings

Participant Unit Agency Theory Field (6 Data analysis

Common Name Scientific Name Evidence

1997 (tables 3.2 & 3.6, figures 3.5 - 3.8):

1998 (tables 3.3 & 3.7, figures 3.9 - 3.12):

1996-1999 (table 3.9; figures 3.17 - 3.20):

Figure 3. 2 No. of Records/Sector in 1996

Figure 3.3 No. of Field Days/Sector in 1996

Figure 3. 4 No. of Man Days/Sector in 1996

Figure 3.6 No. of Records/Sector in 1997

Figure 3.7 No. of Field Days/Sector in 1997

Figure 3.8 No. of Man-Days/Sector in 1997

Figure 3. 10 No. of Records/Sector in 1998

Figure 3.11 No. of Field Days/Sector in 1998

Figure 3.12 No. of Man-Days/Sector in 1998

Figure 3.14 No. of Records/Sector in 1999; until

Figure 3. 15 No. of Field Days/Sector in 1999; until

Figure 3.16 No. of Man Days/Sector in 1999; until

Summarized sector records for 1996

Summarized sector records for 1997

Summarized sector records for 1998

Summarized sector records for 1999 (until Aug. 1999)

Summarized sector records for 1996-999 (until Aug. 1999)

Figure 3.18 Total No. of Records/Sector

Figure 3.20 Total No. of Man-Days/Sector

Figure 3.19 Total no. of Field Days/Sector

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi