Primate Conservation 2018 (32): 175-183
Conservation Status of Primates in the Central Western Ghats, Karnataka, India
P. Ramesh Kumar1, Honnavalli N. Kumara2, M. Malathi Priya3, Hosur S. Sushma2, K. M. Meharabi4 and Swati Udayraj5
1Karnataka Forest Department, Bellary Territorial Forest Division, Bellary, Karnataka, India 2Sálim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India 3Karnataka Forest Department, Working Plan and Survey Division, Bellary, Karnataka, India 4Department of Animal Science, Central University of Kerala, Padannakkad, Kasaragod, Kerala, India 5Department of Ecology and Environmental Sciences, School of Life Sciences, Pondicherry University, Kalapet, Puducherry, India
Abstract: Kudremukh Wildlife Division is one of the largest of the Protected Area Network (henceforth the Kudremukh Forest Complex) in the Western Ghats that includes Kudremukh National Park, Someshwara Wildlife Sanctuary and Mookambika Wild- life Sanctuary, covering an area of about 1,285 km². The Kudremukh Forest Complex support three species of diurnal non-human primates: the lion-tailed macaque (Macaca silenus), bonnet macaque (Macaca radiata), and the black-footed gray langur (Sem- nopithecus hypoleucos), hereafter called the Hanuman langur. A survey of diurnal primates was carried out between December 2014 and April 2015 in the Kudremukh Forest Complex. A grid of 5-km² cells was superimposed on a map of the three protected areas of the Kudremukh Forest Complex. Each grid cell was systematically surveyed for four consecutive days using an existing network of trails and animal paths. The encounter rate of the Hanuman langur was significantly higher than the bonnet macaque and lion-tailed macaque. The encounter rates of the Hanuman langur, bonnet macaque, and lion-tailed macaque were 0.20 ±0.27 SD, 0.11 ±0.16 SD, and 0.03 ±0.10 SD, respectively. Mean group size of the bonnet macaques was 18.3 ±5.9 SD individuals per group, the adult female to male ratio was 1:2.3, and the adult female to immature ratio was 1:2.4. Mean group size of the Hanuman langurs was 6.7 ±3.10 SD, the adult male to adult female ratio was 1:1.9, and the adult female to immature ratio was 1:1.6. Mean group size of the lion-tailed macaques was 15.9 ±7.3 SD. The adult male to adult female ratio was 1:2.8, the adult female–immature ratio was 1:1.8, and the adult female to infant ratio was 1:0.3. The results of the current population assessment show a viable and large population of the lion-tailed macaque with a minimum population size of 585 individuals in 39 groups, making this one of the largest populations of the lion-tailed macaque in the entire Western Ghats.
Key words: Lion-tailed macaque, bonnet macaque, Hanuman langur, population status, central Western Ghats
Introduction and a good number of protected areas (Gubbi et al. 2016). Although narrow, the rainforests in Karnataka are contiguous The Western Ghats of continental India and the island over long stretches, and so may be crucial for the survival of of Sri Lanka have been classed together as one of 25 global the region’s many endemic species, including primates. The Biodiversity Hotspots (Myers et al. 2000), keeping in mind, Western Ghats are home to five of the 17 primates in India, however, that flora and fauna of the two regions differ sub- similar to the Northeastern Himalaya regarding primate diver- stantially (Dittus 2013). The Western Ghats are spread over sity and endemism. Due to the presence of continuous canopy an area of 1,64,280 km² from 8°0'N to 22°26'N and from and the availability of diverse fruit-bearing trees round the 72°55'E to 78°11'E and extend over a distance of 1,600 km year, the rain forests of the Western Ghats are extremely rich from Tapti River in the north to Kanyakumari in the south, in arboreal faunal diversity, especially non-human primates. traversing six states: Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka, The five species of diurnal non-human primates are the lion- Kerala and Tamil Nadu. The Western Ghats range is divided tailed macaque (Macaca silenus), bonnet macaque (M. radi- into three sections—the Northern, Southern, and Central ata), Nilgiri langur (Semnopithecus johnii) and two species Western Ghats. Karnataka holds the major portion of the Cen- of Hanuman langur, Semnopithecus hypoleucos and S. priam tral Western Ghats, with large tracts of relatively intact forest (see Ashalakshmi et al. 2014). Although the bonnet macaque
175 Ramesh Kumar et al.
and Hanuman langur are widespread throughout southern of primates in the three protected areas of the Kudremukh India, the lion-tailed macaque and Nilgiri langur are endemic Wildlife Division, the Kudremukh Forest Complex. to the Western Ghats. The distribution of the lion-tailed macaque once extended from the southern tip of the West- Methods ern Ghats to some parts of the states of Goa and Maharashtra (Green and Minkowaski 1977). Lion-tailed macaques were Study site eliminated from Maharashtra and Goa because of the destruc- The Kudremukh Forest Complex situated in the middle tion and degradation of their habitat over the centuries with of the central Western Ghats was reorganized and made a the fragmentation of the rainforests and consequent isolation separate Wildlife Division in 1992, with jurisdiction over of the macaque groups (Umapathy 1998; Kumara et al. 2011). three protected areas: Kudremukh National Park, Somesh- The species’ range is today restricted to Karnataka, Kerala wara Wildlife Sanctuary, and Mookambika Wildlife Sanc- and Tamil Nadu (Kumara and Sinha 2009), and the majority tuary (Fig. 1). Initially, the three protected areas were not is now in numerous small isolated populations. Owing to its contiguous but separated by reserved forests. The original restricted distribution, low global population, and the existing areas of the Kudremukh National Park, Someshwara Wildlife threats (habitat or population fragmentation, habitat degrada- Sanctuary, and Mookambika Wildlife Sanctuary were 600.32 tion, hunting and vulnerability to random events), the lion- km², 88.40 km², and 246.99 km², respectively. However, in tailed macaque has been listed as “Endangered” on the IUCN 2011, as a part of wildlife conservation strategy, the boundar- Red List, and in “Schedule I” in India’s Wildlife Protection ies of the Someshwara Wildlife Sanctuary and the Mookam- Act 1972. bika Wildlife Sanctuary were rationalized by the inclusion of Large populations of lion-tailed macaque are expected to the reserved forests between the protected areas. Accordingly, occur in very few regions over the entire Western Ghats, and about 225.85 km² areas of reserved forests were added to the the conservation status of the species is likely to differ across Someshwara Wildlife Sanctuary to connect it to the Kudre- these sparse populations (Kumara and Sinha 2009). Along mukh National Park located on its southern side. About the Western Ghats, the Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve 123.37 km² of reserved forest were added to the Mookambika harbors approximately 31 groups with about 460 animals Wildlife Sanctuary, connecting it to the Someshwara Wildlife (Sushma et al. 2014), and there are 32 groups in Sirsi-Hon- navara in Uttara Kannada district, Karnataka (Kumara and Singh 2004a), and 14 groups with an estimated 260 animals overall in Silent Valley National Park (Joseph and Ramach- andran 1998). The lion-tailed macaque habitat in Anamalai Hills is highly fragmented and surrounded by plantations, including tea estates, yet holds about 62 groups (Kumara et al. 2014). A drastic decline of the lion-tailed macaque popula- tion was reported from the Brahmagiri Wildlife Sanctuary, the Talacauvery Wildlife Sanctuary, the Pushpagiri Wildlife Sanc- tuary, and the Sharavathi Valley Wildlife Sanctuary, all due to extensive hunting (Kumara and Singh 2004a, 2004b; Kumara and Sinha 2009). Karanth (1985) provided the first baseline data on the lion-tailed macaque’s status and distribution for the entire state of Karnataka using secondary information that included three protected areas of the Kudremukh Wild- life Division, Karkala. Kumara and Singh (2008) assessed the population status of the lion-tailed macaque for all the then three protected areas of the Kudremukh Wildlife Divi- sion (an area of about 935 km²) and revealed a minor decline in population numbers. The study did not include, however, the adjoining suitable habitats (reserved forests), which have recently been included in the protected area network there. Lacking population data for the entire landscape, the status of the lion-tailed macaque in the Kudremukh landscape or Kudremukh forest complex (Kudremukh National Park, Someshwara Wildlife Sanctuary, and Mookambika Wildlife Sanctuary) was not clear, and the body of literature revealed the need for population assessment in unexplored habitats of Figure 1. Three protected areas (Mookambika Wildlife Sanctuary, Someshwara the species. Here, we report on a survey to establish the status Wildlife Sanctuary, and Kudremukh National Park) of the Kudremukh Forest Complex in the Western Ghats, Karnataka.
176 Primates in the central Western Ghats
Sanctuary (Table 1). Kudremukh National Park (600.57 km²), Someshwara Wildlife Sanctuary (314.25 km²) and Mookam- bika Wildlife Sanctuary (370.36 km²) are now connected, with a total area of about 1,285 km² and form the single larg- est contiguous protected area network in Karnataka (Fig. 2). Major habitat types in the Kudremukh forest complex include wet evergreen forests, semi-evergreen forests, moist deciduous forests, high elevation grasslands and planta- tions (Fig. 3). The evergreen and semi-evergreen forests are mostly restricted to the valleys and steep slopes, whereas the
Figure 2. Forest ranges in three protected areas (Mookambika Wildlife Figure 4. Encounter rate of primates in the Kudremukh Forest Complex Sanctuary, Someshwara Wildlife Sanctuary, and Kudremukh National Park) (LTM: Lion-tailed Macaque, BM: Bonnet Macaque, HL: Hanuman Langur). of the Kudremukh Forest Complex, Karnataka.
Figure 3. Sampling grid cells surveyed. Figure 5. Occurrence of lion-tailed macaque groups in the Kudremukh Forest Complex.
177 Ramesh Kumar et al.
deciduous forests are confined to the vicinity of the foothills either via direct sighting or located after hearing their calls. of the Ghats. Some of the open grassland areas were con- Each detection was then georeferenced using a hand-held verted to plantations of the exotic earleaf acacia Acacia auric- GPS unit and details such as species, date, time of sighting uliformis (Fabaceae). There are about 195 human settlements and number of individuals was recorded. (“revenue enclosures”) present in the Kudremukh forest Accurate group size and age-sex of the individuals could complex, and the villagers cultivate crops such as areca palm not be collected during the grid cell assessment, and the (Areca catechu), paddy rice (Oryza sativa) and rubber (Hevea data on demography was collected separately. Two trained brasiliensis). Few areas around the revenue enclosures are researchers searched the group and followed them to get profoundly disturbed with sparse or scrub vegetation. nearby and fnd the best place to count and record the group size, and composition (age and sex). Information on age and Data collection sex was recorded as adult male, adult female, and immature. Estimation of lion-tailed macaque density using line tran- sect surveys or Distance sampling requires enormous efforts Analysis due to low detectability (Bapureddy et al. 2014). Laying The number of groups encountered per kilometer were out transect lines is often impossible over much of the spe- calculated for each grid using data from temporal replica- cies’ range, and thus the total count method (NRC 1981) has tions, and the mean encounter rate was computed from the been widely adopted to estimate populations of such rare and encounter rate from each grid cell. We were able to collect patchily distributed species (Whitesides et al. 1988; White the data on complete group size and age-sex of individuals for and Edwards 2000), for example in the Indira Gandhi Wildlife few groups, and those data were used to calculate the mean Sanctuary (Singh et al. 2002), Theni forest division (Kumara group size and age-sex ratio. Each group was differentiated et al. 2011), Sirsi-Honnavara (Kumara and Singh 2004a), and considering the time and location of the lion-tailed macaque the Kudremukh Forest Division (Kumara and Singh 2008). groups detected during consecutive walks and by group size, Population estimates are more robust, however, with grid- and the minimum number of groups were enumerated (Singh based surveys, as have been carried out in the Anamalai Hills et al. 2002; Kumara and Singh 2004a, 2008; Kumara et al. (Kumara et al. 2014) and the Kalakad-Mundanthurai Tiger 2011, 2014; Sushma et al. 2014). The minimum population Reserve (Sushma et al. 2014). We thus selected the grid- size was computed by multiplying the mean group size with based survey for the current primate population assessment the number of groups. with special emphasis on the lion-tailed macaques at Kudre- mukh Forest Complex. Results Prior to commencement of the field survey, two training workshops were organized in the Kudremukh Wildlife Divi- Abundance sion, Karkala. About 50 certifed volunteers (who had prior The number of Hanuman langurs encountered per kilo- experience of field surveys) and Forest Department personnel meter was significantly more than bonnet macaques and lion- were provided training in the identification of the different tailed macaques (Fig. 4) (F2,729 =44.06, p<0.000). Mean primate species and in the primate survey technique. Sur- encounter rates of Hanuman langur, bonnet macaque, and the veys were conducted between December 2014 and June 2015. lion-tailed macaque were 0.20 ± 0.27 SD, 0.11 ± 0.16 SD and We chose a cell size that covered a maximum home range 0.03 ± 0.10 SD, respectively. of the species. The home range of the lion-tailed macaque varies from 3–5 km² (Green and Minkowski 1977; Santhosh Group size and demography et al. 2015). A grid of 5-km² cells was laid over the map A total of 318 individuals were recorded in 20 groups of of the Kudremukh Forest Complex, covering all three of its the lion-tailed macaque (Table 2). Group size ranged from 4 protected areas (290 sampling grid cells in all). Of these, we to 31, and the mean group size was 15.9 ±7.3 SD, with 11% selected the 244 grid cells that had forest cover, eliminating being adult males, 31% adult females and 57% immatures those dominated by grassland, reservoirs, scrub forest and (Table 3). The group sizes in the Someshwara Wildlife Sanc- other land use types (Fig. 3). Each grid cell was surveyed on tuary and the Mookambika Wildlife Sanctuary (10.7 ±7.4 SD) four consecutive days by a team of 2 to 3 people comprising a were significantly smaller than in Kudremukh National Park trained volunteer and forest department personnel. The sam- (18.7 ±5.8 SD) (t =2.676, df = 18, p<0.01). The adult sex ratio pling cells were located on the ground using a hand-held GPS was 1:2.8, the adult female–immature ratio was 1:1.8, and the unit. Surveys were typically conducted between 06:00 and adult female to infant ratio was 1:0.3. 11:30 by traversing the grid cell systematically from one side In all, 219 individuals were recorded in 12 groups of to the other, and thus ensuring adequate spatial coverage of bonnet macaque (Table 2), with a mean group size of 18.3 each grid cell (Fig. 3). Survey trails were recorded using the ±5.9 SD and ranging from 9 to 30 individuals (Table 3). The GPS, mapped and measured on a GIS platform. Each team proportion of adult males, adult females, and immatures per walked at a slow pace (1 km/hr), scanning treetops for the group was 11%, 25%, and 63%, respectively. We recorded presence of primates. The length of the trail varied from 500 2.3 adult females per adult male, and the adult female to m to 13 km (mean = 3.3 ±1.5 SD). Primates were detected immature ratio was 1:2.4. The mean group size did not vary
178 Primates in the central Western Ghats
Table 1. Physical features of each forest range in each protected area of the Kudremukh Forest Complex. Total Area Altitude No. of settlements in No. of families in the Protected Area Wildlife Ranges Rainfall (mm) (km²) (m asl) the protected area protected area Kudremukh NP Karkala 135.71 5741 27 243 Kerekatte 178.09 6555 19 541 134-1892 Kudremukh 176.00 6574 11 335 Belthangady 183.58 4427 52 263 Someshwara WS Someshwara, Hebri 196.68 4000 35 621 75-870 Agumbe, Amasebailu 168.35 7000−8000 13 591 Mookambika WS Kollur 344.25 4000 26 478 20-1343 Siddapura 229.57 4000 13 136 NP = National Park, WS = Wildlife Sanctuary
(t = 0.112, df = 10, p = 0.913) between Someshwara Wildlife Discussion Sanctuary and Mookambika Wildlife Sanctuary (18.4 ±7.0 SD), and Kudremukh National Park (18.0 ±5.8 SD) (Table 2). This is a first ever systematic survey to provide the popu- A total of 134 individuals were recorded in 20 groups lation status of lion-tailed macaques, bonnet macaques and of Hanuman langur, with a mean group size of 6.7 ±3.1 SD, Hanuman langurs for the reorganized Kudremukh Forest and the group size ranged from 3 to 14 individuals (Tables Complex, where all the three protected areas (Kudremukh 2 and 3). The proportion of adult males, adult females, and National Park, Someshwara Wildlife Sanctuary, and Moo- immatures per group was 16%, 32%, and 51%, respectively kambika Wildlife Sanctuary) were connected by adjoining (Table 3). The adult male to adult female ratio was 1:1.9 and reserved forests into the protected area network. The method- adult females to immature was 1:1.6 (Table 3). The mean ology we used in the survey is well-focused and intensive for group size did not vary (t = 1.252, df = 18, p = 0.227) between the enumeration of the primate population. The lion-tailed Someshwara Wildlife Sanctuary and Mookambika Wildlife macaque population reported here is the largest in its current Sanctuary (5.8 ±2.1 SD) and Kudremukh National Park (7.6 range (585 individuals in 39 groups). The mean group size of ± 4.0 SD) (Table 3). the lion-tailed macaque (15.9) is comparable to the previous estimate from the very same protected areas (15.0: Kumara Population size of lion-tailed macaques and Singh 2008) as well estimates from other undisturbed The mean encounter rate of lion-tailed macaques in forest complexes in the Western Ghats (15.5: Ramachandran Kudremukh forest complex was 0.04 sightings/km. The total 1995; 15.4: Sushma et al. 2014). The current survey reports number of sightings of the lion-tailed macaque during the a higher number of sightings and groups when compared to survey was 84 (Table 4). Kudremukh National Park alone had the previous study (Kumara and Singh 2008) mainly due to 44 sightings whereas the Mookambika and Someshwara wild- a more adequate spatial coverage by multiple survey teams life sanctuaries had 27 and 13 sightings, respectively. Among simultaneously. Also, we covered many new sites, which had all the wildlife ranges, a maximum number of groups (nine not been surveyed previously—the Agumbe State Forest and groups) was recorded in the Kerekatte Wildlife Range, but no recently added reserved forests such as Balahalli, Somesh- groups were recorded in the Kudremukh Wildlife Range. We wara and Thombattu in the Someshwara Wildlife Sanctuary, compared the date, time and location of each of these sight- and Kodachadri, Chakra, Kilandur, Hulikal, Metkalgudda, ings to arrive at a conservative number of lion-tailed macaque and Baregundi in the Mookambika Wildlife Sanctuary. How- groups for the entire Kudremukh Forest Complex (Kudre- ever, the current population estimate of lion-tailed macaque mukh landscape). We considered two sightings as separate is 34.8% lower than the estimate by Karanth (1985) (Table 5). groups only if they were separated by a distance of 1.5 km and Differences between the estimates could perhaps be due to: occurred within a short span of time. Thus, our conservative a) two different methods employed, yielding different num- estimate of the number of lion-tailed macaque groups in the bers; b) past hunting pressure resulting in a possible decline Kudremukh Forest Complex was 39—Kudremukh National in numbers in certain parts of the Kudremukh forest complex; Park 21 groups; Someshwara Wildlife Sanctuary 8 groups; and c) imperfect detection of lion-tailed macaques due to and Mookambika Wildlife Sanctuary 10 groups (Fig. 5). We avoidance behavior. multiplied the mean group size of lion-tailed macaque (15.9) Among the endangered mammals of the world, primates with the estimated number of groups (39 groups) to indicate inhabit mostly tropical forest areas that are under diverse 585 individuals in the population. anthropogenic pressures (Harcourt and Parks 2003). Large
179 Ramesh Kumar et al.
Table 2. Group composition of the lion-tailed macaque (Macaca silenus) bonnet macaque (Macaca radiata) and the Hanuman langur (Semnopithecus hypoleucos) in the Kudremukh Forest Complex. Species Group Adult male Adult female Subadult Juvenile Infant Total M. silenus SWS 1 2 7 3 3 2 17 SWS 2 1 2 1 0 0 4 SWS 3 2 11 3 4 3 23 SWS4 - - - - - 14 MWS1 1 2 0 4 0 7 MWS2 1 1 1 1 0 4 MWS3 1 2 0 3 0 6 KNP1 2 4 5 5 0 16 KNP2 2 8 3 7 4 24 KNP3 - - - - - 23 KNP4 - - - - - 20 KNP5 - - - - - 15 KNP6 3 4 3 4 3 17 KNP7 1 3 0 2 0 6 KNP8 2 4 5 6 2 19 KNP9 2 5 3 4 2 16 KNP10 3 9 7 9 3 31 KNP11 3 8 3 5 2 21 KNP12 1 4 3 7 2 17 KNP13 1 3 6 6 2 18 Total 28 77 46 70 25 318 M. radiata SWS1 2 5 5 6 4 22 SWS2 3 5 3 7 3 21 SWS3 2 4 2 6 2 16 SWS4 2 6 4 4 3 19 SWS5 1 3 4 2 2 12 MWS1 2 3 2 2 0 9 MWS2 3 8 6 7 6 30 KNP1 2 4 3 4 2 15 KNP2 2 4 3 9 2 20 KNP3 2 6 7 7 5 27 KNP4 1 4 2 3 2 12 KNP5 2 4 4 4 2 16 Total 24 56 45 61 33 219 S. hypoleucos SWS1 1 2 1 2 0 6 SWS2 1 3 3 2 1 10 SWS3 1 2 2 1 0 6 MWS1 1 3 1 1 0 6 MWS2 1 3 1 2 1 8 MWS3 1 1 1 1 0 4 MWS4 1 1 0 2 0 4 MWS5 1 3 2 1 0 7 MWS6 1 2 0 0 0 3 KNP1 1 1 0 3 0 5 KNP2 1 2 1 0 0 4 KNP3 1 1 1 0 0 3 KNP4 1 2 1 1 0 5 KNP5 2 3 1 1 0 7
180 Primates in the central Western Ghats
Table 2. Continued KNP6 1 2 1 2 0 6 KNP7 1 2 1 3 0 7 KNP8 2 4 3 3 2 14 KNP9 1 3 3 4 3 14 KNP10 1 3 2 3 2 11 Total 21 43 25 32 9 130
Table 3. Group characteristics of lion-tailed macaque, bonnet macaque and Hanuman langur in the Kudremukh Forest Complex. Lion-tailed Macaque Bonnet Macaque Hanuman Langur N for group size 20 12 20 Mean group size ±SD 15.90 ±7.32 18.25 ±5.94 6.70 ±3.18 Min-max group size 4−31 9-30 3−14 N for demography parameters 17 12 20 Min-max adult males in the group 1−3 1−3 1−2 Mean adult males/group 1.75 2.00 1.1 Percent adult males/group 0.11 0.11 0.164 Min-max adult females in the group 1−11 3−6 0−4 Mean adult females/group 3.85 4.67 2.15 Percent adult females/group 0.31 0.25 0.32 Min-max immatures/group 1−19 4−19 0−10 Percent immatures/group 0.57 0.63 0.515 Adult males: adult females 1:2.75 1:2.33 1:1.95 Adult females: immatures 1:1.83 1:2.48 1:1.60
Table 4. Lion-tailed macaque sightings and estimation of groups in protected areas in the Kudremukh Forest Complex. Distance walked (total trail Estimated Estimated Estimated Protected Areas No. of sightings length) km groups group size population size Kudremukh NP 1338.12 (334.53) 44 21 18.69 392.49 Someshwara WS 736.68 (184.17) 13 8 10.71 85.68 Mookambika WS 1102.04 (275.51) 27 10 10.71 107.10 Total 3176.84 (794.21) 84 39 15.90 585.27 NP = National Park; WS = Wildlife Sanctuary
Table 5.5. Range-wideRange-wide distribution distribution of of troops troops in inthe the Kudremukh Kudremukh Forest Forest Complex. Complex. Protected Area 1985* 2015 No. of No. of No. of No. of
groups individuals groups individuals Kudremukh National Park Belthangady Wildlife Range 11 171 4 75 Karkala Wildlife Range 16 211 8 150 Kudremukh Wildlife Range 5 76 0 0 Kerekatte Wildlife Range 8 110 9 168 Total 40 568 21 393 Someshwara Wildlife Sanctuary Agumbe Wildlife Range 14 113 4 43 Someshwara Wildlife Range 6 79 4 43 Total 20 192 8 86 Mookambika Wildlife Sanctuary Kollur Wildlife Range 6 56 5 54 Siddapura Wildlife Range 12 84 5 54 Total 18 140 10 108 *Karanth (1985)
181 Ramesh Kumar et al.
protected areas offer much-needed opportunities for in situ the Sharavathi Valley Wildlife Sanctuary in the north, south to conservation of threatened species especially in regions of the Kudremukh Forest Complex would be within the ambit of high human densities. The population decline of the bonnet a protected area network. In the present scenario, large pro- macaque (Erinjery et al. 2017) and Hanuman langur (Kumara tected areas with a clear mandate and monitoring protocols et al. 2010) has been evident in recent years. As indicated by are the only hope for these critical habitats and their wildlife. results of the present survey, the Kudremukh Forest Complex is one of the largest contiguous areas of protected forest (total area about 1,285 km²) in the Western Ghats. It harbors size- Acknowledgments able populations of lion-tailed macaques, bonnet macaques and Hanuman langurs, which demonstrates its importance for We thank Mr. R.S. Suresh, Mr. B.J. Hosmat, and Mr. primate conservation. Vinay Luthra, Principal Chief Conservator of Forests for their We employed many trained volunteers and experienced support and cooperation in this survey. We are also most field personnel to carry out the ground surveys, which demon- grateful Dr. Ravi Ralph, Mr. Ajai Mishra, Mr. Jayaram and Dr. strates a robust, cost-effective, and replicable method to con- Sanjay Bijjur for their encouragement and support throughout duct landscape-level primate surveys with limited resources the survey. We thank Mr. B. Bhaskar, Mr. Sadanand, Smt. N. and time. We emphasize that systematic planning and capac- K. Nirmala, Mr. Shivaram Achar, Mr. Sharath Shetty, Mr. A. ity building of the field staff for rigorous field surveys is cru- A. Gopal, Mr. S. M. Kadolkar, Mr. Tanuj Kumar, Mr. K. V. cial for such endeavors. The baseline estimates provided by Subramanya, Mr. I. R. Dafedar, Mr. Dhavale, Mr. H. Shree- this primate survey can be used for comparisons with subse- dhar, Mr. S. Hariprasad and Mr. Vincent for their support quent surveys conducted in the protected area and they thus during the field survey. Heartfelt thanks and appreciation are provide a framework for the establishment of a population also due to all the field staff of Kudremukh Wildlife Divi- monitoring protocol for the primates of the region. sion, from Deputy Range Forest Officers, Forest Guards, to The Kudremukh Forest Complex has a number of houses Forest Watchers and PCP watchers, for their enthusiastic sup- and human settlements called revenue enclosures. There port during the field survey. We thank our ICT cell of the are pristine stretches of undisturbed forests present within Karnataka Forest Department and Mr. Palaksha for providing the complex, which harbor rare and endemic fauna and the shape files and maps needed for this survey. flora. The voluntary relocation and rehabilitation of families from the revenue enclosures that is underway at Kudremukh Literature Cited National Park should be continued (Ramesh Kumar 2014) and extended to the Someshwara and Mookambika wildlife Ashalakshmi, N. C., K. C. Nag and K. P. Karanth. 2014. sanctuaries (Ramesh Kumar 2016a, 2016b). Of 1,382 fami- Molecules support morphology: species status of South lies living inside the Kudremukh National Park, only 550 Indian populations of the widely distributed Hanuman came forward and applied for voluntary relocation and reha- langur. Conserv. Genet. 16: 43–58. bilitation. Only 248 of the 550 families have been relocated Bapureddy, G., K. Santhosh, S. Jayakumar and H. N. Kumara. from 2009–2010 to the present date. The voluntary relocation 2014. Estimate of primate density using distance sam- and rehabilitation of the families from Kudremukh National pling in the evergreen forests of the central Western Park should continue to be promoted and expedited for the Ghats, India. Curr. Sci. 107: 118–123. mutual beneft of the wildlife and the families. The entirely Dittus, W. P. J. 2013. Subspecies of Sri Lankan mammals as deforested areas remaining after the relocations can, when units of biodiversity conservation, with special reference expedient, be left as such to be kept as grasslands for ungu- to the primates. Ceylon J. Sci. (Biol. Sci.) 42: 1–27. lates, but if the site still has forest, albeit highly disturbed and Erinjery, J. J., S. Kumar, H. N. Kumara, K. Mohan, T. Dhanan- degraded with a discontinuous canopy cover, it should be eco- jaya, P. Sundararaj, R. Kent and M. Singh. 2017. Losing logically restored through the planting of native tree species. its ground: A case study of fast declining populations of Currently, the structural and functional connectivity of forests a ‘least-concern’ species, the bonnet macaque (Macaca is a major concern, given such widespread and rapid habitat radiata). PloS One 12(8): p.e0182140. degradation and loss. Connectivity between the protected Green, S. M. and K. Minkowski. 1977. The lion-tailed areas in the Kudremukh Forest Complex where the links macaque and its south Indian rainforest habitat. In: Pri- are tenuous should be enriched and ecologically restored for mate Conservation, G. H. Bourne and H. S. H. Prince the long-term beneft of the primates and other forest wild- Rainier III (eds.), pp.289–337. Academic Press, New life. Envisioning a larger picture, sites that are contiguous York. and located south of Kudremukh Forest Complex, such as Gubbi, S., K. Mukherjee. M. H. Swaminath and H. C. Poorne- the Charmadi-Kanarpadi reserved forests, Balur state forests, sha. 2016. Providing more protected space for tigers Pan- Shiradi-Sisla reserved forests, and Miyar reserved forests, thera tigris: a landscape conservation approach in the comprising about 267 km², should be incorporated into the Western Ghats, southern India. Oryx 50: 336–343. existing protected area boundary or declared as a new unifed, Harcourt, A. H. and S. A. Parks. 2003. Threatened primates protected area. In this case, the entire stretch consisting of experience high human densities: adding an index of
182 Primates in the central Western Ghats
threat to the IUCN Red List criteria. Biol. Conserv. 109: Ramesh Kumar, P. 2016a. Management Plan of Mookambika 137–149. Wildlife Sanctuary for the Period 2015–16 to 2024–25. Joseph, G. K. and K. K. Ramachandran. 1998. Recent popu- Principle Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife) OM lation trends and management of lion-tailed macaque No: D1/WL/CR.03/2010–11 dated 23.04.2016, Karna- (Macaca silenus) in Silent Valley National Park, Kerala, taka Forest Department, Bangalore. India. Indian Forester 124: 833–840. Ramesh Kumar, P. 2016b. Management Plan of Someshwara Karanth, K. U. 1985. Ecological status of the lion-tailed Wildlife Sanctuary for the Period 2015–16 to 2024–25. macaque and its rainforest habitats in Karnataka, India. Principle Chief Conservator of Forests (Wildlife) OM Primate Conserv. (6): 73–84. No: D1/WL/CR.03/2010–11 dated 14.06.2016, Karna- Kumara, H. N., S. Kumar and M. Singh. 2010. Of how much taka Forest Department, Bangalore. concern are the least concern species? Distribution and Santhosh, K., H. N. Kumara, A. D. Velankar and A. Sinha. conservation status of bonnet macaques, rhesus macaques 2015. Ranging behavior and resource use by lion-tailed and Hanuman langurs in Karnataka, India. Primates 51: macaques (Macaca silenus) in selectively logged forests. 37–42. Int. J. Primatol. 36: 288–310. Kumara, H. N. and M. Singh. 2004 a. Distribution and abun- Singh, M., M. A. Kumar, H. N. Kumara, A. K. Sharma and W. dance of primates in rainforests of the Western Ghats, Kaumanns. 2002. Distribution, population structure, and Karnataka, India and the conservation of Macaca silenus. conservation of lion-tailed macaques (Macaca silenus) in Int. J. Primatol. 25: 1001–1018. the Anaimalai Hills, Western Ghats, India. Am. J. Prima- Kumara, H. N. and M. Singh. 2004 b. The influence of differ- tol. 57: 91–102. ing hunting practices on the relative abundance of mam- Sushma, H. S., R. Mann, H. N. Kumara and A. Udhayan. 2014. mals in two rainforest areas of the Western Ghats, India. Population status of the endangered lion-tailed macaque Oryx 38: 321–327. Macaca silenus in Kalakad Mundanthurai Tiger Reserve, Kumara, H. N. and V. R. Singh. 2008. Status of Macaca sile- Western Ghats, India. Primate Conserv. (28): 171–178. nus in the Kudremukh Forest Complex, Karnataka, India. Umapathy, G. 1998. Impacts of Habitat Fragmentation on the Int. J. Primatol. 29: 773–781. Arboreal Mammals in the Wet Evergreen Forests of the Kumara, H. N. and A. Sinha. 2009. Decline of the endangered Anaimalai Hills in the Western Ghats, South India. PhD lion-tailed macaque in the Western Ghats, India. Oryx 43: thesis, Bharathiar University, Coimbatore, India. 292–298. White, L. and A. Edwards. 2000. Conservation Research in Kumara, H. N., R. Sasi, R. Suganthasakthivel and G. Srini- the African Rain Forests: A Technical Handbook. Wild- vas. 2011. Distribution, abundance and conservation of life Conservation Society, New York. primates in the Highwavy Mountains of Western Ghats, Whitesides, G. H., J. F. Oates, S. M. Green and R. P. Kluber- Tamil Nadu, India and conservation prospects for lion- danz. 1988. Estimating primate densities from transects tailed macaques. Curr. Sci. 100: 1063–1067. in a West African rain forest: a comparison of techniques. Kumara, H. N., R. Sasi, R. Suganthasakthivel, M. Singh, J. Anim. Ecol. 57: 345–367. H. S. Sushma, K. K. Ramachandran and W. Kaumanns. 2014. Distribution, demography, and conservation of Authors’ addresses: lion-tailed macaques (Macaca silenus) in the Anamalai P. Ramesh Kumar, Karnataka Forest Department, Bellary Hills landscape, Western Ghats, India. Int. J. Primatol. Territorial Forest Division, Bellary, Karnataka, India, e-mail: 35: 976–989.
183