New records and conservation status review of the endemic Bengal Mongoose Herpestes palustris Ghose, 1965 in southern West Bengal, India

Abstract Jayanta Kumar MALLICK

The taxonomic status of the poorly known Bengal Mongoose Herpestes palustris Ghose, 1965 remains controversial. Although it is widely considered a synonym of Small Indian Mongoose H. (javanicus) auropunctatus, there has been no credible refutation of its status as a species. Clarifying its taxonomic status is an urgent conservation priority because (i) it is endemic to a tiny range in southern West Bengal, India (in Howrah, North 24-Parganas, and South 24-Parganas districts), where it is (ii) tied to non-saline wetlands, which (iii) have been much converted (for agriculture, industries and satellite townships), degraded and fragmented, and so (iv) its available habitat seems to have greatly shrunk during the last four decades. In addition, it is possibly subject to

Mongoose was sighted in three sites with previous records or claims: Acharya Jagadish Chandra Bose Indian Botanic Garden, threatening levels of poaching. During a survey from January 2010 to April 2011 and collation of 2007−2011 records, Bengal

Shibpur in Howrah; Bheri N° 4 at Nalban fisheries of East Kolkata Wetlands (Ramsar Site n° 1208) in North 24-Parganas; and Joka (south-west Kolkata) in South 24-Parganas. It was also found in five new localities, all peri-urban habitats within Greater MongooseKolkata, three be a in valid South taxon, 24-Parganas a thorough (Survey habitat Park, survey Ajaynagar across southern[Santoshpur], Bengal close to lay to the Easternfoundations Metropolitan for the development Bypass; Kadamtala and im- plementation[Behala]; and Subhasgram,of a species conservation next to Sonarpur), action one plan in is North required. 24-Parganas Pending (Rajarhat), taxonomic andevaluation, one in Howrah the species’s (Santragachhi). omission fromIf Bengal The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species (where it is treated as a synonym of the widespread, non-threatened, Small Asian Mongoose H. javanicus) should be reconsidered.

Keywords: survey, wetlands, reclamation, habitat loss, population decline

  



                                                                                     



31 Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45:31 , December 2011

–48 Mallick

Introduction a distinct species; although no discussion of it was given in the in litt. 1997) told J. W. Duck- Taxonomic background worth (in litt. 2011) that he felt it more useful to conservation In 1965 a new species of mongoose was named from West Ben- tosource segregate itself, named H. Van forms Rompaey in cases ( of doubt, rather than to risk gal, east India: Herpestes palustris Ghose, 1965. Here called the burying them in potentially inappropriate synonymy. Bininda- ‘Bengal Mongoose’, H. palustris is also known as ‘Marsh Mon- et al. (1999) and Feldhamer et al. (2007) treated Ben- goose’ in some sources, but this name is already in wide use for gal Mongoose as a species, but did not discuss its taxonomy; Atilax paludinosus of Africa, which is not a close relative of Her- theEmonds former, at least, did this because they took Wozencraft pestes (Veron et al. 2004). Hussain (1999) named H. palustris (1993) as their taxonomic baseline. Veron et al - ‘Indian Marsh Mongoose’, but this can suggest it is an Indian cepted H. palustris as valid, but without any discussion on why relative of A. paludinosus - they did so, at variance with their stated taxonomic. (2008) reference ac goose’, but this name is misleading; although the type locality (Wozencraft 2005); and in contrast to their earlier and later . It has also been called ‘Salt Lake Mon treatments (Veron et al. 2006, Gilchrist et al. 2009). - ofis Nalbanits erstwhile (as ‘Nalbani’), saltiness, Salt and Lake the mongoose(Ghose 1965), has thebeen record recorded was cussed below (under ‘Morphological distinction…’). In sum, onlynot from at and brackish around habitat; non-saline the namewetlands of the (see area below, is a reflectionin ‘Distri- The characters used to define Bengal Mongoose are dis- bution and Habitat Use’). The animal is very similar in external though none is conclusive on the data published. For most char- and skull morphology to Small Indian Mongoose H. (javanicus) acters,several contextuallines of plausible information evidence is limitedsupport or its non-existentspecific status, con al- auropunctatus, hence its late discovery, even though it occurs cerning the sample sizes and locations of origin of specimens of Bengal and Small Indian Mongooses examined; and, for all, today, some birdwatchers photographing H. palustris in the discussion of intra-taxon variation, particularly from across the in one of the most densely populated areas of the world. Even wide range of Small Indian Mongoose, is inadequate. The latter consider them to be H. (j.) auropunctatus. - semi-urbanBecause non-saline of this close wetlands similarity, of Kolkata Ghose’s Metropolitan proposal remains Area cance of the characters attributed to Bengal Mongoose. In partic- controversial. Many subsequent sources in India, including ular,information the dark is area necessary on the contextmuzzle oftento assess now the seen taxonomic as diagnostic signifi of the Zoological Survey of India (ZSI), the Wildlife Institute of In- H. palustris does occur in other populations of the H. javanicus– dia and the Indian Wildlife Protection Act (1972), as amended H. auropunctatus group of mongooses: in siamensis from Thai- 2002, have treated Bengal Mongoose as a valid species (Soota land and rubrifrons from southern China (Ghose 1965). & Chaturvedi 1970, Ghose & Chaturvedi 1972, Agrawal et al. This uncertainty produces a conservation dilemma: if 1992, De et al et al Bengal Mongoose is a valid taxon, then it is probably highly 1999, Walker 1999, Walker & Molur 1999, Alfred & Nandi 2000, threatened (see below, under ‘Population Trend’), but if it is Chattopadhyay. 1998,2001, MolurAlfred & Chakraborty. 1998, Hussain 2002, 1999, Alfred Sanyal et al. not valid, then these southern West Bengal mongooses are irrelevant to conservation at all but the most local scale. No 2005, Nandy 2006, Dey 2007, Sanyal et al 2002, Chaudhuriet al & Sarkar 2003, Anonymous 2004, Raghu Ram- Indian Mongoose (either as a subspecies or, apparently in hajpal et al. 2009, Bahuguna & Mallick 2010,. 2007,Chakraborty Deuti 2008, & De somesource cases, considering not a valid Bengal taxon) Mongoose detailed conspecific its reasons with for soSmall do- 2010,Kundu Sharma . 2008, 2011). Basak By contrast,2009, Ghosh most 2009, international Mallick 2009, sources Sa ing. The only independent evaluation of the characters used by Ghose (1965) to diagnose the species seems to be that of 1999, Veron et al H. Agrawal et al. (1992: 107), who concluded that “as the distin- (javanicus)either did notauropunctatus mention it (Honacki (Nellis 1989, et al Taylor & Matheson guishing characters mentioned by Ghose (1965) hold good in 1992, Wozencraft. 2005,2006) Wozencraft or considered et al it conspecific withet al. the present series, it is maintained here as a distinct species”. . 1982, Corbet & Hill In the light of this, and since there seems to be no credible, let Indian sources, e.g. Prater (1971), who made. 2008, no Gilchristmention of it, alone compelling, published case that it is not a valid taxon, a 2009). Similar treatment has been afforded by H.some javanicus influential that precautionary stance is taken here, and Bengal Mongoose is “the Marsh Mongoose of West Bengal is possibly a sub-species”. treated as a taxonomic reality at, for convenience, the level of and MenonSome international(2003), who stated sources (p. do 108) not under reject the taxon’s va- lidity, or at least not absolutely. Wenzel & Haltenorth (1972: urgent research and conservation need. 121) listed H. palustris as a separate species, but with the com- species. Conclusive clarification of its taxonomic status is an ment (in translation): “(taxonomic) status uncertain, may be - only a subspecies of javanicus tion’).An Dey associated (2007: problem33) wrote is thethat identification “each and every of mongooses trapped H. urva…pend- mongoosewithin its tinywas rangeH. palustris (which. So is thedetailed inference in ‘Results: was drawn distribu that ”. Ewer (1973: 405) thought it was “possibly . . . only subspecifically distinct from ofing habits further (from clarification Ghose 1965); of [its] her status provisional I have not linkage listed [it]with as H. a (Tablethe entire 3) this mongoose was based population on only insix the animals East Kolkata (three adult(= Calcutta) males, urvadistinct shows species”. that sheEwer presumably (1973) based had hernot viewseen onany descriptions specimens. twoWetlands adult isfemales constituted and one of [Bengal] juvenile Mongoose”,female) caught but apparentlyat one site Schreiber et al H. palustris in an appendix of (Nalban), weakening the validity of their conclusion for the en- named taxa for which there was too little information to eval- uate their validity.. (1989) Wozencraft placed (1993) listed H. palustris as a consistent with those of Ghose (1965: 173), “though sympatric withtire range H. auropunctatus of Bengal Mongoose.H. palustris Nonetheless, these findings are- H. palustris eas, a habitat very different from that of the former”. valid species, based on Wenzel & Haltenorth (1972) and Ewer , [ ] is confined to marshy ar (1973). Van Rompaey & Colyn (1996) considered Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45, December 2011 32 Review of Herpestes palustris

So far as I have traced, there is no credible record of Small Indian Mongoose or of Grey Mongoose H. edwardsii from any non-saline wetland within the known geographic range of Bengal Mongoose. The only other mongoose in West Bengal, Crab-eating Mongoose H. urva, is restricted to its north, and highly distinctive in morphology; it is not discussed further. A compilation of the credible records of Small Indian Mongoose and Grey Mongoose from southern West Bengal would be most valuable, but was beyond the scope of the current work. Agrawal et al. (1992: 106) recorded occurrence of Small Indian Mongoose in all districts of West Bengal, “near the hu- man habitations, particularly adjacent to paddy or sugar cane - tioned. Despite extensive occurrence of Small Indian Mongoose infields West and Bengal, burial only grounds”; four specimens marshes or from swamps the state were are not held men at ZSI. Three are from the state’s northern part. The only one from Fig. 1. Grey Mongoose Herpestes edwardsii, Chintamoni Kar the south in Agrawal et al - Wildlife Sanctuary, Narendrapur, South 24-Parganas District, out exact locality (and so its location relative to Bengal Mon- West Bengal, India, on 13 February 2011 (Photo: Shantanu Bhat- goose range is not known).. (1992) In Hooghly is from (21°56 Kolkata' district' with tacharya). place of the author, which supports large marshes,N, 88°04 he foundE), noon H.the palustris right bank: all of animals the River (about Hooghly, 100) north sighted of Howrah,(opportunistically; the native Mongoose, all individuals from wetlands critically examined there were no systematic observations) during last 40 years, including in marshes, were Small Indian Mongooses. so, for the present review, all recent records of Small Indian/ Small Indian Mongoose is listed as widespread in the have fitted Bengal Mongoose, not other mongoose species, and et al. Bengal Mongoose. Further information may require this stance toBengal be re-evaluated, Mongooses inand the it East is of Kolkata the utmost Wetlands importance are taken that to fube- East Kolkata Wetlands by Anonymous (2004) and Kundu et al. ture authors reporting the species specify the detail of num- (2008); the latter is derived directly from the former, given the close similarity in text in the two documents. Kundu species) for every single record, wherever possible with photo- (2008) tabulated the occurrence of both Bengal Mongoose- graphicbers, precise evidence. locations, Dey (2007: and the 31) basis wrote of identificationthat “because these(as either two and Small Indian Mongoose at all five localities in the East species (Bengal and Small Indian Mongooses) are sibling spe- BantalaKolkata Wetlands(BT), Jhagrasisa that they (JS), studied Sahebmara (based (SM) on theand abbrevia Mahish- bathantions as (MB), explained but the in Anonymousearlier source [2004]): (Anonymous Chowbhaga 2004) (CB), had present review has brought together all records including of un- recorded Bengal Mongoose only at Sahebmara (with Small trappedcies, so trapping individuals, was Dey’sa must (2007) for identification” view should and guide although all future the - work. Camera-trapping and active photography may also gener- orIndian editorial Mongoose slackness recorded is not atclear. all five These sites). two Whether sources gavethe dif no ference between sources reflects genuine change in opinion Morphologicalate records open distinction to certain between and independent Bengal and identification. Small Indian Mongooses andevidence secondary of critical data identification … collected fromof mammals, the local and residents even stated and The original description of H. palustris distinguished it from that the mammal listings were derived from “field observation Small Indian Mongoose by a number of mostly somewhat subtle­ this apparent claim of widespread overlap between the two features (Ghose 1965; see Table 1). Ghose (1965) considered that fishermen community” (Anonymous 2004: 10). Therefore, the morphological characters, ecological conditions, duration corroboration. Similarly vague reference was made to overlap of foraging, food habits, hunting techniques, and the apparent inspecies habitat is usehere between considered Bengal at Mongoosesufficient riskand “bothof error the tospecies need absence of hybridisation (although he did not specify how, on of mongoose” (apparently Grey Mongoose and Small Indian the information available, this could safely be concluded) tend Mongoose) by Sanyal (1999), a statement ignored here because to indicate that Bengal and Small Indian Mongooses are sibling the evidence on which it was based was not presented. species. Subsequent microscopic examination of the structure Grey Mongoose occurs in both north and south West Ben- of dorsal guard hairs of different mongoose species (including samples from seven Small Indian Mongooses from six widely of Bengal Mongoose; specimens are held at ZSI from Basirhat in spaced localities and nine Bengal Mongooses from three locali- Northgal, but 24-Parganas, seems not to and have it beenoccurs collected in Alipore from in theSouth specific 24-Parga sites- H. palustris (De et al nas (Agrawal et al. 1992); Bengal Mongoose has not been record- one absolute difference was found, in the scaling pattern, as ed from these sites. During the present study, Grey Mongoose wereties) supportsvarious othersthe specific that arestatus either of very subtle or apparently. 1998): was photographed (Fig. 1) at Barasat in North 24-Parganas and - Bengal Mongoose closely resembles Small Indian Mon- ganas, where no Bengal Mongoose was sighted. goose.reflect differenceThe blackish in the patch range on of the variation muzzle (see above below, the Tablenose (Fig.2). ChintamoniThus, it Kar seems Bird Sanctuarythat within (Narendrapur) the geographic in Southrange 24-Par of ani- 2) is its most prominent external distinguishing mark (Ghose mals showing the gross morphological characters of Bengal 1965; see photographs in Dey 2007), although it is shared by

33 Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45, December 2011 Mallick

Table 1. Morphological1 and behavioural differences among Bengal MongooseH. palustris, Small Indian Mongoose H. (j.) auropunctatus and Grey Mongoose H. edwardsii. Criterion Bengal Mongoose Small Indian Mongoose Grey Mongoose Source Head and body 28–36 cm 25 cm 33.5–35.8 cm Agrawal et al. 1992 length Tail length 22–26 cm 26 cm 33.2–34.2 cm Weight 450–900 g 305–662 g 1,400–1,700 g NEWS in litt. 2006, Dey 2007, Bahuguna & Mallick 2010 Length of hind foot 5.1–6.4 cm 4.8 cm 6.6–6.9 cm Agrawal et al. 1992 Length of ear 1.8–2.7 cm 0.9 cm 1.5–2.8 cm Cranial length 61.8–72.3 mm 58.4 mm 72.7–73.4 mm Condylobasal 60.9–71.5 mm 57.2 mm 71.4–72.5 mm length Maxillary width 10.1–12.9 mm 10.7 mm 12.5–13.7 mm Least interorbital 9.8–12.1 mm 11.6 mm 12.5–13.8 mm width Postorbital width 8.6–13.8 mm 17.0 mm 11.2–12.8 mm Length of fourth 5.6–6.3 mm 5.5 mm 6.4–7.2 mm upper premolar Length of first 4.8–5.8 mm 3.2 mm 6.2–6.3 mm lower molar Zygomatic width 29.5–34.6 mm 29.0 mm 34.8–38.0 mm Coat Rough Smooth and silky Usually coarse Ghose 1965, Dimorphism in Dimorphic (both dark and light forms), Much individual variation Colour varies due to age, ­Bahuguna & ­Mallick colour not correlated with season, age or sex in colouration, but no season and locality factors 2010 dichromatism reported Grizzling of pelage Coarse Fine Coarse Muzzle Black patch Dark brown, no patch Rusty brown, no patch Tail Darker tip in 8 out of 19 specimens origi- No darker tip Whitish or yellowish-red nally examined (more clearly seen in the tip, but never black light form) Cranium Narrows abruptly behind the orbit so that Gradually narrows from the - postorbital region appears as a constriction orbit between frontals and cranium Crest Well-developed Not so well-developed - Ghose 1965 Skull Stronger, slightly longer, and with ­bulging Weaker, shorter, and with- - forehead; in general more similar to out bulging forehead H. edwardsii than to H. (j.) auropunctatus Basioccipital Broader Narrower - Inner margins of Subparallel Not subparallel - the bullae Teeth Robust and strong; cusps of molars and Weak, cusps of molars and - premolars less pointed premolars more pointed Posterior chamber Reduced and more inflated Less reduced and less - of the bullae inflated Odour “Obnoxious” No such odour - Food preference Small fish and aquatic invertebrates, among Mainly carnivorous, among Carnivorous Ghose 1965, Deuti snails preferring the water snail Pila globosa snails preferring the land 2008, Bahuguna & snail Achatina fulica Mallick 2010

(continued)

Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45, December 2011 34 Review of Herpestes palustris

Table 1. (continued) Criterion Bengal Mongoose Small Indian Mongoose Grey Mongoose Source Hunting Semi-aquatic hunter, more active during the Terrestrial hunter, hunts Terrestrial hunter Dey 2007, Deuti early morning and late afternoon throughout the day 2008, Bahuguna & Mallick 2010 Ecological niche Only non-saline wetlands, mud-banks near Various; but not in non-sa- Near human habitations Ghose 1965, Agraw- the water’s edge line wetlands, in southern al et al. 1992, Dey West Bengal 2007, Deuti 2008

1Characteristics of guard hairs are presented in Table 2.

Fig. 3. Bengal Mongooses Herpestes palustris, Nalban, West Ben- gal, India, on 17 February 2011; (top) grey phase, urinating; (bot- Fig. 2. Bengal Mongoose Herpestes palustris, grey phase, showing tom) rufous phase (Photo: S. Jha). the dark suffusion on the muzzle, Survey Park, Ajaynagar, West Bengal, India, on 9 November 2010 (Photo: S. Bhattacharya). The diameter, scale type, scale count, scale margin and - taxa in the H. javanicus–H. auropunctatus complex in some cies were distinguishable in the samples analysed by De et al. other parts of its large range (Ghose 1965). medullary configuration of dorsal guard hairs of the two spe Bengal Mongoose females are smaller (body length 30–32 Bengal Mongoose was more similar to other mongooses than cm, tail length 25–27 cm, weight 500–625 g) than males (body to(1998; Small see Asian ­Table Mongoose, 2), and while their theyresults found require that corroboration.in some cases

(Agrawal et al. 1992, Dey 2007). It is dimorphic in colour, with the colour dimorphism in Bengal Mongoose mentioned by darklength and 32–36 light forms cm, tail (Fig. length 3): the 26–28 former cm, has weight individual 625–900 contour g) GhoseSpecifically, (1965) they and did others, not examine and the enough sampling specimens of H. javanicus– to notice hairs alternately banded black and buff-yellow, the latter has H. auropunctatus was too spatially limited to account for in- them banded blackish brown and straw yellow (Ghose 1965, - Alfred & Chakraborty 2002). ver, only one specimen came from a state next to West Ben- traspecific variation across its large distribution range; moreo

35 Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45, December 2011 Mallick

Table 2. Microscopic and macroscopic profile of dorsal guard hairs of Bengal Mongoose H. palustris, Small Indian Mongoose H. (j.) auropunctatus and Grey Mongoose H. edwardsii. Character1 H. palustris H. (j.) auropunctatus H. edwardsii Physical characters Colour Alternately banded with ochraceous In general alternately banded with Tip clove brown then alternately buff and Prout’s Brown with Prout’s clove brown and buff with clove banded with cream buff and clove Brown tip. brown tip. brown. In some of the hairs overall ferrugineous tinge evident. Total length 14−25 mm (18.5 ± 3.45) 13−18 mm (14.83 ± 1.76) 20–31 mm (25.61 ± 3.34) Apical diameter 25−50 (40.83 ± 6.31) 25−50 (41.66 ± 5.23) 50–90 (70 ± 12.4) (µ) Middle diameter 50−100 (80 ± 7.64) 50−100 (79.16 ± 9.19) 70–100 (90 ± 8.17) (µ) Basal diameter 50−70 (58.33 ± 4.78) 50−75 (62.5 ± 4.5) 50–90 (60 ± 5.4) (µ) Number of bands Variable, 96–90% hairs five banded Variable, 78–81% hairs five banded Variable, 80–85 % hairs seven band- and rest seven banded. and rest seven banded. ed and rest five banded. Width of bands Variable, Prout’s brown bands usual- Variable, clove brown bands usu- Variable, but clove brown bands ly wider than ochraceous buff; width ally wider than buff except at base; usually wider than Cream buff ex- of Prout’s brown bands 2−6 mm width of clove brown bands 2−6 cept at base; width of clove brown (3.77 ± 0.51) and that of ochraceous mm (3.97 ± 1.05) and that of buff bands 3.30–5.0 mm (4.02 ± 0.6) and buff 1−4 mm (2.75 ± 0.07) 2−4 mm (2.66 ± 0.16) that of cream buff 2–4 mm (2.88 ± 0.54) Surface structure Scale pattern Irregular wave Flattened irregular mosaic Irregular wave Scale count 148–200 (160) 95–120 (104) 180–225 (220) Scale margin Smooth with few notches Smooth Crenate Side-to-side scale 10−20 mm (16 ± 2.02) 10−20 mm (16 ± 3.06) 20–40 (30 ± 4.58) length Proximo–distal 4−10 mm (7.01 ± 1.16) 7−10 mm (8.31 ± 0.08) 2–7 (5 ± 0.91) length Medulla Medullary con- Narrow aeriform lattice Unbroken with cortical intrusion Unbroken with cortical intrusion figuration Medullary Index 0.75−0.76 mm (0.755 ± 0.004) 0.88−0.90 mm (0.885 ± 0.0067) 0.81–0.83 (0.82 ± 0.003) 1After De et al. (1998). Neither the location-specific source of samples nor the sample sizes are given in the original. Numerical values are given as range (mean ± one standard deviation). gal, and none from the state itself. Thus, the possibility of an Landscape ecology overlap in characters, perhaps even clinally, between Bengal Southern Bengal has numerous inland non-saline wetlands, situ- Mongoose and geographically overlapping/nearby Small Indi- - an Mongoose could not be investigated. Sahajpal et al. (2009) wrote of the distinctiveness of Bengal Mongoose hair under ated in the alluvial flood plains of the River Hooghly, a distribu the microscope but unfortunately compared it only with Grey tary of the River Ganga. (A distributary is a stream that branches- H. smithii and Crab-eating Mon- darbans,off and flows have away a greater from proportion the main river.) of open Two saline types water of wetlands surface goose, and it is therefore not clear how, if at all, Bengal Mon- (salinityare found varies in the fromHooghly low sub-delta.to high, depending Large swamps, on the e.g. upstream the Sun gooseMongoose, differs Ruddy in the Mongoose characters investigated from Small Indian freshwater discharge) and are generally deeper than the marsh- Mongoose. Although previous documents have stressed Bengal poorly drained basins. The present review traced no claim of Mongoose’s similarity to Small Indian Mongoose, confusion Bengales, have Mongoose trees, and inare such usually habitat. found It is along the marginal river flood-plains marshes, and e.g. - gal Mongoose seems closer in size to Grey Mongoose than to waste-water of the metropolitan city, and are mostly treeless but with Grey Mongoose can also be problematic. In the field, Ben- otherwisethe East Kolkata with lush Wetlands, plant growth, that are that continually support this inundated species. with ments in Agrawal et al. (1992; although measurements of only Apart from being a rich repository of aquatic and semi- oneSmall Small Indian Indian Mongoose, Mongoose an impression are given). reflecting Grey Mongoose the measure can be - distinguished by its grey coat, heavier build, thicker and bush- ier tail, higher stance (due to longer legs, particularly the hind useaquatic wetlands flora andcontribute fauna of much the Lower to the socio-economicGangetic Plains Bio-geowell-be- ones), and the absence of any black patch on the muzzle. graphic Zone (7B; Rodgers & Panwaret 1988),al these multiple-

ing of the local communities (Kundu . 2008). Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45, December 2011 36 Review of Herpestes palustris

on investigations of the occurrence of Bengal Mongoose in many wetlands, including some that were not surveyed earlier. the eighteenthThe East century.Kolkata TheWetlands, tidal effect those ceased on the in eastern1930 with bank rapid of the River Hooghly, were an extension of the Sundarbans until Study sites - ies)silting by upreceiving of the River(and decomposing)Bidyadhari since waste-waters 1913 (Furedy through 1987). a seriesThese wetlandsof channels were and converted locks. The into present sewage-fed conservation fisheries (bher areas city comprises many water bodies in North and South 24-Par- ganasThe non-saline districts. wetlandsOnly those in thesites south where and Bengal south-east Mongoose of Kolkata was - sighted during 2007–2011 are described. All are within Greater trict),of the SonarpurEast Kolkata (44 Wetlands ha) and Bhangar are located (45.49 at Bidhannagar ha; South 24-Par South- ganas(21 ha, district) North 24-Parganas (Chattopadhyay district), 2001). Tiljala In 1995, (14 ha,the Kolkataarea of Biddis- (22°25Kolkata.'–40 The' survey area'–35 'is shown in Fig. 4. municipality extended over 33.5 km². Thereafter 21 km² was In North 24-Parganas District, the East Kolkata Wetlands addedhannagar to Bidhannagar, was 12.5 km² of and which East Sector Kolkata V comprises Wetlands within2.3 km². this km² N, 88°22 E) were declared a Ramsar site (n° These marshes differ from other Indian wetlands by their 1208) in 2002. This funnel-shaped area extends over 125 negligible surface catchment; instead, a perched aquifer lies outfall).with This 268 marsh water is bodies an inter-distributary on both sides of (encased a dry-weather by the more than 400 feet below them. The marshy edges, infested distributaryflow channel and discharging tidal channel) into the wetland Kulti Gong in the (the mature waste-water delta of with the aquatic plants like cattails Typha, reeds Phragmites, - sedges (Cyperaceae), grasses (Gramineae) and Water-hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes form the typical habitat of Bengal Mon- the River Hooghly. Originally, it was a vast region of tributar in litt. 2006, corroborated by records assembled ies and distributaries extending between the River Hooghly here). oldeston the integratedwest and theresource River recoveryBidyadhari practice (now thatdead) combines on the east ag- goose (NEWS riculture(Kundu 2010). and aquaculture These wetlands to use sustain the refuse the world’s and waste-waters largest and Previous field studies and records of Bengal Mongoose Since the proposal of H. palustris as a valid species, for which wetlands is mediocre, even in the core area. Macrophytes in- cludeof Kolkata Sagittaria metropolis montevidensis (Kumar 2010)., Cryptocoryne Floristic diversity ciliata, Cyperus of these, - Acrostichum aureum and Ipomoea aquatica materials were examined from Duttabad (= Dattavad; north of bund vegetation is mostly dominated by Fimbristylis ferruginea, East Kolkata Wetlands), Hederhat (= Hedearhat; between Ka Suaeda maritima, Acanthus ilicifolius, Excoecaria. Embankment- agallocha and inlikapur North and 24-Parganas Mukundapur, district, south there of East have Kolkata been Wetlands)several exten and- Avicennia officinalis sionsNalban of (= known Nalbani), range. all east Agrawal of the etEastern al. (1992) Metropolitan accepted Bypass, speci- mens from the Botanical Gardens at Shibpur and from Nazim- by numerous algae,. Saltclumps Lake of proper reeds like(which, Aegiceras despite majus its name, and - cattailshas been like non-saline Typha elephantina since 1930;. The Furedy marshy, 1987) shallow is dominated and large water bodies or wetland bogs including swampy edges are (bothganj (both in North Howrah 24-­Parganas [= Haora] district). district) In and addition, from Bantala three reports(= Ban oftal; its south-east occurrence of in the South East 24-Parganas Kolkata Wetlands) district were and Sukhcharavailable, Phragmites karka and Typha angustifolia (Anonymous 2004). but only that of Ghose & Chaturvedi (1972) was supported by a Thesefully or wetlands partially are filled lined with by emergent narrow mud-banks, hydrophytes, on such which as specimen, or by any detail of the record(s). Molur et al - . (1998) tergrasses crustaceans and a few including stunted shrimps, trees grow molluscs (Deuti (Gastropoda, 2008). These Bi- Tableand Raghu 3). Two Ram reports (2005) have simply been stated published that the on speciesits prime occurred habitat valvia),wetlands bugs are rich(Hemiptera), in mongoose beetles food (Coleoptera), items, e.g. fish, amphibians freshwa so are here considered as only unconfirmed reports (see below, (Amphibia) and turtles (Testudines) (Anonymous 2004). in the East Kolkata Wetlands. The first study was undertaken by Nalban, North 24-Parganas District ZSI in 2005 (Deuti 2008), the second by a Kolkata-based non- manygovernmental other sources organisation have mentioned (NGO), the the Nature species, Environment these are the & Wildlife Society (NEWS), in 2005–2006 (Dey 2007). Although Nalban (Fig. 5) is the largest wetland of East Kolkata Wetlands history. In addition, Mallick (2009) compiled the records avail- (Deuti 2008), covering 167.14 ha (413 acres) and composed of a ableonly fivesince presenting Bengal Mongoose’s original records original of distributiondescription, orincluding natural few bheries located near Chingrighata. It is bounded by Eastern - byMetropolitan the Fisheries Bypass Department on the west, of the Basanti Government Road on of the West south Bengal, and andSalt Lakeused Cityfor pisciculture. (Bidhannagar) Compared on the north with andthe vastnesseast. It is of owned open sincemore detail2006 onto investigateNEWS’s 2006–2007 the current survey global results status than of isBengal avail water, few patches of aquatic plants have been left. The periph- Mongooseable in Dey and (2007). assess No its further conservation field study needs. has been undertaken ery of the bheries is covered with aquatic vegetation like Water- Of late, seven local bird-watchers and photographers hyacinth. Most of the recent studies of Bengal Mongoose were (S. Mallick, S. Jha, S. Bhattacharya, A. Chatterjee, H. G. Mukho- conducted in N° 4 bheri of sightings of Bengal Mongoose in the surroundings of a few Sahebmara, North 24-Parganas(Dey 2007, District Deuti 2008, Mallick 2009). fragmentedpadhyay, P. K. wetlands Biswas and of Howrah, L. Barman) North have and reported South 24-Pargaa number- The privately-owned Sahebmara is the second largest bheri of author. The present study collates these records and reports closely resembles that of Nalban. nas districts, all within Greater Metropolitan Kolkata, to the East Kolkata Wetlands, spread over 147.18 ha. Its ecology

37 Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45, December 2011 Mallick

Fig. 4. East Kolkata Wetlands and sur- roundings, West Bengal, India. The en- tire world range of Bengal Mongoose Herpestes palustris lies within the area mapped, except for the extension for 47 km south of Diamond Harbour to Bhasna.

Rajarhat, North 24-Parganas District

BagjolaThis part and of threeEast Kolkata other canals Wetlands pass isthrough nearer thisto the area. erstwhile Due to spill-over basin of the River Bidyadhari on the east. Keshtopur, years, mongoose habitat has further reduced. Only a few small the development of New Town at Rajarhat during the recent bheri, Munshir bheri, Diller bheri, Narkeldangar bheri and Mol- larwetlands bheri. with aquatic vegetation remain, including Khari Bari

Acharya Jagadish Chandra Bose Indian Botanic Garden, Howrah District This Government-owned National Garden, covering an area of 1.09 km², is located at Shibpur on the west (right) bank

plants and many indigenous species. It has 27 large and me- Fig. 5. Bengal Mongoose Herpestes palustris habitat at Nalban, of the River Hooghly. The garden has many exotic tropical West Bengal, India, on 26 March 2011 (photograph by S. Mallick). dium ponds, a few connecting with the River Hooghly. These ponds contain more than two dozen fish species. The garden is Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45, December 2011

38 Review of Herpestes palustris

nymphs, grasshoppers and crickets (Orthoptera), millipedes/ much was converted for agriculture and towns, mainly dur- centipedesrich in molluscs, (Myriopoda) aquatic andbugs crabs and beetles,(Decapoda) dragonfly (A. Chatterjee (Odonata) in ingmals the (Raghu early Ram1970s. 2005). The east–westThe area wasCharial entirely khal a(canal) marsh forms until litt. 2010). the northern boundary of the wetland. The grassland starts a short way down the Yani Sarani (dirt road) and is dominated by Santragachhi, Howrah District Phragmites, Saccharum, Erianthus, Imperata, Desmostachya and Achyranthes. The non-saline wetland is seasonally covered by Typha, Sagittaria, Cyperus, Cryptocoryne, Acrostichum, Ipomoea, Out of 24 ha of Santragachhi (= Santragachi), the ‘Makal jheel’ Eleocharis and others. There is another wetland (area <1 ha), (lake) is spread over 12.8 ha, roughly rectangular (length Green View, near Joka Goddess Kali temple (about 3 km from about 915 m, width 305 m, perimeter 2,418 m and depth 4–7 IIMC) with some reed bed, grasses and aquatic plants. surroundedft), at an altitude by dense of 8 humanm. It lies habitations, south of Santragachhi khatals (cow railway sheds) andyard, small-scale about 20 kmindustry. east of The the jheel East hasKolkata several Wetlands, small islands, and is Kadamtala, South 24-Parganas District Ty- - pha latifolia is moderately common, but Phragmites communis prolific Water-hyacinth, and large trees along its banks. pondKadamtala (totalling is part in ofarea the <1 satellite ha), surrounded township of by Behala. aquatic A fewvegeta pri- been managed by the State Forest Department since 1992. The tion,vately-owned survive. lakes, including Katapukur, Harirpukur, Majhi’s jheelrare. Thereceives land isvarious owned domesticby the South-Eastern and industrial Railways sewage, and andhas Survey Park, South 24-Parganas District thousands of resident and migratory birds, and a wide variety Survey Park, Ajaynagar, lies at the eastern end of Santoshpur, refuse-dumping is engulfing part of the wetland. It supports

Joka,of zooplankton, South 24-Parganas molluscs District and fish. beenbounded developed by Eastern here. Metropolitan The area has Bypassmany big on pondsthe west, and about lakes - 5 km south of Salt Lake City. Of late, a satellite township has- ta, where the Indian Institute of Management, Calcutta (IIMC) Joka is a semi-urban area at the edge of south-west Kolka (privately-owned) including Kalibaripukur, Nilpukur, Halud 117). Just behind IIMC lies a government-owned tract of fallow Mukundapurpukur, Kaanchpukur, on the surroundedeastern side by of aquaticthe bypass vegetation. (22°29 'There32"N, mixedis located wetland-grassland to the east of the (54.63 arterial ha), Diamond rich in wild Harbour plants Road and (NHani- are many' " big bheries a few kilometers away at Kalikapur and Wetlands, which were distributed over 12.35 km² (a 14 km stretch88°23 48 fromE). Santoshpur Formerly, this on areathe south was a to part Majherhat of Brace railway Bridge

- ingstation low ontide the transformed north). Regular 70% ofinflow the original of water swamp from theinto River low- vegetationHooghly at marshland.high tide with This very vast low swamp salinity witnessed and outflow the impact dur of human activities in the post-independence period (1947 onwards). Systematic removal of Typha and Phragmites and Aeschynomene, and insanitary land-

cutting of native flora like

Fig. 6. Bengal Mongoose Herpestes palustris burrow, Nalban, West Bengal, India, on 20 February 2011; (left) close-up, (top) showing multiple openings in proximity (Photos: S. Mallick).

39 Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45, December 2011 Mallick

2006 had caught six of them. Japanese wire traps baited with live drastically and gradually changed the area to a human-made ecosystemfilling with overrefuse the and years solid (Ghosh waste &reduced Nandi 2009).the quality of water measured,country chicken weighed, were sexed, placed marked near burrows black onunder the camouflage tail-tip (with of Subhasgram, South 24-Parganas District hair-dye),leaves of Water-hyacinth. and then released Trapped on the mongooses spot. The whole were identified,operation Subhasgram (Changripota) from setting the trap until release usually took about three hours. Sonarpur on the left side of Netaji Subhas Chandra (N. S. C.) To estimate the population status of Bengal Mongoose is located 2.8 (small, km south-eastwell-covered of in the sample sites at N° 4 bheri, Nalban, the burrow count with aquatic vegetation) and gardens survive nearby, particu- method was followed. Based on observed morning exit and larlyBose westRoad. of A thefew railwayprivately-owned lines, where jheels human habitations are evening return of mongooses, the study team selected burrows scattered. But, the newly developed satellite township has al- (Fig. 6) on the slopes of canal banks and bheries, and closed most destroyed the wetland habitat on the eastern side. the mouths of the burrows with clay in the late evening when all mongooses were assumed to have entered the burrows. Methods Next day, in the early morning, the team counted the number of burrows that were opened. To explore the present distribution of Bengal Mongoose in all three districts known to support it (Howrah, North and South Results 24-Parganas; Fig. 4), post-2006 records were collated and a - Distribution tacharya, S. Jha and some other photographers, local forest During the 45 years since its discovery, H. palustris has been stafffield surveyand NGOs), was conductedduring January (by the 2010–April author, S. Mallick,2011 (152 S. Bhat per- reported from over a dozen sites in southern West Bengal (i.e. son-days, on average 12 hours/day). The survey and/or the collated osbervations investigated known or reported Bengal Table 3. In addition the Bombay Natural History Society con- its entire world range). Records up to 2006H. palustris are summarised or of H. (j)in 24-Parganas (north-eastern part of Bengal Mongoose range), auropunctatus from within the range of H. palustris (S. Bajaru ShibpurMongoose in sitesHowrah at Sukhchar (western and part), East Diamond Kolkata Wetlands,Harbour, BudgeNorth infirmed litt. 2011). that it Theholds total no areaspecimens of non-saline of wetlands surveyed Budge (Bajbaj), Patiatala and Joka, South 24-Parganas (south- during 2010–2011 was under 200 km². Bengal Mongoose was ern part), as well as similar marshes within the known gen- sighted in three previously reported sites and three previously undocumented peri-urban ones (Table 4). The former com- which had not been surveyed for the species earlier. These prised Acharya Jagadish Chandra Bose Indian Botanic Garden, neweral rangesites are of Bengal located Mongoose around: beyond East Kolkata Wetlands, Shibpur (1.09 km²); Bheri and Joka (about 0.55 km²). The new sites comprised Survey N°4 in Nalban fisheries (1.67 km²); Bypass (southern limits of Brace Bridge Wetlands during mid- (1) Rajarhat wetlands, east of East Kolkata Wetlands next Park, Ajaynagar (Santoshpur) close to Eastern Metropolitan- to Salt Lake City; la (Behala) (<1 ha); and Subhasgram (<1 ha) next to Sonarpur. (2) Eastern Metropolitan Bypass up to Garia; Intwentieth addition, century, Indranil now Mitra a satellite (of the Wildlifetownship) Wing, (<1 Forestha); Kadamta Depart- (3) the State Highway (N. S. C. Bose Road) to Baruipur via ment; in litt BehalaKamal Gazi,up to Narendrapur Joka; and and Sonarpur; (4) Diamond Harbour Road (National Highway 117) via . 2011) sighted the speciesin litt. at2011) Rajarhat sighting wetlands of Bengal (<1 ha) near Bagjola canal and Debarati Bose (of Rabindra Bharati (5) Santragachhi wetlands, 20 km west of East Kolkata University, Kolkata) confirmed ( - Wetlands, by the side of Kona Expressway. volvingMongoose 33 at mongooses Santragachhi (22 Jheel unsexed, (12.8 ha).six males, two females Wing (headquarters) in the Forest Department of the Govern- and threeDuring cubs). 2007–2011, All trapped there animals were (four 18 direct males sightings and one infe- mentExisting of West Bengal, information and from was NGOs collected working from in these the wetland Wildlife H. palustris (as in this area earlier; Dey 2007). Whereas ZSI collectedmale) at Nalban comparatively during January–April many Bengal Mongooses2011 were identified (32) during as areas. Literature was consulted to prepare a database of Bengal the 1960s, before promulgation of the Indian Wildlife (Protec- Mongoose records. Specimens preserved by ZSI, Kolkata, were studiedA preliminary before the surveyinvestigation to assist selected in identification potential localities of Bengal of BengalMongoose Mongoose in the field. in consultation with the concerned authori- tion) Act in 1972, NEWS caught only a few individuals, all from ties, NGOs and local inhabitants. Bengal Mongoose is diurnal moreNalban: mongooses six in 2006 to trap.(Table 3) and five in January–April 2011 (Table 4), reflecting legal restrictions, not an inability to find - - ing.(Dey Narrow 2007, Deutimud-banks 2008), on so the the shallow present wetlands survey was are thescheduled known ta WetlandsBengal Mongooseclose to Nalban. was not These found were in visited 27 other on fisheries64 days from 06h00 to 18h00. The species was surveyed by direct sight (roughly(covering totalling about 11 400 km² hours in total) of searching),surveyed in during the East January– Kolka along the banks of bheries were watched at length to note the August 2010 (Table 5). It should not be concluded that Bengal morninghaunts of exit Bengal of mongooses Mongoose from (Deuti them 2008), and andtheir burrows evening locatedreturn. Mongoose is absent from these areas, but it is at best very rare Five mongooses were captured during January–April 2011 that none held a large population. In addition, neither Bengal in them: surveys were sufficiently intensive to be confident by NEWS at Nalban, following the protocol of Dey (2007), who in Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45, December 2011 40 Review of Herpestes palustris

Table 3. Past records (1964–2006) of Bengal Mongoose Herpestes palustris from its entire world range1. Location Sex2 Date Source District: Howrah Shibpur (22°33'N, 88°18'E) 1♂ 25 Nov 1964 Collection: B. Biswas, ZSI; Agrawal et al. 1992 Nazimganj (south of Shibpur) 1♂+1♀ 26 Jan 1965 Collection: R. K. Ghose, ZSI; Agrawal et al. 1992 District: North 24-Parganas Salt Lake (22°35'N, 88°25'E), Bantala 19♂+8♀ 21 Jan, 27 Apr, 7, 21 Collection: B. Biswas, ZSI; Ghose 1965, (22°31'N, 88°26'E), Duttabad (22°36'N, Jun, 11, 26 Jul, 21, 27 Agrawal et al. 1992 88°26'E), Hederhat (22°29'N, 88°23'E), Dec 1964; 21 Feb, 21 Nalban (22°34'N, 88°25'E) (East Kolkata Mar, 28, 31 (sic) June, Wetlands) 28 Nov, 5 Dec 1965 Sahebmara bheri (22°33'N, 88°25'E) not known 2004 Records open to severe doubt (see text), (East Kolkata Wetlands) no details given; Anonymous 2004 Sukantanagar (22°33'N, 88°24'E) and N° 4 20 unsexed Jan–Dec 2005 Sighting: K. Deuti, ZSI; Deuti 2008 bheri, Nalban (22°33'N, 88°25'E) (East ­Kolkata Wetlands) N° 4 bheri, Nalban (East Kolkata Wetlands) 3♂+3♀ 11 March 2006 Trapped and released: NEWS in litt. 2006 Sukhchar (22°43'N, 88°22'E) 1♂ 2 August 1964 Collection: B. Biswas, ZSI; Agrawal et al. 1992 District: South 24-Parganas Bhasna (= Bhajna in Soota & Chaturvedi 1970) 1♀; “very 28 Sept 1967 Collection; sightings (presumed): Y. Chaturvedi, (exact location not known) common” ZSI; Ghose & Chaurvedi 1972 Budge Budge (22°28'N, 88°10'E) and ­Patiatala Not known 1990s Records require corroboration, no details (exact location not known) were specified; S. Chattopadhyay et al. in Molur et al. 1998 and in Walker 1999 IIM wetland, Joka (22°26'N, 88°17'E) Not known 2005 Record open to severe doubt3; Raghu Ram 2005 1All locations lie in southern West Bengal. In addition, Kundu et al. (2008) indicated occurrence in Chowbhaga (opposite Bantala), Jhagrasisa and Mahishbathan, but these records are ignored here (see text). Specimens (skin, skull and incomplete postcranial skeleton) of a male and two unsexed Bengal Mongooses are held by the Museum Victoria, Australia (registration nos 4388/4389; 4838/4839/4840; 4920/4921). They came through the Royal Melbourne Zoo (N. W. Longmore in litt. 2011), and their origin is apparently not recorded. 2Sex could be determined only for animals handled by ZSI and NEWS. 3No details are given, and the photograph purportedly of the species lacks any black patch on the muzzle

banks at Nalban. In a stretch of ½ km in the core area of N° 4 Wetlands), which extends over 34.2 ha, the dumping ground bheri, 11 to 13 Bengal Mongooses were estimated. In the newly Mongoose nor its signs were found at Dhapa (East Kolkata discovered sites, the animal was found in backyard gardens of mongoose species was seen at any survey wetland. - of solid wastes of Kolkata and its neighbourhood. No other ata Wetlands. These sites were marshland before conversion Photographic documentation torecently dry land. developed Thorough urban searching settlements, found southno mongoose of the East burrows Kolk Photographs of sighted or trapped Bengal Mongooses were tak- near these gardens, suggesting that the animals observed were en at four sites: N° 4 bheri of Nalban, Ajaynagar (Survey Park), merely visitors from nearby unconverted marshland. Joka and Subhasgram. Trapping and release operations were also documented. In February 2011, three photographs were Natural history (group size, diurnality, behaviour) taken by S. Jha at Nalban, one each of a Bengal Mongoose forag- ing, urinating at a bush of Parthenium hysterophorus (an exotic sightings were of singles, four of duos, one of a trio and one of poisonous herb), and running fast across an unmetalled road. aOf group the 33 of individuals four. A pair sighted moving during close to 2007–2011 each other (Table was located 4), 18 Both phases were photographed, a light-phase animal at N° 4 - bheri, Nalban, and a dark-phase animal beside the wetland at nied by an adult-sized animal, presumably the mother, seen at Joka. Some photographs failed because at any sound or distur- Nalban,in a backyard hurriedly garden entered in south a burrow. Kolkata. A lonerThree in pups a backyard accompa at Survey Park, Ajaynagar (Santoshpur) stood on its hind legs to monitor the surroundings, a stance also observed at Nalban. Habitatbance the use mongoose usually fled fast (as found by Deuti 2008). Bengal Mongoose was found to be very shy, generally Burrows assumed to be those of Bengal Mongoose were found hiding in the reeds or long grasses and aquatic vegetation, as mainly in the secluded and undisturbed portions of the mud-

noted earlier by Deuti (2008). At monitored burrows on the 41 Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45, December 2011 Mallick

Table 4. Recent records (2007–April 2011) of Bengal Mongoose Herpestes palustris from its entire world range. Location Sex Date Source District: Howrah Santragachhi Jheel (lake) 1 unsexed 14 April 2011 Sighting: Debarati Bosein litt. 2011 (22°34'N, 88°16'E) Shibpur 4 unsexed 13 Sept 2010 Sighting: A. Chatterjee verbally 2010 (n+q)* District: North 24-Parganas N° 4 bheri, Nalban, East Kolkata Wetlands 3 unsexed (n) 21 Nov 2010 Sighting: A. Chatterjeein litt. 2010 1♀+3 cubs (r) 29 Jan 2011 Trapped and released / sighting: NEWS in litt. 2011 1 unsexed 17 Feb 2011 Sighting: S. Jha in litt. 2011 1♂ (n) 19 Feb 2011 Trapped and released: S. Mallick in litt. 2011 1♂+2 unsexed 20 Feb 2011 Trapped and released / sighting: S. Mallick in litt. (n+p) 2011 2♂ (n) 26 Feb 2011 Trapped and released: S. Mallick in litt. 2011 2 unsexed (n) 26 Mar 2011 Sighting: S. Mallick in litt. 2011 4 unsexed 30 April 2011 Sighting: NEWS in litt. 2011 (n+p) Keshtopur, Rajarhat wetland (near Bagjola 1 unsexed 22 April 2011 Sighting: I. Mitrain litt. 2011 canal) (22°37'N, 88°25'E) District: South 24-Parganas Green View wetland, Joka (22°26'N, 88°18'E) 1 unsexed 29 Nov 2010 Sighting: A. Chatterjee verbally 2011 Indian Institute of Management wetland, 1 unsexed 29 Dec 2010 Sighting: H. G. Mukhopadhyay in litt. 2011 Joka Kadamtala, Behala (22°29'N, 88°18'E) 1 unsexed 2009 Sighting: P. K. Biswasin litt. 2010 Survey Park, Ajaynagar, Santoshpur 1 unsexed 9 Nov 2010 Sighting: S. Bhattacharya in litt. 2010 (22°29'N, 88°23'E) Subhasgram (22°24'N, 88°26'E) 1 unsexed 1 Jan 2007 Sighting: S. Bhattacharya in litt. 2010 1 unsexed 10 Sept 2010 Sighting: S. Bhattacharya in litt. 2010 South Kolkata (exact locality not known) 2 (p) 5 Feb 2011 Sighting: L. Barman in litt. 2011

*n= single, p= duo, q= trio, and r= group of four. mud-banks in N° 4 bheri at Nalban, the animals emerged cau- frequently, to jump on a dense bed of Water-hyacinth and tiously just after sunrise and, if the environment was found search for aquatic food, with only the feet becoming wet in undisturbed, they went foraging; otherwise, they took ref- the process. They were also watched wading along the pond uge in their burrows. The foragers returned to their burrows banks, poking paws into crevices and sifting through mud to before sunset and stayed there overnight. Out of 20 burrow take frogs and crustaceans. These mongooses were not seen, however, to swim, or even to immerse themselves. Another opened early the next morning, suggesting that at least a quar- termouths of burrows sealed withcontained mud inanimals. the late It evening,may be more,five were because found a Bengal Mongoose was reported and photographed at Santra- disturbed animal may not come out of the burrow until, pre- gachhihunting Jheel situation on 26 involvingJanuary 2010 a mongoose at 09h49 here(Sen identified2010). A snipe as a sumably, it feels safe. For example, a mongoose stood erect af- Gallinago was spotted on a Water-hyacinth mat by the mon- ter coming out of the burrow in the morning, monitoring the - surroundings, but when a bicycle passed at a distance of about parently sensing the presence of the mongoose. 10 m it returned to its burrow and did not emerge during the goose,Bengal which Mongoose then sat down, was generallyprospecting; silent the butsnipe sometimes flew, ap following hour’s observation. mewed, or gave low yelps or growls in rage with bristling of the Since the burrows of Bengal Mongoose are multi-­ hair (thereby growing in apparent size), particularly of the tail. channelled with openings located side-by-side (Fig. 6b), pre- sumably for easy escape, the number of burrow-openings encircled the trap a number of times, then approached close does not indicate the population. Although mongooses spend to threatenA Bengal the Mongoose bait with findinga hissing a trapsound, with hitting live bait at it typically with its the night in burrows on mud-banks, they seem to shelter in paw. It also often clambered about, with skill, on the cage grat- grasses and shrubs during the day, because they were neither ings. Failing to capture the bait from outside, it entered the seen in the open in scorching sunlight nor to return to their cage through the opening. Immediately after the cage shut, the burrows during hot mid-day. trapped animal showed aggression, made an open-mouthed Hunting animals were seen during the present study,

fierce protest or display and moved up and down. However, Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45, December 2011 42 Review of Herpestes palustris

Table 5. Sites surveyed in the East Kolkata Wetlands, southern West Bengal, India, where no Bengal Mongooses Herpestes palustris or their signs were found. Name of the bheri Area (ha) Remarks Chinta Singh Bheri 75.10 Dumping of refuse by Bidhannagar Municipality, filled up over the years and ­being converted to paddy fields. Sardar Bheri 66.79 Drying up due to reduced flow of waste water. Nater Bheri 71.18 Drying up due to reduced flow of waste water Munshir Bheri 69.25 Located in Mahishbathan area; degraded and encroached by Nabadiganta (New Town) Industrial township Mollar Bheri 54.99 Degraded and encroached Narkeltala Bheri 75.88 Degraded and encroached Patrabad Bheri Nos. I-IV 132.94 Destroyed by Rajarhat New Town Project Baro Paresh Bheri 98.89 Degraded and encroached Choto Paresh Bheri 37.35 Degraded and encroached Goltolla Bheri 42.72 Reduced in size Barochaulari Bheri 27.38 Degraded and encroached Chotochaulari Bheri 23.15 Degraded and encroached Jhagra Sish Bheri 62.32 Degraded and encroached Gonpotta Bheri 50.73 Degraded and encroached Uttar Gorumera Bheri 57.52 Degraded and encroached Durga Bhasan Bheri 56.98 Under cultivation Heder Bheri NA* Both under cultivation and fishery. Chaker Bheri 27.29 Degraded and encroached Gopeshwar Bheri 34.18 Degraded and encroached Chachari Bheri NA Degraded and encroached Hena Khali Bheri NA Under cultivation and fishery Har. Kara Bheri Nos. I-V 22.22 Degraded and encroached Eani Jheel Bheri NA Degraded and encroached Diller Bheri 17.17 Degraded and encroached Danir Bheri 14.79 Degraded and encroached Ban Bheri 17.67 Degraded and encroached Garumara Bheri (South) 39.40 Degraded and encroached *NA= Not available after struggling for some time, it calmed down. When the gate Discussion was opened for its release, it usually moved backwards to Distribution and habitat use of its genus) was particularly observed at the time of entering From 1964 to 2005, Bengal Mongoose records (Table 3) orcome leaving out of the the trap. trap. Some Creeping mongooses (reflecting were the seen literal to avoid meaning the ranged from Sukhchar in the north to Bantala (on the left side trap in the presence of people or other sources of disturbance. - It used the tail probably to balance either when standing sional reports from Budge Budge and Joka) and Bhasna in the upright (laid straight on the ground), or moving fast (kept al- south.of Basanti Bhasna, Road) 47 in km the south-east east, Shibpur of Diamond in the west Harbour, (with isprovi 110 most straight in the air). A mongoose, before entering the trap, was found to curve (angular and U-shaped) the tapering lower part of the tail outward, possibly as a gesture of threat. When presentkm from survey Salt Lake, and whereas record collation, Sukhchar the is aboutnorthern 12 km known from limit Salt it entered the trap, the tail-tip was seen to form an inward loop Lake. This gives a north–south range of 122 km. During the- in defence. In another case, a mongoose fearlessly entered the lands, the western limit is extended to Santragachhi, about 5 trap straight away, keeping its tail in its normal position with kmis Nalban, north-west the eastern of Shibpur limit (Howrah), is extended and to the the southern Rajarhat limit Wet is the tip close to the ground. No upward loop of the tail was ever Subhasgram. Subhasgram is well north of the previous south- observed. ern limit: it is 31 km north of Diamond Harbour, compared Bengal Mongooses were sometimes encountered appar- with 47 km to the south-east. Therefore, Bengal Mongoose ently shifting from one patch to another. While running fast, range may recently have contracted both in the northern and they sometimes even turned without slowing down. However, southern parts, although neither Sukhchar or Diamond Har- sometimes they paused for a moment to look around and then bour were thoroughly surveyed recently, so the species may quickly dashed into cover next to the path. still occur in them.

43 Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45, December 2011 Mallick

activity varies, in part depending on the sunrise (difference of new peri-urban habitats within its previously documented about an hour between summer and winter) and the intensity geographicDuring range. 2007–2011, No published Bengal documentsMongoose wasindicate found any in prefive- of day-temperature. During cloudy days, they were seen mov- vious survey in these areas by the forest department, ZSI or ing around outside the above times. any NGO, and there is no reason to invoke a range expansion. Similarly, it is possible that the species might be found in fur- crustaceans, molluscs, crabs, amphibians, small reptiles, their ther yet-to-be-surveyed non-saline wetlands in the region. eggs, Bengalinsects Mongoose and larvae lives (Ghose on aquatic& Chaturvedi animals 1972, like Deysmall 2007, fish, During 2007–2011, Bengal Mongoose was sighted only - in inland non-saline wetlands. No records of Bengal Mongoose ral history’). Molluscs consumed include the common aquatic from salty or even brackish habitats, such as the present Sun- snailDeuti Pila2008), globosa but may, bivalves also take like birds Lamellidens (see above, marginalis ‘Results: natu and darban mangroves, were traced, but very little suitable sur- gastropods like Bellamya bengalensis and Lymnaea. These mol- vey has been conducted in them, so the possibility remains luscs abound at the water’s edge. Their broken shells were that the species uses such habitat. In addition, although Ben- gal Mongoose visits dryland areas adjacent to some occupied Various aquatic bugs (Hemiptera: Gerris spinolae, Sphaer- wetlands, it has not yet been found in such habitats contigu- odemaseen scattered annulatum at mongoose, Ranatra burrow-mouthselongata, R. varips by Deuti, Laccotrephes (2008). ous with its known range but away from wetlands, such as at griseus, Diplonychus annulatus and D. Sphaerodema moles- ' ' tum) and beetles (Coleoptera: Canthydrus laetabilis, Cybister tripunctatus, Hydrocoptus subvittatus, [=Hypoporus bengalensis] , Chintamoni Kar Bird Sanctuary (6.956 ha; 22°42 N, 88°40 E) Eretes sticticus, Hydrophilus olivaceus and Berosus indicus), anto theorchard right andof N. holds S. C. GreyBose MongooseRoad, near (direct Adi (= sightingold) Ganga, by the12 - author),km south but of not, the apparently East Kolkata (based Wetlands. on considerable This was formerlyobserva- tipedes, crabs etc. are also taken by Bengal Mongooses (Deuti tion), Bengal Mongoose or Small Indian Mongoose. dragonfly nymphs, terrestrial grasshoppers, crickets and cen- Bengal Mongoose is a den-digging animal living around tles, which possess hard elytra and wing membranes (Deuti large but shallow non-saline water bodies, fully or partly cov- 2008). They were seen taking giant water bugs and diving bee ered with a thick growth of aquatic plants, i.e. bogs, marshes Lymnaea and swamp-edges infested with reeds (Alfred & Chakraborty 2008). Juveniles eat various land insects and the small mollusc - (Deuti 2008). After eating, mongooses sometimes use rows of about 45–55 cm long and 33 cm deep with 3–4 en- Aa longlactating fore-claw female to clean was thecollected teeth, like in Junea toothpick (Ghose (Deuti 1965). 2008). Dey 2002, Dey 2007, Deuti 2008). It makes inter-connectedin bur litt. (2007)Little recorded is known courtship about and Bengal mating Mongoose started reproduction.in March and 2006). Permanent underground burrows are short-mouthed, whereastries mainly the along tunnel the is slopes wider of with the waterdownward bodies slope (NEWS from the breeding takes place during January–March, when the male in litt wasyoung often (2–3) seen were to chaseborn inthe June, female but along Deuti the (2008) mud-banks stated thatand mother enlarges her own burrow by re-excavation before giv- most births were observed between April and June. He stated ingmouth birth. (NEWS The area surrounding. 2006). Deuti the occupied (2008) reported burrow is that devoid the that the cubs grow rapidly within 2–3 months and by August– of clay particles, with fresh scratch marks often apparent near September come out of the burrow to hunt with the mother. in litt. 2006). Burrows were not found in drier He also observed the cubs playing near the mouth of the burrow areas. It seems that the territory of each Bengal Mongoose is not in the evening of September–October. A mother and three cubs its mouth (NEWS were, however, seen at Nalban in January during the present in litt - survey. This indicates that probably the breeding time is not galextensive, Mongoose but burrowsis small, fixed,on mud-banks exclusive less and frequented usually spaced by ­people, along - andthe water’sobserved edge mongooses (NEWS running. 2006). away Deuti when(2008) approached. found Ben huguna & Mallick 2010). Though Bengal Mongoose was not found amid human habita- fixed, and thus resembles that of Small Indian Mongoose (Ba tions adjacent to Nalban during the present study, it was occa- care of the young and the mother guards and protects her cubs sionally sighted near them peripheral to fragmented small wet- ferociously,Deuti (2008) even by also attacking reported Yellow that theMonitor male takeslizards no Varanus part in flavescens, which try to prey on mongoose cubs.

Behaviourlands south of the East Kolkata Wetlands. Population trend Alfred & Chakraborty (2002) assumed that Bengal Mongoose 2007–2011 and, since Small Indian Mongoose is usually soli- has declined drastically due to large-scale conversion of wet- taryMost (Veron Bengal et Mongooses al. 2004), itwere seems seen likely alone that (18; Bengal Table Mongoose 4) during lands to human habitation. In the 1960s, Bengal Mongoose also is. Bengal Mongooses were sighted mostly in the early - morning and late afternoon during the present survey. They enter the burrow just before sunset (based on about 12 ob- was fairly common throughout East Kolkata Wetlands, extend - areasing over were 125 surveyed km², at Saltduring Lake, 2007–2011, Bantala, Duttabad, but Bengal Hederhat Mon- and Nalban, wherefrom 27 mongooses were collected. All five 07h00servations). and 10h00Deuti (2008) during also winter. recorded After thata gap they of aresix moreto seven ac to conclude that it is now very rare in, or may be absent from, hourstive between (probably 06h00 resting and 08h00period), during they summerresume andforaging between be- thegoose other was four found areas. only at Nalban. Survey effort was sufficient tween 16h00 and 17h00 during summer and between 15h00 The maximum number of mongooses captured in a day - and 17h00 during winter (Deuti 2008). The time of starting at one location (Nalban) was six (in 2006; NEWS) and the cor

Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45, December 2011 44 Review of Herpestes palustris

Table 6. Former bheries destroyed in Bidhannagar township, 24-Parganas district, India. Act). with a minimum fine of INR 25,000 (see Section 51 of the said Name of bheri Present use Threats to the species comprise habitat loss due to large-scale conversion for agriculture, satellite townships, Bidyadhari Spill Cooperative Vidyasagar and Laboni Housing, industries and roads; conversion of large portion of natu- Fisheres B.D. Market - Knakrimari bheri Bhaba Atomic Research Center nal concretisation; dumping of municipal solid wastes; and Boro bheri Baisakhi and Digantika Housing poachingral wetlands and to illegal fisheries; trade clearing in mongoose of aquatic hair forvegetation; paint-brush ca Daser bheri Mayukh Bhawan and other industry. ­government office premises Much habitat has been lost by large-scale conversion for Nortala khas bheri Salt Lake Stadium agriculture, satellite townships, industries and roads. Many Kansar bheri Baisakhi Housing bheries Bager bheri Nicco Park (formerly Jhilmil) Kajar bheri Industrial estate, IT (Sector IV) large-scalewere conversion filled up since and convertedthe 1950s there to human were habitationsonly about Hansar bheri Industrial estate, IT (Sector V) in the north-eastern East Kolkata Wetlands (Table 6). Due to 200 bheries in East Kolkata Wetlands in the 1990s. In 1945, of the total wetlands of about 8,000 ha, nearly 4,628 ha of area- sites, only singles or duos were seen, and only once or twice at clinedwere occupied steadily. byBy fisheries.1970, the Since expanding 1953, cityafter had the engulfedformation Salt of eachresponding site. figure in January–April 2011 is five. In the five new Salt Lakes Reclamation Scheme, the area under fisheries de Therefore, the information on which to assess popula- tion trend is fragmentary. In 2005, about 20 Bengal Mon- Lakes by about 2,000 ha. In the northern Salt Lake area, 26- gooses were reported to live closely in burrows in a 50 m eriesfisheries when were some taken bheries over byturned Salt Lakevested. City The housing major complexparts of secluded portion of the mud-bank between Sukantanagar alone. During 1969, there was a large-scale conversion of fish and the people living on the wetland mostly do not have prop- count method (see above), 11 to 13 Bengal Mongooses, includ- ertywetlands rights are on held the either wetland. by Government The land, considered or influential as ownedpeople ingand breedingN° 4 bheri pairs (Deuti and 2008),cubs, were whereas, estimated following in the the same burrow site land, is actually the vested land distributed amongst the mar- over a stretch of ½ km in the core area of N° 4 bheri during the present survey. However, this does not necessarily mean a major decline in this bheri’s population. A single location- peopleginal farmers do not and have fishers selling through rights theof these process vested of land lands. reforms Saha - Ghatakunder West (2010) Bengal found Land that Reforms local people Act of do1955, not but really these care latter for either conservation of environment or about the ecological inspecific mongoose change population, in habitat or quality distribution (say, re-profiling of burrows. the However, earth allworks) lines might of evidence have caused (common-sense an equally location-specific assumptions of changeeffects prefer non-wetland-based livelihood to wetland-based live- of habitat conversion; resurvey of 1960s sites; and decreased lihood.importance Under of thepolitical East Kolkatapatronage, Wetlands, these vestedand most lands of themwere number found at N° 4 bheri) are consistent with a severe de- distributed among landless people. Some co-operatives were cline having occurred. The area occupied by Bengal Mongoose during the late twentieth century was reported to be <500 total conversion around this time was about 6,000 ha. Cultiva- km² (Molur et al formed. But, a large part was converted into paddy fields: the probable extent of such area to be <200 km², representing a major decline since. 1998), the 1960s. but the present survey assessed the encroachmenttion also started of onthe the wetlands, dried-up the bed process of the Riverwas not Bidyadhari. stopped. ThroughoutAlthough local the fishery 1970s, owners creeping and conversion legal actions continued. halted further New Threats and conservation status Several potential anthropogenic threats to Bengal Mon- goose have been proposed (Chattopadhyay 2001, Alfred & townships like Kasba, Vaishnabghata, Patuli and others came- Chakraborty 2002, Dey 2007, Mallick 2009, Bahuguna & Mal- ropolitanup spread Bypass, over about operating 800 ha. since Starting the latefrom 1970s, the northern runs over hub a lick 2010), and a participatory assessment of threats to Indian of Ultadanga flyover to Garia in the south, the Eastern Met carnivores (Molur et al and then extending southwards, where many satellite town- The IUCN Red List shipsstretch have of 21 developed km, cutting during through the last the four East decades. Kolkata Wetlands of Threatened Species considers. 1998) gave Bengal it the Mongoose national a IUCN synonym Red Of those (semi-)natural wetlands that have not been ofList H. status javanicus of Endangered. and does not However, list it. globally,Given the possibility that - Bengal Mongoose is a valid and highly threatened species, the mentation and degradation of those parts not yet converted. global Red List should review this stance and consider listing Pisciculturedrained, many involves have beenclearing converted of the aquatic to fisheries, vegetation with used frag - by foraging Bengal Mongooses (see discussion on foraging tainty. The species was upgraded by the Indian Wildlife Pro- technique, above). So, compared with the vastness of the open tectionit, perhaps Act (1972),as Data as Deficient amended reflecting 2002, from the Schedule taxonomic IV touncer Part water (Fig. 5), only a few patches of aquatic plants remain. II of Schedule II, providing absolute protection, and offences Thus, comparatively little Bengal Mongoose foraging habitat under which are prescribed the highest penalties (Bahuguna remains in most bheries. Concretisation of both sides of the & Mallick 2010). In such cases, the minimum imprisonment prescribed is three years, which may extend to seven years Bengal Mongoose are located, has occurred. This reduces bur- main canals in East Kolkata Wetlands, where the burrows of

45 Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45, December 2011 Mallick rowing opportunities, and, presumably, foraging habitat and survey of all non-saline wetlands remaining in southern West invertebrate populations. Bengal, and adjacent areas of potentially suitable habitat. This Municipal solid wastes (domestic and commercial organ- would allow a cohesive species action plan to be developed and implemented. But most importantly, the taxonomic valid- ity of Bengal Mongoose urgently requires assessment, through ic-rich sources) of Kolkata are dumped (2,500 tonnes/day) for a critical re-evaluation of all purported morphological, behav- beenproduction released of vegetablesover an area in of the 21.4 landfill ha. As sites, this and dumping untreated site ioural and odour characters, and DNA-based investigation. industrial effluents at Dhapa (East Kolkata Wetlands) have This should use many individuals of H. javanicus–H. aurop- by the side of the main dumping ground. Much methane is unctatus, from within West Bengal and across the rest of their dischargedwas being filledfrom thisup, ansite, alternative needing immediate site was selected remediation in 2010 be- range. Depending on the result, Bengal Mongoose may be any- cause runoff into nearby water bodies creates environmental thing from one of the most threatened and high-conservation- hazards for wetland-dependent species (i.e., including people) priority small carnivores in the world, to merely an indicator (Purkait & Chakraborty 2011). Mongoose poaching to meet the demands of the paint- The records on which these conclusions are based have - of pervasive habitat problems of only local significance. - in litt. December 2002). Trapped ple other than the original observers and/or authors. And the mongoosesbrush industry are is beaten on the torise death, in south and Bengal the hair (K. Ghosh,(about States10 g/ numbernot been of subject animals to examined opinions in-handon their from identification southern Westfrom Benpeo- man News Service, Kolkata, in gal remains small. Thus, as stated in the introduction, this study litt in litt has assumed that the small mongooses of wetlands in this part Northanimal, and fetching South 24-Parganas Rs.25.00) is districts plucked engaged by hand in (K. this Ghosh occupa - of West Bengal are all Bengal Mongooses. Other than by a ma- tion.. 2002). The Forest K. Ghosh Department ( . 2002) of West identified Bengal seized a few mongoose-villagers in jor trapping programme, the validity of this assumption could be tested by the collation of many photographs of Small Indian - Mongoose, Grey Mongoose and Bengal Mongoose from locali- hair brushes (508 in 2002–2003, 56 in 2004–2005, and 887 in ties across their range in India and neighbouring countries, such2007–2008) a small, andfragmented, mongoose range, hair (2even kg inmodest 2004–2005) levels of in offtake Kolka and taken from a range of lighting conditions and angles show- couldta and heightensuburbs (Annualthe risk Reportof extinction. 2009–2010). Although For Nandya species (2006) with ing animals in varied postures and behaviours, and of varying considered that Bengal Mongoose might be threatened by cap- ages and sexes, and the group discussion of what these images ture for the pet trade, this seems unlikely to be so. - ters. Many cases with birds have shown that this approach (pi- Conclusions oneeredshow and by how Porter useful et al. are the purported identification charac- larly since the advent of the internet) gives immensely valuable In sum, it seems that Bengal Mongoose has become rare in its perspective, addition to what[1974]), can andbe gained now widespread from direct particustudy of - vey), its largest remaining habitat-block. Though Nalban has aentire number range of exceptbheries, at onlyNalban the (Dey little-disturbed 2007, Deuti core 2008, area this of sur N° skins, on how to use distinguishing characters in the field. The 4 bheri in litt. 2006). Ben- continuing lack of clear guidelines on field identification (the gal Mongoose is rare in Sahebmara bheri on the west, its sec- meanspecies that is notpeople in thewho two have most not thecommonly-used opportunity toidentification study skins ond largestis considered habitat-block. viable It habitatwas not (NEWS sighted at four locations, lackguides clear to Indianguidance mammals, on how toPrater identify [1971] Bengal and Mongoose. Menon [2003]) Thus, much potential insight on the animal remains untapped. Jhagrasisa (east) and Mahishbathan (north) areas within the Bantala (south-east), Choubhanga (south) [opposite Bantala], Acknowledgements - East Kolkata Wetlands, despite survey during October 2010 at havelevels reportedly adequate to been find omitted the species from if presentthe latest and Indian anything National oth informationI am specifically to build grateful up theto all database those persons on Bengal and Mongooseinstitutions, – whoZSI; Wetlander than extremely Atlas prepared rare. Moreover,by Ahmedabad-based the East Kolkata Space Wetlands Applica- helped in conducting this study at various locations or provided field- - ers as well as the birdwatchers and photographers like Sumanta Mal- Times of India lick,NEWS; Soma IIM, Jha, Kolkata; Shantanu staff Bhattacharya, of Forest Department; Indranil Mitra, respondent Debarati villag Bose, tion Centre (SAC), a part of the Indian Space Research Organi sationSurvival (ISRO) (of the restricted-range, 18 July 2011). Bengal So, Mongoose there is a riskde- their records that stimulated the search in the new areas. I am also pendsof derecognition on existence of thisof non-saline Ramsar site. wetlands. Therefore, Nalban indebtedA. Chatterjee, to Indranil H. G. Mukhopadhyay, Mitra for providing P. K. Biswasthe map and of the L. Barmanstudy area, for

- per(a government-owned provisions under the fishery Wildlife used (Protection) by the communities) Amendment is ences.and to Besides,Jerry Belant, I express Richard my gratitudeKraft, Divya to VivekMudappa, Sahajpal, Géraldine Sameer Veron Ba- Actrecommended of 2002. Active for declarationconservation as of a the Conservation habitats and Reserve inhabit as- (Harry Van Rompaey library) and Roland Wirth for providing refer ants should be implemented earnestly by the nodal agency referees for their comments on an earlier draft. jaru and Wayne Longmore, who provided information, and to two local people and NGOs. Captive breeding of Bengal Mongoose References has(East already Kolkata been Wetlands recommended Management (Walker Authority) 1999), but involving no follow- the distribution and status of Bengal Mongoose requires in-depth Agrawal, V. C., Das, P. K., Chakraborty, S., Ghose, R. K., Mandal, A. K., up action has yet been undertaken. Clarification of the current Chakraborty, T. K., Poddar, A. K., Lal, J. P., Bhattacharyya, T. P. & Ghosh, M. K. 1992. Mammalia. Pp.105–107 in Director, Zoological Survey Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45, December 2011 46 Review of Herpestes palustris

of India (ed.) Fauna of West Bengal, part I, overview, Mammalia, Community-based wetland manage- Aves and wildlife Ghosh, A. K. & Nandi, N. C. 2009. �������������������������������Sustaining the world’s Records of Zoological. Zoological Survey ofSurvey India, of Occasional India, Kolkata, Paper India. 201: 1–37. wetlands:ment: a case setting study policy of Brace and Bridge resolving Nature conflicts Park. Springer(BBNP), Kolkata,Science, Alfred, J. R. B. & Chakraborty, S. 2002. Endemic mammals of India. NewIndia. York, Pp. 125–152U.S.A. in Smardon, R. C. (ed.) ENVIS Newsletter 6(2): 1–3. Gilchrist, J. S., Jennings, A. P., Veron, G., & Cavallini, P. 2009. Family Alfred, J. R. B. & Nandi, N. C. 2000. Faunal diversity in Indian wetlands.- - mals of India. Records of Zoological Survey of India, Occasional Handbook of the mammals of the world, vol. Alfred,Paper J. R. B., Sinha, N. K. & Chakraborty, S. 2002. Checklist of mam 1.Herpestidae Carnivores (mongooses). Pp. 262–328 in Wilson, D. E. & Mit Anonymous 2004. Final report on preliminary study on biodiversity of termeier, R. A. (eds) Mammal spe- sewage199: [fed] 1–289. fisheries of East Kolkata Wetland ecosystem. Institute cies of the world:. Lynx a Edicions, taxonomic Barcelona, and geographic Spain. reference. Allen Honacki, J. H., Kinman, K. E. & Koeppl, J. W. (eds) 1982. India. U.S.A. of Wetland Management & EcologicalHandbook Design, of Salt the Lake, mammals Kolkata, of Hussain,Press S. Inc.A. 1999. & the Mustelids, Association viverrids of Systematics and herpestids Collections, of India: Kansas, spe- South Asia. Natraj publishers, Dehra Dun, India. Basak,Bahuguna, A. 2009. N. C. Environmental & Mallick, J. K. studies 2010. (ed.) Mustelids, viverrids and herpestids of India. Wildlife Insti- tutecies profileof ­India, and Dehra conservation Dun, India. status. Pp. 27–28 in Hussain, S. A. . Dorling Kindersley (India) Pvt. treesLtd, Delhi, by combining India. phylogenetic information: a complete phylog- Wetlands. East Kolkata Wetlands 1: 7–15. Bininda-Emonds,eny of the extant O. R., Carnivora Gittleman, (Mammalia). J. L. & Purvis, Biological A. 1999. BuildingReviews oflarge the Kumar, R. 2010. Integrated management planning for EastEast Kolkata Cambridge Philosophical Society 74: 143–175. Wetlands 1: 1–6. Atlas on hairs of Indian mammals, Kundu, N. 2010. East Kolkata Wetlands: an introduction. Part I, Carnivora Chakraborty, R. & De, J. EnvironmentalK. 2010. conservation and valuation of Kundu, N., Pal, M. & Saha, S. 2008. East ProceedingsKolkata Wetlands: of Taal a 2007: resource the East Calcutta Wetlands. Zoological. Indira Survey Gandhi of India,Institute Kolkata, of Developmen India. - 12threcovery World system Lake throughConference productive activities. Pp. 868–881 in Chattopadhyay, K. 2001. Committee,Sengupta, M. Jaipur, & Dalwani, India. R. (eds) Chaudhuri, A. B. & Sarkar, D. D. 2003. Megadiversity conservation: flora, . International Herpestes Lake Environment palustris faunatal Research, and medicinal Goregaon, plants Mumbai, of India’s India. hotspots. Daya Publishing - House, Delhi, India. Mallick,tus report. J. K. 2009. Journal Endemic of Threatened Marsh Taxa Mongoose 1: 215–220. The mammals of the Indomalayan region. Menon,(Carnivora: V. 2003. AHerpestidae) field guide to of Indian East Kolkata mammals Wetlands, India: a sta Natural History Museum Publications and Oxford University Corbet, G. B. & Hill, J. E. 1992. Report. Dorling of the Kindersley workshop - “Conservation(India) Pvt. Ltd, Assessment Delhi, India. and Management Plan for Mammals of Press, Oxford, U.K. Herpestes Il- Molur,India” S., Nameer, (BCCP P.– O.Endangered & Walker, S. Species (eds) 1998. Project) . Zoo Outreach Or- De, J.liger K., Chakraborty, (Mammalia: S. Carnivora). & Chakraborty, Mammalia R. 1998. Identification of dor ganisation and Conservation Breeding Specialist Group – India, sal guard hairs of five Indian species of mongoose, Coimbatore, India. Mongoose (Herpestes palustris 62: 285–296. Nandy, H. 2006. Threatened mammals of West Bengal. West Bengal Deuti,Swamps K. 2008. near Habits, Calcutta, food West preference Bengal. and Records family of Zoologicallife of the SurveyMarsh of India Ghose, 1965) in the Salt Lake Herpestes auropunctatus. Mammalian Species 342: Dey, P. 2007. Study on Marsh Mongoose (Herpestes palustris, Ghose) 1–6.48(10): 25–30. 108(2): 47–50. Environ 10: 31–33. Nellis, D. W. 1989. Flight iden- The carnivores. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, tification of European raptors U.S.A.in the East Kolkata Wetland. Prater,Porter, R.S. F.,H. Willis,1971. I.,The Christensen, book of Indian S. & Nielsen,animals. B.Bombay P. 1974. Natural His- Ewer, R. F. 1973. - tory Society and Oxford University. T. & A. Press, D. Poyser, Mumbai, Calton, India U.K. (elev- ski, C. 2007. Mammalogy: adaptation, diversity, ecology, 3rd edn. Feldhamer,Johns Hopkins G. A., Drickamer, University L. Press, C., Vessey, Baltimore, S. H., Merritt,Maryland, F. &U.S.A. Krajew fromenth impression,a garbage dump. 1998). Current Science Purkait, N. N. & Chakraborty,Biodiversity D. K. 2011. register Pattern Indian of methane Institute emission of Man- Furedy, C. 1987. From waste land to waste-not land:Calcutta: the rolethe urbanof the agement Calcutta: birds–snakes–lizards–mammals 101: 528–531. . CMDS experience.Salt Lakes, Essays East Calcutta,in honour in of wasteProf. Nisith treatment R. Ray and recycling, Raghu Ram, T. L. 2005. Calcutta,1845–1930. India. Pp. 145–153 in Sinha, P. (ed.) . Riddhi-India, Project, Centre for DevelopmentPlanning & Environment wildlife protected Policy, area IIM, Viverridae) from West Bengal, India. Proceedings of the Zoologi- networkKolkata, inIndia. India: the report. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, Ghose,cal R. Society K. 1965. of CalcuttaA new species of mongoose (Mammalia: Carnivora: Rodgers,India. W. A. & Panwar, H. S. 1988. - Saha Ghatak, D. 2010. Trade-off between conservation of environment goose, Herpestes palustris 18(2): (Mammalia, 173–178. Carnivora, Viverridae), and economic development? A case study of East Kolkata Wetland. Ghose,with R. aK. note & Chaturvedi, on its endoparasitic Y. 1972. Extension nematode. of Journal range ofof thethe monBom- M.A. thesis, Graduate School of Development Studies, Interna- bay Natural History Society 69: 412–413. tional Institute of Social Studies, The Hague, Netherlands. Ghosh, A. 2009. Biodiversity conservation. A.P.H. Publishing Corpora- tion, New Delhi, India. mongoose (genus: Herpestes) species from hair through band Sahajpal, V., Goyal, S. P., Raza, R. & Jayapal, R. 2009. Identification of

47 Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45, December 2011 Mallick

pattern studies using discriminate functional analysis (DFA) and Small Indian Mongooses (Herpestidae, Carnivora). Zoologica microscopic examination. Journal of the Forensic Science Society Scripta 36: 1–10. 49: 205–209. - mals (Mammalia) in freshwater. Hydrobiologica 595: 607–617. West Bengal. West Bengal Veron, G., Patterson, B. D. & Reeves, R. 2008. Global diversity of mam Sanyal, P.A. 1999.K., Ramakrishna Common mustelids, & Alfred, viverridsJ. R. B. 2007. and Faunal herpestids resources of West in Bengal. Pp. 59–61 in Hussain,49(10&11): S. A. (ed.) 38–48. Mustelids, viverrids and Walker,Workshop S. 1999. Output. Endemic Part and III non-endemic – civets and mongooses mammals in of Indian India. Zoos’zoos herpestids of India. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehra Dun, India. Print– from Central Zoo Authority Data Base 1998 and BCPP CAMP Weasels, civ- Walker, S. & Molur, S. 1999. Conservation breeding and Indian spe- ets, mongooses, and their relatives: an action plan for the conserva- 14(8): 7–18. Schreiber,tion of A., mustelids Wirth, R., and Riffel, viverrids M. & .Van IUCN, Rompaey, Gland, Switzerland. H. 1989. in Hussain, S. A. (ed.) Mustelids, viverrids and herpestids of India. Wildlifecies of mustelids, Institute ofviverrids India, Dehra and herpestids: Dun, India. a perspective. P. 108 System der Schleichkatzen (Viverri- Sen, S. K. 2010. The hunter and the hunted and the effectiveness of dae). Säugetierkundliche Mitteilungen 20: 110–127. camouflage. Delhibirdpix. [https://groups.google.com/group/ Wenzel, E. & Haltenorth, T. 1972. ����������������������������������� delhibirdpix]. Downloaded on 20 April 2011. Na- Mammalian species of the world. A taxonom- Sharma,tional U. Conference2011. Effect on of Forest global Biodiversity: warming on Earth’s biodiversity living treasure,in India. Wozencraft,ic and geographic W. C. 1993. reference Order Carnivora., 2nd edition. Pp. 279–348 Smithsonian in Wilson, Institution D. E. 22Pp.nd 76–84May 2011 in Uttar Pradesh State Biodiversity Board (ed.) Press,& Reeder, Washington D. M. (eds) D.C., U.S.A. India. . Uttar Pradesh State Biodiversity Board, Lucknow, Mammalian species of the world. A taxo- from vertebrates. Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences, Wozencraft,nomic and W. C.geographic 2005. Order reference Carnivora., 3rd edition.Pp. 532–628 The John in Wilson, Hopkins D. Soota,Section T. D. & B Chaturvedi, Y. 1970. On five new species of nematodes UniversityE. & Reeder, Press, D. M. Baltimore, (eds) U.S.A. Wozencraft, W. C., Duckworth, J. W., Choudury, A., Muddapa, D., Yon- African and71: Asian 100–108. mongooses in the genus Herpestes (Carnivora: Herpestes Taylor,Herpestidae). M. E. & Matheson, Mammalia J. 1999. 63: 449–464. A craniometric comparison of the javanicus. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, versionzon, P., Kanchanasaka, 2010.4. . B., Jennings A. & Veron, Downloaded G. 2008. on 29 May Herpestidae and Viverridae (Carnivora, Mammalia). Musée Royal 2011. Van Rompaey,de l’Afrique H. Centrale, & Colyn, Annales M. 1996. Sciences An annotated Zoologiques bibliography 279: 1–411. of the Molecular systematics and Wildlife Wing, Directorate of Forests, Government of origin of sociality in mongooses (Herpestidae, Carnivora). Mo- West Bengal, Bikash Bhawan, North Block, Veron,lecular G., Colyn, Phylogenetics M. & Dunham, and Evolution A. E. 2004. Salt Lake City, Kolkata 700 091, West Bengal, India. (for 2007). Systematic status and biogeography 30: 582–598. of the Javan and Email: [email protected] Veron, G., Patou, M. L., Pothet, G., Simberloff, D. & Jennings, A. P. 2006

Small Carnivore Conservation, Vol. 45, December 2011

48