Density of Indian Peafowl- Gurjar et al

PODOCES 2013 Vol. 8, No. 1 Journal homepage: www.wesca.net

Density of the Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus in Satpura Reserve,

Raju Lal Gurjar 1*, Ramesh Pratap Singh 2 & Ashok Mishra 2

1) Senior Project Officer, SML, WWF-India, 172-B, Lodhi Estate, New Delhi-110003, India 2) , , , India

Article Info Abstract Original Research We used line transect method to estimate the density of Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus in the Satpura Tiger Reserve, Madhya Pradesh, India Received 17 May 2013 during April 2012 and January 2013. A total of 222 line transects were Accepted 28 December 2013 taken in 111 beats of the Tiger Reserve. In 2012, total length and sampling effort were 705 km with 387 observations while in 2013 Keywords sampling effort and observations were 425 km and 203 respectively. A Density total of 1,213 Indian Peafowls were recorded with density of 5.60 ± Distance sampling 0.24 per km 2 in April 2012 and similarly 661 birds were found in Indian Peafowl January 2013 with density of 6.29 ± 0.45 per km 2. Line transects Satpura Tiger Reserve

1. Introduction The Indian Peafowl is a resident breeder Birds are widely recognized as good bio- across the Indian subcontinent and found mainly indicators of the quality of the ecosystems (Gill on the ground in dry, semi-desert areas, 1994) and health of the environment. They are grasslands, scrublands, open and deciduous being used as tools for conservation and , roost in trees or other high places at night. environmental impact assessment. Galliformes Peafowls are omnivorous and eat seeds, fruit, species are useful indicators of environmental insects, small rodents and reptiles (snakes, quality and the assessment of their status is lizards). Male Indian Peafowl shows the essential for management purposes (Fuller & characteristic colorful tail feathers or train during Garson 2000). breeding season. Its train makes the male peafowl The Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus also known one of the largest flying birds in the world. The as the Blue Peafowl is the national bird of India Indian Peafowls are terrestrial birds; their loud and comes in Schedule-I of the Indian Wildlife calls make them easy to detect, and in areas Protection Act, 1972. This bird is listed as of often indicate the presence of a predator such as a Least Concern (LC) by the International Union tiger. for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

* Corresponding: [email protected]

12

Podoces, 2013, 8(1): 12–18

2. Study Area and Methods The pangolin Manis crassicaudata is patchily 2.1. Study area distributed. The ungulates include the Bos Satpura Tiger Reserve (STR), Hosangabad, gaurus , sambar Cervus unicolor , spotted deer Madhya Pradesh (22º15’–22º45’N; 77º50’– Axis axis in plain and rolling terrain and valleys 78º30’E; 1,352 m a.s.l.) is in the only, Boselaphus tragocamelus , barking (Mahadeo Hills) and situated in Hoshangabad deer Muntiacus muntjak , four horned antelope or district of Madhya Pradesh (Figs. 1–2). Bori chousingha Tetracerus quadricornis , wild pig Sus Wildlife Sancturay and Wildlife scrofa , Gazella bennettii and the mouse Sanctuary are a part of Satpura Tiger Reserve. deer Moschiola meminna . Core area is 1,339 km 2 and buffer area is 794 Four species of vultures viz., White-backed km 2. Vulture Gyps bengalensis , Long-billed Vulture G. STR area has three distinct seasons, i.e. cold indicus, King Vulture Sarcogyps calvus and (November–February), hot (March–June) and the Egyptian Vulture Neophron percnopterus , are rainy (July–October). There is great variation in reported in different areas of Satpura Tiger temperature and precipitation in different parts. Reserve (Gurjar 2007). Tiger population was 39, STR area is well known for its rich bio-diversity ranging 26–52 in 2006, from an area of 1,503 km 2 and rare and endangered species of flora and (Jhala et al. 2007, 2008), and 43, ranging 42–46 fauna. in 2011, from 1,671 km 2 (Jhala et al . 2011). The forests are tropical dry deciduous, tropical moist deciduous and sub-tropical. The 2.2. Materials and Methods is rich with over 1,300 species of Field sampling was carried out during April 2012 plants, including numerous rare bryophytes and and January 2013, in area of 1,503 km² within the pteridophytes. Forest is mainly dominated by Tiger Reserve (Fig. 1). The data were collected Tectona grandis , , Buchanania by 120 forest guards of Satputa Tiger Reserve. latifolia, Terminalia arjuna, Emblica officinalis, We used a Distance Sampling line transect Madhuca indica, and Rauwolfia serpentina. The method to estimate the population of the Indian forest types consist of Southern moist mixed Peafowl (Anderson et al . 1979, Burnham et al. deciduous, Southern dry mixed deciduous, and 1980, Buckland et al.1993). Within forest areas, a Dry peninsulas Sal (Champion & Seth 1968). beat was considered as the sampling unit and two There are 52 species of mammals, 287 species transects of 2 km length were studied in each of birds, and 31 species of reptiles (Management beat. Plan of Satpura Tiger Reserve, unpubl. data). The Since beats are spread out the entire protected principal species of carnivores are tiger Panthera area, this transect layout design allows for tigris , Panthera pardus , wild dog Cuon sampling across all habitat types within the alpinus, hyena Hyaena hyaena and jackal Canis Protected Area (Jhala et al. 2009). A total of 222 aureus . The sloth Melursus ursinus , the permanently marked transects were studied in honey badger Mellivora capensis and the wild pig 111 beats of 6 ranges. In each transect we walked Sus scrofa are the three important omnivores. three times in the morning (6:30–09:00 hrs) Small carnivores include the jungle cat Felis resulting in a sampling effort of 705 km chaus , the palm civet Paradoxurus (DISTANCE 6.0 software) in April 2012 and 425 hermaphroditus and the small Indian civet km (DISTANCE 6.0 software) in January 2013. Viverricula indica . There are two important For each peafowl species, detection time, arboreal mammals, the group size, sex, sighting angle and the sighting Ratufa indica and the Large Brown Flying radial distance from the transect line were Squirrel Petaurista philippensis . The only record recorded. Sighting angles were recorded using a of the Horseshoe Bat Rhinolophus luctus in hand held compass. Sighting distances were central India is around the Pachmarhi plateau. measured accurately using a laser rangefinder.

13

Density of Indian Peafowl- Gurjar et al

Fig. 1. Location of Satpura Tiger Reserve.

Fig. 2. Map of study area- Satpura Tiger Reserve.

14

Podoces, 2013, 8(1): 12–18

Data analysis 3. Results Line transects data were analysed using During the surveys, 1,213 and 661 Indian DISTANCE 6.0 software (Thomas et al. 2009). Peafowls were recorded in April 2012 and Distance enables the computation of detection January 2013. Maximum group size was 19 probability for the sightings obtained during Indian fowls and minimum group size was one transect (Buckland 1985, Buckland et al. 1993, peafowl on line transects. Karanth & Nichols 2002). Four key functions In 2012, the total length and sampling effort (uniform, half-normal, hazard rate and negative were 705 km with total 387 observations. exponential all with cosine series adjustment) Uniform with Polynomial adjustment was were considered for analysis. Key function selected as the best fit estimator for computing selection was evaluated using Akaike’s effective strip width 49 meter, minimum AIC Information Criteria (AIC) and chi-squared 311.13 and Chi-square value 0.9999. The density statistics were used to assess the ‘goodness of fit’ of Indian Peafowl was estimated to be 5.60 ± 0.24 of each function (Burnham et al ., 1980; Buckland per km 2. et al . 1993). The distribution of the data was first In 2013, the 203 observations yielded about examined by assigning very small cut-off points total length and sampling effort of 425 km. to the distance intervals during the curve fitting, Hazard with Cosine adjustment was selected as to detect evidences of evasive movements by the the best fit estimator for computing effective strip peafowl. After choosing convenient cut-off points width 38 meter, minimum AIC 406.14 and Chi- for the distance intervals, the best key function square value 0.9262. The density of Indian with the appropriate adjustment term was selected Peafowl was estimated to be 6.29 ± 0.45 per km 2. using the criterion of lowest AIC.

Table 1. Density estimates for Indian Peafowl in STR during April 2012 & January 2013. CV= Coefficient of variation of estimate. Variables April 2012 January 2013 Total effort (km) 705 425 Total sample 323 213 Total observations 387 203 Strip (km) 200 80 Model Uniform Hazard Model adjustment term Polynomial Cosine Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) value 311.13 406.14 Density (number/ Sq. km) 5.60 6.29 Standard Error of density 0.24 0.45 CV% of density 4.23 7.11 Lower Confidence Limit of 95% 5.15 5.47 Upper Confidence Limit of 95% 6.08 7.23 Chi-Square value 0.9999 0.9262 Probability of detection 0.2450 0.4750 CV % of probability 3.27 6.46 Effective Strip Width (meter) 49.01 38.00 CV % of Effective Strip Width 3.27 6.46

15

Density of Indian Peafowl- Gurjar et al

Fig. 3. Peafowl captured in Satpura Tiger Reserve Camera Trap, 5 February 2013, the photographer’s name: Automatic Cuddeback Cameras (Camera Trap).

4. Discussion Conservation The line transect method was found to be more Due to maintaining and increasing populations, convenient as most of the birds were detected the Indian Peafowl has a conservation rating of close to the line making the detection and Least Concern by the International Union for counting easier. Past research has also suggested Conservation of Nature (IUCN). However, that line transects produce more accurate poaching of Indian Peafowl for their meat and densities of bird species than point counts feathers in addition to accidental poisoning by (Jarvinen 1978, Verner 1985, Raman 2003). The feeding on pesticide treated seeds are known line transect method was previously used for threats to the wild birds (Alexander 1983). Adult estimating abundance of peafowl in Gir National birds can usually escape from ground predators Park (Trivedi 1993, Sankar et al. 2004). by flying into trees. Large animals such as , We counted 1,213 Indian Peafowls with and can sometimes ambush them; density of 5.60 ± 0.24 per km 2 in April 2012 and and in some areas such as the Gir forest, Indian 661 birds with density of 6.29 ± 0.45 per km 2 in Peafowls are fairly common prey for such January 2013. Density was higher in January formidable predators (Parasharya et al. 1999, 2013. There was water scarcity in some areas of Arviazhagan et al. 2007). They are also Satpura during summer season i.e. April and sometimes hunted by large birds of prey such as subsequent May and June months. Tiger, leopard, the Crested Hawk-Eagle Nisaetus cirrhatus and wild dog, jungle cat, civet and jackals are main Rock Eagle-owl Bubo bengalensis (Dhanwatey & predators of peafowl in Satpura Tiger Reserve. Amrut 1986, Tehsin & Tehsin 1990). Chicks are Predators usually take the birds down in a somewhat more prone to predation than adult surprise attack; otherwise, it is difficult to hunt birds. Adults living near human habitations are the peafowl because of its fast running and also sometimes hunted by domestic dogs. perfect camouflage ability in shrubs. The male train can contribute to a higher predation rate on this species.

16

Podoces, 2013, 8(1): 12–18

Acknowledgements Fuller R.A. & Garson P.J. (2000). Pheasants: Status We are really grateful to Ravi Singh, Secretary Survey and Conservation Action Plan 2000–2004. General & CEO, WWF-India, Principal Chief WPA/Birdlife/SSC Pheasant Specialist Group, Conservator of Forest Wildlife & Chief Wildlife IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, and Cambridge, UK, and Warden, Madhya Pradesh for funding support. We the World Pheasant Association, Reading, UK. wish to thank Dr. Sejal Worah, Programme Director, Gill F.B. (1994). Ornithology–2nd Edition. Oxford Dr. Dipankar Ghose, Dr. Chittranjan Dave, Jimmy University Press, New York, 117 pp. Borah and Joseph Vattakaven for their timely inputs IUCN (2012). IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. and help with logistics and coordination. We would Version 2012.2. . like to thank the ACF; Range officers of Kamti, Bori, Downloaded on 10 May 2013. Bhoura, Matkuli, Park Pachmari and Pachmari Gurjar R.L. (2007). Long-billed Vulture Gyps indicus Sanctuary and all forest staffs for logistic support, breeding in Satpura Tiger Reserve, Madhya Pradesh, secondary information, and assistance in data India. Indian Birds, 3(3) , 150. collection. We are also thankful to Shweta Gurjar, Jarvinen O. (1978). Estimating relative densities of Jyotirmay Jena, Amol Kumhar, Ratnesh Dholpuriya land birds by point counts. Ann. Zool. Fennici, 15 , and all staff of SML for help and support during the 290–293. field work, data collection, discussion and analysis. Jhala Y.V., Gopal R. & Qureshi Q. (Eds.) (2007). Status of the Tigers and Co-predators in Central References Indian Landscape: a preliminary report. New Delhi Alexander J.P. (1983). Probable diazinon poisoning in & Dehradun: National Tiger Conservation peafowl: a clinical description. Vet Rec. 113(20) , Authority, Government of India & Wildlife Institute 470. doi:10.1136/vr.113.20.470. of India. Anderson D.R., Laake J.L., Crain B.R. & Burnham Jhala Y.V., Gopal R. & Qureshi Q. (Eds.) (2008). K.P. (1979). Guidelines for line transect sampling of Status of the Tigers, Co-predators, and Prey in biological populations. Journal of Wildlife India. National Tiger Conservation Authority, Govt. Management , 43 , 70–78. of India, New Delhi, and Wildlife Institute of India, Arviazhagan C., Arumugam R. & Thiyagesan K. Dehradun. TR 08/001 pp-151. (2007). Food habits of leopard Panthera pardus Jhala Y.V., Quereshi Q., Gopal R. & Amin R. (2009). fusca , Ceuon alpines and striped hyaena Field Guide: Monitoring Tigers, Co-predators, Prey Hyaena hyaena in a tropical dry thorn forest of and their Habitats- 3rd ed. Technical Publication of southern India. Journal of the Bombay Natural National Tiger Conservation Authority, New Delhi History Society, 104 , 178–187. and the Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun. Buckland S.T. 1985. Perpendicular distance models Jhala Y.V., Qureshi Q., Gopal R. & Sinha P.R. (Eds.) for line transect sampling. Biometrics, 41 , 177–195. (2011). Status of Tiger Co-predators, and Prey in Buckland S.T., Anderson D.R., Burnham K.P. & India,2010 . National Tiger Conservation Authority, Laake J.L. (1993). Distance Sampling: Estimating Govt. of India, New Delhi and Wildlife Institute of Abundance of Biological Populations . Chapman & India, Dehradun. TR 2011/003 pp-302. Hall, London, 446 pp. Karanth K.U. & Nichols J.D. (2000). Ecological Buckland S. T., Elston D.A & Beaney S.J. (1996). Status and Conservation of Tigers in India : Final Predicting distributional change, with application to Technical Report submitted to US Fish and Wildlife bird distribution in northeast Scotland. Global Service, Washington DC, and Wildlife Conservation Ecology and Biogeography Letters, 5, 66–84. Society, New York. Centre for Wildlife Studies, Burnham K.P., Anderson D.R. & Laake J.L. (1980). Bangalore. Estimation of density from line transect sampling of Parasharya B.M. & Mukherjee A. (1999). Roosting biological populations. Wildlife Monographs, 72 , 1– behaviour of Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus . Journal 202. of Bombay Natural History Society, 96(3) , 471–472. Champion H.G. & Seth S.K. (1968). A Revised Raman S.T.R. (2003). Assessment of census Survey of the Forest Types of India. Publish by techniques for interspecific comparisons of tropical Government of India Press. rainforest bird densities: a field evaluation in the Dhanwatey A.S. (1986). A Crested Hawk-Eagle Western Ghats, India. Ibis , 145(1) , 9–21. Spizaetus cirrhatus (Gmelin) killing a Peafowl Pavo Sankar K., Qureshi Q., Shah N., Mukherjee S. & Dave cristatus Linnaeus. Journal of the Bombay Natural C. (2004). Monitoring of Gir: A Technical History Society, 83(4) , 202. consultancy report submitted to the Forest

17

Density of Indian Peafowl- Gurjar et al

Department under GEF-India eco-development (2009). Distance 6.0. Release 2. Research Unit for program, Wildlife Institute of India, pp. 44–54. Wildlife Population Assessment, University of St. Tehsin R. & Tehsin F. (1990). Indian Great Horned Andrews, UK. http://www.ruwpa.st- Owl Bubo bubo Linn. and Peafowl Pavo cristatus and.ac.uk/distance/ Linn. Journal of Bombay Natural History Society, Trivedi P. (1993). Habitat selection by Indian peafowl 87(2) , 300. Pavo cristatus. M.Sc. Dissertation. Wildlife Institute Thomas L., Laake J.L., Rexstad E., Strindberg S., of India. Marques F.F.C., Buckland S.T., Borchers D.L., Verner J. (1985). Assessment of counting techniques. Anderson D.R., Burnham K.P., Burt M.L., Hedley Current Ornithology, 2, 247–302. S.L., Pollard J.H., Bishop J.R.B. & Marques T.A.

18