BASELINE BIODIVERSITY AND APE POPULATION ASSESSMENT AND PRELIMINARY MONITORING PROTOCOL IN THE KATINGAN PEAT SWAMP, CENTRAL KALIMANTAN, INDONESIA Baseline Biodiversity and Ape Population Assessment and Preliminary Monitoring Protocol in the Katingan Peat Swamp, Central Kalimantan, Indonesia Report on research commissioned by: PT. Rimba Makmur Utama / PT. Starling Asia And performed by: The Orangutan Tropical Peatland Project (OuTrop) Field Research Coordinators: Hendri Marc L. Dragiewicz Krisno Report Compiled by: Mark E. Harrison Scientific Advisors: Simon J. Husson Susan M. Cheyne Palangka Raya, May 2010 Citation: Harrison M. E., Hendri, Dragiewicz M. L., Krisno, Cheyne S. M. and Husson S. J. (2010). Baseline Biodiversity and Ape Population Assessment and Preliminary Monitoring Protocol in the Katingan Peat Swamp, Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Report produced by the Orangutan Tropical Peatland Project for PT. Rimba Makmur Utama / PT. Starling Asia, Palangka Raya, Indonesia. Contact: Simon J. Husson, OuTrop Biodiversity and Conservation Director, Jl. Semeru 91, Palangka Raya 73112, Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Email: [email protected] Cover images (clockwise from top): orang-utan (Pongo pygmaeus wurmbii) in Perigi, grey-tailed racer (Gonyosoma oxycephalum) and Storm’s stork (Ciconia stormi) on the River Katingan. CONTENTS CONTENTS i PREAMBLE v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS viii 1. SUMMARY RESPONSES TO CCB CHECKPOINTS 1 G1. Original Conditions in the Project Area 1 G1.7. Current biodiversity and threats to this biodiversity 1 G1.8. Evaluation of presence of High Conservation Values 1 G1.8.1.a. Protected areas 1 G1.8.1.b. Threatened species 1 G1.8.1.c. Endemic species 2 G1.8.1.d. Areas supporting significant biodiversity concentrations 2 G.1.8.2. Areas with viable populations of species in natural patterns of 2 distribution and abundance G.1.8.3. Threatened or rare ecosystems 2 G2. Baseline Projections 2 G.2.1. Most likely land-use scenario in absence of project 2 G2.2. Documentation that project benefits would not occur in the absence of 3 the project G2.5. Description of how the ‘without project’ scenario would affect 3 biodiversity in the region G2.5.1 Habitat availability 3 G2.5.2 Landscape connectivity 4 G2.5.3 Threatened species 4 G3. Project Design and Goals 5 G3.1. Biodiversity objectives 5 G3.2. Description of the impacts of each project activity on biodiversity 5 G3.6. Measure to ensure the maintenance or enhancement of high 6 conservation values G4. Management Capacity and Best Practice 6 G4.2. Key technical skills: biodiversity 6 G5. Legal Status and Property Rights 6 G5.5. Illegal activities that could affect biodiversity impacts 6 CM1. Net Positive Community Impacts 6 CM1.2. Demonstration that no HCV will be negatively affected by the 6 project B1. Net Positive Biodiversity Impacts 6 B1.1. Demonstrating net positive biodiversity impacts 6 i B1.2. Demonstration that no HCVs will be negatively affected by the project 9 B1.3. Identification of species to be used in project activities and 9 confirmation of invasive status B1.4. Identification of species to be used in project activities and 9 confirmation of native status B1. 5. Guarantee that no genetically modified organisms will be used 9 B2. Offsite Biodiversity Impacts 10 B2.1. Identification of potential negative off-site biodiversity impacts 10 B2.2. Mitigation strategies for negative off-site biodiversity impacts 10 B2.3. Unmitigated negative off-site biodiversity impacts 10 B3. Biodiversity Impact Modelling 10 B3.1. Selecting biodiversity variables to be monitored and frequency of 10 monitoring, and ensuring variables are directly linked to biodiversity objectives and anticipated impacts B3.2. Assessing the effectiveness of measures to maintain/enhance high 11 conservation values B3.3. Commitment to producing a full monitoring plan 12 GL1. Climate Change Adaptation Benefits 12 GL1.2. Risks to anticipated biodiversity benefits from climate change 12 GL1.3. Demonstration that climate change is likely to have an impact on 12 biodiversity in the project zone and surrounding areas GL1.4. Demonstration that project activities will assist biodiversity in 13 adapting to climate change GL3. Exceptional Biodiversity Benefits 13 GL3.1. Vulnerability 13 GL3.2. Irreplaceability 13 2. BIODIVERSITY PRESENT, IDENTIFICATION OF HCVS AND 15 THREATS 2.1 Section Summary 15 2.2 Background Information 16 2.2.1 Biodiversity in Borneo 16 2.2.2 Biodiversity in Peat-Swamp Forests 16 2.2.3 Threats to Biodiversity in Borneo 17 2.2.4 Forest-Carbon Projects and Biodiversity Conservation 18 2.3 Methods 19 2.3.1 Study Site 19 2.3.2 Timeframe 23 2.3.3 Methods: Fauna 23 2.3.3.1 Biodiversity Surveys 23 2.3.3.2 Orang-utans 25 2.3.3.3 Gibbons 27 ii 2.3.3.4 Proboscis monkeys 27 2.3.4 Community Interviews 28 2.3.5 Floral Biodiversity Surveys 29 2.3.6 Comparisons with Neighbouring Sites 29 2.3.7 Identifying and Describing Threats 29 2.4 Results 29 2.4.1 Forest Condition 29 2.4.1.1 Terantang 29 2.4.1.2 Perigi 31 2.4.2 Faunal Biodiversity Present in the Project Area 35 2.4.2.1 Mammals 35 2.4.2.2 Birds 35 2.4.2.3 Herpetofauna (reptiles and amphibians) and fish 35 2.4.3 Fauna Species Lists 37 2.4.3.1 Mammals 37 2.4.3.2 Birds 41 2.4.3.3 Herpetofauna (reptiles and amphibians) 51 2.4.3.4 Fish (preliminary) 54 2.4.4 Confirmed and Potential High Conservation Value Species (HCVs) 60 Present 2.4.4.1 Orang-utans 60 2.4.4.2 Gibbons 62 2.4.4.3 Proboscis monkeys 64 2.4.4.4 Primates (excluding orang-utans, gibbons and proboscis monkeys) 66 2.4.4.5 Cats 67 2.4.4.6 Sun bears 67 2.4.4.7 Pangolins 68 2.4.4.8 Otters 68 2.4.4.9 Storks 68 2.4.4.10 White-shouldered ibis 69 2.4.4.11 Birds of prey 69 2.4.4.12 Hornbills 69 2.4.4.13 Crocodiles and gharials 69 2.4.4.14 Turtles 70 2.4.5 Floral Biodiversity 70 2.4.6 Threats to Biodiversity in the Region 71 2.4.6.1 Illegal logging 71 2.4.6.2 Forest Conversion 76 2.4.6.3 Charcoal production 77 2.4.6.4 Peat drainage and fire 77 2.4.6.5 Hunting 79 2.4.6.6 Fishing 81 2.4.6.7 Harvesting of non-timber forest products 82 2.4.6.8 Climate change 83 2.5 Importance of Katingan Peat Swamp for Biodiversity Conservation 83 3. PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATING NEGATIVE IMPACTS 85 3.1 Section Summary 85 iii 3.2 Drivers of Biodiversity Loss 86 3.2.1 Conversion for crops 87 3.2.2 Conversion for non-crop plantations 88 3.2.3 Conversion for settlements 88 3.2.4 Illegal logging for local needs 88 3.2.5 Illegal logging for commercial sale 88 3.2.6 Use of fire to clear land 89 3.2.7 Use of fire in local disputes 89 3.2.8 Accidental fires 89 3.2.9 Peat drainage 90 3.2.10 Gold mining 90 3.2.11 Harvesting non-timber forest products 90 3.2.12 Clearance for transport infrastructure 90 3.2.13 Hunting 91 3.2.14 Charcoal production 91 3.3 Impact of Project Activities on Biodiversity and HCVs 92 3.4 Recommended Biodiversity Objectives 96 3.4.1 Immediate research objectives 96 3.4.2 Measures to mitigate threats to HCVs 96 3.4.3 Measures to maintain/enhance biodiversity and HCVs beyond the 97 project timeframe 3.4.4 Biodiversity monitoring and HCV-specific objectives 97 3.5 Analysis of Species Used in Project Activities 97 3.6 Potential Risk to Biodiversity Benefits from Climate Change 98 4. MONITORING PROTOCOL 100 4.1 Section Summary 100 4.2 Background: Ecological Monitoring and Biodiversity Conservation 100 4.3 Indicators for Monitoring 102 4.4 Monitoring Methods and Frequency 103 4.4.1 Methods 103 4.4.2 Monitoring frequency 104 5. REFERENCES 105 6. APPENDICES – COMMUNITY QUESTIONNAIRE 116 iv PREAMBLE The Climate, Community and Biodiversity Alliance (CCBA) Standards are intended to “foster the development and marketing of projects that deliver credible and significant climate, community and biodiversity benefits in an integrated, sustainable manner. Projects that meet the Standards adopt best practices to deliver robust and credible greenhouse gas reductions while also delivering net positive benefits to local communities and biodiversity”. Validation of a project against these Standards is achieved through a 17-point checklist, comprised of 14 checkpoints compulsory for gaining “Approved” status and an additional 3 optional checkpoints (listed in Appendix 1). Satisfaction of at least one of these optional checkpoints is required to achieve “Gold” status. Many of the checkpoints are either focussed on, or include, aspects of biodiversity. The Orangutan Tropical Peatland Project (OuTrop) was contracted by PT. Rimba Makmur Utama/Starling Resources to help satisfy the checkpoints related to biodiversity and facilitate the acquisition of Approved/Gold Standard status for the proposed Forest Carbon Project in Katingan Regency. Established in 1999, OuTrop is a UK-based group of scientists who carry out research, ecosystem monitoring and conservation management in the peat-swamp forests of the River Sabangau catchment and surrounding areas. Our long-term research focuses are: floral and faunal biodiversity; ecological monitoring; forest ecology, dynamics, phenology and restoration; the distribution, population status, behaviour and ecology of the forest's flagship ape species – the orangutan and agile gibbon – and provide scientific feedback to conservation managers and work with our local partners to implement successful conservation programmes.