Title
Current distribution and conservation status of small carnivores in Thailand: a baseline review
Author(s)
Chutipong, W.; Tantipisanuh, N.; Ngoprasert, D.; Lynam, A. J.; Steinmetz, R.; Jenks, K. E.; Grassman, L. I.; Tewes, M.; Kitamura, S.; Baker, M. C.; McShea, W.; Bhumpakphan, N.; Sukmasuang, R.; Gale, G. A.; Harich, F. K.; Treydte, A. C.; Cutter, P.; Cutter, P. B.; Suwanrat, S.; Siripattaranukul, K.; Duckworth, J. W.
Published
2014
Publisher
Small Carnivore Conservation
Abstract
The status and distribution of small carnivores in Thailand are poorly documented even though parts of the country fall within a global core area for small carnivore conservation. Small carnivore records were compiled from most camera-trap programmes in Thailand during 1996–2013, from 21 survey areas with a total effort of about 80,000 camera-trap nights. Some records from this period generated by other methods were also collated, mainly from the authors, their correspondents through social networks, and the literature. Most photographic records were validated by independent reviewers. Of 24 species of small carnivore known from Thailand, nine were not camera-trapped by any contributing survey. No 1996–2013 records were traced from anywhere in Thailand for one species, Siberian Weasel Mustela sibirica, nor any from the 21 survey areas for another, Hairy-nosed Otter Lutra sumatrana. Six of these nine (three weasel Mustela species, Asian Small-clawed Otter Aonyx cinereus, Small-toothed Palm Civet Arctogalidia trivirgata and Otter Civet Cynogale bennettii) were recorded by other surveyors and/or other means in at least one of the 21 camera-trap survey areas; another (Eurasian Otter L. lutra) had been camera-trapped in one such area shortly before 1996. Conventional camera-trapping evidently has limited ability to detect these seven species. The number of camera-trap stations with records varied widely across species, presumably reflecting differences in species abundance and behaviour, patterns of survey effort, random chance and perhaps other factors. Common Palm Civet Paradoxurus hermaphroditus, Large Indian Civet Viverra zibetha, Hog Badger Arctonyx collaris, Crab-eating Mongoose Herpestes urva and Yellow-throated Marten Martes flavigula were camera-trapped in most survey areas. Hog Badger and Large Indian Civet are healthier in status in Thailand than in some neighbouring countries, consistent with longer-term and greater commitment to protected areas and wildlife laws in the country. The three species of highest priority for national conservation action, Hairy-nosed Otter, Otter Civet and Large-spotted Civet Viverra megaspila, are threatened mainly by conversion and degradation of their habitats, forested coastal wetlands (the former two) and forest on gentle-terrain under 300–400 m asl (the latter). Immediate habitat protection is required. Among eight species of less clear conservation status, three species of otter, Binturong Arctictis binturong and Banded Civet Hemigalus derbyanus are arguably of higher action priority because all are considered globally threatened. Rapid conversion of natural habitats threatens these species’ survival in Thailand. Comprehensive survey of semi-natural wetlands is probably the highest national survey priority for small carnivores (including cats [Felidae]). Any surveys, particularly in the north and any research, even of common species, would add to the knowledge base from which to conserve Thai small carnivores. Available resources for small carnivore in Thailand should be directed towards the priority species and habitats wherever possible.
Keywords
protected areas; conservation; habitat use; social network; camera-trapping; altitudinal distribution; locality records

Access Full Text

A full-text copy of this article may be available. Please email the WCS Library to request.



Back

PUB26836