 Reference Base  Conservation programmes for Sumatran and Javan rhinos in ... |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Location: |
World |
| Subject: |
Management - Programs |
| Species: |
Sumatran Rhino |
 |
|
The action plan for conservation of these two species in Indonesia and Malaysia emphasizes two major components:
(1) Anti-poaching teams known as Rhino Protection Units (RPUS) for both Sumatran and Javan rhinos, and
(2) Managed Breeding Centres in Native Habitat
RHINO PROTECTION UNITS (RPUS)
Under the conditions that have prevailed in Indonesia and Malaysia over the last five years, Rhino Protection Units (RPUS) appeared to be the best method to protect effectively tropical forest rhinos.
Funding. The current RPU programme in Indonesia and Malaysia was initiated with and catalysed by a grant from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) through the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). The GEF provided $2,000,000 over three years (1995-1998) to initiate and catalyze a major programme to conserve the Sumatran rhinoceros. Funds were equally divided between Indonesia and Malaysia, the wildlife conservation departments of which administered a large portion of the funds and supplemented them with governmental allocations to rhino conservation. The international Rhino Foundation (IRF) and the IUCN/ SSC Asian Rhino Specialist Group (AsRSG), for which IRF operates as the financial and administrative agent under an MOU with IUCN-The World Conservation Union, co-ordinated and facilitated the GEF Project. To supplement the GEF funds during the initial three years and particularly to continue the programme after the expiration of the GEF grant in December 1998, the AsRSG and IRF have contributed funds and recruited a number of other donor partners including: the United States Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Fund (RTCF) administered by the Office of International Affairs of the US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS); WWF-Indonesia (WWF-IP), which in turn has received funds from other WWF National Organisations (UK, Switzerland, Netherlands); the Bowling for Rhinos programme of the American Association of Zoo Keepers (AAZK); and the Anna Merz Trust. The IRF/AsRSG initiated programme operates in Indonesia under a Memorandum of Understanding with the Directorate General of Nature Protection and Conservation (PKA); similar arrangements exist and are evolving in Malaysia through the Department of Wildlife and National Parks in Peninsula Malaysia, and the Wildlife Department in Sabah.
Locations of RPUs: Under the IRF/AsRSG-initiated programme, RPUs have been formed in all areas where Sumatran rhinos exist with the exception of Gunung Leuser National Park in Sumatra where the European Union has organized and is managing RPUs, albeit with technical assistance from AsRSG/IRF. As of late 1998, RPUs have also been formed for Javan rhinos as a result and at the recommendation of a Javan Rhino Colloquium organized by the AsRSG and IRF with a grant from the USFWS RTCF.
There are a total of 37 RPUs operating in Indonesia and Malaysia under the two auspices described above: (1) the IRF/AsRSG with joint funding in Indonesia from WWF-Indonesia; and, (2) the European Union Project in Gunung Leuser.
Javan Rhino. Moreover, the RPU programme initiated in Indonesia and Malaysia is extending to other range states in South East Asia. Another recommendation from the 1997 Javan Rhino Colloquium was to provide technical assistance for Javan rhino conservation in Vietnam, which AsRSG has provided with funds from IRF and the USFWS RTCF. An improved rhino census has been conducted and a revised action plan formulated in Vietnam (Sung et al., 1998). One objective is to establish RPUs as soon as possible and they may materialise with funds fromWWF-US as well as the Cat Tien Project funded by the Netherlands Government and administered through the WWF-Indochina programme.
Operation. In Indonesia and Malaysia, each RPU usually consists of four to five persons (Figure 4) and is engaged in antipoaching activities, intelligence operations, and community outreach work. The RPUs are attempting to create intensive protection zones (IPZs) for the rhinos in each area. The emphasis for the RPUs is to patrol in the rhino core, to destroy traps and snares and to interdict intruders. The RPUs also engage in community outreach efforts as well as intelligence operations to identify poachers in the local area. Each park or reserve (or sometimes a combination of two parks or areas) has an area co-ordinator and there is a programme manager for each of the three major political units where the RPUs operate: Indonesia; Peninsula Malaysia, and Sabah. There are also technical advisers provided by AsRSG/ IRF who assist with the training and monitoring of the RPUs.
In Indonesia, the RPUs for Sumatran rhino comprise one PKA Jagawana ranger and three members who are recruited from the local community and trained by the co-ordinators and technical advisers. The area coordinators have also been recruited from outside PKA. The RPUs for the Javan rhino are somewhat different in composition and consists of two PKA rangers and three local recruits. The area co-ordinator for Ujung Kulon is a national park employee. In Malaysia, all the members of the RPUs are government rangers. However, it has recently been decided in Malaysia to recruit area coordinators who are outside of the government structure.
In all cases, the RPUs co-ordinate closely with the existing staff of the national park but are concentrating specifically on anti-poaching in rhino core areas. Prior to the inception of the GEF project, rhino conservation was merely a limited part of the many activities of regular wildlife staff. RPUs were formed because the existing government staff of protected areas simply did not have the time, flexibility and resources to concentrate on the intensive patrols and intelligence work required to protect the rhinos. Hence, a system that combines government rangers and more autonomous staff has proven more effective and is being employed in several variations whose relative performance will be evaluated. Indeed, there have been and will continue to be many adaptive modifications of the system to respond to assessment of performance as well as changes in circumstances.
The most important activity of each RPU is the forest patrols. Each patrol continues for about four to seven days, with a day of rest, a day of reporting and a day of preparation for the next patrol. In conjunction with ten days of leave every three months, the optimum number of patrol days per team is 14 per month. To date, many RPUs are realising ten to 12 days of patrol per month. The emphasis in the patrols is to detect and destroy snares and traps and to interdict intruders. One indication of the greater activity and effectiveness of the RPUs compared to previous efforts is the fact that on several occasions RPU members have been able to photograph for the first time, with hand-held cameras, Sumatran rhinos during daytime encounters.
The difficulty, particularly in Indonesia, of prosecuting poachers (a difficulty that is in increasing with the economic and political instability) argues for concentration on preventative rather than corrective measures. This reality also limits the value of intelligence operations versus actual patrols. Intelligence is crucial and the RPUs have engaged in such activities and will probably increase these efforts in the future, but the patrols seem still to be the most critical activity.
The RPUs have been effective over the last three years. Poaching has been eliminated or drastically reduced in areas where RPUs have been operating. For example, in the first six months of 1998 for which a formal assessment has been compiled (Wells, 1999), the RPUs in Way Kambas National Park interdicted 101 intruders, of which 46 were apprehended and 32 delivered to the police for prosecution (of which 75 % were successfully prosecuted). Sixty-seven snares/ traps were also destroyed or confiscated. Quantitative assessments for other areas (e.g. Bukit Barisan Selatan and Kerinci Seblat) are in progress.
Problems. A major problem with the RPU programme is that there have not been sufficient funds to deploy an adequate number of RPUs to provide satisfactory coverage of the parks. The RPUs have the objective of protecting the other large mammals as well as the rhinos in the parks. However, because the number of RPUs is limited, they have not been able to provide coverage of the entire area of the parks. Thus, for example, in Way Kambas, where there has been no evidence of rhino poaching, there have been several cases of tigers lost to poachers. In response. the 13 persons involved with the RPUs combined forces with the research staff of the Sumatran Tiger Project based in the Park as well as some additional jagawanas to form 13 anti-poaching teams, each led by an RPU member This intensive operation was successful in apprehending the poachers and stopping their activities. This result emphasises the need for more RPUs to provide greater and better coverage. IRF/AsRSG are currently attempting to secure the additional funds required to add one RPU in Way Kambas for the first half of 1999.
Over the last year the need for more RPUs has intensified due to the economic crisis and political changes in Indonesia and to a somewhat lesser extent in Malaysia. In Indonesia particularly, there have been significant disruptions of civil law and order which are increasing the pressure on the parks and intensifying the challenge, including personal danger, to the RPUS.
The GEF funds concluded at the end of 1998, and under the current GEF system, there was no possibility of renewing or extending the grant even though the RPU project received excellent reviews. It is difficult to recruit funds for the existing RPUs, and a much greater number of RPUs are needed. Hence, a major objective currently in progress is to develop financial sustainability of the rhino conservation programmes independent of support from range state governments. Financial self-sufficiency for the rhino conservation programmes is critical as government funds are inadequate and external donor support uncertain.
Over the shorter term, i.e. 1999 to 2002, the IRF is attempting both to provide and to recruit bridging funds (until the eco-tourism programmes are in full operation) from other conservation partners such as: WWF; the USFWS RTCF; AAZK; and the Anna Merz Trust. Over the long term (year 2002 and beyond), a major mechanism being developed for financial sustainability are the conservation tourism programmes associated with the managed breeding centres.
|
|
|
File available
details
Original text on this topic: