Research and training manual

Research and training manual

Monitoring Movement, Population and Harvest of the Migratory Bearded Pig (Sus barbatus) in the Kayan Mentarang National Park, East Kalimantan: Implications for Community Livelihoods and Forest Ecosystem Dynamics

by Erik Meijaard,

March 2003, Canberra, Australia

WORLD WIDE FUND FOR NATURE – INDONESIA (WWF-Indonesia) and AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

© 2003 World Wide Fund for Nature – Indonesia/Center for International Forestry Research Research and training manual. Monitoring Movement, Population and Harvest of the Migratory Bearded Pig (Sus barbatus) in the Kayan Mentarang National Park, East Kalimantan: Implications for Community Livelihoods and Forest Ecosystem Dynamics

Cover photo by Margaret Kinnaird, WCS-Indonesia. Bearded pig from Sarawak, Borneo ii

Research and training manual

Monitoring Movement, Population and Harvest of the Migratory Bearded Pig (Sus barbatus) in the Kayan Mentarang National Park, East Kalimantan: Implications for Community Livelihoods and Forest Ecosystem Dynamics

by Erik Meijaard

March 2003, Canberra, Australia

WORLD WIDE FUND FOR NATURE – INDONESIA (WWF-Indonesia) and AUSTRALIAN NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

iii

CONTENTS SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................................................... 2 Description of bearded pigs .................................................................................................................................... 2 Distribution .............................................................................................................................................................. 3 Borneo ....................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Ecology...................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Habitat ................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Migratory behaviour and feeding ecology in Borneo ............................................................................................ 4 Daily movements ............................................................................................................................................... 5 Yearly migrations .............................................................................................................................................. 6 Eruptions ............................................................................................................................................................ 7 Population states .................................................................................................................................................... 8 Reproduction and Life History .............................................................................................................................. 9 Mortality ................................................................................................................................................................ 9 Forest-pig interaction ............................................................................................................................................. 9 Links between migration and forest phenology. .................................................................................................. 10 The use and conservation of bearded pigs ........................................................................................................... 11 Habitat loss .......................................................................................................................................................... 11 The effects of habitat loss .................................................................................................................................... 12 Disease ................................................................................................................................................................. 12 Hunting ................................................................................................................................................................ 12 Protection and management of bearded pig populations ..................................................................................... 14 AN OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES ......................................................................................... 15 Research activity 1. Analysis of bearded pig population states ......................................................................... 17 Dung-count based methods .................................................................................................................................. 17 Protocol ............................................................................................................................................................ 18 Materials required ............................................................................................................................................ 18 Sub plot number................................................................................................................................................... 20 Number of pellet groups ...................................................................................................................................... 20 Other signs of pig activity.................................................................................................................................... 20 Research activity 2. Analysis of bearded pig physical condition ....................................................................... 21 Protocol ............................................................................................................................................................ 25 Materials required ............................................................................................................................................ 26 Research activity 3. Analysis of pig movement ................................................................................................... 29 Protocol for pig trapping .................................................................................................................................. 30

iv

Protocol for pig tagging ................................................................................................................................... 33 Materials required per trap ............................................................................................................................... 33 Materials for tagging and trapping ................................................................................................................... 34 Research activity 4. Mapping of bearded pig features within the national park ............................................. 36 Research activity 5. Assessment of the overall sustainability of hunting for bearded pigs ............................. 37 POLICY IMPLICATIONS ......................................................................................................................................... 38 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................................................... 38 REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................................................... 38

Figure 1. Long Uli, Kayan-Mentarang National Park. East Kalimantan. Photo by Tantyo Bangun for WWF Germany.

v

SUMMARY

Bearded pigs (Sus barbatus) are a very important wildlife species in the Kayan Mentarang National Park, East Kalimantan, Indonesia. Not only do they provide the most important protein source to local communities, but also they are expected to have a significant effect on forest regeneration. Up until now, the number of ecological studies of bearded pigs has been limited in number and duration, and the species remains poorly understood. A review of the literature on this subject reveals that bearded pigs occur in different population states, which are probably directly related to the amount and type of food that is available. Every so many years the pigs gather in large groups and migrate, presumably over large distances. Because of our limited understanding of the species we cannot predict how these different population states and migration routes are affected by deforestation and fragmentation of what was once a very large contiguous habitat. It is possible that these factors could lead to a crash in pig population numbers, which would potentially have serious consequences for local communities. A research programme is therefore proposed that will investigate the relation between pig numbers and physical condition, pig movement, forest phenology, and off-take by hunters. These factors will be investigated using several easy research techniques, including relative pig density assessment, analysis of movement by tagging and re-capturing pigs, mapping of pig migration routes based on direct observation and village interviews, analysis of physical state of pigs by measuring various fat indices, and assessing numbers of hunted pigs by setting up hunting monitoring stations. The research will primarily be conducted by local WWF staff and members of local communities. Eventually, the aim will be to develop, in close collaboration with local communities, a management plan for the long-term sustainable use of bearded pigs in Kayan-Mentarang National Park. Because bearded pigs are probably ranging over scales surpassing that of the national park, it is envisaged that this research approach will be expanded to other parts of Borneo, including to Malaysian states of Sarawak and Sabah.

1

INTRODUCTION

On a global level, southeast Asia has the highest wild pig species diversity. The exact number of species, however, remains uncertain. In their taxonomic overview of the mammals of the world, Wilson and Reeder (1993) recognized 10 species within the genus Sus, 6 of which are restricted to Indonesian and Philippine islands. Groves and Grubb (1993) rejected two of these species, Sus heureni and S. timorensis, leaving 8 species with 22 subspecies (17 of which are within the Eurasian wild boar Sus scrofa). Further work by Groves (1997) revealed new subspecies within the Philippine pigs: at least 2 subspecies of S. cebifrons — i.e. the nominate (but now extinct) cebifrons from Cebu (for locations see Fig. 1), and negrinus from Negros — and at least 3 subspecies of S. philippensis — i.e. philippensis from Luzon and associated islands, mindanensis from Mindanao and associated islands, and a hitherto undescribed form, oliveri, from Mindoro (Oliver 2001). Within the bearded pig (S. barbatus) 3 subspecies are presently recognized: the nominate subspecies from Borneo, S.b. oi from Sumatra, the Malay Peninsula, and several islands of the Riau and Lingga Archipelagos, and S. b. ahoenobarbus from the Palawan, Balabac, and Culion Islands, Philippines. However, Groves (2001) recently suggested that S. b. ahoenobarbus should be elevated to full species status. In addition to this proposed change, recent discoveries of new wild pig populations suggest further taxonomic revisions. A possibly new species found on Tawi Tawi Island and offshore islets still awaits formal description (Rose and Grubb, in prep. in Oliver 2001), while several relatively distinct wild pigs from various other islands in the Philippines Archipelago have yet to be described (Oliver in press find ref). Finally, the race of S. barbatus from Bangka Island remains to be clarified. Sody (1937) referred it to S. barbatus edmondi, a subspecies that Groves (1981) rejected, and it needs to be established whether the Bangka population is more closely related to oi or to barbatus.

Description of bearded pigs Payne et al. (1985) provided the following description of bearded pigs in Borneo: 1. Measurements of adult males: Head-body length: 1.37 – 1.52 m.; Tail: 0.23 – 0.26 m.; Hindfoot: 0.28 – 0.32 2. Measurements of adult females: Head-body length: 1.22 – 1.48 m.; Tail: 0.17 – 0.25 m.; Hindfoot: 0.27 – 0.29 3. Weight in both sexes usually between 57 and 83 kilograms, but sometimes much more when fat. 4. Height at shoulder in both sexes is about 90 cm. The coloration of bearded pigs varies from blackish in young pigs, to a paler reddish brown, yellow-grey or almost buffy white in adults. The colour of mud wallows also affects the apparent colour of pigs. Piglets of S. barbatus are longitudinally striped, black-brown and whitish to fawn (Groves 1981), and Mohr (1960, 2

in Groves 1981) reports that these stripes are quite gone before 6 months. The head is typically long with a ‘beard’ of bristles along the upper jaw and a fleshy lump above each size of the mouth with upward pointing bristles. Females have 5 pairs of mammae. Foot prints are more rounded and symmetric than those of deer, with imprints of the dew toe even apparent on hard ground (Payne et al. 1985). Van Strien (1983) points out that the prints of bearded pigs are similar to the other pig species and, although on average possibly slightly larger, probably indistinguishable from them.

Distribution The bearded pig occurs in Peninsular Malaysia, Sumatra, and Borneo (Fig. 2). In Peninsular Malaysia and Sumatra its distribution is now limited to a relatively small part of their presumed pre-historic range, while in Borneo the species is still widespread but declining (Caldecott et al. 1993).

Borneo

Peninsular Malaysia

Sumatra

Java

Figure 2. Distribution range of bearded pigs (shown in black)

Borneo Endert (1925, in Nederlandsch-Indische Vereeniging tot Natuurbescherming 1939) found that south of the Mahakam Lakes in, what is now, East Kalimantan, bearded pigs had been all but exterminated by intensive hunting with blowpipes. More recently, this is becoming reality for more areas in Borneo, where through over-hunting and logging and conversion of forests bearded pig populations may decline (Bennett et al. 1996, 1999; Bennett & Robinson 2000). Also, Simons (1987) reported declining pig populations in the Gunung Niut Nature Reserve in West Kalimantan. Still, the species is widely distributed over the entire island of Borneo. Apart from the areas shown on the distribution map in 3

Caldecott et al. (1993), bearded pigs are reported to occur in the following conservation areas, and the species appears to be more widely distributed than suggested by Caldecott et al. (1993): 1. Kendawangan Nature Reserve (now degazetted) (Noor & Hanafia 1994); 2. Gunung Palung National Park (Curran & Leighton 2000; Curran & Webb 2000); 3. Tanjung Putting National Park (http://users.bart.nl/~edcolijn/Kalimantan.html); 4. Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve (Jeanes &

Meijaard 2000a, b); 5. S. Sebangau peat swamp area (Central Kalimantan) (Page et al. 1997). In 1939, the Nederlandsch Indische Vereeniging tot Natuurbescherming (NIVN) reported island populations of bearded pigs on Pulau (Pulau = island hereafter abbreviated as P.) Tarakan, P. ‘Boenjoe’, and P. Laut, while Medway (1977) reported the species on P. Lamukotan, P. Penata, P. Kebun in the Burung group of northern West Kalimantan (although the species had already become extinct on the last two by 1906), P. Pelapis and P. Panebangan, in the Karimata group, P. Juanata, off Sukadana and P. Sebuku, South Kalimantan. The present status of these island populations is unknown.

Ecology

Habitat Bearded pigs are well-adapted species to the extensive dipterocarp forest of Borneo and Sumatra. This tree family if often dominant in lowland and hill forests, and is characterized by synchronized flowering and mast-fruiting behaviour (Janzen, 1974, in Caldecott 1991). Bearded pigs also make extensive use of riverbank communities, where they root among herbs and look for earthworms (MacKinnon et al. 1996; personal observation). Banks (1949) described a wide range of habitats used by bearded pigs: estuarine swamps, secondary and all kinds of old jungle, beaches, riverbanks, all kinds of plantations, clearings and also the outskirts of towns. Keystone habitats: peat swamp, freshwater swamp and montane forests provide continual asynchronous fruiting resources for maintenance during non-mast times. Pigs are found throughout all forest habitat or vegetation types in West Kalimantan. Usually one or two large boars can be found in alluvial swamps year round. Sows and piglets begin arriving during the peak or tail of the fruiting in a dipterocarp mast. In West Kalimantan, they move in from both the mountains and the swamps indicating that they are scattered across the region during non-mast times. (L. Curran, in litt., 30 May 2000).

Migratory behaviour and feeding ecology in Borneo Caldecott (1991) provided a list of food plants of bearded pigs from his study area in Sarawak. Besides these bearded pigs consume roots, fungi, invertebrates in soil and rotting wood, small vertebrates, turtle eggs, and carrion (Caldecott 1988, 1991; Caldecott et al. 1993). Fruit supply is believed to have particular influence in determining growth rate, fat deposition and reproduction, with the other foods as

4

they normally occur in the forest assumed to allow only slow growth at best. The oil-rich seeds of members of the tree families Fagaceae and Dipterocarpaceae are thought to be especially important (Caldecott & Caldecott 1985; Caldecott 1988; 1991). Curran (in litt., 30 May 2000) has a list of observations of feeding on seeds and fallen fruit across seven ecosystems/forest types at Gunung Palung, but it is almost easier to state what they will not eat. During the dipterocarp mast pigs primarily feed on the seeds of dipterocarps, although they can and will eat other species available. Dipterocarps are preferred, but oaks especially Castinopsis spp. Lithocarpus and Quercus are favorite foods. They are almost solely seed predators although a few figs (e.g. Ficus dubia), melastomes and other tiny, hard testas can pass through their guts and germinate. Under favourable conditions bearded pigs can gain a lot of weight, with body weights reaching as much 200 kilograms (Pfeffer 1959; Pfeffer & Caldecott 1986). It is interesting to note that Payne et al. (1985) limit maximum weight to 120 kilograms, while their maximum body lengths are also considerably less than for instance the total length of a male bearded pig described by Pfeffer (1959) and Pfeffer and Caldecott (1986): 208 cm. Bearded pigs, at least those on Borneo, are subjected to irregular migrations, seeming to follow the fruit when in season so that one year a particular spot may swarm with them but not be troubled again for many years after (Banks 1931). Especially the ripening of illipe nuts (Shorea sp.) in Sarawak and East Kalimantan, appears to be significantly correlated with pig migrations (Pfeffer 1959; Caldecott &

Caldecott 1985; Pfeffer & Caldecott 1986; Caldecott 1988). Banks (1949) was among the first to report on the lemming-like mass migrations of bearded pig, which he considered to be quite distinct from the annual local movement damaging rice fields, ‘since food is not main purpose of these changes.’ Pfeffer (1959) and Pfeffer and Caldecott (1986) also thought that these eruptions were not food related as they had seen very fat pigs among those that migrated. Furthermore, Pfeffer (1959) indicated the somewhat forced, lemming-like aspects of these large scale pig migrations by pointing out that he once saw a pig whose hind quarters were paralyzed and which pulled itself forward by its front legs to follow its conspecifics. Pfeffer (1959) was probably the first scientist to distinguish between sedentary and migratory populations; the latter not to be confused with extreme eruptions in pig numbers which occur every so many years. In Gunung Palung National Park, West Kalimantan, pigs will arrive or congregate when even a few mangos, Tetramyrista glabra (in peat swamp) or other resources are available. They begin their largescale movements after fruit is exhausted in this region and appear to move independently to areas with high density of available food.

Daily movements The Nederlandsch Indische Vereeniging tot Natuurbescherming (NIVN) (1939) mentioned that in Berau daily bearded pig migrations were recorded to occur between the coastal areas and the higher mountains

5

and back. At night pigs would look for food in the Nipa forests and coconut gardens, while during the day they would return to the cooler areas at higher altitudes.

Yearly migrations Bearded pigs in Borneo show large-scale seasonal migrations; huge herds of thousands of pigs ford rivers and cover great expanses of forest, following the fruiting seasons of favoured food trees (MacKinnon et

al. 1996). Yearly bearded pig movements were reported by the NIVN (1939) who thought that bearded pigs made such journeys to look for areas of ripe fruit. Also pigs were thought to move to drier areas at the start of the rainy season (NIVN 1939). Pfeffer (1959) and Pfeffer and Caldecott (1986) considered that in Pfeffer’s study area in Long Punjungan (East Kalimantan) there were two more or less defined annual migrations, one in AugustSeptember and one in December-January. The animals came from the basins of the upper Sesayap, upper Sembakung and Malinau Rivers and moved en masse to the south. Another route runs more to the west from the same source area, via the upper Bahau, the upper Kayan, towards the Iwan River and further south to the Boh River. A third route ran from Malinau, across the Bahau (between the mouth of the Punjungan River and the junction of the Kayan and Bahau Rivers) and then on to the upper Kayan towards the Brem-Brem rapids. Some animals coming from the same source area crossed the Kayan River between Long Peso and Tanjung Selor and moved into the forest complex between the Kayan and Kelai Rivers. Finally, part of the animals crossed the Kayan Rivers upstream from Long Peliban and directed themselves towards the upper Kelai area. Dove (1993) described yearly bearded pig migrations in his study site in the upper Kapuas area in West Kalimantan. Here, bearded pigs were reported to migrate from the Kapuas Lakes area into Dove’s upriver study site at the start of the fruiting season (October- December). At the end of the season (January March), these pigs returned downriver. A small number of pigs remained as a resident population. Approximately every four years the bearded pigs in this region appear in very large numbers (see section on “Eruptions”). Puri (1992) described pig migrations in his study site in East Kalimantan. Here pig migrations appear to originate and end in the headwater areas of the Peliran, Bena, Melangga and Lurah Rivers. They follow an east-west direction between the upper Lurah and Iwan Rivers to the mountains separating the Malinau and Tubuh Rivers from the Lotong, Uli, Peliran and Aran Rivers. It is unknown whether this population of pigs migrates all the way to the lower Kayan areas around Long Peso, or as far as the upper Baram and Balui Rivers of Sarawak (see map in Puri 1992). Apart from data in the literature a number of anecdotal accounts are provided below as recorded one of the author of this study. 1. In Long Bagun, Ulu Mahakam, every year in February pigs cross the river between Lahang and Long Apari. Every family gets between 5 and 10 pigs each year. Pig were said to always cross in one direction per year, but sometimes from north-east to south-west and sometimes the other way around. The animals were always found to be in good (fat) condition). 2. In Batu Majang, Long

6

Bagun, Ulu Mahakam, generally each year, pigs migrate from the east to the west side of the S. Mahakam. This migration lasts for about one month, and only consists of grown-up pigs (no juveniles). From west to east, the migration lasts for a shorter period (± 1/2 month), and there are a lot of young pigs. There is sometimes a period of almost a year between these two events. When the pigs swim across, usually the big males come first, followed by the females and young. 3. In the Batu Ampar area, S. of Pontianak, pigs can be seen to cross the rivers and bays about twice a year in groups of up to 100 animals (E. Meijaard, unpublished information).

Eruptions Pfeffer (1959) and Pfeffer and Caldecott (1986) indicated that sometimes the annual pig migrations concerned extreme numbers of pigs, which are often remembered by local Dayaks as exceptional pig years. They specifically mention December 1956–January 1957 and also 1954. Banks (1949) described two such events of large-scale pig movements. One occasion along the Baram River in October 1935 is pictured as follows: ‘For five or six weeks, at points sixty to a hundred miles apart, moves a steady stream of wild pigs, a few solitary, some family parties of seven or eight, many packs from fifteen to thirty or forty, occasionally convoys estimated at two hundred, sufficiently large to deter the natives from attack. Every ten minutes or quarter of an hour pigs pass by, a few large, old individuals, many of medium size, none in very fat condition. Rice crops on route are utterly destroyed but they do not deviate in search of others off line of march and food is not an objective. Silent, not quarrelsome, almost furtive, intent on something, looking round little, they push on undeterred by waiting natives, who club and spear them at river crossings until weary of pork. Whence came the pigs, and where they go none know, over a narrow front travelled this horde of pork, not to be turned from its path until exhaustion.’ Elsewhere, along the Batang Rejang River, between October 1935 and February 1936 pigs were migrating as well, attracting over 800 Dayaks from down river. The District officer reported that well over 1,500 pigs had been killed. In November, information was received that the great pig migration had ceased; later in the month it recommenced. The migration of pigs across the Batang Rejang continued in December, lasting for three months, unprecedented even in the memory of the oldest men (Banks

1949). Congregations of large herds of wild pigs in certain seasons in the Rejang delta were also mentioned by Beccari (1986). Furthermore, Nieuwenhuis (1907, Vol. II, p. 293) reported on large herds of bearded pigs that crossed through his study area near the S. Boh in April 1900, something that he did not see again on subsequent visits to the area. Large eruptions in pig numbers were further reported by Caldecott (1988; 1991), and Caldecott and Caldecott (1985) who related these events to the occurrence of paired consecutive years of widespread heavy mast-fruiting by dipterocarps. The 1983 bearded pig migration in Borneo was estimated to have involved ‘perhaps a million pigs’ (McNeely & Wachtel 1991, p. 172). Such exceptional mast-fruiting

7

recently occurred in 1953-54, 1958-59, 1982-83 and 1986-87, and in no other years since 1945. There may be some correlation between such mast-fruiting events and severe droughts. Knapen (1997) recorded all severe drought events on Borneo between 1747 and 1891 and it would be interesting to see whether there is any reference in the literature to pig eruptions in the following periods: 1748-50, 1761-63, 1826-26, 1848-49, 1853-55, 1866-69, 1876-78, 1883-85, and 1888-89. Dove (1993) described mass migrations in the upper Kapuas area in West Kalimantan. Here, at intervals of four years on average, pigs migrate into the upper Kantu River area, sometimes from as far away as the east bank of the Kapuas River – crossing this river in a single mass. Dove points out that, because the timing of mast fruiting is not constant throughout Borneo, pigs may be following the height of the fruit season from one part of the island to another.

Population states Caldecott (1991) summarized a range of population states of bearded pigs in Borneo and Malaya as follows: a) Dispersed, static populations exploiting small, dispersed, unpredictable and discontinuous ‘background’ food sources. Low breeding and growth rates possible. Local movements only. Example: typical mixed dipterocarp forest in Borneo between generalized fruiting episodes. b) Small to medium populations exploiting concentrated, predictable and continuous ‘target’ food sources. High breeding and growth rates possible. Local movement only. Example: Koompassia– Burseraceae forest in Malaya. c) Small to medium populations, with members aggregating to exploit large, dispersed, unpredictable food sources. Breeding and birth rates depend on success of matching movements to fruiting within a dynamic phenological mosaic. Short to medium-range movements. example: typical mixed dipterocarp forest in Borneo between generalized fruiting episodes. d) Small to large populations moving regularly to exploit concentrated, predictable and discontinuous target food sources. Breeding and growth linked to activity of food sources. Short-range to long-range movements. Size of population varies from year to year depending on background food supply. Examples: Dryobalanops aromatica association in Malaya; Dinochloa association in Sabah. e) Large and expanding population exploiting an exceptional supply of background food available over a period sufficient for several litters to be raised to sexual maturity. High breeding and growth rates characteristic. Long range movements. Example: interior of Sarawak in 1954, 1959, 1983 and 1987. f)

Very large and collapsing population having exceeded background food supply. Low breeding and

high death rates. Increasingly desperate long-range movements. Example: starving herds reported from Malaya and Borneo.

8

Reproduction and Life History The following reproductive data for bearded pig were published by Caldecott et al. (1993): - Age at first pregnancy: 10 – 20 months - Litter size: variable, depending on body size: 3 – 12. - Gestation periods range from 90 to 120 days. In any one area the rut coincides with synchronized flowering in the forest, with the timing centred on the transition between late flowering and early fruit formation. Caldecott et al. (1993) suggested that a certain nutritional status may have to be attained by females before they become responsive by whatever stimulus acts to trigger mating. Pregnant females had a median fatness index of 1.5. Data by Linkie and Sadikin (2003) similarly suggested that bearded pigs in Kerinci Seblat, Sumatra, coordinate their movement and reproduction according to the fruiting events in Sumatra, with breeding taking place during the main fruiting season. Curran (in litt., 30 May 2000) reported that during the onset of ENSO-droughts and flowering of dipterocarps, the bearded pigs rut and constructed nests, primarily in the freshwater swamp and peat swamp forests although they found nests in the understory of several habitats including logged over forests and in ironwood (Eusideroxylon zwageri) cuts/secondary forest. The pigs seem to breed only in ENSO/masting periods in the forest. Rutting was observed while dipterocarps were flowering and nest construction occurred primarily then although exceptions occur. 6-8 piglets are around the 20 kg size when they start moving into lowland forest at Gunung Palung [see graphs in Curran and Webb (2000) and Curran and Leighton (2000)], they can also “double-clutch” in big fruiting years. Again, only a few masts were monitored over a 15 yr. period and those differed considerably at the same site in pig breeding response.

Mortality Curran (in litt., 30 May 2000) reported that in addition to hunting, piglets suffer from a mysterious bloat and are eaten by the reticulated python and clouded leopard. Admittedly, there are only a handful of observations. Large boars have nasty battles and get very skinny before the onset of the next mast, so at the end of a 3-4 yr cycle they seem to die, although the reasons for this are still unclear. They tend to raid agricultural lands (and camps) out of desperation and become more vulnerable to hunters then too.

Forest-pig interaction MacKinnon et al. (1996) suggested that bearded pigs may play a role in the dispersal of Rafflesia plants by picking up the seeds on their hooves and unwittingly dispersing them while foraging. Pigs are also thought to assist in dispersal of durian (Durio spp.) seeds by feeding on fallen fruit and dispersing the undigested seeds through the forest, depositing them in their faeces. 9

It is interesting to note that according to Sellato (1986 in MacKinnon et al. 1996) the nomadic Penan people in East Kalimantan actively disperse fruit seeds and plant fruit trees along their migration routes; later, they return to harvest the fruit or to hunt wild pigs attracted by the fruit. Dove (1993) hypothesised on forest – pig – human interactions. He suggested that on the one hand the impact of mast fruiting on the pig population appears to be generally favourable for human society and agriculture by keeping pig populations low and providing the pigs with an alternate food source to the agricultural fields during some years. On the other hand, the presence of agricultural crops helps to maintain a larger population of pigs between mast fruitings and, thus, presumably is disadvantageous for the forest trees. These possible relationships in the tropical forest between cyclic biological and socioeconomic phenomena merit further study. Curran and Webb (2000) and Curran and Leighton (2000) investigated mast-fruiting Dipterocarpaceae, their seed and seedling survival and the vertebrate response to seed survival. Because of the disputed role of vertebrate seed predators in causing and maintaining mast-fruiting behaviour, the response to seed-eating vertebrates to this spatio-temporal variation in dipterocarp seed production was examined. Timed with dipterocarp seed production in all mast events between March 1985 and January 1993, nomadic vertebrates like S. barbatus increased their populations through both reproduction and regional movement. In the 1986 minor mast, 21 dipterocarp species that produced 60,000 seeds/ha lost all monitored viable seeds to a diversity of resident and nomadic vertebrate seed predators. However, in both the 1987 and the 1991 mast events resident vertebrates destroyed only a small portion of the seed production, and predation was only recorded in the tails of fruit fall distribution. Nomadic vertebrates arrived late in the fruit fall period during both major mast events and thus, were able to destroy only seed dispersed in the final one to three weeks of fruit fall. Seed escape, and thus regeneration, only occurred in major mast events when all dipterocarp species across large areas participated. Although the patterns generally conformed to the predator-satiation hypothesis, the observed mechanism for seed escape within a mast fruiting event did not. Resident and nomadic vertebrate foraging and ranging patterns resulted in dipterocarp seed ‘escape’ rather than local ‘swamping’ with copious seed production per se.

Links between migration and forest phenology. Curran (in litt, 2000) reported that several of her recent papers point out that dipterocarp masting has to occur across large spatial scales to satiate these large highly mobile seed predators. However, like U boats in WWII, any particular stand may or may not escape. It depends on where pigs are during the asynchronous times. They scatter across the landscape and when the mast hits begin to eat what’s available then they move in search of food. All individuals begin to move with relatively simple decision rules and eventually congregate in areas. The fate of dipterocarp regeneration depends on satiating pigs primarily. However, forest degradation and fragmentation will alter routes and as was witnessed at Gunung Palung National Park during the last mast, high densities of pigs may move into protected areas in search of food because logging and other land use changes remove key seed sources. Curran (in litt., 2000) does not agree with the view that logging does not affect pig densities because only few trees per

10

hectare are taken. All canopy dipterocarps fruit around 50 dbh and higher, and that’s what the loggers are taking out. The remaining seed trees cannot satiate weevils, orangutans, parakeets and squirrels – predispersal predators so little is left for the post-dispersal seed predators. Curran’s research group was working in logged forest in 1990-92 during the mast and measured what was remaining for seed and seedling production before, during and after the mast. Then experimentally added seeds in both logged and protected forest to quantify this pattern. Pigs were not satiated over a 1km2 area when high densities of seed were added. Dipterocarps are critical resources for pigs and they move from the montane and swamp areas into the lowlands to feed on dipterocarps.

The use and conservation of bearded pigs

Habitat loss Forest destruction is the main threat to many species in Kalimantan (see Rijksen & Meijaard 1999). The total forest area of Borneo probably exceeded 400,000 km2 in the early 1990s (Collins et al.

1991), although most of this had already been fragmented through logging and human settlement. Apart from the 15% of the land set aside for watershed protection and conservation, virtually all forest is earmarked for logging or conversion to plantations or agricultural land. According to the World Bank, deforestation in Borneo amounted to 7,000 km2/year in 1988 (Davis & Ackermann 1988). According to the Indonesian Land Resources Development Centre an estimated 112,000 km2 in Kalimantan alone is under the impact of slash-and-burn agriculture (Rijksen & Meijaard 1999). Other data reveal that Kalimantan lost >100,000 km2 of forest between 1984 and 1990, almost 20% of its total land area, indicating even higher deforestation rates (RePPProT (Regional Physical Planning Programme for Transmigration) 1990). In 1996, 24% of the total state forest in Kalimantan (ironically consisting of 21% non-forest) was earmarked for complete conversion to plantations or other non-forest land, 54% for normal or limited production forest, and 14% for watershed protection [Ministry of Forestry and Food and Agricultural Organization (MoF & FAO 1996)]. In Sabah and Sarawak, logging intensity increased considerably during the last decade (Repetto 1988;

Manser 1992). In Sabah, forest harvest almost tripled from 1,570 km2/year in 1980 to 4,263 km2/year in 1990. In Sarawak, forest harvest increased from 1,400 to 4,500 km2/year (Rijksen & Meijaard 1999). In the early 1980s, virtually all of Sabah's forests were under timber concessions, and since the early 1990s, much of the logged-over forests have been converted into plantations (Rijksen & Meijaard

1999). By 1986, 86% of forested land area of Sarawak was allocated to timber concessions. Unless logging is done strictly according to regulations, and hunting in logging areas strictly controlled, this causes major declines and even extinction of bearded pigs (Bennett & Gumal 2001).

11

The effects of habitat loss The clearance of forest for logging has led to a decline in many populations of wildlife, including bearded pigs. They are mostly affected by loss of feeding and breeding grounds and by damage to food trees, such as oaks and dipterocarps. Since bearded pigs range over large areas and make long distance seasonal migrations to areas of mast fruiting, a decline in numbers due to logging may affect several rural communities. In logged-over areas meat harvest decline, falling from about 54 kg per person per year to about 18 kg within ten years. As numbers of pigs and deer decline, other species may suffer from increased hunting pressure (MacKinnon et al. 1996). In a discussion on the impact of East Kalimantan’s forest fires on wildlife Mayer (1996) found that in most areas affected by fire there was no shortage of wild pigs and in areas where they were not hunted for food, they became major pests. As normal sources of food for wildlife became scarce in the damaged forests, where fruit, bark, roots and green vegetation had burned, pigs fled to cultivated areas and riversides in search of food and water.

Disease Knapen (1997) reported on a rinderpest epidemic that killed a large proportion of the cattle population of Southeast Borneo between 1871 and 1872 before spreading to the bearded pig population, which it affected in areas as far afield as the Upper Kahayan and Kapuas. In 1878, rinderpest struck once more, again hitting the cattle population first and later killing pigs in large numbers. Another epidemic was reported by Nieuwenhuis (1907, Vol. 1, p. 196), who mentioned that during his first journey through central Borneo in 1894 pigs were rare, because both the wild and domestic population had been killed off by an epidemic in central Borneo in 1888 and 1889. Feuilletau-de Bruyn (1933) further reported that in 1906, ’very many bearded pigs’ succumbed to a contagious disease in the Tabalung area (north-east Ulu Sungai, S. Kalimantan).

Hunting Humans have lived in Borneo for at least 40,000 years and have been hunting mammals such as bearded pigs for at least 35,000 years (Medway 1959). Holocene and pre-historic cave finds in Sabah (Harrison, 1998), Sarawak (Medway 1964), and East Kalimantan (personal observation) indicate that bearded pig has been the most commonly hunted Bornean mammal for at least the last 15,000 years. Hose (1926, p.

105) already noted that ‘most of the peoples are, at least partially hunters, since they breed no animals, except the pig and the fowl for the table’. He further stated that wild pigs are frequently hunted with dogs, spears or traps and snares. Caldecott (1988) estimated that Sarawak hunters take an estimated annual harvest of one million pigs, making wild meat of considerable economic significance in this Malaysian state. In Sarawak there are appears to be a considerable market for wild pig meat, as opposed to

12

Kalimantan where pig meat was rarely encountered on markets, and then only in larger cities such as Pontianak and Balikpapan (Meijaard 2002). Bearded pig meat was sold cheaply in Kalimantan’s markets (between US$ 1.3. and 1.5/kilo) (Meijaard 2002) and even cheaper on Sumatran markets (US$ 0.1–0.2/kilo) (Linkie & Sadikin 2003). Bennett et al. (1999) investigated hunting in Sarawak and Sabah in a total of sixteen study sites, differing in habitat, ethnic groups, degree of access and types of hunting. They found that by far the most preferred species of wild meat throughout Sarawak and Sabah was bearded pig, which comprised seventy-two percent of the dressed weight of all animals hunted in Sarawak. The data further indicate that people of all ethnic groups and lifestyles, apart from workers in plantations, hunt animals because they are there. This is strongly reflected for bearded pigs for which a positive correlation was found between the proportion of meals that contained wild meat and the abundance of pigs in the forest (rs = 0.8286; n = 6;p = 0.042). The impact of hunting on bearded pig populations seems to be significant, with a significant correlation between hunting pressure and animal density (rs = -0.5604; n = 13;p = 0.046). This pattern is so strong that hunting pressure overrides the large effects of habitat variables and is the single main determinant of animal density in an area. As hunting pressure increases, the density of all animal groups investigated, including bearded pigs, decreases until, at high hunting pressure, all large animals are locally extirpated (Bennett et al. 1999). Elsewhere, Bennett et al. (1996) reported that one typical logging camp in Sarawak killed as many as 880 pigs per year, mainly for food. Hunting in these camps was found wasteful, with species being killed on sight even if the worker did not need that much meat. In one logging area, for example, during a pig migration, people would kill an animal, take only the prime cuts of meat, leaving the rest to rot, and kill another animal the next day.

Figure 3. Dead bearded pig in boat. Photograph by Tantyo Bangun for WWF Germany.

13

In his study area in East Kalimantan, Puri (1992) reported similar trends in the use of pig meat as in the study above in Sarawak and Sabah. He found that pigs were the dominant source of meat and fat in the diets of the local Penan and Kenyah tribes, although fish may be an important source as well. Puri (1997) reported that bearded pigs contributed 79.8% of all catches and 91% of all the edible meat yielded, which is in line with Chin’s (2001) work that found that the percentage of bearded pig meat in total hunted biomass varied from 67.4 to 97%. Puri (1997) estimated an average consumption of 133.6 kg of pig meat per person per year, which is in sharp contrast with Caldecott’s (1988) estimate of 12 kg of pig meat per person per year. In another study, conducted in 1979 and 1980 (total 243 recording days), Pierce-Colfer and Soedjito (1996) recorded 134 meals consisting of wild pig in an East Kalimantan village inhabited by some 1,000 people. From their data, it cannot be deduced how important wild pig was in the people’s diet, compared to other sources. When there were no pigs (approximately four out of the twelve months of record keeping), fish provided the majority of protein to both groups’ diets. Pigs also provide fat used for lamps and cooking oil (Puri

1992). Puri (1992) continued to state that the pig is unquestionably the most important animal, nutritionally and culturally for both the Penan and Kenyah people in his study area. Also, he pointed out the importance of hunting knowledge for Penan culture as so much of Penan knowledge is gained directly or indirectly through the activities of hunting and learning to hunt. Chin (2001) reported that for Penan people in Sarawak the use of spears and dogs is the preferred method for hunting pig, because good dogs seldom miss prey, and some Penan, especially the older generation, claim that pig shot with gun and cartridge leaves an undesirable taste in the mouth.

Protection and management of bearded pig populations Heinsius-Viruly and van Heurn (1935) proposed a number of measures for bearded pig protection in Dutch Borneo. Among this were a ban on hunting of migrating bearded pigs by others than Dayak people; a ban, also for Dayak people, to use shotguns in this hunt; the determination and implementation of maximum hunting quota; and a prohibition for traders to make down-payments to Dayaks for obtaining pig fat. These laws were only to apply to the migration season. NIVN (the Netherlands’ conservation body in the 1930s) (1939) did not consider such measures necessary in the light of bearded pig abundance, nor did they consider it plausible that such measures could ever be implemented. Of importance to conservation biologists and nature reserve managers is the fact that the number of species caught by indigenous hunters increased during time when pig numbers are low. When pigs are migrating almost all subsistence activity directed at catching animals is suspended in favour of catching pigs (Puri 1992). Caldecott et al. (1993) recommended that in Borneo the dipterocarp forests should be deliberately managed for a variety of non-wood as well as wood outputs, which will benefit bearded pigs if wild meat is

14

one of the outputs required. Such management clearly needs a change in resource-use thinking, from a short-term destructive approach to a long-term sustainable use and conservation approach. Bearded pigs are not protected in Indonesia and Malaysia. However, in Sarawak they are protected from being traded under the Wild Life Protection Ordinance 1998. This stipulates that all commercial sales of mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians or any other recognisable part or derivates thereof are illegal. As this is now rigorously enforced, it provides major protection to bearded pigs since wild meat trade in them is illegal (L. Bennett, personal communication, 25/5/2000).

AN OVERVIEW OF RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES

Below I outline several independent research methods, which will be implemented for the development of sustainable use criteria in Kayan Mentarang National Park. These methods are designed to answer the following research questions: 1. Do pigs display long distance migrations, or is it a wide-spread, but relatively short distance movement by independent animals, which suggests long distance migrations by one large group? 2. Why do pigs start and stop moving? 3. What are biological indicators of migrating pigs for people and what are the biological interactions between pigs and reported indicators (e.g. Bulwer’s pheasant (Lophura bulweri), fruit, butterflies, bees and other insects, flying foxes and birds?) 4. What are the differences in behaviour and ecology of stationary and migratory pigs? 5. What are the migration routes? 6. How is migration temporally and spatially connected to food availability? 7. Do they eat and run or run and eat? 8. What are the physiological and behavioural links between fat, reproduction and migration? 9. How important are protection reserves in the area as refugia and breeding areas for stationary pigs or as migration routes or corridors. 10. How can we map vital migration routes? 11. What is the role of pigs in the ecology of forests within reserves (i.e. interactions with other species and correlation of hunting pressure on other species with the abundance of pigs)? 12. What are the environmental and biological factors affecting food distribution, abundance and availability? (e.g. seasonal variation, climatic events, geographical distribution of food sources, competing seed predators, human impact on vegetation and included food sources.) 13. How important are bearded pigs as a resource (protein for people)? 14. How can we determine a rough estimate of population density so we can calculate sustainable off-take rates -- over a large area, and at local level?

15

15. With migratory species, is the concept of protected sources and exploited sinks still applicable? Can it be used as a management concept for the non-migratory phases/populations? These research question provide the general direction at which this research is aiming; more specifically the research will address these issues as follows:

16

Research activity 1. Analysis of bearded pig population states Primary research question: How do pig densities vary in time and space? Main methodology: Pig presence will be regularly assessed in a number of permanent plots Pigs are very wary in Kayan-Mentarang and difficult to census using direct sighting (Yeager 1999); an indirect method is therefore proposed. Several 1 km2, randomly selected, permanent plots will be established throughout the park in which, on a regular basis, pig-dung density will be assessed (Fig. 2). It is difficult to translate such counts into estimates of pig density because of problems related to dung decay, and the difficulty of translating dung and track numbers into numbers of animals, but the counts will give an indication of spatial and temporal variation in pig numbers.

Dung-count based methods Hedges and Tyson (2002) provided the following account of dung-based survey techniques. Dung-counts have long been used to estimate relative abundance or population density for large herbivores (Neff 1968; Putman 1984), and they have been refined as a major survey method for elephants (Barnes & Barnes 1992; Dawson & Dekker 1992; Barnes 1993; Barnes et al.

1997). Nevertheless, there are a number of potentially serious problems with dung-count based surveys and censuses. The problems with using dung counts can be thought of under the following headings: (1) dung identification problems, (2) dung decay rate problems, (3) defecation rate problems, and (4) dung density problems. The problem of identifying which species is responsible for a pile of dung is a major problem in many parts of the world. This is not a problem in the upper Bahau area, since the only wild pig species is the Bearded Pig, and it should be possible to reliably tell pig droppings from other similar species (e.g. Sambar Cervus unicolor). Much more seriously for pig surveys in the upper Bahau area are the problems associated with dung decay rates. To interpret estimates of dung density from different areas, one either must make the (unjustifiable) assumption that decay rate is the same in all the areas or invest a lot of time monitoring the decay rate of large numbers of known-age dung piles in the different areas, both before and during the survey (not merely afterwards). And after monitoring enough cohorts of reasonable size for long enough (which most studies do not), one may well find that decay rates are highly variable both spatially and temporally (e.g. Wiles 1980; White 1995; Barnes et al. 1997; Hedges & Meijaard in prep). This problem can be ignored if plots are used, in which all dung pellets have previously been removed, and which is revisited within the minimum decay rate period. A further problem with trying to convert numbers of dung piles into numbers of animals is that defecation rates are needed, but obtaining data on the defecation rate of free-living wild animals is very difficult. And

17

even for surveys which treat estimates of dung density as indices of relative abundance (and do not attempt to convert dung pile density into numbers of animals) we still need to make the assumption that the defecation rates are the same in both areas or for both periods, which is unrealistic if the animals’ diets vary between the different areas or periods. Additional problems can be caused by age- or sexrelated differences in defecation rate (e.g. Neff 1968; Rogers 1987; Fuller 1991). The problems of estimating dung density are the least worrying of the big four—line transect methods are now well established as the method of choice for dung counts under most conditions. However, under certain conditions plot-based dung surveys are more appropriate than line transects. For example, in tall grassland or open deciduous forest with a dense layer of herbs you cannot see dung piles very easily when walking transects, so plots that are actively searched tend to be more efficient. Dung-based methods are rather time-consuming too, especially in areas of dense vegetation containing few of the animals of interest (such as Kayan Mentarang). And adding to the logistical difficulties, cut transects cannot be re-used because large ungulates like nice clear paths through dense forest or thorny scrub just as much as biologists do and so re-using cut transects will lead to over-estimates of dung density. More generally, animals tend to defecate non-randomly throughout their home ranges and this can require a very large sampling effort to overcome (and causes problems when analysing and interpreting the data). Problems associated with surveyor skill (e.g. the detection and correct classification of dung piles) need to be taken into consideration too, as well as the question of what constitutes a single defecation event since many animals, including pigs, sometimes defecate while walking, which means that the pellets of one event may be spread over a considerable distance; conversely, defecations may also lie on top of other defecations. Despite the problems discussed above it is important to note that several studies have shown, through comparison with other methods, the potential of dung-counts as indices of relative abundance and population trend (e.g. Jachmann & Bell 1979; Koster & Hart 1988; Aulak & Babinska-Werka

1990; Mandujano & Gallina 1995). Furthermore for pigs living in areas like the upper Bahau we currently have little choice but to use dung-based methods.

Protocol Within each permanent plot a number of plots will be randomly selected on which dung pellets will be counted in permanently marked sub plots of 10 x 2 m (Fig. 4). Dung will be removed from the plots after counting and plots will be checked after several days; the maximum interval between plot counts will be determined by assessing the minimum amount of time for pig dung to decay beyond recognition. Plot locations will be determined in consultation with WWF’s chief conservation scientist.

Materials required 

Tape measures



Plot markers

18



GPS

1 kilometer

10 randomly selected subplots of 10 by 20 m

1 kilometer Figure 4. Plot configuration Proposed personnel: 1 WWF staff, 2 local assistants Suggested research duration: 3 years NOTES…………………………………………………………..…………………………………………………… ……..…………………………………………………………..……………………………………………………… …..…………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………..… ………………………………………………………..…………………………………………………………..…… ……………………………………………………..…………………………………………………………..……… ………………………………………………..…………………………………………………………..…………… ……………………………………………..…………………………………………………………..……………… …………………………………………..………………………………………………………..…………………… ……………………………………..…………………………………………………………..……………………… …………………………………..…………………………………………………………..………………………… ……………………………..…………………………………………………………..……………………………… …………………………..…………………………………………………………..………………………………… ………………………..………………………………………………………..……………………………………… …………………..…………………………………………………………..………………………………………… ………………..…………………………………………………………..…………………………………………… …………..…………………………………………………………..………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 19

Work sheet example for assessing relative pig densities

Main plot location and number Name of investigator(s) Date of initial plot clearing (removing all pellet groups) Date of pellet group count

Sub plot number

Number of pellet groups

Sub plot 1 Sub plot 2 Sub plot 3 Sub plot 4 Sub plot 5 Sub plot 6 Sub plot 7 Sub plot 8 Sub plot 9 Sub plot 10

Remarks

20

Other signs of pig activity

Research activity 2. Analysis of bearded pig physical condition Primary research question: How does the physical conditions of pig vary in time and space and how does this relate to their most recent diets? Main methodology: Hunted pigs will be examined for fat content to assess physical condition. Many pigs are hunted throughout the national park, which potentially provides a very large source of information. However, because of the size of the park it will be impossible to obtain direct data from most of these pigs by the researchers, and a method is required that allows local hunters to record the information for future collection by the researchers. Nutritional status and physical condition of an animal is best expressed by its fat content. The order of fat catabolism on a declining nutritional phase is approximately as follows: (1) subcutaneous fat over the rump and saddle disappears; (2) abdominal cavity fat is used; and (3) bone marrow fat declines; any loss of bone marrow fat is indicative of poor condition. Assessing these individual fat indices may be too complicated for the present purpose, however, and a simpler technique would be to assess the nutritional status of an animal by weighing and measuring it. For this I propose that in a selected number of villages throughout the national park, a bearded pig monitoring station is established in which each hunted pig is weighed and measured. Also, a mandible of each hunted pig should be collected to assess the specimens’ age class. Bandy et al. (1956) in a study of nutritional status of ungulates predicted body weights from heart girth measurement and hind foot length and compared the ration of the two to estimate recent nutritional status of deer. They reasoned that hind foot length, once attained, is not affected as much as is heart girth by nutritional levels. If the ratio, body weight estimated from heart girth to body weight estimated from hind foot length, was 1, it was in a very good condition (Bookhout 1994). Riney (1955) developed the kidney fat index (KFI) as an indicator of abdominal fat reserves. The KFI is obtained by removing the kidney and its surrounding (perirenal) fat from the animal. The fat is cut exactly at both ends of the kidney, perpendicular to the main kidney axis. Tissue that does not remain affixed to the kidney is discarded. The ratio of the weight of the remaining fat to the weight of the kidney x 100 is the kidney fat index. A study by Fingers et al. (1981) found that KFI explained 75% of the variance in present body fat, indicating that KFI is a good predictor of total fat stores. To establish how nutritional status relates to diet, as much as possible, stomachs of hunted pigs should be investigated to assess the animal’s most recent diet content. If a dead bearded pig is found, take the following measurements: 1. total length (cm), 2. tail length (cm), and 3. hindfoot length (mm). If possible, total weight should also be determined. See, for instance, Payne et al. (1985) or Yasuma (1994) for instructions on how to take these measurements. Another useful characteristic to note is hair pattern and coat colour. In the Asian pig species, apart from S. scrofa, there

21

are two hair types intermixed: shorter part-agouti hairs and longer saturated ones. In S. barbatus the agouti hairs vastly predominate, some specimens appearing to lack the saturated hair-type completely; they are black with broad yellow bands or tips, the latter a result of wear, while the saturated hairs are black (Groves 1981). A brief description of hair types when pigs are investigated would be useful. Also notes on beards, whorls and manes should be made. The following measurements, as described by Groves (1981; 1997), would be useful to take when pig skulls are obtained as they can then be prepared to existing data sets on pig skull dimensions (see Fig. 5a–e): 1. Greatest skull length (gl) 2. (a) Condylo-basal length (cbl); (b) Basal length 3. Bizygomatic breadth 4. Occipital (crest) breadth 5. Occipital height (a) from basion; (b) from opisthion 6. Total skull height 7. Nasal length (= front of nasal bones to the posterior suture of the nasal bones, not shown in Figure) 8. Palate length 9. M3 length 10. Greatest depth of zygomatic process of zygomatic arch 11. Diameter of inferior surface of lower canines of males 12. Diameter of posterior surface of lower canines of males 13. Lower tooth row length from canine to third molar 14. Lengths of each premolar and molar, upper and lower jaws (see Fig. 5b) 15. Maximum widths, molars and PM4, upper and lower jaws (see Fig. 5b) 16. lengths of the following diastemata (=gaps between teeth): a. upper canine to first premolar (PM1), b. lower canine to first premolar (PM1), c. first (PM1) to second (PM2) lower premolar.

22

1

6

10

13

Figure 5a. Side view of bearded pig skull with measurements 1, 6, 10, and 13.

M3 M2 M1 PM4 PM3 PM2 PM1

3

8 2b 2a

23

Figure 5b. Ventral view of bearded pig skull without mandibles, with measurements 2a, 2b, 3, 8, and the locations of the individual molars and premolars.

5b 5a 4

Figure 5c. Posterior view of bearded pig skull showing measurements 4, 5a and 5b.

PM1 PM2 PM3 PM4 M1 M2 M3

9

canine

Figure 5d. Mandible of bearded pig, showing the premolars, molars, and canine, and measurement 9.

24

posterior

inferior

anterior

Figure 5e. Pig canines showing anterior, inferior (measurement 11), and posterior (measurements 12) surfaces.

Protocol For each hunted pig the following data should be collected: 

Location of kill



Sex of animal



Total weight of animal



Length of hind foot



Total length of animal



Tail length



Heart girth

25



Weight of kidney and attached fat



Several measurements on skull (this can be done at a later stage when all skulls are collected at a central location)

Materials required 

Tape measures



Big scales for whole animal weight



Small scales for kidney weight



Callipers for skull measurements



GPS

Proposed personnel: 2 WWF staff, 10 local community members to be trained as bearded pig monitor Suggested research duration: 3 years

NOTES………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

26

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

27

Work sheet example for assessing physical condition of pigs

Location (area name, GPS coordinates) Name of investigator(s) Date of assessment

Method of hunting Pig group size Parts of animal taken back to village

Sex of animal Total weight of animal Length of hind foot Total length of animal Tail length Hearth girth Weight of kidney – weight of attached fat

Skull and mandible measurements 1

2a

2b

3

10

11

12

13

PM1

M3

M2

M1

4

5

6

7

8

9

M3

M2

M1

PM4

PM3

PM2

PM4

PM3

28

PM2

PM1

16a

16b

16c

Research activity 3. Analysis of pig movement Primary research question: How far and where do pigs move, and how is this related to the nutritional status? Main methodology: Pigs will be captured and tagged with inexpensive tags that will be retrieved through a (reimbursement) program for hunters that turn in tags from captured animals. To analyse the movement of bearded pigs, I propose a cheap and relatively easy method of tagging pigs and monitoring where they have been recaptured. This will only give a limited amount of information per recaptured pig (as no data are obtained between release and recapture), but it is hoped that the number of pigs that can be involved in the research will compensate for this. The advantage of this method as opposed to more standard techniques such as the use of radio telemetry is that the movement of more animals can be assessed for a lower price; also the method relies to a lesser extent on expensive and fragile technology. The idea is to catch pigs in a number of areas in various parts of the park, mark them with ear tags, and release them. The ear tags will be inscribed with a message asking the hunter to return the tag to one of the bearded pig monitoring stations throughout the park. In consultation with local WWF management it will be decided whether a financial reward for returning tags should be considered, and also what exactly the message on the tags should be. One of the difficult aspects of this method is the need to catch and release many bearded pigs without a health risk to either the animal or the researchers. Wong (2002) had very low success rates in catching bearded pigs in Sabah using barrel traps, but found that Aldrich foot snares worked a lot better. In tropical Queensland, Australia, over 2,000 pigs were trapped in one year using a dense network of traps. Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages, and possibly a combination of the two should be considered; for now I suggest to initially focus on using traps rather than snares. Because of the remoteness of the park and the study areas therein, locally built box traps are probably the best option. Steel mesh should be used with a grid no greater than 100 x 100 mm; the minimum height should be 1.5 m, although if a roof is used the walls can be shorter. The construction should clearly be strong enough to contain several highly excited pigs; possibly some of the steel material can be substituted by locally available material such as bamboo. Details of trap construction and baiting will be provided in the training manual. Once pigs are trapped, they will be constrained by using a plastic pole which supports a rope noose which is placed around the pig's neck. The pig is then dragged to the trap mesh and held tightly against the mesh, an assistant then attaches the ear tag. If possible nutritional status (weight, skin fat) will be determined at the same time. Tags should be large enough to be visible by field researchers that come across these pigs and should be individually marked by colours or other means to allow for pig identification.

29

The success of the research will depend on the cooperation and participation from local communities, especially their willingness to collect tags and return them to WWF. Clear information on what the tags look like and what they are for should be provided to all communities in Kayan Mentarang. Furthermore, by establishing several bearded pig monitoring stations throughout the park retrieval rates of tags may increase. Because cross border migration between Kalimantan and Sarawak has been reported it would be very interesting to somehow collect tags that end up on the other side of the border. One possible way to maximize the chances of this happening would be to link up with the bearded pig research project that is presently developed by the Sarawak Forestry Department. Also other research projects, such as the CIFOR project in Bulungan, or WWFs Betung Kerihun project could be involved in this aspect of the research.

Protocol for pig trapping Pigs will be captured using box traps as designed by the feral pig control program in Queensland, Australia (Fig. 3a-e).

Figure 3a. Overall pig trap design, showing in detail the trip bar

30

Figure 3b. Front view of trap, showing the dimensions, placement of hinges, and location of spring.

Figure 3c. End view of trap, showing trap width (175 cm).

Figure 3d. Top view of trap, showing overall dimensions

31

Figure 3e. Dimensions of trap door and use of 25x25x2 rectangular hollow section steel beams Tips for construction 

Any available material may be substituted, however, consideration should be given te weight and strength. Mesh size should not exceed 10 x 10 cm.



Roof bars are designed to prevent pigs climbing out and could be changed to 200 mm mesh sheet.



A short piece of chain should be used between the spring and door frame, to allow tension adjustment and prevent damage to the spring by it bending around the frame



The gap below the door is important to allow for free movement and prevent it getting blocked by pig diggings.

Tips for using portable traps: 

Selecting a site to locate the trap is one of the most important factors in successful trapping and should be given careful consideration. The site should be in a shady area with as much natural vegetation as possible. It should also be close to signs of pig activity but definitely not on or right beside a trail or path.



Pre-feeding should be carried out at several potential sites prior to trap placement, with the best sites being used.



Traps should be located in a circuit to make for easy daily checking. This task could possibly be included in other daily activities.

32



Once in position the trap should be secured using at least 2 star pickets, which can be left in place for re-use, when the trap is moved.



Bait used should initially be whatever pigs are naturally eating, however experimenting with a few different baits can produce good results. Bait should be readily available at low or no costs as large quantities will be required. Where pigs are eating carrion, carcasses are suitable; in areas where bananas or other waste fruit is available, these can produce good results



Do not be deterred if pigs are hesitant to enter the trap at first, as a little time should overcome this. Some ideas for enticing shy pigs into the trap include: 1. disturbing the ground inside the trap with a hoe 2. using aromatic attractants such as vanilla essence, aniseed or fish oil 3. laying a bait trail from the pig signs to the trap



While pigs are being caught continue to pre-feed at other sites so that the trap can be moved and immediately continue to catch pigs when the first site is exhausted.



Always use the prescribed trip bar, which is normally a straight branch about 100 mm diameter. Ensure the slot on the door is wide enough and releases freely, and fix end is tied down. Do not use trip wires as less pigs will be caught and possible non-target captures can result.



Use of the door latch will prevent trapped pigs from opening the door once trapped, however this will prevent more pigs pushing into the trap.



Keep activity in the area of the trap to an absolute minimum and cease hunting and use of dogs in the entire area while trapping is in progress.



Tag and release trapped pigs from the trap as quickly as possible.

Protocol for pig tagging Each captured pig will be tagged using a clearly visible ear tag. The ear tags will have different colours depending on where pigs were initially captured. Furthermore, on each tag a message will be written or otherwise inscribed asking anyone capturing a pig to return the tag to a regional address (the pig monitoring stations in Kayan Mentarang) or any of the future programs that will be associated with the research in Kayan Mentarang (e.g. the CIFOR program in Malinau, WCS program in Sarawak). It will be considered to offer a financial award for returning tags to any of these addresses.

Materials required per trap 

5 of 7.5 m lengths 40 x 4 0x 3 mm angle iron or equivalent material



1 of 6 m length of 25 x 25 x 2 mm rectangular hollow section steel beams or equivalent material



3 of 6 m length DB 12 bar (reo bar) or equivalent material

33



1.5 sheets of 3 x 2.4 m mesh (75 x 50 x 4 mm) or equivalent material



2 of 16 mm cattle gate hinges



1 latch that locks the door once pigs are inside



1 gate spring (or trampoline spring)



short length of chain



2 star pickets

Materials for tagging and trapping 

Bait



Noose for managing pigs once inside the trap



Ear tags



High strength stainless steel ear tag applicator



Tag marking pen

Proposed personnel: 2 WWF staff, 3 local assistants for cage construction and assistance in trapping Suggested research duration: 3 years NOTES………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

34

Work sheet example for capturing and tagging pigs

Location of trap (area name, GPS coordinates) Name of investigator(s) Date of capture

Bait used in trap Number of pigs trapped in one trap Sex of captured pigs Estimates age of captured pigs (juvenile, young, adult) Ear tag codes and colours used to mark the pigs Physical condition of captured pigs (thin,

bones

showing;

medium

condition; fat etc.)

Remarks

35

Research activity 4. Mapping of bearded pig features within the national park Through participatory sketch mapping the important bearded pig features in the park (feeding and breeding areas, migration routes, river crossing sites) will be identified and mapped. This information will be stored in a GIS and combined with the findings from the other research activities. The information will be primarily collected by means of village interviews. Such interviews should address the following questions: 

When do pigs migrate in the area?



How many pigs are generally involved in these migrations (for instance the number that are seen crossing rivers per day)?



For how long do these migrations last?



What is the general condition of pigs when they migrate?



Do the migration include young and juvenile animals or do they mostly involve adults?



Are the migration preceded by migration of other animal species?



Do the interviewees know what triggers pig migration



In which direction do pigs travel at particular times of the year?



Where do pigs cross rivers?



Are pig population declining or increasing?



Are bearded pigs considered to be agricultural pests, and if so, how do they rank compared to other crop-raiding species (e.g. macaques, deer etc.)?



In which local area are pigs generally hunted, and has this changed over the years (e.g. do hunters need to look for more remote locations than in previous times)?

It is important that these interviews are conducted in a structured manner and that all replies are recorded (including negative ones) to allow for a proper statistical analysis of the interview.

Proposed personnel: 2 WWF staff Suggested research duration: 1 year

36

Research activity 5. Assessment of the overall sustainability of hunting for bearded pigs Main methodology: Information will be collected on the number of pigs hunted in each community in the national park. The idea is to train local villagers in a number of villages in the park to keep hunting diaries regarding pig hunts following Puri’s (1997) and Yeager’s (1999) methods. The data collected for each hunting expedition (and it needs to be defined what exactly is an expedition) should give an indication about the number of pigs sighted during the hunt, the number of animals killed, the number of participants on the hunt, hunting technique and tools (for details see Puri 1997). These records can be combined with data on nutritional status of pigs and their size, stomach content, and possibly the presence of tags. If a considerable percentage of the total pig population is hunted it may be possible to estimate total pig populations using catch-effort calculations (see Bishir & Lancia 1996; Lancia et al. 1996). Proposed personnel: 1 WWF staff, any local hunters that are willing to collaborate Suggested research duration: 3 years NOTES………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 37

POLICY IMPLICATIONS

During an earlier assignment, the PA wrote an inventory and compilation of the existing information on bearded pigs relevant to the park (see Meijaard 2000). It is therefore proposed that this information will serve as a background to the hereby proposed research. The research aims to provide the required understanding of bearded pig ecology to develop a set of final management recommendations, which could be used in a sustainable management plan. It is proposed that this final management plan will be produced by the Kayan Mentarang project managers, the senior conservation biology scientist, local WWF staff, and local community members that have been involved in the research or that are otherwise interested in a sustainably managed bearded pig population; if needed the PA can provide assistance and advice. This plan which will provide a strategy for sustainable management of bearded pig populations and their forest environment, and should include: 

A spatial plan for the establishment and maintenance of forest reserves, corridors, and protected (no-hunting) zones, including an assessment of key points in the landscape that block or limit pig movement,



An assessment of sustainable harvesting levels of bearded pigs, including recommendations on legal and illegal hunting methods, and times of the year when hunting should be limited,



An overview of the ecological role of bearded pigs in forest environments, and what would happen if pigs were to disappear.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank World Wide Fund for Nature - Indonesia (WWF-I) for financial and logistic support.

REFERENCES Aulak, W., and J. Babinska-Werka. 1990. Estimation of roe deer density on the abundance and rate of disappearance of their faeces from the forest. Acta Theriologica 35:111-120. Bandy, P. J., I. T. Cowan, W. D. Kitts, and A. J. Wood. 1956. A method for assessment of the nutritional status of wild ungulates. Canadian Journal of Zoology 34:48-52. Banks, E. 1931. A popular account of the mammals of Borneo. Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Asiatic Society 9:137. Banks, E. 1949. Bornean mammals. The Kuching Press, Kuching, Sarawak. Barnes, R. F. W. 1993. Indirect methods for counting elephants in forest. Pachyderm 16:24-30. Barnes, R. F. W., B. Asamoah-Boateng, J. Naada Majam, and J. Agyei-Ohemeng. 1997. Rainfall and the population dynamics of elephant dung-piles in the forests of southern Ghana. African Journal of Ecology 35:39-52. Barnes, R. F. W., and K. L. Barnes. 1992. Estimating decay rates of elephant dung piles in forest. African Journal Ecology 30:316-321.

38

Beccari, O. 1986. Wanderings in the great forests of Borneo. From the English translation published by Archibald Constable & Co. Ltd, London, 1904. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. Bennett, E. L., and M. T. Gumal. 2001. The inter-relationships of commercial logging, hunting and wildlife in Sarawak, and recommendations for forest management in R. A. Fimbel, A. Grajal, and J. G. Robinson, editors. The Cutting Edge: Conserving Wildlife in Logged Tropical Forest. Columbia University Press, New York. Bennett, E. L., M. T. Gumal, J. G. Robinson, and A. Rabinowitz. 1996. A masterplan for wildlife in Sarawak. Wildlife Conservation Society and Sarawak Forest Department, Kuching, Malaysia. Bennett, E. L., A. J. Nyaoi, and J. Sompud. 1999. Saving Borneo's bacon: The sustainability of hunting in Sarawak and Sabah. Pages 305-324 in J. G. Robinson, and E. L. Bennett, editors. Hunting for sustainability in tropical forests. Columbia University Press, New York. Bennett, E. L., and J. G. Robinson. 2000. Hunting of wildlife in tropical forests. Implications for biodiversity and forest peoples. Page 42. The World Bank, Washington, D.C. Bishir, J., and R. A. Lancia. 1996. On catch-effort methods of estimating animal abundance. Biometrics 52:1457-1466. Bookhout, T. A. 1994. Research and management techniques for wildlife and habitat. The Wildlife Society, Inc., Bethesda, Maryland, USA. Caldecott, J. 1988. Hunting and wildlife management in Sarawak. Page 172. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. Caldecott, J. 1991. Eruptions and migrations of bearded pig populations. Bongo 18:233-243. Caldecott, J., and S. Caldecott. 1985. A horde of pork. New Scientist 1469:32-35. Caldecott, J. O., R. A. Blouch, and A. A. MacDonald. 1993. The bearded pig (Sus barbatus). Pages 136 145 in W. L. R. Oliver, editor. Pigs, peccaries, and hippos. Status survey and conservation action plan. IUCN/SSC Pigs and Peccaries Specialist group and IUCN/SSC Hippos Specialist Group, Gland, Switzerland. Chin, C. 2001. Pig in the pot: Comments on Sus barbatus in the hunting lifestyle of the Penan in Sarawak (Borneo). Asian Wild Pig News 1:10-12. Collins, N. M., J. A. Sayer, and T. C. Whitmore 1991. The conservation atlas of tropical forests. Asia and the Pacific. Macmillan Press, London. Curran, L. M., and M. Leighton. 2000. Vertebrate Responses to Spatiotemporal Variation in Seed Production of Mast-Fruiting Dipterocarpaceae. Ecological Monographs 70:121-150. Curran, L. M., and C. O. Webb. 2000. Experimental Tests of the Spatiotemporal Scale of Seed Predation in Mast-Fruiting Dipterocarpaceae. Ecological Monographs 70:151-170. Davis, G., and R. Ackermann. 1988. Forest, land and water: Issues in sustainable development. World Bank Document,. World Bank, Asian Regional Office, Jakarta, Indonesia. Dawson, S., and A. J. F. M. Dekker. 1992. Counting Asian Elephants in forests. FAO-RAP, Bangkok. Dove, M. R. 1993. A revisionist view of tropical deforestation and development. Environmental Conservation 20:17-24. Feuilletau-de Bruyn, W. K. H. 1933. Bijdrage tot de kennis van de afdeeling Hoeloe Soengei (Z. en O.afdeeling Borneo). Koloniale Studiën 17153-93 and 183-211. Fingers, S. E., I. L. Brisbin, M. H. Smith, and D. F. Urbston. 1981. Kidney fat as a predictor of body condition in white-tailed deer. Journal of Wildlife Management 45:964-968. Fuller, T. K. 1991. Do pellet counts indicate white tailed deer numbers and population change? Journal of Wildlife Management 55. Groves, C. P. 1981. Ancestors for the pigs. Australian National University Press, Canberra. Groves, C. P. 1997. Taxonomy of wild pigs (Sus) of the Philippines. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 120:163-191. Groves, C. P. 2001. Taxonomy of wild pigs of Southeast Asia. Asian Wild Pig News 1:2-3.

39

Groves, C. P., and P. Grubb. 1993. The suborder suiformes. Pages 1-4 in W. L. R. Oliver, editor. Pigs, peccaries, and hippos. Status survey and conservation action plan. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. Hedges, S., and E. Meijaard. in prep. Fallacies from faeces, or how not to count ungulates. Hedges, S., and M. Tyson. 2002. Some thoughts on counting elephants in SE Asian forests, with particular reference to the CITES Monitoring the Illegal Killing of Elephants Program. Page 54. WCS Sumatran Elephant Project, Bogor, Indonesia. Heinsius-Viruly, A., and F. van Heurn. 1935. Overzicht van de uit Nederlandsch-Indië ontvangen gegevens, met biologische anntekeningen omtrent de betreffende diersoorten. Mededeelingen no. 10. Nederlandsche Commissie voor Internationale Natuurbescherming. Hose, C. 1926. Natural man: A record from Borneo. Macmillan, London, reprinted by Oxford University Press, Singapore. Jachmann, H., and R. H. V. Bell. 1979. The assessment of elephant numbers and occupance by means of droppings counts in the Kasungu National Park, Malawi. African Journal of Ecology 17:231239. Jeanes, K., and E. Meijaard. 2000a. Danau Sentarum's wildlife. Part 1. Biodiversity value and global importance of Danau Sentarum's wildlife. Borneo Research Bulletin 31:150-229. Jeanes, K., and E. Meijaard. 2000b. Danau Sentarum's wildlife. Part 2. Habitat characteristics and biodiversity distribution within and surrounding Danau Sentarum. Borneo Research Bulletin 31:230-245. Knapen, H. 1997. Epidemics, droughts, and other uncertainties on Southeast Borneo during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Pages 121-152 in P. Boomgaard, F. Colombijn, and D. Henley, editors. Paper Landscapes. Explorations in the environmental history of Indonesia. KITLV Press, Leiden. Koster, S. H., and J. A. Hart. 1988. Methods of estimating ungulate populations in tropical forests. African Journal of Ecology 26:117-126. Lancia, R. A., J. W. Bishir, M. C. Conner, and C. S. Rosenberry. 1996. Use of catch-effort to estimate population size. Wildlife Society Bulletin 24:731-737. Linkie, M., and L. Sadikin. 2003. The bearded pig in Kerinci Seblat National Park, Sumatra. Asian Wild Pig News 3:3-9. MacKinnon, K., G. Hatta, H. Halim, and A. Mangalik 1996. The ecology of Kalimantan. Periplus Editions, Singapore. Mandujano, S., and S. Gallina. 1995. Comparison of deer censusing methods in tropical dry forest. Wildlife Society Bulletin 23:180-186. Manser, B. 1992. Stimmen aus dem Regenwald; Zeugnisse eines bedrohten Volkes. Bern, Switzerland. Mayer, J. 1996. Impacts of the East Kalimantan forest fires of 1982 - 1983 on village life, forest use, and land use. Pages 187-218 in C. Padoch, and N. J. Peluso, editors. Borneo in transition. People, forest, conservation and development. Oxford University Press, Oxford. McNeely, J. A., and P. S. Wachtel 1991. Soul of the tiger. Searching for Nature's answers in Southeast Asia. Oxford University Press, Singapore. Medway Lord. 1959. Food bones in Niah Cave excavations. Sarawak Museum Journal 13:627-636. Medway Lord. 1964. Post-Pleistocene changes in the mammalian fauna of Borneo. Archaeological evidence from the Niah caves. Studies in Speleology 1:33-37. Medway Lord 1977. Mammals of Borneo, Kualu Lumpur, Malaysia. Meijaard, E. 2000. Bearded pig (Sus barbatus). Ecology, conservation status, and research methodology. Background document for the electronic conference on bearded pig research, and recommendations for a collaborative research programme. Page 75. WWF-Indonesia, CIFOR, and Ecosense Consultants, Bogor, Indonesia. Meijaard, E. 2002. Wild pig meat on Sumatran and Bornean markets. Asian Wild Pig News 2:8.

40

MoF, and FAO. 1996. National Forest Inventory of Indonesia. Final forest resources statistics report. Annex 2 Kalimantan. Indonesia UTF/INS/066/INS National Forest Inventory. Field Document No. 55. Page 59. FAO, Jakarta, Indonesia. Nederlandsch-Indische Vereeniging tot Natuurbescherming. 1939. Natuur in Zuid- en Oost- Borneo. Fauna, flora en natuurbescherming in de Zuider- en Ooster-Afdeeling van Borneo. Pages 334-411 in Nederlandsch-Indische Vereeniging tot Natuurbescherming, editor. 3 Jaren Indisch natuur leven. Opstellen over landschappen, dieren en planten, tevens elfde verslag (1936-1938), Batavia, Indonesia. Neff, D. J. 1968. The pellet-group count technique for big game trend, census, and distribution: a review. Journal of Wildlife Management 32. Nieuwenhuis, A. W. 1907. Quer durch Borneo. Ergebnisse seiner Reisen in den Jahren 1894, 1896-97 und 1898-1900. E.J. Brill, Leiden, The Netherlands. Noor, Y. R., and E. W. Hanafia. 1994. A preliminary survey on the ecological potential of the Cagar Alam Muara Kendawangan, West Kalimantan. Pages Bogor, Indonesia. PHPA and AWB. Oliver, W. L. R. 2001. Taxonomy and conservation of Asian wild pigs. Asian Wild Pig News 1:3-5. Page, S. E., J. O. Rieley, K. Doody, S. Hodgson, S. Husson, P. Jenkins, H. Morrough-Bernard, S. Otway, and S. Wilshaw. 1997. Biodiversity of tropical peat swamp forest: A case study of animal diversity in the Sungai Sebangau catchment of Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Pages 231-242 in J. O. Rieley, and S. E. Page, editors. Tropical peatlands. Samara Publishing Limited, Cardigan, United Kingdom. Payne, J., C. M. Francis, and K. Phillipps 1985. A field guide to the mammals of Borneo. The Sabah Society, Kota Kinabalu. Pfeffer, P. 1959. Biologie et migrations du sanglier de Borneo (Sus barbatus Müller 1869). Mammalia 23:277-303. Pfeffer, P., and J. T. Caldecott. 1986. The bearded pig in East Kalimantan and Sarawak. Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society 59:81-100. Pierce-Colfer, C. J., and H. Soedjito. 1996. Food, forest, and fields in a Bornean rainforest: Toward appropriate agroforestry development. Pages 162-186 in C. Padoch, and N. J. Peluso, editors. Borneo in transition. People, forest, conservation and development. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Puri, R. 1992. Mammals and hunting on the Lurah River: recommendations for management of faunal resources in the Cagar-Alam Kayan-Mentarang. Page 48. WWF, Samarinda, East Kalimantan. Puri, R. K. 1997. Hunting knowledge of the Penan Benalui of East Kalimantan, Indonesia. Page 496. Department of Anthropology. University of Hawaii. Putman, R. J. 1984. Facts from faeces. Mammal Review 14:79-97. Regional Physical Planning Programme for Transmigration. 1991. Review of Phase 1. Main report. Page 232. Land Resources Department ODNRI, Overseas Development Administrator and Departemen Transmigrasi, London, England and Jakarta, Indonesia. Repetto, R. 1988. The forest for the trees? Government policies and misuse of forest resources. World Resource Institute, Washington DC. Rijksen, H. D., and E. Meijaard 1999. Our vanishing relative. The status of wild orang-utans at the close of the twentieth century. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. Riney, T. 1955. Evaluating condition of free ranging red deer (Cervus elaphus), with special reference to New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Science and Technology, Section B 36:429 - 463. Rogers, L. L. 1987. Seasonal changes in defecation rates of free-ranging white-tailed deer. Journal of Wildlife Management 51:330-333. Simons, H. 1987. Gunung Niut Nature Reserve. Proposed Management Plan. Page 42 + appendices. WWF Indonesia, Jakarta. Sody, H. J. V. 1937. On the mammals of Banka. Temminckia 2:221-250.

41

Strien van, N. J. H. 1983. A guide to the tracks of the mammals of Indonesia. School of Environmental Conservation Management, Ciawi, Indonesia. White, L. J. T. 1995. Factors affecting the duration of elephant dung piles in rain forest in the Lopé Reserve, Gabon. African Journal of Ecology 33:142-150. Wiles, G. J. 1980. Faeces deterioration rates of four wild ungulates in Thailand. Natural History Bulletin of the Siam Society 28:121-134. Wilson, D. E., and D. M. Reeder 1993. Mammal species of the world. A taxonomic and geographic reference. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington. Wong, S. T. 2002. The ecology of Malayan sun bears (Helarctos malayanus) in the lowland tropical rainforesr of Sabah, Malaysian Borneo. MSc thesis. University of Montana. Yasuma, S. 1994. An invitation to the mammals of East Kalimantan. Tropical Rainforest Research Project (JTA-9(a)-137. PUSREHUT Special Publication No. 3. PUSREHUT and JICA, Samarinda, Indonesia. Yeager, C. 1999. Research report Lalut-Birai Field Station 1997-1999. WWF Indonesia, Kayan-Mentarang National Park Project, Jakarta, Indonesia.

42