Printer Friendly

Danau Sentarum's wildlife: part 2. Habitat characteristics and biodiversity distribution within and surrounding Danau Sentarum.

This paper presents a broad analysis of wildlife habitat usage and the need for habitat conservation within and surrounding Danau Sentarum National Park, West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Flood and dry season habitat analysis reveal that intact Peat Swamp and Hill Forests, largely outside DSNP's boundaries, support much greater bird and mammal species numbers, and endemic and threatened species, than the Stunted Swamp Forests of the DSNP central lakes basin. Peat Swamp Forest and hill stream habitats also act as key year-round habitats for the majority of the site's endemic fish, and threatened crocodile, tortoise, turtle, waterbird and fish populations. Furthermore, these habitats provide a vital dry season refuge to fish fauna migrating up-catchment to escape the dry season drying up of the central basin lakes. Comparatively the extensive "within-reserve" lake basin habitat offers key year-round habitat only to terrestrial fauna ecologically restricted to the area (i.e. Proboscis Monkey), and only a flood season habitat for the diverse fish fauna of the central basin lakes and rivers. These patterns suggest that the inclusion in the Park of all the forests that surround the lakes would significantly increase the Park's biodiversity. Finally, available data form an adequate basis to initiate a "blanket approach" to habitat and faunal community conservation, i.e. exercising the assumption that habitat conservation measures will by default also conserve the fauna species shown to use these habitats. Yet, the ecological detail concerning wildlife nutrition, breeding, habitat use, ranging and migration, as needed to initiate firmer "species-focused" conservation programs, is still lacking. This data gap is becoming increasingly crucial as the risk of site and regional species extinction mounts in the face of accelerating habitat destruction and uncontrolled harvest and trade impacts.

Introduction

In view of the bioregional and global importance of the wildlife diversity in Danau Sentarum National Park (DSNP) (see Jeanes and Meijaard, 2000), and against a background of increasing human population and development pressure, there is currently a pressing need to initiate concerted conservation action to head-off the mounting risks of local and regional species extinction. Effective wildlife management can only be successful if based on accurate knowledge of the ecological requirements of the target species in the area. This is especially the case because many wildlife species in the area are threatened in their survival and it is unlikely that these species will survive if their ecological needs are not specifically addressed. What is needed, therefore, are data on wildlife habitat preferences, ranging needs, feeding ecology and species population dynamics. This paper summarizes and discusses ecological data that have been gathered by a variety of researchers working in DSNP. Relatively little research ha s been done on the ecology of Danau Sentarum's wildlife, and this overview of species ecology is necessarily brief. Still we hope that this account of the more recent findings concerning habitat importance, wildlife ecology and population distributions will assist in improving wildlife management in DSNP.

Methods

Detailed methodology of the publications and reports on wildlife ecology will not be described here, unless specific mention is required to explain certain findings. As a fundamental data requirement for any in-situ fauna conservation program, a clear definition is needed of the relationship between animal species and habitats, most notably how faunal biodiversity is distributed within the site and where it is found in greatest concentrations. As a first step in the analysis a classification of terrestrial and aquatic habitats is needed.

Terrestrial

Derived from the ecological studies of Giesen (1987, 1994, 1996, 2000) and Jensen, et al. (1994)-(reported in Giesen (2000)), and based on the associated floristic, phenology, structural, soil, flood pattern, classification and mapping detail generated concerning DNSP's vegetation types, a simplified mapping of the major terrestrial habitat types of DSNP and near-catchment surrounds has been made (see Jeanes, 1997; source Dennis, 1996, 1997) defining six major terrestrial habitat types as follows:

A. Surrounding Uplands with shifting cultivation;

B. Elevated River Levees with shifting cultivation;

C. Hills and Hill Forest;

D. Peat lands and Tall Swamp Forest;

E. Fresh water Swamp and Stunted / Dwarf Swamp Forest; and

F. Fresh water Swamp and Riparian Swamp Forest.

The initial two cleared landscapes were not mapped, but are identified as the boundary between the lake basin fresh water swamps (D and E) and the Kapuas river levee to the south (B); the boundary between Tall Peat Swamp Forest (D) and the well-drained uplands (A) to the north east, north and west; and the tongues of cleared land on river levees of the catchment tributaries (B) extending into the Tall Swamp Forest belts from the east, north and west. All other habitat units are clearly mapped; with the hills divided into forested (C) and secondary regrowth/ladang (r) belts, and the lake basin habitats mapped as a complex of lakes, water ways, Dwarf Swamp Forest and Stunted Swamp Forest (E). The few remaining un-cleared sites of Riparian Swamp forest (F) are marked as strips along the Tawang, Tengkidap, Belitung and Belitung Hulu Rivers.

Aquatic

Despite a lack of systematic data there is ample evidence in the analysis of site data to suggest that numerous differing "aquatic habitats" exist in the DSNP lake basin. Based studies of water quality data, differing hydrology, flooding patterns, and periods of flooding within and surrounding DSNP (reported in Giesen (1987, 1996; Jeanes, 1997), nine potentially differing "aquatic habitats" have been defined in DSNP as outlined in Table 1.

A. The main Kapuas river.

B and C. The two classes of hydrological connection between the Kapuas the lake basin (i.e. main and peak flood season water flow routes).

D and E. Catchment tributaries (generally "white" water).

F, G and H. three classes of lake (two seasonal; and one permanent).

I. the black-water swamp and forest streams.

Despite the lack of details on aquatic species ecology and population distributions (particularly for fish), such a limnology-based habitat classification remains the best basis for further strategic study concerning aquatic wildlife ecology, hydrological patterns, and water quality.

Results

Beyond consideration of habitat type, analysis must progress to define patterns of habitat use by individual species, the concentrations of biodiversity in differing habitats, and consideration of how these patterns influence species ecology.

Fish

Vaas (1952) provides some limited data concerning feeding habits and habitat distribution of DSNP and adjacent Kapuas River fish species. Suryaningsih (1993) adds data on the feeding behavior and length to weight ratios of five DSNP fish species. Such work on selected DSNP fish species (i.e. feeding behavior and breeding cycles) has also been carried out by staff of the Freshwater Fisheries Research Institute (Palembang) in mid-1996 (unpublished data). Widjanarti (1996), and Kottelat (1993) to a lesser extent, provide brief notes on fish species distribution and ecology for most of their 218 listed fish species. As such, knowledge of fish habitat preferences and requirements remains sketchy. Only the work of Kottelat (1993) notes some trends in fish biodiversity distribution with 125 species found in the central lakes basin, 175 species in the "lakes area" plus fringing forest lakes, and 185 species from the total DSNP site and near catchment. Kottelat (1993) suggested, and recent surveys proved, that over 20 0 fish species could inhabit the DSNP central lakes basin and peripheral lakes, making it the most biodiverse habitat complex for DSNP fish fauna. However, he also notes that the addition of the tall swamp forest zone surrounding DSNP, would add at least 50 species, translating into a 25% increase in the Park's fish biodiversity. Particularly, if the extension zone would include the priority habitats of upland, headwater and hill streams, oligotrophic blackwater habitats, and other perennial fish habitats, a significant increase in the number of species is expected. Upland streams are known to have a distinctive fauna, which is usually very rich in endemics. Similarly, oligotrophic blackwater habitats are known to host a poorer fauna in terms of biomass, but a much richer one in terms of species diversity and endemicity rate, when compared to the usually nutrient-rich "white" (silt-loaded) waters (such as the Kapuas river) (Kottelat, 1993).

Subsequent buffer zone, hill stream and black-water habitat surveys suggest Kottelat's (1993) predictions to hold true at DSNP (see Kottelat, 1995; Martin-Smith, 1996; Ng and Kottelat, 1996; Widjanarti, 1996). These surveys show that habitats of nine of the 14 newly discovered fish species at DSNP, and nine of the 13 new fish species collection sites, are in black-water (tall peat swamp) or upland/headwater stream sites. This suggests that a large percentage of DSNP's population of the rare, endemic and new species (see Table 1 in Jeanes and Meijaard, 2000) do not inhabit the central lakes basin, but inhabit the peat swamps and near-catchment surrounds. This includes the Arowana (Scleropages formosus), a key conservation species, which now appears to be largely restricted to remote swamp forest areas due to high fishing pressure elsewhere in the lake basin.

Reptiles

As with fish species, data concerning the ecology, population numbers and distribution of reptile species within the DSNP basin is incomplete. However, the work of Frazier (1994, 2000) and Ross et al. (1996) does give some quantitative (transects) and general data on crocodile species distribution, population levels, and crocodile ecology within and around DSNP. Furthermore, the work of Walter (1996, 2000) and Sumarni and Soraya (1996) does provide some basic data on habitat, ecological requirements and distribution of fresh water turtle and tortoise species, while Walter (1996, 2000) also provides indirect quantitative data on population levels (i.e., trade volumes).

Concerning the crocodilians, both Frazier (1994, 2000) and Ross et al. (1996) note extremely low crocodile densities in the rivers (middle and lower courses) and lakes of the DSNP central lake basin. High human population density, high incidence of boat traffic, intensive fishing activity, use of poison, effective but destructive fishing gear (i.e. drowning crocodiles), hunting pressure and fires destroying nesting habitat, are all quoted as reasons why crocodiles were absent or scarce in these areas. The situation with crocodile species (both Crocodylus porosus and Tomistoma schlegelii) appears much the same as with the rarer and more threatened fish species (e.g. Scleropages formosus). Particularly in dry season, during low water and peak fishing activity, the remaining crocodiles escape to refuges in head water areas, and in holes (kerinan) in the forest and lake beds, larger pools (lubuk) in up-river locations and remote permanent lakes.

The crocodile distribution map, derived from local interview and field observations (Mr. A. Erman, I-UKTFMP, 1996, personal communication; also see Jeanes, 1997), clearly shows a pattern of crocodiles concentrating in the Tall Peat Swamp edges, permanent lake areas (Habitat H, Table 1) and more inaccessible and remote forest areas (Habitat H, Table 1). The same distribution also applies to the elusive "buaya kodak" (Crocodylus raninus) said by local informants to formerly only inhabit headwaters of remote forest streams.

As to other reptiles, little information is currently available about their distribution. CITES listed monitor lizards (Varanus salvator and V bornensis) and the reticulated python (Python reticulatus) are known to exist in DSNP. Yet, it is not known if they prefer the central lakes basin or the peripheral swamp forests for habitat. For turtles and tortoises, Walter (1996, 2000) verified that out of the eight tortoise and three soft-shelled turtle species within and around DSNP, eight species appear to rely on relatively undisturbed Tall and Stunted Swamp Forest and forest streams as habitat. They do so as they require to lay eggs next to streams or lakes in undisturbed areas. Sumarni and Soraya (1996) added that the soft-shelled turtle species, in particular, appear to rely on refuge areas of permanent water to survive (e.g. permanent lakes, and streams at hill bases).

Birds

A general idea about the ecology, population and distribution of DSNP's bird species can be obtained from general data of other sites. Yet, little is known about either bird population numbers or frequencies of occurrence in DSNP, or of species distributions and habitat preferences. Hood (1993), van Balen (1993), van Balen and Jensen (1994) and van Balen and Dennis (2000) provided most data, in defining the distribution of bird species and total species numbers between habitat types. Noveriawan (1993), also added data on species differences between Dwarf Swamp, Stunted Swamp and Burnt Regrowth vegetation types. Table 2 summarizes the findings of various authors with respect to distribution of bird species numbers between the main habitats of DSNP and surrounds.

As can be seen, the main habitats of the central lakes basin are "low bird diversity" areas. Noveriawan (1993) recorded only 58 bird species in these habitats during intensive dry season survey. Burnt area regrowth vegetation is the poorest bird habitat with potential 30 species estimated, followed by Dwarf Swamp Forest and Stunted Swamp Forest (both 45 to 50 species). Peak flood season bird species counts are even lower as recorded by Hood (1993) (Table 2). Riparian Forests (with 50 to 60 species), and surrounding Tall (Peat) Swamp Forests (with 60 to 70 species), are relatively richer "medium value" habitats, due to their taller structure and higher plant species diversity. The remaining pockets of intact Upland and Hill Forest are by far the richest "high value" bird biodiversity habitat. More than 100 species have been found here, with at least 40 bird species exclusively restricted to this habitat (van Balen and Jensen, 1994; van Balen and Dennis, 2000).

Of the "key conservation" species (Table 3 in Jeanes and Meijaard, 2000), field observations suggest that very few of DSNP's threatened and endemic bird species inhabit the low, deeply flooded, Fresh Water Swamp Forest habitats of the central lake basin (i.e. Dwarf, Stunted or Riparian Swamp Forests). Only seven of the 33 threatened species listed (Wallace's Hawk Eagle, Jerdon's Baza, Black Hornbill, Red-Crowned Barbet, White-Bellied Woodpecker, Straw-Headed Bulbul and White Chested Babbler), or 21% of the total, would appear to overlap in habitat range into the central lakes basin habitats. The same is true with endemic species where only four out of 13 listed species appear to use central lake basin habitats. White-headed Spider Hunter and Dusky Munia range into the central lake basin habitats, yet use Tall Swamp Forest and Hill Forests as well. The Yellow-rumped Flowerpecker and Bornean Blue Flycatcher are recorded only from dwarf swamp and riparian swamp forest respectively.

This leaves the bulk of DSNP's threatened and endemic species to be largely found in the tall (peat) swamp forest and hill forests, outside the main central lakes area. Threatened hornbills, threatened and endemic pheasants, and the endemic Whitehead's Trogon and Golden-naped Barbet, all tend to be restricted to hill forests. Tall Swamp Forest habitats (and water bodies) support, in turn, at least six endemic species (Bornean Bristlehead in tall swamp forest only, and five other species shared with hill forest), and 20 threatened species.

Figure 1 outlines the habitat trends for threatened water birds, showing the distribution (i.e. key habitats) of the globally endangered Storm's Stork (Ciconia stormii) (Dennis et al. 1996; A. Erman, pers.comm.). The species appears to prefer isolated areas of Tall Swamp Forest or Riparian Forest (i.e. tall tree habitats) next to permanent dry season water bodies (rivers and lakes). In these areas it has been seen to nest between April-July. Other water birds, such as egret species, Great-billed Heron (Ardea sumatrana), Purple Herons (Ardea purpurea) and Lesser Adjutant Stork (Leptoptilos javanicus), as shown in Figure 1, also have a restricted local distribution ranges. Generally their local breeding areas are only known from a few isolated swamp and lake locations south of the lakes basin; where thick reed beds and other protective vegetation grow close to the lake edges.

Mammals

Via studies from elsewhere it has been possible to obtain a general idea of the ecology of most of DSNP's mammal species, yet very little is known of population numbers or frequencies of occurrence of all but a few species. Population data at DSNP is only available for Orangutan (Pongo pymaeus) (Meijaard and Dennis 1995; Meijaard et al., 1996; Russon et al. 1996, 2000) and Proboscis Monkey (Nasalis larvatus) (Meijaard and Nijman, 1999: 15-24; Sebastian, 1993; Sebastian, 1994, 2000). The surveys by Russon et al. (1996) have yielded adjusted population estimates of 600-700 Orangutans from within the Park boundaries and 1600-1700 from within the Park plus buffer zone. This was, however, considered too high by Rijksen and Meijaard (1999). Based on detailed surveys, Sebastian (1993, 1994, 2000) estimated a population of 630 Proboscis monkeys for the initial 80,000 ha Wildlife Reserve and its buffer surrounds.

As to data on the distribution of mammal species in general, the work of Hood (1993), Harmaya (1996) and Erman and Sudrajat (1997) provides useful input. Furthermore, specific surveys by Sebastian (1993, 1994, 2000), supported by feeding and behavioral studies of Woods (1995) and Fadillah (1995), have provided good data on the ecology and distribution of Proboscis Monkeys. Observations and village interview data by Erman (1997) further supported knowledge on the distribution of Proboscis Monkey, Orangutan and Gibbons within and around DSNP.

A summary of the field survey findings of the above authors with respect to distribution of mammal species biodiversity within DSNP and surrounds is provided in Table 3. As can be seen the main habitats of the central lakes basin (Habitat E; Table 1) are again "low diversity" areas, with flood season surveys of Hood (1993) showing very low species numbers. Burnt area regrowth is the area poorest in mammal species (possibly zero species potential), followed by dwarf swamp forest (<five species) and stunted swamp forest (around five species). The taller, plant species rich, riparian forests (Habitat F; Table 1) only show a marginally higher diversity (10 to 15 species potential). Yet, it is not until reaching the surrounding tall (peat) swamp forests (Habitat D, Table 1), that mammal species biodiversity begins to sharply increase (30 to 40 species). Reaching maximum diversity in the tall, plant species rich, non-flooding, hill forest habitats (Habitat C, Table 1) (>50 species potentially).

The pattern of distribution of threatened and endemic mammal species resembles that of birds (see above). Namely, very few "key conservation species" are found in the central lakes basin dwarf, stunted and riparian forest habitats. Of the 16 threatened species, only five, the Proboscis Monkey, Otter Civet, and probably two Otter species (the Hairy-nosed and Oriental Small-clawed) may be found in the central lakes basin area in the flood season. Of the 29 endemic species, only three, the Proboscis monkey, Ruddy Tree-shrew and Brooke's Squirrel utilize the Dwarf, Stunted and Riparian Swamp Forests of the central lakes basin, while two other species, the Black Shrew and Large Pencil-tailed Tree-mouse, are found in Riparian Swamp Forests. The remaining threatened and endemic species are restricted to the Tall (Peat) Swamp Forest and Hill Forest habitats. Annex 4 (in Jeanes and Meijaard, 2000) shows that 11 IUCN threat-listed species and 22 endemics use the Hill Forest habitat, and 14 IUCN threat-listed species an d 16 endemics use the Tall (Peat) Swamp Forest habitat.

Only four DSNP mammal species, the Proboscis Monkey, the Orangutan and the Gibbon species (Hylobates muelleri and H. agilis) have received any habitat mapping and population distribution effort. The general distribution of DSNP's threatened and endemic Proboscis Monkey, is described in Sebastian (1993, 1994, 2000). This indicates that the species is restricted to the central lakes basin and river-edge habitats. Observations of Sebastian (1993, 1994, 2000), Woods (1995) and Fadillah (1995) suggest the species to have a dry- and flood-season reliance on tall canopy forests (i.e. 10m above water level), along river and lake edges. Sebastian (1994) further noted that key dry season Proboscis Monkey habitats are the lake basin Riparian Forests and remaining tall Stunted Swamp Forest sites. Yet in peak flood season, due to flood heights and food availability, the Proboscis Monkeys needs to move into the peripheral Tall Swamp Forest areas out of the central lakes basin, or to key tall Stunted (Shorea belangeran) Swa mp Forests sites along the Belitung and Tawang rivers. Sebastian (1994) identified five key habitat sites. His species conservation proposal included a "strict sanctuary" (Site A), and four "core conservation zones" (Sites 1, 2, 3-4-C and 5-D), as the focus areas for Proboscis Monkey populations and habitat conservation effort.

Finally, for more detailed information on Orangutan population distribution in DSNP refer to Russon et al. (2000), while, with regards to Gibbons, surveys by A. Erman (pers.comm.) suggest that areas with undisturbed Hill Forest habitat adjacent to isolated and undisturbed Tall Peat Swamp Forests are the key (if not only) habitat for this species.

Discussion

A discussion of the relative importance of vegetation types in DSNP needs to take the considerable seasonality into account, i.e. a flood season (9 to 10 months/year; with up to 12m water level fluctuation) and a dry season. Results suggest that the peat swamp and hill forests, largely in the Park's buffer zone, represent the key habitats for terrestrial biodiversity during the flood season period. Numbers of bird and mammal species, and incidence of globally threatened and endemic species, are all much higher in these habitats than within the stunted swamp forests of the central lakes basin. The same can also be said for the majority of the threatened and endemic aquatic fauna. The majority of endemic fish species and globally threatened crocodile, tortoise, freshwater turtle, waterbird and fish species, are now found only within the more remote peat swamp forest and hill stream habitats, rather than in the populated and heavily fished central lake basin. The central lake basin, and the majority of the exist ing DSNP, is thus left only as prime habitat for those specialized terrestrial species which rely on it as critical year-round habitat (i.e. possibly only the Proboscis Monkey - Nasalis larvatus) and for the majority of freshwater fish species.

Significant evidence exists to suggest that during the dry season (two to three months/year), the majority of terrestrial wildlife (birds, mammals and reptiles) remain largely confined to the hills and peat swamp forests due to the high incidence of human activity (peak fishing season) in the lake basin area. A possible exception to this may be nocturnal forays by larger mammals in search of drinking water, and monitor lizards, whose tracks are commonly seen. Furthermore, some cat and otter species may be attracted to the relative abundance of fish in the drying out lakes basin. The same is true of aquatic species, with endemic and threatened fish, reptile and waterbird species retreating further into the isolated peat swamp forests in search of refuge and permanent water. Also, the remaining fish fauna of the lake basin follows this migration, or moves further up into the catchment or to the Kapuas river, to escape the drying out of the lake basin. Again, the dry season lake basin habitats remain only crucia l for those terrestrial species ecologically restricted to the area (i.e. Proboscis Monkey).

In terms of Park management it is important to know the value of various vegetation types in and around the protected site. Table 4 sums up the various management options that have been available for DSNP, in terms of boundary revisions and protected area extensions, and the effects that this has had or could have for the viability of DSNP's wildlife.

Thus in summing-up the wildlife data in hand, and those still needed, significant data already exists for DSNP with which to start generalized wildlife and habitat conservation programs. Yet, significant data gaps remain with respect to individual species conservation. For example, very limited knowledge exists concerning the seasonal movement, and related feeding and breeding ecology, of the vast majority of terrestrial and aquatic wildlife species of DSNP. An exception to this is the reasonable study detail on the seasonal habitat requirements and migratory patterns of the Proboscis Monkey (1) and to a lesser extent for the Crocodile species (Frazier, 1994, 2000), Storm's Stork (Ciconia stormii) and Lesser Adjutant Stork (Leptoptilos javanicus). No useful knowledge at all exists concerning invertebrates, amphibians, snakes and lizards. There is some basic knowledge of the freshwater turtles and tortoises. Yet, habitat and breeding requirements are still not clear. Dry season bird surveys need to be carried out to confirm the importance of lakeside habitats for migratory birds, while more detailed population ecology and habitat surveys are needed for the site's seven threatened and/or endemic pheasant species. Add to this the lack of knowledge of population distributions, population numbers and ranging needs for virtually all of the site's threatened mammal species (e.g. cats, otters, otter-civet and Malayan sun bear) and endemic mammal species, the need for more detailed research is clear.

Thus in conclusion the DSNP site's importance for wildlife biodiversity conservation is clear, enough data exists to determine where the bulk of species exist for most of the time, and hence form the basis for a "blanket approach" to habitat and species conservation (i.e. exercising the assumption that habitat conservation measures will by default also conserve the fauna species shown to use these habitats). Yet much remains to be done concerning clarification of the ecological details of individual species, which would provide a firmer basis for the individual species conservation efforts. Such efforts becoming increasingly needed in DSNP and near-catchment sites to ensure that a significant proportion of the sites endemic and threatened species do not become locally extinct in near future due to habitat destruction and excessive local harvesting and trading pressures.
Table 1

Aquatic habitats and characteristics of DSWR.

CLASS HABITAT HYDROLOGICAL
 TYPE DETAILS

A Main River Riverine; uni-directional
 and large volume flow;
 widely fluctuating flood
 levels; main water
 supply for lake basin
 system

B Main Riverine; reversible flow
 Floodplain direction; large volume
 Distributaries flow; widely fluctuating
 flood levels. Main routes
 of water input and
 drainage to lake basin
 system.

C Secondary Rivers; streams, and
 Floodplain lakes; reversible flows.
 Distributaries Secondary input routes
 for Kapuas as waters to
 lake basin; low flow
 volumes (mainly
 overland and small
 streams); wide to
 medium fluctuation in
 flood levels.

D Main Riverine; uni-directional
 Catchment flow; medium to no flow
 Tributaries volume; medium
 fluctuation in flood
 levels. Secondary supply
 of water to
 floodplain/lake system.

E Minor Streams; uni-directional
 Upland flow; low to no flow
 Drainage volume. Negligible
 Lines water input to lakes
 system.



F Central Lakes Lacustrine; widely
 (seasonal) fluctuating flood levels;
 main storage area for
 floodplain waters;
 medium to no flow.

G Peripheral Lacustrine; wide
 Forest Lakes fluctuation of flood
 (seasonal) levels; mixed storage of
 floodplain/forest
 drainage waters; low to
 no flow.

H Catchment Lacustrine; medium to
 Lakes low fluctuation of flood
 (permanent) levels; mixed storage of
 swamp
 forest/upland/catchment
 river drainage; no flow.

I Swamp Streams and forest pools;
 Forest medium (?) to wide
 Drainage fluctuation in flood
 Lines levels; storage and
 drainage of forest/swamp
 waters; high dry season
 flow.


CLASS WATER QUALITY HABITAT
 LOCATION

A White water; nutrient Kapuas river and
 rich (eutrophic) fringing ox-bows.





B White/black water mix S. Tawang; S. Belitung-
 good to medium Danau Bekuan-S.
 nutrient levels Batang Putus





C White/black water mix; Danau Gandal-S.
 good to medium Gandal-S. Sebuayak; S.
 nutrient levels Tengkidap-Batang
 Sekentut-S. Mentibal;
 S. Telaga-S. Batang
 Serawak-Danau
 Bekuan; S. Tanjung
 Petak-S. Batang
 Sekuang-S. Belitung
 Hulu-Danau Sekawi.

D White water, medium Leboyan, Empanang,
 nutrient levels Seriang, Sebadin,
 Piyam, Ensanak,
 Empanang.




E White water; high Streams/drainage of
 nutrient levels Bukit's Tekenang,
 Semujuan, Meyukung
 ranges, Lanjak-Meliau
 ranges, Empaik-Seligi
 range, Bukit's Segerat-
 Setubu.

F Black water mix; Danau's Seriang, Turus
 medium to low nutrient Duata, Belida,
 levels Pengembung, Genali,
 Luar and surrounds


G Black water; low All minor tributary
 nutrient levels lakes within forested
 (oligotrophic) terraces adjacent the
 Central Lakes zone
 (e.g. Pemerak, Seliban,
 Semangit).

H Black and white (?) D. Telatap; D. Lukuk-
 water lakes; probably Kemati-Meliau Tujuh
 changing nutrient levels complex; D. Santak and
 Merasu; D. Berasau.



I Black water; low All peat swamp forest
 nutrient levels areas (fresh water and
 (oligotrophic) peat) and black-water
 streams (e.g S. Piyam,
 S. Senunuk. S. Air
 Merah, S. Tangit)
 draining to the lake
 basin
Table 2

Bird Spectes Numbers per Habitat.

Observers Burnt Dwarf Stunted Riparian Tall (Peat) Hill
 Area Swamp Swamp Swamp Swamp Forest
 Regrowth

Hood 6 15 27 53 23 47
van Balen 30 17-43 53 50-62 85-100
Noveriawan 40 40
Wadley 58
Estimate of 30 40-45 45-50 50-60 60-70 >100
Potential

Observers: Hood (1993)--Hood; van Balen and Jensen (1994)--Van Balen;
Noveriawan (1993)-- Noveriawan; Wedley et al. (1996)--Wadley.
Table 3

Mammal Species Numbers per Habitat.

Observers Burnt Area Dwarf Stunted Riparian Tall (Peat) Hill
 Regrowth Swamp Swamp Swamp Swamp Forest

Hood 0 0 4 6 5 36
Harmaya 28
Erman/
Sudrajat 34 30
Wadley 41
Estimate of 0(?) < 5 5 10-15 30-40 >50
Potential

Observers: Hood (1993)--Hood; Pierce-Colfer et al. (1993), Wadley
et al. (1994; 1995; 1996)--Wadley; Harmaya (1996)--Harmaya; Erman and
Sudrajat (1997)--Erman/Sudrajat.
Table 4

Relative importance of past, existing, and proposed boundaries for the
Danau Sentarum conservation area.

Boundary/Options (1) Original DSNP
Species Wildlife (132,000 ha) (2)
 Reserve
 boundary
 (80,000 ha)

Lakes and river good, year-round most likely
fish habitat extension of
 breeding areas

Fish of hill probably no small
streams habitat available inclusion of
 hill stream
 habitat

Fish of peat little habitat some peat
swamp rivers available swamp habitat
 available





Crocodiles little dry season some dry
 habitat available season and
 refuge habitat


Water birds good, year-round Extension of
 habitat breeding and
 feeding areas


Hill forest birds very little habitat some small
 available areas available




Swamp forest some habitat small increase
birds available in available
 habitat



Mammals very little habitat small increase
 available in available habitat







Boundary/Options (1) DSNP-extension Linking DSNP
Species (197,000) (3) with Bentuang
 Karimun NP (4)



Lakes and river added protection of probably few
fish migration routes to added benefits
 Kapuas

Fish of hill small inclusion of hill considerable
streams stream habitat inclusion of hill
 stream habitat


Fish of peat considerable amount large extension
swamp rivers of peat swamp habitat of the
 available contiguous
 protected area
 of both peat and
 fresh water
 swamp

Crocodiles considerable amount probably no
 of dry season and added benefits
 refuge habitat
 available

Water birds considerable probably few
 extension of breeding added benefits
 and refuge sites for
 Storms Stork

Hill forest birds some small areas a very
 available significant
 increase in
 available year-
 round habitat

Swamp forest considerable increase very large
birds in available habitat increase of the
 peat and
 fresh water
 swam habitat

Mammals considerable increase very large
 in available habitat increase of the
 Peat and
 freshwater
 swamp habitats,
 and migration
 opportunities to
 hill forests

(1) For discussion on these boundaries and their locations see Russon et
al. (2000).

(2) Proposal forwarded by PHPA (1996a) to Ministry of Forestry for
formalisation of Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve boundar as based on the
earlier boundary extension recommendations of Giesen, et.al. (1994).

(3) As derived from buffer zone and boundary extension proposal of
Jeanes (1996).

(4) Unpublished 1997 proposal (Jeanes and Meijaard) suggesting reserve
extension or the establishment of a corridor that would link the Danau
Sentarum lowlands with the upland forests of the Bentuang Karimun
National Park, to allow a considerable increase in seasonal migration
possibilities within the area.


(1.) Studies of Sebastian (1993 and 1994), Woods (1995) and Fadillah (1995).

References

Balen, S.van

1993 Preliminary report on the short bird survey to the Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve, PHPA-Asian Wetland Bureau, Bogor, Indonesia.

Balen, S.van and Jensen, R.

1994 The ornithological importance of the Danau Sentarum Nature Reserve, PHPA-Asian Wetland Bureau, Bogor, Indonesia.

Balen, S. van and R. Dennis

2000 The birds of Danau Sentarum National Park. (this volume)

Dennis, R. A.

1996 Vegetation Map--Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve. 1:400,000 Scale. Remote Sensing/GIS Component. Indonesia-UK Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5--Conservation, LTS-ODA.

1997 Land Cover Mapping at DSWR--The Experience of The Indonesia-UK Tropical Forest Management Programme. Remote Sensing/GIS Component. Indonesia-UK Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation, LTS-ODA.

Dennis, R.H., et al.

1996 Report of the ornithological survey of Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve and surrounds, 30 January to II February 1996. Survey Report (draft), Indonesia-UK Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation. Wetlands International-Royal Ornithological Society (U.K.)-ODA, Bogor, Indonesia.

Dudley, R.G.

1996 The fishery of the Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve, West Kalimantan, Indonesia: Management consideration. Consultancy report, Indonesia-UK Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation. Wetlands International-ODA, Danau Sentarum Field Centre, Bukit Tekenang, Indonesia.

Erman, A.

1997 Inventarisasi satwa liar, wilayah kerja kampung dan hutan adat, pendam, buah adat dan hukum adat masing-masing kampung daerah Barat-Timur sekitar kawasan Suaka Margasatwa Danau Sentarum. Laporan Survie Lapangan, Jilid II: Maret s/d April 1997, Indonesia - UK-Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation, Wetlands International - DEID, Danau Sentarum Field Centre, Bukit Tekenang, Indonesia.

Erman, A. and Sudrajat, I.

1997 Inventarisasi satwa liar, wilayah kerja kampung dan hutan adat daerah utara sekitar kawasan Suaka Margasatwa Danau Sentarum. Laporan Survie Lapangan: Lanjak-Badau July s/d September 1996, Indonesia-UK-Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation, Wetlands International-ODA, Danau Sentarum Field Centre, Bukit Tekenang, Indonesia.

Fadillah

1995 Studi populasi dan habitat bekantan (Nasilis Iarvatus) di Suaka Margasatwa Danau Sentarum, Kab. Kapuas Hulu, Kalimantan Barat. Skripsi (NIM.871521227), Fak. Pertanian, Universitas Tanjungpura, Pontianak, Indonesia.

Frazier, S.

1994 A preliminary dry season crocodile survey of Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve (Lake Sentarum Wildlife Reserve) in Kalimantan Barat, Indonesia (December 1994), UK-Indonesia Tropical Forest Management Project. KSDA-Asian Wetland Bureau, Bogor, Indonesia.

2000 The Crocodilies of Danau Sentarum, West Kalimantan. (this volume) Giesen, W.

1987 Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve: Inventory, Ecology and Management Guidelines. PHPA/WWF, Bogor.

1994 Interim Report on Progress on Work Plan Activity B.1.1(a): Rapid Appraisal of Flora & Habitats. AWB.

1996 The Habitat Types and Their Management: Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve, West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Consultancy report. UK-Indonesia Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation. Wetlands International-PHPA-ODA

2000 Flora and vegetation of Danau Sentarum: Unique lake and swamp forest ecosystem of West Kalimantan. (this volume)

Giesen, W., Deschamps, V. and Dennis, R.A.

1994 Recommendations for Modification of the Boundary of Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve, West Kalimantan (Revised Edition. 30 June 1994). Sub-Project 5, UK - Indonesian Tropical Forestry Management Project, KSDA/AWB/LTS.

Harmaya, S.

1996 Keanekaragaman jenis fauna mamalia di Kawasan Suaka Margasatwa Danau Sentarum, Kabupaten Kapuas Hulu, Kalimatan Barat. Laporan Praktek Lapang, Fakultas Pertanian, Universitas Tanjungpura, Pontianak, Indonesia.

Hood, I.

1993 Study of the fauna of Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve, Kalimantan Barat, Indonesia-UK Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation. Asian Wetlands Bureau-ODA-PHPA (Ministry of Forestry), Bogor, Indonesia.

Jeanes, K. W.

1997 A Biophysical Profile of Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve. Indonesia-UK-Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation, Wetlands International-DFID

1996 Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve: Catchment Development Review, Reserve Boundary Review and Buffer Zone Proposal. Survey report, Indonesia-UK Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation, Wetlands International-ODA.

Jeanes, K. and E. Meijaard

2000 Danau Sentarum's Wildlife Part 1. Biodiversity value and global importance of Danau Sentarum's wildlife. (this volume)

Jensen, R., Giesen, W., Widjanarti H. E. and Deschamps, V.

1994 An Introduction to the Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve. AWB.

Kottelat, M.

1993 Technical report on the fishes of Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve and the Kapuas lakes area, Kalimantan Barat, Indonesia, Indonesia-UK Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation. Asian Wetlands Bureau-ODA-PHPA (Ministry of Forestry), Bogor, Indonesia.

1995 Four new species of fishes from the middle Kapuas basin, Indonesian Borneo (Osteichthyes: Cyprinidae and Belontiidae). The Raffles Bulletin of Zoology 43: 51-64.

Martin-Smith, K.

1996 Additional fish survey data from Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve and surrounds, West Kalimantan-30 June-10 July 1996, Indonesia-UK Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation. Wetlands International-ODA-PHPA (Ministry of Forestry), Pontianak, Indonesia.

Meijaard, E. and Dennis, R.A.

1995 The status and distribution of the Bornean Orang Utan (Pongo pygmaeus pygmaeus) in and around the Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve, West Kalimantan, The International Ministry of Forestry-Tropenbos Kalimantan Project/Indonesia-UK Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation. Asian Wetlands Bureau-ODA-PHPA (Ministry of Forestry), Bogor, Indonesia.

Meijaard, E., Dennis, R.A. and Erman, A.

1996 Orangutan conservation in and around the Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve, West-Kalimantan: Management implications, The International MOF-Tropenbos Kalimantan Project, Balikpapan.

Meijaard, E. and Nijman, V.

1999 Distribution and conservation of the proboscis monkey (Nasalis larvatus) in Kalimantan, Indonesia. Biological Conservation 92:15-24.

Ng, H.H. and Kottelat, M.

1996 Akysis fuscus, a new species of catfish (Teleostei: Akysidae) from the Kapuas basin, Borneo. Ichthyological Exploration Freshwaters 7:19-26.

Noveriawan, H.

1993 Keanekarangaman jenis burung di Kawasan Suaka Margasatwa Danau Sentarum Kab. Kapuas Hulu, Kal Bar. Skripsi (NIM. 871521560), Fakultas Pertanian Universitas Tanjungpura, Pontianak, Indonesia.

Pierce-Colfer, C.J., Wadley, R.L., Sinaga, Pangarimpunan and Hood, I.

1993 Hunting among the Iban--First glimpses (Study 8) (June 1993). Attach report within Dudley and Pierce-Colfer, Quarterly Report, Indonesia-UK Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation. Asian Wetlands Bureau-ODA-PHPA (Ministry of Forestry), Danau Sentarum Field Centre, Bukit Tekenang, Indonesia.

Rijksen, H.D. and Meijaard, E.

1999 Our vanishing relative. The status of wild orang-utans at the close of the ftwentieth century, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Ross, C.A., Cox, J.J. and Kurniati, H.

1996 Preliminary survey of palustrine crocodiles in Kalimantan. Project Progress Report, Phase 1--1995, LIPI / SI Cooperative Project, Pusat Penelitian dan Pengembangan Biologi, LIPI and Department of Vertebrate Zoology, Smithsonian Institute, U.S.A.

Russon, A.E., Erman, A. and Sinanga, P.

1996 Nest-count survey of Orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus pygmaeus) in and around the Danau Sentarum Wetlands Reserve, West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Final report collaborative survey programme, York University, Toronto, Canada-Wetlands International, Indonesia-PHPA, Bogor, Indonesia.

Russon, A.E., E. Meijaard and R. Dennis

2000 Declining orangutan populations in and around Danau Sentarum National Park, West Kalimantan, Indonesia. (this volume).

Sebastian, A.C.

1993 A preliminary investigation of the Proboscis Monkey population in Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve (towards a management strategy to ensure long-term viability), Indonesia-UK Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation. Asian Wetlands Bureau-ODA-PHPA (Ministry of Forestry), Danau Sentarum Field Centre, Bukit Tekenang, Indonesia.

1994 A preliminary investigation of the Proboscis Monkey population in Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve, Western Kalimantan, Indonesia, Indonesia-UK Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation. Asian Wetlands Bureau-ODA-PHPA (Ministry of Forestry), Danau Sentarum Field Centre, Bukit Tekenang, Indonesia.

2000 Proboscis monkeys in Danau Sentarum National Park. (this volume)

Sumarni, S. and Soraya

1996 Jenis, habitat, populasi labi-labi (Trionichydae) di Suaka Marga Satwa Danau Sentarum, Kabupaten Kapuas Hulu. Laporan Penelitian, Fakultas Pertanian, Universitas Tanjungpura, Pontianak, Indonesia.

Suryaningsih, N.

1993 Karakteristik berberapa jenis ikan di perairan Suaka Margasatwa Danau Sentarum, Kalimantan Barat. Skripsi (D1D88259), Jurusan Biologi, Facultas Matematika dan Ilmu Pengetahuan Alam, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia.

Vaas, K.F.

1952 Fisheries in the Lake District along the Kapuas River in West Borneo. Proc. Indo-Pacific Fisheries Council Madras, India 2, 1-10.

Wadley, R.L., Pierce-Colfer, C.J. and Hood, I.

1994 A note on wildlife harvesting among the Iban of Wong Garai: A case from West Kalimantan (rough draft). Research Report, Indonesia-UK Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation. Asian Wetlands Bureau-ODA-PHPA (Ministry of Forestry), Danau Sentarum Field Centre, Bukit Tekenang, Indonesia.

1995 Hunting and natural resource management among forest farmers in Indonesian Borneo: A comparison of non-human primates and other large mammals. Unpublished.

Wadley, R.L., Pierce-Colfer, C.J. and Hood, I.G.

1996 The role of sacred groves in hunting and conservation among the Iban of West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Paper presented at the 95th. Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, San Francisco.

Walter, O.

1996 A report on the freshwater turtles and tortoises of Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve, West Kalimantan, Borneo: Hunting and trade. Research Report, Indonesia-UK Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation. Wetlands International-ODA-PHPA (Ministry of Forestry), Danau Sentarum Field Centre, Bukit Tekenang, Indonesia.

2000 A Study of hunting and trade of freshwater turtles and tortoises (Order Chelonia) at Danau Sentarum. (this volume)

Widjanarti, E.H.

1996 A checklist of freshwater fishes of Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve and adjacent areas, Kapuas Hulu, West Kalimantan, Indonesia-UK Tropical Forest Management Programme: Project 5-Conservation. Wetlands International-DA-PHPA (Ministry of Forestry), Danau Sentarum Field Centre, Bukit Tekenang, Indonesia.

Woods, A.

1995 Observations on dietary habits of Proboscis Monkeys Nasalis larvatus, at Danau Sentarum Wildlife Reserve, Kalimantan Barat, Republic of Indonesia, Professional Practice in Resource Science Programme, University of Canberra, Australia-AWB, Indonesia-UK Tropical Forest Management Programme: Conservation Project. ODA, Danau Sentarum Field Centre, Bukit Tekenang, Indonesia.
COPYRIGHT 2000 Borneo Research Council, Inc
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2000, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Meijaard, Erik
Publication:Borneo Research Bulletin
Geographic Code:9INDO
Date:Jan 1, 2000
Words:6685
Previous Article:Danau Sentarum's wildlife: part 1. Biodiversity value and global importance of Danau Sentarum's wildlife.
Next Article:Traditional honey and wax collection with Apis dorsata in the upper Kapuas Lake region, West Kalimantan.
Topics:


Related Articles
Butterfly biosensors offer habitat hints.
Eliminating the National Forest Management Act's diversity requirement as a substantive standard.
Study finds modern agriculture could foster, not degrade, biodiversity.
Danau Sentarum's wildlife: part 1. Biodiversity value and global importance of Danau Sentarum's wildlife.
Proboscis monkeys in Danau Sentarum National Park.
Declining orangutan populations in and around the Danau Sentarum National Park, West Kalimantan, Indonesia.
Biodiversity factors. (Matters of Scale).
Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act: top ten issues for the next thirty years.

Terms of use | Copyright © 2014 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters