1

FOREST MANAGEMENT AND CONSERVATION PROGRAMME

A Rapid Participatory Assessment of Wildlife

Diversity in the Dong Sithouane Production Forest

by
Ramesh Boonratana, Ph.D.

with assistance from

Vannalack Sengsavanh and Khongsavanh Chounlamounty

February 2000
 2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A rapid participatory wildlife diversity assessment, focusing on large mammals, was conducted
in Dong Sithouane State Production Forest, in Savannakhet Province. Dong Sithouane SPF is
one of the two production forests in Lao PDR where FOMACOP’s forest management sub-
program is piloting a ‘village forestry’ program. A program which aims at sustainably managing
forests within traditional village territories to benefit the villagers and the national community. A
planned forest certification for the SPF, however, requires compliance with certain criteria, that
includes adequate protection for endangered wildlife. Hence, this study was carried out to
determine the wildlife diversity values of the SPF, and to propose mitigation measures
appropriate for their conservation.

Semi-structured interviews conducted through village-based participatory wildlife assessments

in 20 villages, and field-based PWAs yielded a provisional list of at least 47 mammal species.
Besides mammals, 26 birds, 8 reptiles and 6 amphibians were recorded from the area. Of the
wildlife reported/recorded, 13 are Globally Threatened species, namely pygmy loris, pig-tailed
macaque, Douc langur, dhole, Asiatic black bear, clouded leopard, tiger, large-antlered muntjac,
gaur, banteng, serow, east Asian porcupine, and the Siamese crocodile. However, if the Asian
elephant, which might occasionally use the extreme eastern part of the SPF be included, then
there would be 14 Globally Threatened species in Dong Sithouane SPF.

Hence, the biodiversity value of Dong Sithouane SPF, at least in terms of mammal diversity and
the number of species having conservation significance is probably at par to the protected areas
in the province. Apparently, however, the density of wildlife population and amount of viable
wildlife habitat available in the SPF are most likely much lower than those in the protected areas.
Furthermore, most, if not all the Globally Threatened species in Dong Sithouane SPF are
reported rare in the area, and may represent remnant populations. Thus, mammal diversity found
in the SPF have better representation in the protected areas located in the province and the
adjoining provinces.

Nevertheless, the presence of several species of conservation significance imply that

conservation measures must be taken to ensure their adequate protection. Their conservation
may, in the long-term, be beneficial to the greater biodiversity conservation efforts, as the
wildlife population in Dong Sithouane SPF might serve as an important gene pool. Main
 3

measures needed include setting aside an area, a special ‘conservation management zone’ within
the SPF for their conservation, and establishing feasible and practicable ‘rules and regulations’
with regard to the zone and outside the zone.

Dong Sithouane SPF, because of its location, is theoretically a ‘land corridor’ linking Dong Phou
Vieng NBCA with Xe Bang Nouan NBCA. However, with more than 60 villages in and around
it, with numerous access roads throughout the SPF, and most wildlife restricted to the eastern
part of the SPF, it cannot realistically function as a ‘land corridor’. But with enormous benefits
to be gained by the SPF’s residents, Savannakhet Province and Lao PDR from the forestry
sector, the area justifiably should remain a state production forest.

Biodiversity in Dong Sithouane SPF too, can benefit from ‘village forestry’. There is little doubt
that villagers will actively ensure the protection of biodiversity, if the villagers’ continued
benefits will partly depend on their commitment towards addressing the conservation needs of
biodiversity in the SPF. Looking at the greater picture of biodiversity conservation in Lao PDR,
it might be worth looking at ‘village forestry’ as one possible solution in protecting protected
areas and preventing biodiversity loss in Lao PDR. Hence, ‘village forestry’ in Dong Sithouane
SPF can play an important role as a test case for the ‘Integrated Conservation and Development’
concept. If ‘village forestry’ is unable to address the conservation needs in Dong Sithouane SPF,
then it is obvious that ICAD is not a solution to protecting and managing protected areas. Other
alternatives must be sought. However, if ‘village forestry’ is able to provide adequate protection
to the wild fauna and their habitats, then this is one approach towards protected area
management worth seriously looking into.
 4

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The team wishes to acknowledge Mr. Bouahong Phanthanousy (Director), Mr. Bouaphahn
Phantavong (Deputy Director), Dr. Marko Katila (Chief Technical Adviser), Dr. Manuel Bonita,
Mr. Edwin V. Payuan, and Ms. Vaneska Litz ( FOMACOP Advisers), and the FOMACOP staff
based in Vientiane and Savannakhet, PAFO Savannakhet, and DAFO Thapanthong for
facilitating this study. None the least, acknowledgments are due to the villagers whose
information on wildlife and other assistance have made this report possible. Mr. Bryan L. Stuart
(WCS) kindly identified the amphibians and reptiles recorded.

Ramesh Boonratana, Ph.D. Vannalack Sengsavanh Khongsavanh Chounlamounty

(Consultant) (FOMACOP Adviser) (PAFO Savannakhet)
 5

CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................. 1
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS............................................................................................................... 3
CONTENTS .................................................................................................................................... 4
1. INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................... 5
1.1 BACKGROUND................................................................................................................... 5
1.2 AIMS, ACTIVITIES & OUTPUTS...................................................................................... 6
1.2.1 Aims ............................................................................................................................... 6
1.2.2 Activities ........................................................................................................................ 6
1.2.3 Outputs ........................................................................................................................... 6
2. METHODS.................................................................................................................................. 9
2.1 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................. 9
2.2 INITIAL PREPARATIONS ................................................................................................. 9
2.3 VILLAGE-BASED PWA ................................................................................................... 10
2.4 FIELD-BASED PWA ......................................................................................................... 11
3. RESULTS.................................................................................................................................. 14
3.1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................... 14
3.2 OBSERVATIONS .............................................................................................................. 14
4. DISCUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................... 22
4.1 DISCUSSIONS ................................................................................................................... 22
4.2 RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................... 24
4.3 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................... 26
REFERENCES.............................................................................................................................. 28
APPENDIX I: List of Wildlife Reported and/or Recorded at Dong Sithouane SPF, and Their
Local Names.................................................................................................................................. 29
APPENDIX II: Villages Interviewed and Animals Reported....................................................... 33
APPENDIX III: Conservation Significance of Wildlife Recorded/Reported at Dong Sithouane
SPF ................................................................................................................................................ 36
APPENDIX IV: Wildlife Data Recording Format........................................................................ 38
APPENDIX V: Human/Habitat Impact Data Recording Format.................................................. 39
APPENDIX VI: Brief Discussion on Methodology ..................................................................... 40
APPENDIX VII: Study’s Itinerary ............................................................................................... 42
 6

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND
Dong1 Sithouane State Production Forest (figure 1), covering an area about 212,000 ha, is
located in Songkhone and Thapanthong Districts of Savannakhet Province, between 15°56.5’ -
16°19.5’N and 105°16’ - 106°11.5’E. The area primarily comprise dry dipterocarp, dry
evergreen, and mixed deciduous forests that has been extensively logged in the past. Since 1995,
the Forest Management and Conservation Project through its Forest Management Sub-program,
has been piloting a ‘village forestry’ project in 47 villages in the area.

‘Village forestry’ is a partnership between the government and organized villages in the co-
management of all forests within the traditional village territories, which aims to sustainably
manage the forested land for the benefit of the villagers and the entire national community
(Phanthanousy & Katila, 1999). This has resulted in the formation of 31 villages into 23 Village
Forestry Associations. These associations have now prepared land-use and forest management
plans covering 77,000 ha of forest in Dong Sithouane SPF2. These plans, with emphasis on
sustainable forest production, cover the management of all forest types and resources, and
address production, conservation and protection of forest resources.

Albeit Dong Sithouane SPF have been identified as a production forest, it is nevertheless,
important to make biodiversity conservation a more integral part of village forest management,
to minimize adverse impacts on biodiversity. Furthermore, the planned forest certification
assessment also requires compliance with certain criteria, that includes the protection of
endangered species and ecologically important ecosystems, as well as monitoring their stability.

To the northeast and south of Dong Sithouane SPF, and partly adjoining it, respectively lie the
1,990 km² Dong Phou3 Vieng (16°07’ - 16°44’N/105°51’ - 106°32’E) and the 1,300 km² Xe4
Bang Nouan (15°44’ - 16°01’N/105°36’ - 106°17’E) National Biodiversity Conservation Areas.
Further north of Dong Sithouane SPF, lies the 1,060 km² Phou Xang He (16°42’ - 17°04’N/105°
19’ - 106°06’E) NBCA5. Both Dong Phou Vieng and Phou Xang He NBCAs are located in

1
Dong = forest
2
SPF = State Production Forest.
3
Phou = hill or mountain
4
Xe = river
5
NBCA = National Biodiversity Conservation Area
 7

Savannakhet Province, whereas only part of Xe Bang Nouan NBCA lies in Savannakhet
Province, and the remainder in Salavan Province. Hence, at least 29% of the land area of
Savannakhet Province have been demarcated for conservation and protection, and this partly
addresses the conservation needs of the province (Marko Katila, pers. comm.).

1.2 AIMS, ACTIVITIES & OUTPUTS6

1.2.1 Aims
The main aims of the study are:

• to determine the biodiversity value of Dong Sithouane SPF, and the main threats to it;

• to propose concrete actions for addressing priority conservation needs in the area, including
monitoring changes in biodiversity, and linking information to management decision-
making.

1.2.2 Activities
The activities of this study can broadly be organized into:

• Desk research and preparation for field work;

• Rapid participatory biodiversity assessment;

• Documentation of findings.

1.2.3 Outputs
The main outputs expected from this study include:

• A concise statement:

a) indicating the biodiversity value of Dong Sithouane SPF, in relation to conservation

measures already taken in the province;

b) clarifying the status of Dong Sithouane as a state production forest.

• Potential high conservation value forest areas and rare, threatened, or endangered species of
national or regional importance identified, and where possible mapped;

6
The study’s aims, activities and expected outputs form RB’s Terms of Reference.
 8

• A concrete, implementable proposal for conservation management interventions including a

simple, village-based monitoring system for monitoring possible changes in valuable
ecosystems/habitats, and presence of endangered species (if applicable), or changes in related
indicators.
 9

Figure 1: Dong Sithouane State Production Forest and main wildlife area (highlighted)
 10

2. METHODS

2.1 INTRODUCTION
As Dong Sithouane is a State Production Forest that has been logged over several times, it was
not regarded as an important area for biodiversity when a national system for protected areas for
Lao PDR7 was being established in the early 1990s, and that biodiversity values of the region
have better representation in the three NBCAs located near it. Hence, a rapid ‘minimalist’
approach was used for assess the biodiversity values of Dong Sithouane SPF. Furthermore, time
and monetary constraints do not allow detailed and elaborate efforts.

Albeit the study was carried out within a short period, it was nevertheless intensive. The methods
comprised the initial preparations, village-based participatory wildlife assessment and field-
based PWA8,. As ‘village forestry’ is meant to be a partnership between the government and the
villagers in the co-management of all forested areas within traditional village territories, hence it
was necessary to involve the villagers in all activities carried out in the area.

2.2 INITIAL PREPARATIONS

This primarily involved the gathering of verbal and written information about Dong Sithouane
SPF, and the three NBCAs located nearby. Verbal information was initially gathered through
discussions with wildlife experts based in Vientiane, and almost all the literature on wildlife
diversity and distribution were obtained from the libraries of FOMACOP, IUCN9 and WCS10,
similarly based in Vientiane. These information, reinforced with relevant verbal and written
information from the FOMACOP office in Savannakhet Province, and DAFO11 office in
Thapanthong District, were reviewed along with existing aerial photographs, land use and
topographic maps of Dong Sithouane SPF. Through this preparatory process, areas with potential
biodiversity conservation values, and proposed villages and sites where PWA will be carried out
were identified. Also, this exercise allowed the activities to be planned in a manner to be most
efficient with regard to the limited time available.

7
PDR = People’s Democratic Republic
8
PBA = Participatory Biodiversity Assessment
9
IUCN = The World Conservation Union
10
WCS = Wildlife Conservation Society
11
DAFO = District Agricultural and Forestry Office
 11

2.3 VILLAGE-BASED PWA

In this study, village-based PWA refers to the process of gathering information on wildlife and
key wildlife habitats from knowledgeable villagers. Interviews were semi-structured, conducted
in a conversational manner, and in a relaxed atmosphere. This frequently involved initially
making ‘small talk’ to make the respondents feel at ease. Care was also taken by team members
to respect the local customs and culture. All members of the assessment team were conversant in
the Lao language, therefore, an important factor to the verbal data gathering process.

Questions with regard to wildlife presence primarily focused on species of conservation

significance, followed by distinctive and/or easily distinguishable animals. The latter was to
avoid unnecessary confusion over species’ names and descriptions (see appendix VI). With this
in mind, a simple list of potential wildlife possibly present in Dong Sithouane SPF was
developed during the pre-PWA exercise. Inquiries regarding wildlife, however, were not limited
only to those listed in the questionnaire, but included other species as and when opportunities
presented themselves. The list merely serves to guide in the data gathering process.

Besides gathering information about a species presence, information was also gathered about the
species’ locality, and when its evidence was last observed. The species’ general location on map
was extrapolated from the area’s general direction from the village concerned, and the area’s
walking distance (in hours) from the village. It should be noted that the villagers’ average hiking
speed in forested areas range from 15-20 minutes to a kilometer. In addition, villagers were
asked about the presence of mineral licks known to them.

Illustrations of wildlife, those found and not found in Lao PDR, were also shown to the
respondents. This was to gather additional information that the villagers might have to offer, i.e.,
information that was not offered during the interviews, and to cross-check information gathered
during the interviews.

2.4 FIELD-BASED PWA

Village-based PWA was supplemented by short expeditions to the main wildlife area, and to
potential key wildlife habitats. This was to assess the information gathered through village-based
PWA, and to conduct a brief wildlife and human impact surveys. Also, it provided an ‘image’ to
 12

the names of places mentioned by respondents. The team, accompanied by two Ban12
Khoktheuleu residents (Lung Nooat and Lung Samien) and a Ban Nalavieng resident (Thao Piu),
established a camp at ‘Daan Falang Thim Khueang’ (16°07’41”N/105°55’36”E), in the eastern
part of Dong Sithouane SPF. Diurnal surveys and a short nocturnal survey were carried from this
campsite. Besides the area around the ‘Daan Falang Thim Khueang’, surveys were also carried
along the eastern boundary of the SPF, and along the dirt tracks joining different villages.

Diurnal survey routes were pre-determined from 1:100,000 topographic maps and/or based on
villagers’ information. Routes normally took the shape of irregular loops, originating and
terminating at the campsite. This allowed greater coverage of an area. Surveys were carried out
on foot, along existing tracks and trails. The chances of encountering an animal or its signs are
higher when surveys are carried out along existing animal trails. Furthermore, using animal trails
have been observed to be effective in covering large areas in tropical rainforests (Boonratana,
1997). Through the field-based PWA, wildlife presence was recorded based on sightings and/or
other evidence (tracks, scats, vocalizations, etc.).

12
Ban = village/settlement
 13

Plates 1 & 2: Village-based PWA

Participatory wildlife assessment at Ban Nadokthong

Old and young (including this hard-smoking five-year old girl) frequently participated in the PWAs
 14

Plates 3 & 4: Field-based PWA

Recording gaur signs at Dong Aa Chien

Checking for wildlife signs at a mineral lick

 15

3. RESULTS

3.1 INTRODUCTION
In the strictest sense, it must be emphasized here that all species reported present in Dong
Sithouane SPF during the PWAs should be regarded as ‘provisional’, until more conclusive
evidence are obtained. However, for biodiversity conservation purposes, the species reported
present should be regarded as still being extant, and their conservation and protection needs must
be incorporated into the management plans and activities of the SPF. Otherwise, there would
inevitably be a further loss of biodiversity. Furthermore, there is a strong reason to believe,
based on unanimous findings, that most, if not all species reported are still extant.

Although the primary objective was to assess wildlife diversity in Dong Sithouane SPF, the team
nevertheless recorded information on human activities, useful in assessing impacts on both
wildlife and habitats, hence identifying threats to their long-term viability. Field PWA was
achieved in a much shorter duration than expected primarily because being the dry season and
free from rice-growing activities, most villagers could be found in their respective villages.

3.2 OBSERVATIONS
Mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians reported and recorded in Dong Sithouane SPF during
the village-based and field-based PWAs are listed in Appendix I. It should also be noted that
several indeterminate species whose Lao names were reported are also included here. Some of
these names might possibly represent species that are different from those whose scientific
names are listed. Conversely, some of these names might be different local names for those
whose scientific names are already listed.

Wildlife reported by different villages during PWAs are listed in Appendix II. This is to allow a
better understanding of the species listed in Appendix I, and to those accounted below. Reports
of wildlife presence were not limited to those found in the respective village areas, but included
all areas within the SPF. Based on this information, and those gathered during the preparatory
exercise and field PWA, wildlife in Dong Sithouane SPF are apparently mainly found towards
the eastern part of the SPF (figure 1). Some wildlife are also reported in other parts of the SPF,
mainly in the forested hill range that runs east-west (almost dividing the SPF into the northern
 16

and southern halves). In the eastern part of the SPF, wildlife are reported mainly in ‘Dong Aa
Chien’ (the area south of Phou Mali), along the Phou Mali escarpment, and in ‘Dong Phali’ (in
the central part of Dong Sithouane SPF’s eastern boundary, along Highway No. 2313).

Among the species reported and/or recorded in Dong Sithouane SPF (see Appendix III), there
are 14 Globally Threatened species (IUCN, 1996), 31 species threatened and potentially
threatened by trade (WCMC, 1998), and 26 species at risk or potentially at risk in Lao PDR
(Duckworth et al., 1999). It should be noted that this list also included the Asian elephant,
although extirpated from the area, might occasionally use the SPF. Information regarding these
Globally Threatened species are briefly summarized in table 1. Most of these species are mainly
found in the eastern forested area of Dong Sithouane SPF.

The main threats to biodiversity in Dong Sithouane SPF include forest fire, wildlife hunting,
unregulated NTFP harvesting, and livestock grazing. Forest fire, both human induced and natural
is a common feature in the SPF, and is expected to increase in the future with expectedly
devastating results. One village was reportedly razed down as a result of this forest fire. Wildlife
hunting using muzzle-loading guns (in spite of such guns being already handed over to the
province), crossbows, hunting dogs and snares are not uncommon. Trophies and remains of
wildlife were frequently observed in the villages. There is a tendency among the villagers to
‘over harvest’ NTFP, e.g., two or more ‘wells’ in the extraction of ‘yaang’ oil. Sometimes, trees
are chopped down to capture wild animals. Some of the domestic cattle were observed suffering
from ‘foot and mouth’ disease, which could potentially spread to the wild cattle population, as
these domestic cattle ranged far and deep into the main forested areas.

Dong Sithouane SPF, located between Dong Phou Vieng NBCA and Xe Bang Nouan NBCA is
theoretically a ‘land corridor’ linking the two NBCAs. There is, however, very little contiguous
forest cover to directly link the SPF with the two NBCAs. Furthermore, there are more than 60
villages in the SPF, and more around it. With settlements at such a scale and with numerous
access roads throughout the SPF, it is not a realistic ‘land corridor’.

13
Highway No. 23 forms part of the historically famous Ho Chi Minh trail. Much of the road and bridges have been
bombed out, making bomb craters a prominent feature along the route.
 17

Table 1: Summarized account of the Globally Threatened species in Dong Sithouane SPF.

Species GT Location in SPF Threats Distribution in Lao

Category PDR
Pygmy loris Vulnerable EW Hill Range; Fire; Provisionally
Dong Aa Chien Loss of habitat; localized to certain
Possibly hunting areas
Pig-tailed Vulnerable EW Hill Range; Fire; Common to most
macaque Dong Aa Chien Loss of habitat; areas
Hunting
Douc langur Endangered Dong Aa Chien Fire; Common in remote
Loss of habitat; areas of good habitat
Hunting
Dhole Vulnerable EW Hill Range; Fire; Common to most
Dong Aa Chien Loss of habitat; areas
Loss of prey
Asiatic black Vulnerable EW Hill Range? Fire; Possibly uncommon
bear Dong Aa Chien Loss of habitat to most areas
Clouded leopard Vulnerable Dong Aa Chien Fire; Uncertain
Loss of habitat;
Loss of prey
Tiger Endangered EW Hill Range; Fire; Common to most
Dong Aa Chien Loss of habitat; areas, but possibly in
Loss of prey; low numbers
Elephant Endangered Dong Aa Chien? Fire; Possibly restricted to
Loss of habitat dense and hilly forest
in some areas
Large-antlered Vulnerable Dong Aa Chien Fire; Restricted to some
muntjac Loss of habitat; areas
Hunting
Gaur Vulnerable Dong Aa Chien Fire; Possibly restricted to
Loss of habitat; some areas
Possibly hunting;
Possible transfer
of diseases from
domestic cattle
Banteng Endangered Dong Aa Chien Fire; Rare in most areas
Loss of habitat;
Possibly hunting;
Possible transfer
of diseases from
domestic cattle
Serow Vulnerable EW Hill Range; Possibly hunting Restricted to steep
Dong Aa Chien karst mountains
East Asian Vulnerable EW Hill Range; Fire; Common to all areas
porcupine Dong Aa Chien Loss of habitat;
Hunting
 18

Siamese Critically Xe Pa-em Loss of habitat Rare, if any found.

crocodile Endangered
Note:
EW Hills = the hill range running east west in the central part of Dong Sithouane SPF.
Dong Aa Chien = main forest bloc in the eastern part of Dong Sithouane SPF, and
include Dong Phali and Phou Mali areas.
Xe Pa-em = a river in the eastern part of Dong Sithouane SPF. Crocodiles are supposedly
restricted to the upper reaches of this river
Distribution in Lao PDR primarily with respect to protected areas
 19

Plates 5 & 6: Captive primates in Dong Sithouane SPF

A young pig-tailed macaque at Ban Khoktheuleu

A young rhesus macaque at Ban Xeku

 20

Plates 7 & 8: Evidence of wildlife presence

Thao Piu observing fresh droppings of sambar deer

KC with quills of recently poached Asiatic brush-tailed porcupine

 21

Plates 9 & 10: Threats to wildlife in Dong Sithouane SPF

KC with an active snare of a

500 m long snareline.

A Phayre’s flying squirrel shot

with a muzzle-loading gun.
 22

Plates 11 & 12: Impacts on habitat in Dong Sithouane SPF

‘Yaang ‘ oil extraction

This tree was apparently chopped

down to capture pangolins.
 23

4. DISCUSSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 DISCUSSIONS
Assuming that all wildlife reported does indeed occur in Dong Sithouane SPF, then there exist
several species of low to high conservation significance. The wildlife population in Dong
Sithouane SPF, possibly representing a remnant population, is likely to be low and might not be
viable in the long-term. This will, however, require intensive field biological surveys before any
statements can be made regarding their density and viability. Furthermore, all the wildlife
reported have better representation in the Lao PDR’s system of protected areas within the
province and in other provinces.

Nevertheless, the species reported/recorded in Dong Sithouane SPF, by virtue of their existence
and conservation significance, and possibly representing an important gene pool, need active
protection and conservation efforts throughout their range. However, there is no further need to
establish Dong Sithouane SPF as an NBCA. Conservation needs of biodiversity in Dong
Sithouane SPF can, however, be addressed by setting aside a special conservation management
zone within the SPF, and establishing rules and regulations with regard to wildlife and NTFP
harvesting, habitat use and other practices, both inside and outside this special zone. The benefits
from ‘village forestry’ are already excellent incentives for the village forestry associations to
include a small component of biodiversity conservation and monitoring in the existing program.
Hence, continued benefits alone can ensure the villagers’ commitment towards biodiversity
conservation.

As mentioned in section 1.1, the biodiversity conservation needs in Savannakhet Province have
partly been addressed by the establishment of Phou Xang He and Xe Bang Nouan NBCAs.
Although realistically, however, setting aside areas for protection in Lao PDR have done very
little for biodiversity conservation and habitat protection in the country, as almost all these areas
receive little or no active management, or in most cases management have been obstacled by
bureaucratic and political issues. Furthermore, even with the establishment of NBCAs,
biodiversity loss is still proceeding at an alarming rate. Biodiversity conservation is currently not
the Government of Lao PDR’s top priority, whereas livelihood improvement is. This is
understandable, given that much of the population are living at subsistence level, and dependent
on the forest resources. However, current livelihood improvement activities would mean very
 24

little once Lao PDR loses its biodiversity and natural resources. Then, if that should occur, the
majority would find it difficult even to live at subsistence level.

If FOMACOP’s ‘village forestry’ program can be true to its theory, then ‘village forestry’
program might possibly be one solution towards biodiversity conservation and habitat protection
in Lao PDR. Hence, the concept of ‘low impact and sustainable village forestry’ might actually
prevent the loss of biodiversity and habitats, and improve livelihoods at the same time. Hence, it
might be worth considering introducing ‘village forestry’ as one possible solution in managing
protected areas and preventing biodiversity loss in Lao PDR.

Thus, ‘village forestry’ in Dong Sithouane SPF can actually be a test case for the ‘Integrated
Conservation and Development’ concept. If ‘village forestry’ is unable to address the
conservation needs in Dong Sithouane SPF, even after following the implementation of
measures recommended, then the current ‘Integrated Conservation and Development’ approach
is obviously not the solution to protecting and managing protected areas. Conversely, if ‘village
forestry’ is able to address the biodiversity conservation needs in Dong Sithouane SPF, then the
application of this approach should be seriously considered as one possible option towards
biodiversity conservation in protected area.

Caution should be taken, if there comes a time when ‘village forestry’ should be considered for
introduction in protected areas. It is imperative that forestry activities be limited to restricted
parts of the NBCA’s Controlled Use Zone and forested ‘buffer zone’ areas outside the NBCA.
Nevertheless, even such ‘low impact and sustainable village forestry’ will have some impact on
wildlife and habitat. But this is probably more desirable than the current situation with most
NBCAs, where log and wildlife poaching, forest clearance, and other damaging activities go
unchecked. It must, however, be emphasized that such a program should not be attempted in the
NBCAs, until and unless, such a program has proven true to its theory and has successfully
provided adequate protection and conservation to biodiversity. Furthermore, it should not be
regarded as the only possible solution to the protection of NBCAs, but considered as one of the
possible options.

4.2 RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Establish a zone for biodiversity conservation in Dong Sithouane SPF:
 25

Areas within the east-west hill range and Dong Aa Chien need to be identified and
demarcated as a special conservation management zone within the Dong Sithouane
SPF for biodiversity conservation purposes. Criteria needed for inclusion into this
zone are adequate forest cover, the presence of permanent water bodies and mineral
licks, and information on the distribution and range of wildlife. Wildlife distribution
and range can only be determined from field biological surveys. Such surveys would
also confirm wildlife presence in Dong Sithouane SPF, provide information on their
relative abundance, and provide baseline information for monitoring purposes. Also,
all known mineral licks should be visited, mapped and assessed for their viability
during these surveys.

2. Develop and establish conservation ‘rules and regulations’:

Rules and regulations with regard to wildlife and NTFP harvesting, and the special
conservation management zone, must be developed and established to prevent the
loss of biodiversity. This should be carried out in consultation with the stakeholders
in good faith, therefore ensuring commitment from them. A general ‘rules and
regulations’ with regard to this zone and NTFP harvest in the SPF should be
incorporated into the Village Forest Management Contract (FOMACOP, 1998), and
making appropriate amendments to the contract. A village-specific ‘rules and
regulations’ may also have to be developed for villages with key features (e.g.,
mineral licks).

Ideally, no harvest of wildlife whatsoever should be allowed in this special conservation

management zone. Outside this zone, wildlife harvest can be allowed only for those
species not listed as Globally Threatened by IUCN, in CITES Appendix I, and as At
Risk in Lao PDR. Also, harvest of wildlife outside the special management
conservation zone should be regulated. For example, frogs should not be harvested
during spawning period (see B.L. Stuart in Duckworth et al., 1999). Wildlife harvest
regulation would hopefully ensure a continued supply of protein to the SPF’s
residents.

3. Conservation awareness program in Dong Sithouane SPF:

The on-going conservation awareness program in the SPF should also include listing out
Lao PDR’s protected species to the residents, and laws and penalties with regard to
 26

capturing or killing them. Rules and regulations with regard to wildlife and NTFP
harvesting within and outside the proposed special conservation management zone
should also be a priority of the conservation awareness program. This is, however,
possible once those rules and regulations, and the zone are established.

4. Initiate biodiversity monitoring activities for Dong Sithouane SPF:

Biodiversity monitoring can easily be an ‘add-on’ component to the VFA’s other

monitoring activities. Although focus should be on key wildlife species, observations
of other wildlife and human activities should also be recorded. A simple data
recording format currently in use in five NBCAs (appendices IV & V) in Lao PDR
can be used or adapted for use by the VFAs.

Biodiversity monitoring must be carried out regularly on a monthly basis, to observe

trends, if any. Monitoring patrols should focus on main existing wildlife trails, along
waterways, and at mineral licks. These are areas of wildlife concentration.
Information gathering should not, however, be restricted during the monitoring
activity alone. Information should also be gathered opportunistically i.e., when
carrying out other activities or when reported by fellow residents of Dong Sithouane
SPF. A ‘record book’ could be maintained in the villages, where such information
can be recorded and later disseminated. Information to be included can comprise date
of observation, species, evidence, location, name of person/persons reporting, and
remarks/comments.

Imperative to this village-based monitoring system, is to carry out a short training course
for members of the VFAs, both in the ‘classroom’ and in the field, translating theory
to practice. Even with simple data recording formats, training is needed to ensure
legibility and consistency of data recorded, lest the very idea of monitoring is
defeated. Training of village-based monitoring can follow that implemented for three
villages in Nakai - Nam Theun NBCA (Boonratana, 1998). After a year following the
implementation of biodiversity monitoring activities, another short training course is
needed to interpret the data collected, assessing trends in wildlife records and threats.
Training activities should also include the DAFO staff, as they similarly need to
understand the activities carried out by the VFAs. This ‘data interpretation’ training
can follow that carried out for Dong Hua Sao and Phou Xiang Thong NBCAs
(Boonratana, 1999).
 27

5. Mitigate threats to wildlife and habitats:

Currently recognizable threats to biodiversity conservation in Dong Sithouane SPF are

forest fires, wildlife hunting and the possible transfer of diseases from domestic cattle
to the wild cattle population. To address forest fires, a comprehensive study on fire
ecology should be carried out. Following that, feasible and practicable management
plan and activities based on mitigation measures needed must be drawn up and
implemented. Also, it may be desirable to train villagers in fire prevention and
control. Guns, other than those issued to the militia, should be handed over to the
provincial authorities. Also, the militia should use their guns only for enforcing
security, and not for hunting. Current practices allow domestic cattle to graze far into
the proposed special conservation management zone. These cattle, some of which
have been observed suffering from ‘mouth and foot’ disease, may potentially transfer
it to the wild cattle.

6. Extend ‘village forestry’ program to totally cover Dong Sithouane SPF:

FOMACOP should extend its activities to include the villages in the eastern part of
the Dong Sithouane SPF. This is an important preliminary activity to ensure
biodiversity conservation needs are addressed, and benefits of village forestry in the
SPF are shared with those villages whose areas should fall partly or totally within the
proposed ‘special conservation management zone’. For those villages that cannot, by
default of the zone’s establishment, harvest timber and NTFP, should earn their share
of shared benefits through their commitment to patrolling and monitoring.

4.3 CONCLUSION
A rapid participatory wildlife diversity assessment in Dong Sithouane SPF has resulted in a
provisional list of at least 87 species, of which 13 are Globally Threatened species. The mammal
diversity value of the SPF is probably at par to the designated protected areas in the province,
although the density of wildlife population and amount of viable wildlife habitat available in the
SPF are very likely much lower than those in the protected areas. Mammal diversity found in the
SPF are, therefore, better represented in the established NBCAs. Thus, at the national level,
Dong Sithouane SPF does not rank high as a conservation priority area. Nevertheless,
biodiversity conservation in Dong Sithouane SPF can be addressed by establishing a ‘special
 28

conservation management zone’ and ‘ conservation rules and regulations’. Known and clear
benefits from ‘village forestry’ are important incentives that will ensure the villagers’
commitment towards addressing the conservation needs of biodiversity in the SPF. If
conservation of biodiversity in Dong Sithouane SPF can be successfully achieved, then it might
be worth applying the ‘village forestry’ concept to Lao PDR’s protected areas.
 29

REFERENCES

Boonratana, R. 1998. Nakai – Nam Theun Conservation Project [Phase 2]: Wildlife monitoring
techniques and participatory conservation at Nakai – Nam Theun NBCA. Vientiane:
IUCN/WCS.
Boonratana, R. 1999. Biodiversity Conservation Project: Training in Field Techniques and Data
Analysis. Vientiane: IUCN/BCP.
Corbet, G.B. and J.E. Hill.1992. Mammals of the Indomalayan Region: a systematic review.
London and Oxford: Natural History Museum Publications and Oxford University Press.
Duckworth, J.W., R.E. Salter, and K. Khounboline (comps). 1999. Wildlife in Lao PDR: 1999
Status Report. Vientiane: IUCN/WCS/CPAWM.
FOMACOP. 1998. Training Course on Procedures for Registering Village Forestry
Associations, Approving Village Forest Management Plans, and Signing Village Forest
Management Contracts. Savannakhet: FOMACOP.
Inskipp, T.P., N. Lindsey and W. Duckworth. 1996. An annonated checklist of the birds of the
Oriental Region. Sandy: Oriental Bird Club.
IUCN. 1996. 1996 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. Gland and Cambridge: IUCN.
Phanthanousy, B. and M. Katila. 1999. Village Forestry in Laos: Towards Sustainable Forest
Management. Unpublished paper presented at the annual meeting of the Forest, Trees and
People Program in Lao PDR from Oct. 22 - Dec. 3, 1999.
Thewlis, R.M, R.J. Timmins, T.D. Evans, and J.W. Duckworth. 1998. The conservation status of
birds in Laos: a review of key species. Bird Conserv. Internat. 8 (suppl): 1-159.
WCMC. 1998. Checklist of CITES species. Cambridge: CITES and WCMC.
 30

APPENDIX I: List of Wildlife Reported and/or Recorded at Dong Sithouane SPF, and
Their Local Names.

Evidence:
1 = Sighting (including captive animals, 6 = Scrapes/Claw Marks
carcasses, trophies & other remains)
2 = Tracks 7 = Feeding Signs
3 = Vocalization 8 = Other (e.g., wallows, bathing pools, mud
smears, antler & horn marks, etc.)
4 = Scat/Dung 9 = Verbal report
5 = Nests

Mammals14:
Common name Scientific name Lao name15 Katang name16 Evidence
Pangolin spp. Manis spp. Lin Maan-juel 9
Chinese pangolin(?) Manis pendactyla(?) Lin ngoua Maan-juel 9
Sunda pangolin(?) Manis javanica(?) Lin khwaai Maan-juel 9
Northern treeshrew Tupaia belangeri Kachon Se-luay; Se- 1,9
lueh
Primate spp. Ling Tamirr 9
Loris spp. Nyticebus spp. Ling lom Tamirr kujaal 9
Slow loris(?) Nycticebus coucang(?) Ling lom Tamirr kujaal 9
Pygmy loris(?) Nycticebus pygmaeus(?) Ling lom Tamirr kujaal 9
Macaque spp. Macaca spp. Ling Tamirr 9
Pig-tailed macaque Macaca nemestrina Khamut; ling Tamirr 1,9
haang san; khamut;
ling houa taap Tamirr choup;
Tamirr khamit
Rhesus macaque Macaca mulatta Ling haang Tamirr ratoi 1,9
nyao
Silvered langur Semnopithecus cristatus Talung Talung 9
Douc langur Pygathrix nemaeus Khadaeng; Sab-lai; Soy- 9
Khaeng daeng blai
Gibbon spp. Hylobates spp. Thanee Kouan 9
White-cheeked Hylobates leucogenys(?) Thanee Kouan 9
crested gibbon(?)
Golden jackal Canis aureus Ma chok Chi-chor 9
Dhole Cuon alpinus Ma nai Se-kong 9
Bear sp. Ursus sp. Mi 9
Asiatic black bear Ursus thibetanus Meauy Se-kaow 9
Sun bear Ursus malayanus Mi Se-koup; Te- 9
sai
14
Sequence and names of species follow Corbett and Hill (1992), comparable to Duckworth et al., (1999).
15
It must be emphasized here that the Lao names for species recorded/reported are correct (unless stated otherwise)
only for the Dong Sithouane SPF, and may differ with other areas of Lao PDR. [Note: see text in section 4.2.1]
16
The predominant Lao Theung ethnic group in Dong Sithouane SPF. [Note: some names vary between villages.]
 31

Yellow throated Martes flavigula Haen khreua Sampiak pong- 9

marten(?) kroh?
Hog badger Arctonyx collaris Mou lung Paruul 9
Ferret badger sp.(?) Melogale sp.(?) Haen kapoo Sampiak 9
ariang
Otter spp. Naak Pa haer 9
Civet spp. Haen Sampiak 9
Large Indian civet Viverra zibetha(?) Haen haang Sampiak haang 9
(?) kaan kaan
Common palm civet Paradoxurus Haen om Sampiak om 9
hermaphrodatus
?? Haen dok lao 9
?? Haen daang 9
?? Haen phaeng Sampiak 9
phaeng
?? Haen i-tan Sampiak 9
ariang
?? Haen hou 9
baang
?? Haen song 9
?? Haen jong 9
?? Haen khimin 9
Binturong Arctictis binturong Haen khaw; Te-nyu 9
Haen haang
khut
Mongoose spp. Herpestes spp. Chon phon Soon-puon 9
Small Asian Herpestes javanicus Chon phon Soon-puon tiah 9
mongoose
Crab-eating Herpestes urva Chon phon Soon-puon 9
mongoose treung
Leopard cat Prionailurus bengalensis Seua nok; Meo treung; 9
Seua meo Kola meo;
Kola chaem
Marbled cat? Pardofelis marmorata? Seua mung 9
mang
Asian golden cat? Catopuma temmincki? Seua faai; Asang 9
Seua leuang
Clouded leopard(?) Pardofelis nebulosa(?) Seua kaloot 9
Leopard Panthera pardus Seua dao Asang 9
Tiger Panthera tigris Seua nyai; Asang; Kola 9
Seua krong peut
Asian elephant? Elephas maximus? Saang Aa-chiang 9
Wild pig(?) Sus scrofa(?) Mou paa Alik krouang 2,4,7,8,9
Lesser oriental Tragulus javanicus Kai Se-ang koi 9
chevrotain
Sambar deer Cervus unicolor Kouang Yert; Yourt 2,4,8,9
Muntjac spp. Muntiacus spp. Faan Poih 4,9
Red muntjac Muntiacus muntjak Faan; Faan Poih tia 1,9
 32

thamada; Faan
kadow
Large-antlered Muntiacus vuquangensis Faan dong; Poih treung 9
muntjac Faan nawa
Gaur Bos gaurus Meauy; Sa-ngorr 2,4,9
Khouay paa
Banteng Bos javanicus Ngoua paa; Ta-keng; Ta- 9
ngoua kathing keng krouang
Serow Naemorhedus sumatrensis Nyeuang Keh 9
Squirrel spp. Kahok Prook
Black giant squirrel Ratufa bicolor Kahok mo; Te-song 9
Khadaang;
Kahok daang
Variable squirrel(?) Callosciurus finlaysonii(?) Kerhok daeng Prook 9
Striped squirrel Tamiops sp. Kalaen Te-lia 9
Berdmore’s squirrel Menetes berdmorei Katae Kraaih 9
Flying squirrel sp. Baang 9
(Larger type) flying Petaurista philippensis(?) Baang loua; Te-jurr 9
squirrel sp. Baang nyai
Phayre’ flying Hylopetes phayrei Baang tong; Te-liang 1,9
squirrel Baang noi
East Asian Hystrix brachyura Min Se-keay 1,9
porcupine
Asiatic brush-tailed Atherurus macrourus Hon Se-kai 1,9
porcupine
Siamese hare(?) Lepus peguensis(?) Katai Te-sai 4,9

Birds17:
Common name Scientific name Local Lao name Evidence
Chinese francolin Fracolinus pintadeanus Nok katha dong 1,9
Scaly-breasted partridge Arborophilia charltonii Nok khaw 1,3,9
Red junglefowl Gallus gallus Kai pa 1,3,9
Black-headed woodpecker Picus erythropygius Nok sai 1
Lineated barbet Megalaima lineata Nok kondok 1,3
Oriental pied hornbill Anthracoceros albirostris Nok kaeng 1,9
Hornbill sp. Nok kok 9
Common hoopoe Upupa epops Nok sai hon kuan 1
Indian roller Coracias benghalensis Nok khaochao 1
White-throated kingfisher Halcyon pileata Nok kataen 1
Greater coucal Centropus sinensis Nok kapoot 1,9
Lesser coucal Centropus bengalensis Nok kapoot 1
Red-breasted parakeet Psittacula alexandri Nok khaek 1
Spotted dove Streptopelia tranquebarica Nok khao 1
Red-wattled lapwing Vanellus vanellus Nok tae-tae 1,3
Chinese pond heron Ardeola bacchus Nok nyaang 1
Red-billed blue magpie Urocissa erythrorhyncha Nok khangkhaet 1

17
Sequence and names follow Inskipp et al. (1996), comparable to Duckworth et al., (1999).
 33

Large-billed crow Corvus macrorhynchos Nok kaa 1

Black drongo Dicrurus macrocerus Nok saew 1
Greater racket-tailed drongo Dicrurus paradiseus Nok saew 1
Oriental magpie robin Copsychus saularis 1
Black collared starling Sturnus nugricollis Nok ieang mong 1
Common myna Acridotheres tristis Nok ieang 1
White-vented myna Acridotheres javanicus Nok ieang 1
Hill myna Gracula religiosa Nok sieang kaa 1
White-crested Garrulax leucolophus Nok kathoua 1
laughingthrush
White wagtail Motacilla alba Nok kadaep dau 1
Yellow wagtail Motacilla flava Nok kadaep dau 1

Reptiles and Amphibians18:

Common name Scientific name Local Lao name Evidence
Rana nigrovittata Khiat 1
Rana limnocharis Khiat 1
Hoplobatrachus rugulosa Kob 1
Microhyla ornata Khiat 1
Microhyla berdmorei Khiat 1
Microhyla pulchra Khiat 1
Mabuya multifasciata Ki-ko 1
Calotes versicolor Kapom 1
Water dragon Physignathus cocincinus Kathang 9
Bengal monitor Varanus bengalensis Laan 9
Water monitor Varanus salvator Hiea 3,9
Python sp. Python sp. Ngou leam 9
King cobra Ophiophagus hannah Chong-ang 9
Siamese crocodile Crocodylus siamensis Khae 9

Note:
(?) = animal recorded/reported most likely belongs to the species listed; e.g., Chinese
pangolin
? = provisional; subject to confirmation; e.g., Asian golden cat
?? = indeterminate

18
See Bryan L. Stuart in Duckworth et al., (1999).
 34

APPENDIX II: Villages Interviewed and Animals Reported

1. Ban Nasano 8. Ban Kamep Noy 15. Ban Lavang Gnai

[16บ 02’20”N/105บ 43’15”E]
2. Ban Napheu
[16บ 07’56”N/105บ 49’13”E]
3. Ban Khoktheuleu
[16บ 08’40”N/105บ 48’44”E]
4. Ban Houay Lai
[16บ 12’33”N/105บ 52’49”E]
5. Ban Padong (Lanong)
[16บ 10’53”N/105บ 59’28”E]
6. Ban Nahangkhae
[16บ 01’52”N/105บ 30’56”E]
7. Ban Naxuak
[16บ 01’00”N/105บ 40’10”E]
[16บ 06’57”N/106บ 08’22”E]
9. Ban Mai Xe
[16บ 02’05”N/105บ 49’16”E]
10. Ban Napasat
[15บ 59’29”N/105บ 57’02”E]
11. Ban Phoumali
[16บ 01’53”N/105บ 58’37”E]
12. Ban Xe Ku
[16บ 02’22”N/106บ 02’45”E]
13. Ban Hintangkhok
[16บ 11’06”N/105บ 47’07”E]
14. Ban Nadokthong
[16บ 12’17”N/105บ 49’35”E]
[16บ 14’30”N/105บ 55’35”E]
16. Ban Mai No.23
[16บ 11’30”N/106บ 00’05”E]
17. Ban Bakkhoumkham
[16บ 09’55”N/105บ 41’38”E]
18. Ban Nathamou
[16บ 10’13”N/105บ 35’53”E]
19. Ban Naklung
[16บ 11’35”N/105บ 30’59”E]
20. Ban Nongkhone
[16บ 05’32”N/105บ 26’32”E]

Species/Village 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.
Pangolin sp. ! + + x + # + + + + + + +
Chinese pangolin(?) + + + + + + +
Sunda pangolin(?) + + + + + + +
Northern treeshrew + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Loris sp. + + + + + + + + + +
Slow loris(?) + + + + + + + + + +
Pygmy loris(?) + + + + + + - + + +
Pig-tailed macaque + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Rhesus macaque + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Silvered langur + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Douc langur + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
White-cheeked + + + + + + x + + - + + + + - + + + + x
crested gibbon(?)
Golden jackal + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Dhole + + + + + + + + + + + + - + + + + + - +
Bear sp. ! ! + + ! + + -
Asiatic black bear + + ! ! ! + + x + ! ! !
Sun bear + + + + + + + + + + + +
Haen khreua - + + - + - ! - + + + + + - - + - - - -
[Yellow throated
marten(?)]
Hog badger + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + x +
Haen kapoo [Ferret - - - - + + + + - - - + - - + - - + + +
badger(?)]
Otter sp. - - x # # - - # # x - # - - # # - - - -
Large Indian civet(?) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Common palm civet + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Haen phaeng?? - + + - + + - + + + + + - + - + + + - +
Haen daang?? - + + - + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Haen dok lao?? + + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + + -
 35

Haen i-tan?? - - + - + - - - + + - - + - - - - + - +
Haen khimin?? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - -
Haen hou baang?? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +
Haen song?? - - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - - - -
Haen jong?? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + -
Binturong ! + + + + + + + + + + + - - + + + + - -
Small Asian + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
mongoose
Crab-eating - - - - - - + - + + - - - x - - + - + +
mongoose
Leopard cat + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Seua mung-mang - - - - - - - + - - - - - + - + - - - -
[Marbled cat?]
Seua leuang [Asian - + + + + - - - + - - + - - - + - - - -
golden cat?]
Seua kaloot - + + # + + # + - + ! + - + + + - - - -
[Clouded leopard(?)]
Leopard ! ! + # + ! # + x # # + # + # + ! - # !
Tiger + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + - + !
Seua cham-lod?? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - - - -
Asian elephant? x x x x c x x x x x x x x x x c x x x x
Wild pig + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Lesser oriental + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
chevrotain
Sambar deer - + + + + + x + + + + + + + + + + + + x
Red muntjac + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Large-antlered - - + - + + + - + - - + - - + - - - -
muntjac
Gaur ! + + + + x x + + + + + + + + + + + x x
Banteng ! ! + + + + + + + + - + + + + + x x x x
Serow - # + - # - ! + - + - + - ! + - - - - -
Black giant squirrel ! + + # + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Variable squirrel(?) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Striped squirrel + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Berdmore’s squirrel + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
(Larger type) flying + + + # + + + - + + + + + + + + + + -
squirrel
Phayre’ flying + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
squirrel
East Asian + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
porcupine
Asiatic brush-tailed + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
porcupine
Siamese hare(?) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Green peafowl x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Large hornbill sp. - - - - ! ! x + x + + + - + + x + x x x
Oriental pied + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
hornbill
Water dragon + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Bengal monitor + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Water monitor + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Python sp. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
 36

King cobra + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Siamese crocodile(?) - - - - # - - # - - - + - - + x - - - -

Key:
+ = reported extant, with evidence encountered in recent years (c. 5 yrs)
# = reported extant, but no evidence encountered in recent years
x = none reported in recent years and/or locally extirpated
- = not reported
! = uncertain (either respondents were uncertain or team was uncertain of respondents’
answers)

Note:
(?) = animal recorded/reported most likely belongs to the species listed; e.g., Chinese
pangolin
? = provisional; subject to confirmation; e.g., Asian golden cat
?? = indeterminate
 37

APPENDIX III: Conservation Significance of Wildlife Recorded/Reported at Dong

Sithouane SPF

Mammals:
Common name Scientific name IUCN19 CITES20 Lao PDR21
Chinese pangolin(?) Manis pendactyla(?) NT II R
Sunda pangolin(?) Manis javanica(?) NT II R
Northern treeshrew Tupaia belangeri II
Slow loris(?) Nycticebus coucang(?) II LK
Pygmy loris(?) Nycticebus pygmaeus(?) V II LK
Pig-tailed macaque Macaca nemestrina V II PR
Rhesus macaque Macaca mulatta II R
Silvered langur Semnopithecus cristatus NT II R
Douc langur Pygathrix nemaeus E I R
White-cheeked crested Hylobates leucogenys(?) DD I PR
gibbon(?)
Golden jackal Canis aureus LK
Dhole Cuon alpinus V II R
Asiatic black bear Ursus thibetanus V I R
Sun bear Ursus malayanus DD I R
Hog badger Arctonyx collaris LK
Ferret badger sp. Melogale sp. LK
Otter sp. I/II CR/R
Binturong Arctictis binturong R
Leopard cat Prionailurus bengalensis II
Asian golden cat? Catopuma temmincki? NT I LK
Marbled cat? Pardofelis marmorata? DD I LK
Clouded leopard(?) Pardofelis nebulosa(?) V I R
Leopard Panthera pardus I R
Tiger Panthera tigris E I R
Asian elephant? Elephas maximus E I R
Wild pig Sus scrofa(?) LK
Sambar deer Cervus unicolor R
Large-antlered muntjac Muntiacus vuquangensis V I PR
Gaur Bos gaurus V I R
Banteng Bos javanicus E R
Serow Naemorhedus sumatrensis V I PR
Black giant squirrel Ratufa bicolor II PR
Phayre’ flying squirrel Hylopetes phayrei LK
East Asian porcupine Hystrix brachyura V NR
Water dragon Physignathus cocincinus PR

19
1996 IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals (IUCN, 1996).
20
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (WCMC, 1998).
21
Lao PDR Risk Categories (Thewlis et al.,1998 & Duckworth et al., 1999)
 38

Bengal monitor Varanus bengalensis I PR

Water monitor Varanus salvator II PR
Python sp. Python sp. NT II PR
King cobra Ophiophagus hannah II PR
Siamese crocodile Crocodylus siamensis C I R
Hoplobatrachus rugulosa II

Conservation Significance:
IUCN C = Globally threatened - Critical (the species faces an extremely high risk of
extinction in the wild in the immediate future).
E = Globally threatened - Endangered (the taxon is facing a very high risk of
extinction in the wild in the near future).
V = Globally threatened - Vulnerable (the taxon is facing a high risk of extinction in
the wild in the medium-term future).
NT = Near Threatened (the taxon is close to qualifying for Vulnerable).
DD = Data Deficient (a taxon for which there is inadequate information to make a
direct or indirect assessment of its risk of global extinction in the wild).
CITES I = Appendix I (Species threatened with extinction which are or may be affected by
trade. Trade in specimens between parties is only authorised in exceptional
circustances, although import and export for scientific purposes may be
permitted.)
II = Appendix II (Species which although not necessarily now threatened with
extinction may become so unless trade in specimens is subject to strict regulation
in order to avoid overutilisation. Species may also be listed in Appendix II
because of their similarity to more threatened species, as an aid to enforcement.
Commercial trade in wild specimens listed in Appendix II is permitted between
members of the convention, but is controlled and monitored through a licensing
system.)
Lao PDR R = at Risk (Species approximately equivalent to the Globally Threatened species of
IUCN.)
PR = Potentially at Risk (Species suspected to be at Risk, but lacking information
on threats and status, or almost at Risk.)
CR = Conditionally at Risk (Globally Threatened species of IUCN that might
possibly be present.)
LK = Little Known (Species whose conservation status cannot currently be
assessed.)
NR = Not at Risk.

Note:
(?) = animal recorded/reported most likely belongs to the species listed; e.g., Chinese
pangolin
? = provisional; subject to confirmation; e.g., Asian golden cat
 39

APPENDIX IV: Wildlife Data Recording Format

Location:...........................………………………………….......................... Date:………………...
Time Start:….......……… Time End:....…................. Distance Covered:...........................................
Personnel:.............................................................……….…….......……………......................……
Evidence: 7.Feeding Signs
1.Sighting 8.Other:
2.Tracks - Wallows
3.Vocalization - Bathing Pools
4.Scat/Dung - Mud Smears
5.Nests - Antler/Horn marks
6.Scrapes/Claw Marks 9.Reliable Report
Time Species Location Evidence Remarks
 40

APPENDIX V: Human/Habitat Impact Data Recording Format

Location:...........................…………………………..................……… Date:…………..............….
Time Start:……….....… Time End:............…......... Distance Covered:.............................................
Personnel:.......................................................................……….………………..................………
A: Hunting Activities B: Non-Hunting Activities
1. Traps/Snares 1. Forest clearance
2. Guns/Crossbows 2. Timber-cutting
3. Fishing gear 3. Huts
4. Hunting dogs 4. NTFP collection
5. Camps 5. Livestock grazing
6. Wildlife 6. House construction
7. Other 7. Other
Time Activity Location* Active/Non-active Remarks**

*Latitude and longitude, if possible

**To also include information on the number of persons, their ethnic group, purpose, residence,
names, etc.
 41

APPENDIX VI: Brief Discussion on Methodology

Given that time was a constraint, and the main objective was to obtain an assessment of the
biodiversity values of Dong Sithouane SPF, the methodology used was hence apt. Furthermore,
local knowledge is an important source of information about wildlife presence in any area, and is
essential towards the planning of field surveys. Village-based PWA is not, however, without its
limitations. Hence, it should not be used as substitute to field biological surveys.

The main limitation encountered during this study was with regard to the Lao names for wildlife
species. There are several wildlife species with no ‘official’ Lao names. Many of the ‘official’
Lao names currently in use by the Department of Forestry and conservation non-governmental
organizations are borrowed from the Thai language, therefore, unfamiliar to the general Lao
public. For example, “seua laai maek” in Thai means clouded leopard, but “seua laai maek” is
not known to the general Lao public. To overcome this, respondents were requested to name and
describe all cat species known to be present in Dong Sithouane SPF.

Likewise, as many species in the Lao language have a common generic name, but no specific
name, it was adequate to refer to their taxonomic group. Following that, if that taxonomic group
was present, further inquiries were made. For example, the crab-eating mongoose and the small
Asian mongoose are both known as “chon-phon” in Lao. Thus, respondents were asked to
describe the mongoose/mongooses present.

Also, although some species’ names are both there in Lao and Thai, they do not necessarily refer
to the same species. “Kathing” in Thai refers to gaur, but “ngoua kathing” in some parts of Lao
PDR refers to banteng, although the more common name in Lao for banteng is “ngoua paa”.
Furthermore, within the Lao language, the same name can refer to different species. “Khouay
paa” in Lao usually refer to wild water buffalo, but in many parts of Lao, it is synonymously
used to refer to gaur, which otherwise is commonly known as “meauy”. Frequently, common
Lao names for a species may locally refer to another species in the absence of the former. Long-
tailed macaque is widely referred to as “ling haang nyao”, but in the absence of long-tailed
macaques, the same Lao name can refer to any other ‘long-tailed’ macaques, such as rhesus or
Assamese macaques. In Dong Sithouane SPF, “ling haang nyao” refers to rhesus macaques.
 42

Thus, in conducting interviews, it is important to treat Thai and Lao languages as two distinct
languages to avoid errors in species identification. Secondly, the interviewer must have had
some training in wildlife biology, familiar with species description, behavior and ecology, to
assist in correct identification. Finally, as there is currently no Lao wildlife biologist, it is
therefore important that interviewers must be proficient in the usage of the Lao language, to
avoid misinterpretation of information.

Based on past experiences in Indochina, Thailand and Borneo, respondents were not asked to
identify species from illustrations (drawings, photographs, etc.) at the start of the PWA. It was
observed that in many parts of the region, experienced hunters could not identify common
species or misidentified many species illustrated. This is primarily because these simple
communities have little exposure to such illustrations, hence are not able to discern the size and
shape of those wildlife illustrated, unless it is highly distinguishable (e.g., tiger and elephant).
Nevertheless, illustrations were used during this study, but only at the end of the main semi-
structured interviews.

Although the interviews were primarily addressed to village elders and individuals with forest
experience, children and the women frequently participated, and most often than not frequently
contributed useful information. This sort of participation may likely lay the groundwork for
future conservation awareness and education.
 43

APPENDIX VII: Study’s Itinerary

Date Location Activity

9/1/00 Travel RB arrives Vientiane.
10-11/1/00 Vientiane Primary preparations
10/1/00 Vientiane RB meets Bouahong Phanthanousy (FOMACOP National
Director), Bouaphanh, Marko Katila (CTA for Forest
Management), Vannalack Sengsavanh. Introductions & briefing
by FOMACOP staff/advisers.
Gather & review existing & relevant literature, information &
maps.
11/1/00 Vientiane Preliminary preparation for study (review materials & purchase
additional topographic maps)
12/1/00 Travel RB & VS arrive Savannakhet.
13-14/1/00 Savannakhet Secondary preparations
13/1/00 Savannakhet RB & VS meet Somsakoune (Project Coordinator). Brief
introductions & briefing.
RB & VS meet Dr. Manuel Bonita (Village Forestry Adviser),
Edwin Payuan (Village Forestry Adviser), Vaneska Litz and
Kongsavanh Chounlamonty. Introductions & briefing by
FOMACOP staff/advisers.
Gather further information & materials.
RB & VS review aerial maps, land use maps and topographic
maps of DSSPF.
RB, VS & KC (team) discuss appropriate plan of field activities,
logistics, & methodology.
14/1/00 Savannakhet RB & VS meet Boonyot Namsena & Puthavong Sitthidet(Deputies
to the Project Coordinator). Introductions & briefing.
RB gathers more information from FOMACOP advisers.
RB & KC meet Sengpaseut Southammavong (Deputy Foresty
Section of PAFO). Introductions & briefing.
VS & KC prepare travel documents, equipment, supplies and other
logistics.
15-30/1/00 DSSPF Field work
15/1/00 Travel RB, VS & KC arrive Muang Thapanthong (after losing more than
half a day in Savannakhet repairing an apparently ‘repaired and
 44

serviced’ vehicle.
16/1/00 DSSPF Team meets Kongsawaeng Buttawong (Deputy DAFO).
Introductions, briefing & registration with police.
Village PWA at Ban Nasano, Ban Napheu, & Ban Khoktheuleu.
17-19/1/00 DSSPF Field PWA at Dong Aa Chien
20/1/00 DSSPF Village PWA at Ban Houay Lai & Ban Padong.
21/1/00 DSSPF Village PWA at Ban Nahangkhae & Ban Naxuat
22/1/00 DSSPF Village PWA at Ban Kamep Noy (Tumlan District, Salavan
Province).
Field PWA along southern section of Highway No. 23
23/1/00 DSSPF Village PWA at Ban Mai Xe, Ban Napasat & Ban Phoumali
24/1/00 DSSPF Village PWA at Ban Xe Ku
25/1/00 DSSPF Village PWA at Ban Hintangkhok, Ban Nadokthong & Ban
Lavang Gnai.
Field PWA along northern section of Highway No. 23
26/1/00 DSSPF Village PWA at Ban Mai No.23 (Ban Padong Noy)
Field PWA along central section of Highway No. 23
27/1/00 DSSPF PWA at Ban Bakkhoumkham, Ban Nathamou, Ban Nakalung, &
Ban Nongkhone.
28/1/00 Savannakhet Team debrief Sikeo (Head Forestry Section, PAFO Savannakhet)
29/1/00 Travel RB & VS return to Vientiane.
30/1-9/2/00 Vientiane Documentation of findings
31/1/00 Vientiane RB & VS debrief Marko Katila
10/2/00 Travel RB departs Vientiane.