fbpx

Are corridors good for tigers Panthera tigris but bad for people? An assessment of the Khata corridor in lowland Nepal

By 28th October 2016January 1st, 2018Conservation Papers

Abstract

As part of a landscape-scale programme for conserving tigers Panthera tigris the Khata corridor was established between Bardia National Park in Nepal and Katarniaghat Wildlife Sanctuary in India in early 2000. We examined its functionality by comparing the status of tigers and prey in the corridor and in the adjacent National Park, using camera trapping, transect sampling and diet analysis of scats. Tiger movement was inferred from the photographs, and tiger–human conflict was assessed by means of questionnaires and interviews. The corridor harboured transient individuals as well as resident, breeding tigers. Tigers with core areas in the corridor were also recorded in the two protected areas, and vice versa. Wild prey was 3–4 times more abundant in the area of the National Park bordering the corridor than in the corridor itself, and domestic livestock constituted 12–15% of the tigers’ food in the corridor. Livestock losses and human fatalities or injuries were relatively low compared to within the buffer zones of the National Parks. Despite such problems and restrictions on grazing and extraction of natural resources, local residents were generally positive towards tigers and the corridor. The successful establishment of the corridor and the positive attitudes of local people were attributable to community development programmes initiated to compensate for the imposed restrictions, financed by the government and national and international organizations. By linking Bardia National Park and Katarniaghat Wildlife Sanctuary via the Khata corridor, a protected tiger landscape of c. 3,000 km2 was established in west-central Nepal and northern India.

Wegge, P., Yadav, S.K. and Lamichhane, B.R. (2016) ‘Are corridors good for tigers Panthera tigris but bad for people? An assessment of the Khata corridor in lowland Nepal’, Oryx,  pp. 1–11. doi: 10.1017/S0030605316000661