Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Tiger density, movements, and immigration outside of a tiger source site in Thailand
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Tiger density, movements, and immigration outside of a tiger source site in Thailand
Do you wish to request the book?
Tiger density, movements, and immigration outside of a tiger source site in Thailand
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Tiger density, movements, and immigration outside of a tiger source site in Thailand
2021
Overview
Landscape‐scale strategies for conserving wild tigers emphasize the role of core breeding populations (source sites) to replenish surrounding areas which have lost tigers. In Southeast Asia, a few potential source sites remain, particularly Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuary, Thailand (HKK). We investigated tiger density in two reserves (Mae Wong, Khlong Lan: MWKL) adjacent to HKK where tigers and their prey were scarce due to historic poaching but current management offered effective protection. Camera trapping revealed 10 adult tigers (four males, six females), at least two of which had immigrated from HKK. Spatially explicit tiger density was 0.359 tigers/100 km2, 5.6 times lower than HKK. The population was breeding, with six cubs observed. Tiger movements (measured by σ, the spatial scale parameter) were twice as extensive in MWKL as in HKK, indicative of prey scarcity in MWKL. The disparity in density between MWKL and HKK reveals that tiger recovery is a slow process when prey are scarce, even when recovery areas are apparently well‐managed and connected to a source site. We review source‐recovery dynamics of tigers in other sites in Asia and find that low prey impedes landscape‐scale recoveries elsewhere as well. Landscape‐scale recovery of wild tigers is impeded by prey depletion, even when recovery areas are connected to a source population.
