The impact on tigers of poaching versus prey depletion

Authors

  • Guillaume Chapron,

    Corresponding author
    1. Laboratoire d’Ecologie CNRS UMR 7625, Ecole Normale Supérieure, 46 rue d’Ulm, 75005 Paris, France;
    2. Conservation Biology Division, Institute of Zoology, University of Bern, Baltzerstrasse 6, 3012 Bern, Switzerland;
    3. Grimsö Wildlife Research Station, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 73091 Riddarhyttan, Sweden;
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Dale G. Miquelle,

    1. Wildlife Conservation Society, 185th Street and Southern Boulevard Bronx, NY 10460-1099, USA; and
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Amaury Lambert,

    1. Laboratoire d’Ecologie CNRS UMR 7625, Ecole Normale Supérieure, 46 rue d’Ulm, 75005 Paris, France;
    Search for more papers by this author
  • John M. Goodrich,

    1. Wildlife Conservation Society, 185th Street and Southern Boulevard Bronx, NY 10460-1099, USA; and
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Stéphane Legendre,

    1. Laboratoire d’Ecologie CNRS UMR 7625, Ecole Normale Supérieure, 46 rue d’Ulm, 75005 Paris, France;
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Jean Clobert

    1. Laboratoire d’Ecologie, CNRS UMR 7625, Bâtiment A, 7ème étage, Université Pierre & Marie Curie, Case 237, 7 Quai St Bernard, 75252 Paris Cedex 05, France
    Search for more papers by this author

*Correspondence author. E-mail: gchapron@carnivoreconservation.org

Summary

  • 1There exists a continuing dilemma in prioritizing conservation actions for large carnivores. Habitat loss, poaching, and prey depletion have often been cited as the three primary threats, but there is debate over the relative importance of each.
  • 2We assess the relative importance of poaching and prey depletion rates, and use existing information in the literature and multi-type branching process and deterministic felid population models to address four lines of evidence used to infer that tiger populations are inherently resilient to high mortality rates.
  • 3Our results suggest that tigers, more so than leopards or cougars, require large populations to persist, are quite susceptible to modest increases in mortality, and less likely to recover quickly after population declines. Demographic responses that would ensure population persistence with mortality rates that are sustainable for cougars or leopards are biologically unrealistic for tigers.
  • 4We propose alternative interpretations of evidence used to suggest that tigers are inherently resilient to high mortality rates. In contrast to other solitary felids, tigers breed later and their inter-birth interval is larger, making them less resilient to poaching. A model used to support the contention that prey depletion has greater impact on population persistence than poaching appears to be based on false premises. Camera-trapping data that suggest positive population growth despite low survival rate cannot differentiate mortality from emigration, and does not differentiate the impact of varying survival rate on different sex-age classes; for example, low survival rate of dispersers is tolerable if survival rate of adult breeding females is high.
  • 5Synthesis and applications. While high prey numbers are essential to sustain tiger populations, our results suggest prey recovery efforts will not be sufficient if mortality rates reach 15%. Extrapolating demographic responses from other, even closely related species to develop conservation strategies can be misleading. Reduction of human-caused mortality, especially of resident breeding females, appears to be the most essential short-term conservation effort that must be made. Since mortality rates are usually unknown and generally stochastic in nature, any management policy that might reduce survival rates should be firmly avoided.

Ancillary