Table of Contents
Overview
Brief Summary
Biology
© Wildscreen
Source:
ARKive
Trusted
Comprehensive Description
Description
© Wildscreen
Source:
ARKive
Trusted
Distribution
Range Description
The global Eld?s deer population is currently very localised to small areas within the species' former range. R. e. eldii is now confined to a single small population at the southern end of Loktak Lake in Manipur, India (Singh 2004). R. e. thamin still occurs in several localised areas of central Myanmar, as well as there being introduced populations in Thailand (McShea et al. 2000; Aung 2004; Naris Bhumpakphan et al. 2004). R. e. siamensis occurs in one or two small localised populations in Lao PDR (Johnson et al. 2004), and as scattered small subpopulations mainly in the northern and eastern lowlands of Cambodia (Tordoff et al. 2005), and occurs in a relatively wild state in one protected area on Hainan, with additionally several other managed herds on that island (Pang et al. 2003).
© International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
Source:
IUCN
Trusted
Geographic Range
Eld's deer (Rucervus eldii) are indigenous to Southeast Asia. They were discovered in the Manipur Valley of India in 1838 by Lieutenant Percy Eld. Three recognized subspecies of R. eldii exist today. They are Rucervus eldii eldii in Manipur, Rucervus eldii thamin, previously in Burma/Myanmar and the Malay Peninsula, and Rucervus eldii siamensis, in Thailand, Annam, and Hainan island. The subspecies Rucervus eldii thamin is now restricted to Burma/Myanmar. Rucervus eldii siamensis is found throughout Hainan island . Some individuals of R. eldii live as far north as 48°N. Eld's deer have also been documented in Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam.
Biogeographic Regions: palearctic (Native ); oriental (Native )
- McCracken, K. 1996. At the Zoo: Saving the Skittish Eld's Deer. Zoogoer, 25(3). Accessed (Date Unknown) at http://www.fonz.org/zoogoer/zg1996/eld'sdee.htm.
- McShea, W., P. Leimgruber, M. Aung, S. Monfort, C. Wemmer. 1999. Range Collapse of a Tropical Cervid (*Cervus eldi*) and the Extent of Remaining Habitat in Central Myanmar. Animal Conservation, 2(3): 173-183. Accessed (Date Unknown) at http://www.csa.com/htbin/linkabst.cgi?issn=1367-9430&vol=2&firstpage=173.
© The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
Source:
Animal Diversity Web
Trusted
India to Southeast Asia
Trusted
Range
© Wildscreen
Source:
ARKive
Trusted
Physical Description
Morphology
Physical Description
Adults weigh between 70 and 130 kg. Eld's deer have selenodont teeth, a large body and foregut fermentation type of digestion.
Eld's deer, like many other cervids, have a reddish brown to gray colored coat. They are similar in size to white-tailed deer, but differ somewhat in appearance. They have uniquely shaped antlers that are replaced every year. The antlers of Eld's deer are shaped in one continuous curve from the pedicle on the head to the very tip of the antler. There is a lesser branch of the antler that is positioned directly off the pedicel that grows in the direction of the front of the head.
Range mass: 70 to 130 kg.
Other Physical Features: endothermic ; homoiothermic; bilateral symmetry
Sexual Dimorphism: male larger; ornamentation
© The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
Source:
Animal Diversity Web
Trusted
Ecology
Habitat
Habitat and Ecology
The Loktak lake population in Manipur, India, inhabits an area of floating marsh called locally ?phumdi? (Singh 1983; 2004). This population has adaptations of the feet which are thought to help the animals move easily in their marshland habitat (Pocock 1943), but Pocock (1943) speculated that elsewhere in north-east India Eld?s deer would also have occupied drier plains.
In Myanmar most Eld?s deer occur in indaing forest, which is usually dominated by the tree Dipterocarpus tuberculatus, and is structurally and ecologically fairly equivalent to the Deciduous Dipterocarp Forest of Indochina and Thailand. There are two other types of deciduous forests used by the deer in Myanmar, dry (thandahat), and mixed (teak). All three forest types receive 100?200 cm of rainfall a year (Prescott 1987; Bronson 1989; McShea et al. 1999, 2001; Myint Aung et al. 2001). Pristine habitat is now absent within the Myanmar range of Eld?s deer and all populations use habitats at various stages of secondary succession (McShea et al. 2005).
The ecology of animals in Myanmar is likely to be similar to those in Indochina and Thailand reflecting the similarities in habitat, with dry-season movement closely correlated with the locations of water sources (Prescott, 1987; McShea et al. 1999, 2001). At the Hlawga wildlife park just outside Yangon, Myanmar, many species of Myanmar?s native wildlife have been introduced. In contrast to hog deer, sambar and northern red muntjac, which have all increased to good populations, Eld?s deer has failed to establish itself within this small fenced area. This is attributed by staff, including a past veterinarian, to the area being too humid (it is said to be outside the native range of Eld?s deer) although this has not been confirmed.
The typical habitat of Eld?s deer in Hainan Island is scrubland and dry grassland together with sparse trees in hills below 200 m asl in altitude (Zeng et al. 2005).
Eld?s deer feeds on grass and some browse and also take fallen fruits and flowers, and reportedly can live without water for several days. Eld?s deer regularly visits salt licks. Stags are generally solitary except during the rut, while hinds congregate throughout most of the year (Gee 1961; Myint Aung pers. comm. 1996). Wharton (1957) recorded large herds in Cambodia in the 1950s, and Lekagul and McNeely (1988) stated that, prior to hunting reductions, herds of over 50 formed. In Keibul Lamjao National Park, R. e. eldii is thought to move from the ?phumdi? to island hillocks during periods of flooding (Green 1990). In China, the rut is during February?June, with a single fawn born from September to January. In India, calving occurs from mid-October to the end of December. Gestation period is between 237 and 240 days, and sexual maturity is reached at approximately 1.5?2.0 years (Wemmer and Grodinsky 1988).
Systems
- Terrestrial
- Freshwater
© International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
Source:
IUCN
Trusted
Habitat
The main habitat for Eld's deer is referred to as an indaing forest and is usually dominated by the tree Dipterocarpus tuberculatus. Indaing refers to sandy, flat terrain that floods seasonally. The range of Eld's deer also includes monsoonal forest. Rucervus eldii thamin is found in a variety of habitats, ranging from dry scrub and thorn forest to open deciduous forest. There are three main types of deciduous forests in southeastern Asia: dipterocarp (indaing), dry (thandahat), and mixed (teak). All three of these receive between 100 and 200 cm of rainfall a year.
The ability of Eld's deer to obtain adequate amounts of nutrients to sustain both the bone growth and body mass of males, and the gestation and lactation needs of females, depends heavily on the types and abundances of food sources in the habitat. Rucervus eldii exhibits seasonal movements that are slightly correlated with crop cycles. They tend to wander farther from crop land during the hot-dry season, mainly because they are moving closer to existing water holes.
Habitat Regions: temperate ; tropical ; terrestrial
Terrestrial Biomes: savanna or grassland ; chaparral ; forest ; scrub forest
Other Habitat Features: agricultural
- Bronson, F. 1989. Mammalian Reproductive Biology. Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press.
- Aung, M., W. McShea, S. Htung, A. Than, T. Soe. 2001. Ecology and Social Organization of a Tropical Deer (*Cervus eldi thamin*). Journal of Mammalogy, 82(3): 836-847. Accessed (Date Unknown) at http://www.bioone.org/bioone/?request=get-document&issn=0022-2372&volume=082&issue=03&page=0836.
- McShea, W., M. Aung, D. Poszig, C. Wemmer, S. Monfort. 2001. Forage, Habitat Use, and Sexual Segregation by a Tropical Deer (*Cervus eldi thamin*) in a Dipterocarp Forest. Journal of Mammalogy, 82(3): 848-857. Accessed (Date Unknown) at http://www.bioone.org/bioone/?request=get-document&issn=0022-2372&volume=082&issue=03&page=0848.
© The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
Source:
Animal Diversity Web
Trusted
Habitat
© Wildscreen
Source:
ARKive
Trusted
Trophic Strategy
Food Habits
Rucervus eldii is a species known to graze and browse opportunistically on wild fruits and cultivated crops from nearby fields. A few commonly eaten crops are rice, lentils, maize, peas and rape. Rucervus eldii thamin tends to eat the fruits of various woody species such as Emblica officinalis, Terminalia chebula, and Diospyrous burmanica. They also eat forbs and grasses in these areas.
Rucervus eldii is closely associated with areas that are seasonally burned. These deer eat the new grasses as they emerge after the burn.
Feeding may vary seasonally, not just with food availability, but with reproductive considerations. During rut males, experience a decline in body weight. This is proably due to a decrease in their food intake.
All cervids are foregut fermentators. This means that they have four-chambered stomachs, and are able to extract the majority of the nutrients offered by their poor quality food source.
Plant Foods: leaves; wood, bark, or stems; seeds, grains, and nuts; fruit
Primary Diet: herbivore (Folivore )
© The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
Source:
Animal Diversity Web
Trusted
Associations
Ecosystem Roles
Rucervus eldii plays an important role in dispersing seeds due to its dependence upon fruit as a food source. This species is probably also important in structuring plant communities as a result of its browsing behavior.
Ecosystem Impact: disperses seeds
© The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
Source:
Animal Diversity Web
Trusted
Predation
One anti-predator adaptation of R. eldii is periodically forming large groups or herds, even though these deer are usually solitary creatures. Large groups decrease the risk of predation, both by increasing the chance that a predator will kill a neighboring animals rather than a lone individual, and by the increased vigilance for predators which can be provided by all members of the group.
The most common predators of R. eldii are tigers, leopards, and dholes. But only the latter two predators still exist in abundant numbers in the present range of this deer. Jackals and occasionally feral dogs also hunt R. eldii. Poaching by humans is a serious problem to Eld's deer populations.
Known Predators:
- tigers (Panthera tigris)
- leopards (Panthera pardus)
- dholes (Cuon alpinus)
- jackals (Canis)
- domestic dogs (Canis lupus familiaris)
- humans (Homo sapiens)
© The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
Source:
Animal Diversity Web
Trusted
Known predators
Homo sapiens
Panthera pardus
Panthera tigris
Cuon alpinus
Canis lupus familiaris
This list may not be complete but is based on published studies.
© SPIRE project
Source:
SPIRE
Trusted
Life History and Behavior
Behavior
Communication and Perception
Most cervids have numerous glands on their feet, legs, and faces. These scent glands are used for intraspecific communication. Males often use chemosignaling through urine and feces to inform females that they are in reproductive condition. Not only do cervids utilize chemosignaling, they also use sight and touch. This is mostly commonly displayed before breeding when their antlers are at their largest. Rucervus eldii does not use combat as its primary mode of hierarchy, but it is sometimes necessary to fend off a competing male.
Communication Channels: visual ; tactile ; chemical
Other Communication Modes: scent marks
Perception Channels: visual ; acoustic
© The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
Source:
Animal Diversity Web
Trusted
Life Expectancy
Lifespan/Longevity
The maximum recorded longevity of a R. e. siamensis male in captivity is 14 years and 11 months. Females can live up to 19 years and 7 months in captivity.
Range lifespan
Status: captivity: 19 (high) years.
© The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
Source:
Animal Diversity Web
Trusted
Lifespan, longevity, and ageing
© Joao Pedro de Magalhaes
Source:
AnAge
Trusted
Reproduction
Reproduction
Rucervus eldii exhibits polygynous mating.
Mating System: polygynous
Rucervus eldii females can begin reproducing at 2 years of age and typically continue to reproduce until they are 10 years of age. They begin estrus in the late winter or early spring. They exhibit a long period of ovarian activity of 225 to 342 days, during which the females average 10 to 17 estrous cycles. Then after they have mated, females enter anestrus. This is just the opposite of estrus, and is a period when they are not sexually receptive. This cycle occurs in the autumn months. Some studies have shown that the presence of males triggers ovarian function in females.
The proportion of males to females at birth tends to be a 1:1. The average gestation period for Eld's deer is about 34 weeks or 8 and a half months. Females of the subspecies R. eldii siamensis have been shown to give birth annually for up to 6 consecutive years. Females are fertile for a maximum of 12 to 14 years. Most births of R. e. siamensis occur between October and November (75 percent if 171 reported births). Of all births, 94 percent occurred betweem October 1 to February 28. About 92 percent of births involve single young, while the remaining 8 percent are twins. Most twins are apparently stillborn or die within a few days of birth.
The average weight of a newborn from the subspecies R. e. thamin is between 4.7 and 4.8 kg. Newborns of R. e. eldii are slightly larger, averaging between 4.7 and 6 kg. The young are weaned at about 5 months of age.
Breeding interval: Eld's deer tend to breed once per year.
Breeding season: Breeding occurs from February to May.
Range number of offspring: 1 to 2.
Average number of offspring: 1.
Average gestation period: 7.93 months.
Range weaning age: 4 to 6 months.
Average age at sexual or reproductive maturity (female): 2 years.
Key Reproductive Features: iteroparous ; seasonal breeding ; gonochoric/gonochoristic/dioecious (sexes separate); fertilization ; viviparous
Like most cervids, R. eldii mothers hide their young immediately after birth. Females typically give birth during the cool-dry season when the flood waters have receded and vegetation has begun to grow. This provides the young with shelter and helps to conceal them.
After 4 to 5 months, the fawns are weaned. By the end of time of weaning, the climate has changed to the hot-dry season, and the deer tend to migrate. The 4 to 5 month nursing period allows fawns to have sufficient time to increase their mobility, so they are able to travel with the herd.
Fawns are primarily raised by their mothers. Males are around, usually watching over the herd, but they do not participate in most of the parental care.
Parental Investment: no parental involvement; altricial ; pre-fertilization (Protecting: Female); pre-hatching/birth (Provisioning: Female, Protecting: Female); pre-weaning/fledging (Provisioning: Female, Protecting: Male, Female); pre-independence (Protecting: Male, Female)
- Bronson, F. 1989. Mammalian Reproductive Biology. Chicago, Illinois: The University of Chicago Press.
- Aung, M., W. McShea, S. Htung, A. Than, T. Soe. 2001. Ecology and Social Organization of a Tropical Deer (*Cervus eldi thamin*). Journal of Mammalogy, 82(3): 836-847. Accessed (Date Unknown) at http://www.bioone.org/bioone/?request=get-document&issn=0022-2372&volume=082&issue=03&page=0836.
- Hosack, D., K. Miller, R. Marchinton, S. Monfort. 1997. Ovarian Activity in Captive Eld's deer (Cervus eldi thamin). Journal of Mammalogy, 78(2): 669-674.
- McCracken, K. 1996. At the Zoo: Saving the Skittish Eld's Deer. Zoogoer, 25(3). Accessed (Date Unknown) at http://www.fonz.org/zoogoer/zg1996/eld'sdee.htm.
- McShea, W., M. Aung, D. Poszig, C. Wemmer, S. Monfort. 2001. Forage, Habitat Use, and Sexual Segregation by a Tropical Deer (*Cervus eldi thamin*) in a Dipterocarp Forest. Journal of Mammalogy, 82(3): 848-857. Accessed (Date Unknown) at http://www.bioone.org/bioone/?request=get-document&issn=0022-2372&volume=082&issue=03&page=0848.
© The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
Source:
Animal Diversity Web
Trusted
Conservation
Conservation Status
IUCN Red List Assessment
Red List Category
Red List Criteria
Version
Year Assessed
Assessor/s
Reviewer/s
Contributor/s
Justification
History
- 1996Critically Endangered
- 1996Vulnerable(Baillie and Groombridge 1996)
- 1994Vulnerable(Groombridge 1994)
- 1990Vulnerable(IUCN 1990)
© International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
Source:
IUCN
Trusted
Conservation Status
All three subspecies of R. eldii have become threatened. Conservation of these deer in tropical regions is difficult because of the fragmentation of their forest home caused by farming. These deer are a targer for poaching, as they can be used for food, trophies, and "traditional" medicinal products. The increase of the human population within the range of this species puts a additional stress upon these animals. There is a lack of funding for protection.
One of the subspecies, R. e. eldii, has become so rare that survival will eventually rely on the practice of gene exchange of the wild and captive organisms by means of assisted reproduction. This type of assisted breeding is being used in Thailand and Burma/Myanmar on the other subspecies as well.
Poaching reduced the R. e. siamensis population from a reported 500 individuals in 1964, to 26 in 1976. Hainan Datian Nature Reserve was established to help R. e. siamensis recover, and the population increased to 151 individuals by 1986.
US Federal List: no special status
CITES: appendix i
IUCN Red List of Threatened Species: endangered
© The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
Source:
Animal Diversity Web
Trusted
Status: Endangered
Date Listed: 06/02/1970
Lead Region: Foreign (Region 10)
Where Listed:
Population detail:
Population location: entire
Listing status: E
For most current information and documents related to the conservation status and management of Cervus eldi , see its USFWS Species Profile
Trusted
Status
© Wildscreen
Source:
ARKive
Trusted
Trends
Population
In Cambodia Eld?s deer still occurs over a relatively wide area, although localised within this, surviving as small remnant groups in the lowland forests of the north and east. The total population could well be several thousand animals in a forest area that probably exceeds 20,000 km², but densities are extremely low (Tordoff et al. 2005; R.J. Timmins pers. comm. 2008). Survey work in appropriate habitat in the last decade has detected populations in at least 15 separate areas, with anecdotal evidence from several more areas (McShea et al. 2005; Tordoff et al. 2005; Bird et al. 2006; Timmins 2006; Bezuijen et al. in press). A few may remain in the southwest, although there is little evidence other than for one small population in the Phnom Aural area which persisted until at least the late 1990s (Henshaw et al. 2002; Tordoff et al. 2005). Declines since the late 1950s, when large herds were still readily seen (Wharton 1957), have been dramatic. Even in the last decade or so, the species has declined by 90% or more, given comparisons of aerial counts in 1994 with ground survey results from 1998 to the present (Olivier and Woodford 1994; Timmins and Ou 2001; Timmins et al. 2003; R.J Timmins pers. comm. 2008). Declines are likely to continue into the future, especially as most remnant groups and animals live either outside protected areas, or in protected areas with little active management. At least a 50% decline in the next 10?15 years seems likely. Populations in the Srepok Wilderness Area, the Siema Biodiversity Conservation Area, the Preah Vihear Protection Forest, Ang Trapeang Thmor Conservation Area and Kulen Wildlife Sanctuary are likely to remain stable and may potentially increase due to ongoing externally funded conservation area management projects (WWF unpublished data; WCS unpublished data; R. J. Timmins pers. comm. 2008).
R. e. thamin was still relatively widespread and abundant during the mid-1980s on the plains of central and northern Myanmar, where its range centred on the Irrawaddy Plain, including the Bago or Sittang Plain to the east. It was said to be present to the southeast, along the Thai border (Salter and Sayer 1986), and along the western border with Bangladesh (Lekagul and McNeely 1977), but these records are doubtful and a questionnaire in 1992 and surveys in 1997 could only find evidence for the species in the northeast (McShea et al. 2000). In 1992 a countrywide questionnaire was distributed by the then Wildlife Department of Myanmar, this resulted in reports of Eld?s deer from 28 Myanmar townships, and 2,200 Eld?s deer were estimated to remain within Myanmar, with the largest population (over 1,200 deer) in Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary (Myint Aung 1994; McShea et al. 2000). Regular transect surveys in Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary between 1983 and 1996 indicated a population decline of upwards of 40% (McShea et al. 2000), with a population estimated at about 500 deer in the latter years (Myint Aung pers. comm. 1996). A nationwide survey of Myanmar in 1997 found evidence of Eld?s deer within 23 of 24 townships surveyed, out of the 28 that were reported to contain Eld?s deer in 1992. The four unsurveyed townships were considered very unlikely to still harbour deer because of the little remaining habitat within them (McShea et al. 2000). By 2003 a repeat of the 1992 surveys concluded that deer had disappeared from four townships and had declined in at least another four, but there were signs that in some townships populations were stable or even increasing (Myint Aung 2004). Increases and decreases were in part put down to reforestation efforts and habitat loss respectively (Myint Aung 2004). Conditions in Myanmar for Eld?s deer have deteriorated in the most recent years. At Shwesettaw Wildlife Sanctuary, favourable habitat has been taken over by agriculture. Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary is now the only viable population with nominal protection, and habitat currently appears more secure, but protection efforts appear to be failing, at least partly reflecting changes in management. Since funding from the Smithsonian Institution ceased in 2003, the amount of patrolling and the Eld?s deer population have both decreased every year (W. McShea pers. comm. 2008); a causal link seems inescapable. A population detected on the outskirts of Alaungdaw Kathapa National Park was never protected by inclusion in the national park, and elsewhere in the country other populations and large blocks of suitable habitat have not been gazetted into the protected area system despite hopes that they would be (McShea et al. 2000; W. McShea pers. comm. 2008). No large populations have been found outside of Chatthin WS, and indeed all new populations detected in recent years have been based on sporadic records in planted teak forests, with numbers too low to attempt any empirical estimate of population (W. McShea pers. comm. 2008). The rate of net removal of forest is high within Eld?s deer range, even taking into consideration efforts to plant teak, giving further cause for concern (W. McShea pers. comm. 2008).
In Lao PDR there are one or two known populations. One (of probably under 100 animals) is in Savannakhet province (central Lao PDR) and has been the focus of a small-scale species-specific conservation project, with regular subjective monitoring of the population (Johnson et al. 2004; A. Johnson pers. comm. 2007). Activities lapsed in 2007, but options are being assessed for restarting support. In the late 1990s another small population, of probably the low dozens of animals, was found from Champasak Province, far south-western Lao PDR, in areas adjacent to the Dong Khanthung Provincial Protected Area, but there has been no recent re-evaluation of the site and it is quite plausible that the species has been hunted out there (Round 1998; Duckworth et al. 1999; A. Johnson pers. comm. 2007; R. J. Timmins pers. comm. 2008). It is unlikely, given the distribution of suitable habitat, the distribution of the human population, and the pervasive hunting culture in Lao PDR that any more significant populations of the species remain to be found (R.J. Timmins pers. obs.); lowland Savannakhet province was the only unprotected part of Lao PDR where in Duckworth et al. (1999: 41) recommended additional surveys of large mammals as likely to reveal new conservation priorities. One population was indeed found but since that was written, options for others have greatly declined due to extensive road-building, conversion of remaining dry forest habitat and assignment of much of the rest to plantation concessions (particularly on the western plains of the province) and continued extremely high levels of trade-driven large mammal hunting make the chances of any others remaining now very low (J.W. Duckworth in litt. 2008 from field assessment in late 2007).
Survival in Viet Nam is now very doubtful. Eld?s deer is still reported by local inhabitants (e.g. as reported in Nguyen Xuan Dang and Nguyen Thi Thuy (2004), but field surveys of such areas have failed to find the species (Do Tuoc pers. comm. 2006). Perhaps a few animals remain along the border with Cambodia (Do Tuoc pers. comm. 2006), but repeated recent surveys of one of the more promising areas, Yok Don National Park, has not produced good evidence (Le Xuan Canh et al. 1997; Eames et al. 2004). The reported distributions given by Dang Huy Huynh (1990) and Ratajszczak (1991) were either overly optimistic and based on unverified evidence, or indicate a recent swift decline in the species in Viet Nam; probably both factors are responsible.
Continued presence of ancestral wild populations in Thailand is also now very unlikely. Very occasional reports, which are largely unverifiable, continue to be made, primarily in the Thailand?Lao PDR?Cambodia triborder area, and the Huai Kha Khaeng WS (e.g. Naris Bhumpakphan et al. 2004). At best a few remnant individuals may survive or immigrate. The Thai Royal Forestry Department has a captive breeding programme for both R. e. thamin and R. e. eldii and there have been attempts at introduction of the former in two areas (where it was never a native subspecies); numbers living in a ?wild state? are in the low tens (Naris Bhumpakphan et al. 2004).
Although once distributed in the tropical zone of southwest Yunnan and further east, the South China Eld?s deer has long been extirpated (Smith et al. in press; Zeng et al. 2005). By the 1970s the only remaining Chinese populations were on Hainan and had declined to some 40 animals in Dong Fang and Bai Sha Counties, primarily due to poaching, from a reported 500 individuals in 1950s (Zeng et al. 2005). In 1976 two protected areas, the Datian Nature Reserve, and the Bangxi NR, West Hainan, were founded around the two last remaining isolated herds of deer, with 26 and 20 animals respectively (Song and Zeng 2004; Pang et al. 2003; Zeng et al. 2005). By 1981 the Bangxi NR population had been exterminated by poaching (Zeng et al. 2005). The animals in Datian NR were kept in fenced enclosures while the population grew, and at the current time the whole c. 13 km² of the reserve is enclosed (Song 1996; Pang et al. 2003; Zeng et al. 2005). Initial problems with conservation efforts at Datian included encroachment of almost half its habitat by agriculture since its establishment, deer deaths through drought and overcrowding in small enclosures, and some poaching (Pang et al. 2003; Zeng et al. 2005). By 1991 the Chinese population had rebounded to 346 animals, of which 261 were within the Datian Nature Reserve (Yuan et al. 1993). By 2003 there were about 1,000 animals in Datian NR, and beginning in 1986 captive and semi-wild populations were established at other facilities, the total population in which was approximately 260 animals in 2003 (Song and Zeng 2004; Zeng et al. 2005). A semi-wild herd was founded once again in Bangxi NR, and by 2002 the population there was reportedly 115 animals (Zeng et al. 2005). In 2003 a third ?wild? herd was founded in Mihouling Reserve (Song and Zeng 2004; Zeng et al. 2005).
In India, R. e. eldii was thought to be extinct in the early 1950s but was subsequently rediscovered. By 1975, the only remaining wild population had declined to about 14 animals in the swamps of Loktak Lake, Manipur (Ranjitsinh 1978). On this basis, a floating marsh on the southern end of Loktak Lake was gazetted in 1977 as the Keibul Lamjao National Park (Ranjitsinh 1978). The population was reported to have increased to about 137 by 1994 (Singsit 1994; Singh 2004), and by 2003 censuses indicated a total of about 180 animals (Singh 2004). There are additionally similar numbers in captive conditions in India (Salter and Sayer 1986; Decoux 1993).
Population Trend
© International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
Source:
IUCN
Trusted
Threats
Threats
Probably the most significant challenge to conserving the species in Lao PDR, Cambodia and Viet Nam is the uncertainty involved with long-term protected-area based conservation management. Protected areas, even those that at present have relatively active and effective management, face an uncertain future with the possibility of excision of conservation status for parts or all of some, the lack of long-term security in external funding adequate to maintain high standards of management, fluctuations in political support necessary to uphold high protection standards and the consequential difficulties of maintaining a motivated and well-trained staff. Currently most protected areas that could or do support Eld?s deer in Lao PDR, Cambodia and Viet Nam offer the species little if, any, protection (exceptions are listed under Conservation Measures).
Protected areas, primarily those along the triborder area of Thailand where it adjoins both Lao PDR and Cambodia, and the Huai Kha Khaeng WS, were unable to prevent the decline and likely extirpation of Eld?s deer from the wild in Thailand (see Bhumpakphan et al. 2004). This decline was likely to have been driven by much the same reasons as in Indochina. If any Eld?s deer do remain in the wild there, it seems unlikely that they will ever recover unassisted. There are few data on the introduced populations of R. e. thamin to non-native areas (see Bhumpakphan et al. 2004).
Threats to the species in Myanmar appear to be similar to those in Indochina, with perhaps more emphasis on exploitation for meat (Salter and Sayer 1986; Myint Aung pers. comm. 1997). Habitat loss in some range areas is still ongoing (Myint Aung 2004) and Koy et al. (2005) found that ?patterns of percentage tree canopy-cover were negatively correlated with human population density, suggesting further threats to Eld's deer populations as the human population continues to grow?. A support programme for the main site, Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary, had an encouraging start but following cessation of external funding the population is now in decline (see Population), while other protected areas in the country either failed to include appropriate habitat for the species (e.g. Alaungdaw Kathapa National Park) or failed to protect the habitat even within the protected area (e.g. Shwesettaw Wildlife Sanctuary). Overall, the challenges of generating functional protected areas which will sustain Eld?s deer are similar to, and under current conditions even more daunting than, those outlined for Cambodia, Lao PDR and Viet Nam (above). In general, protected areas in Myanmar are themselves highly threatened by major shortfalls in funding and political will (Rao et al. 2002).
The population on Hainan faces an uncertain future as a wild animal without hands-on management because protected area management has not been effective in preventing poaching (see Pang et al. 2003; Zeng et al. 2005). Loss of suitable habitat has been extensive and is continuing, but large enough areas probably remain for further population expansion, provided that herds in such situations could be adequately protected from poaching (see Zeng et al. 2005). Genetic analyses of the population suggest that there is low diversity resulting from a population bottleneck, and this could in the future threaten the population?s viability (Pang et al. 2003; Balakrishnan et al. 2003).
Indian populations of Eld?s deer declined due to some combination of hunting and habitat loss. Even at the Keibul Lamjao National Park, the habitats of the deer have been encroached for grazing, cultivation, and fish farming (Green 1990), but this seems to be mainly now under control (Singh 2004). This population is now most threatened by a hydro-electric project in Logtak Lake which maintains unnaturally high water levels during the dry season and has changed water flow patterns and water quality in the lake (Singh 2004). These in turn appear to be affecting the ecology of the Keibul Lamjao National Park floating marsh (Singh 2004; Sanjit et al. 2005). Floods could also seriously affect the population, which has no high ground to which it can easily escape (Singh 2004). There may also be the threat of low genetic diversity resulting from the effect of a very small founder population (Balakrishnan et al., 2004) and as a small isolated population it must also be considered at risk from disease transfer from domestic livestock, and potentially other factors.
Eld?s deer readily grazes on rice and some other agricultural products (McShea and Myint Aung 2001). This provides some potential for human?wildlife conflict, but under current conditions populations seem to be too low for this to be a serious problem (e.g. at the Chonbuly district population, Savannakhet province, Lao PDR; J.W. Duckworth in litt. 2008). Retributory killing may become more of a threat if populations are successfully rebuilt in areas close to agriculture.
© International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
Source:
IUCN
Trusted
Threats
© Wildscreen
Source:
ARKive
Trusted
Management
Conservation Actions
Most Cambodian Eld?s deer are within protected areas, although a significant (but decreasing) number occur outside (Timmins et al. 2003; McShea et al. 2005; Tordoff et al. 2005; Timmins 2006). In several protected areas mammals effectively receive no protection other than a decreased likelihood of landscape-scale conversion of habitat (R.J. Timmins pers. comm. 2008). Conservation management of the Siema Biodiversity Conservation Area, Kulen Wildlife Sanctuary, Preah Vihear Protection Forest, and, particularly, Ang Trapeang Thmor Conservation Area and Srepok Wilderness Area may be stabilising and perhaps even increasing Eld?s deer populations, through externally funded conservation management projects supported by the Wildlife Conservation Society and The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF unpublished data; WCS unpublished data; R.J. Timmins pers. comm. 2008). These five areas cover well over 3,000 km² of relatively suitable Eld?s deer habitat, and thus the most pressing conservation need is the continued support and consolidation of these protected areas. Only once this is in place would it be sensible to divert resources to protect Eld?s deer in further areas of Cambodia currently with little to no active protection.
The central Lao population in Chonbuly District, Savannakhet Province, is under nominal protection in a roughly 200 km² provincial protected area specifically designated for the species (Johnson et al. 2004). The area had an ongoing conservation management project supported by the Wildlife Conservation Society (Johnson et al. 2004) but despite a very promising start, this stalled in 2007. Options are being investigated for resumption of collaboration, because this population is highly threatened by ongoing agricultural expansion and unfettered dogs, and probably by poaching (A. Johnson pers. comm. to J.W. Duckworth 2008). The single southern Lao population found during extensive surveys in the 1990s was small and inhabited a mosaic of farmland amidst forest, adjacent to a subsequently declared provincial protected area (Round 1998). Attempts to upgrade the provincial protected area to national status have failed (A. Johnson pers. comm. 2007). The most important conservation measures for the species in Lao PDR are resumption and consolidation of the Chonbuly District Eld?s deer project, and perhaps assisting protected area management in southern Lao PDR, especially of Xe Pian National Protected Area, in order to maintain significant areas of suitable habitat, which might one day be recolonised.
In Thailand the protected area system failed to prevent the species' effective national extinction some years ago. Therefore, recent conservation efforts there have focused on the captive breeding of large numbers of R. e. thamin (see Bhumpakphan et al. 2004), which is not, however, native to most of Thailand. Attempts to introduce R. e. thamin to non-native areas have had limited success, although there is a residual herd at Phu Khieo Wildlife Sanctuary and Propogation Station (Bhumpakphan et al. 2004). There is a current plan to introduce 40 of them into Hauai Kha Khaeng WS, in 2008, with 100 more in 2009 (W.J. McShea pers. comm. 2008). R. e. siamensis was the subject of an abortive Smithsonian Institution reintroduction program initiated in 1985. By 1989, progress was limited to construction of holding facilities at Phu Khieo Wildlife Sanctuary and Propogation Station. As with other range states the most pressing conservation measures seem to be strengthening protected area management in those areas that cover the species' former range, so that reintroduction might be possible in the future, jointly with measures to align all stakeholders to ensure that introduction programmes do not create herds with a mix of R. e. siamensis and R. e. thamin ancestry.
The Hainan population is now highly managed with most of the population in Datian NR, and other animals in Bangxi NR and Mihouling Reserve, and other captive facilities (Zeng et al. 2005). The species has been the subject of various avenues of research, for instance a population viability analysis was undertaken to examine demographic and environmental (drought) challenges to the two enclosed populations at the Hainan Datian Nature Reserve (Song 1996), with other research by Yuan et al. (1993) and Song (1993) (see also Zeng et al. 2005). But, the most important conservation measure needed appears to be strengthening of the protected area system so that deer can be re-established in a wild state without danger of poaching or habitat encroachment (see Zeng et al. 2005).
India held 97 captive animals in 15 zoos in December 1992, a slight decline from over 100 in the mid-1980s (Decoux 1993); by 1994, 14 zoos held 107 animals (Sharma 1994). The population is probably inbred: all reportedly are descended from two founder pairs (Walker and Marimuthu 1991; see also Balakrishnan et al. 2003). The 40 km² Keibul Lamjao National Park was gazetted in 1977 specifically to protect R. e. eldii (Ranjitsinh 1978). Subsequently projects at the park have raised public awareness, and local support has been developed for conserving the endemic Manipur subspecies, and largely halted encroachment of the species habitat (Singh 2004). Status surveys of R. e. eldii have been carried out annually in Keibul Lamjao National Park since 1975 (Ranjitsinh 1996; Singh 2004), and research has been undertaken by Singh (1983; 2004). A Wildlife Institute of India proposal in the 1980s to establish a second free-ranging population in Assam (Khan et al. 1993) was not implemented. Conservation needs are essentially mitigating detrimental effects of the hydropower project on the park, strengthening the protected area management of the park (e.g. through even further improvement of local relations and capacity building), increasing the park?s area to meet the needs of deer through appropriate research and potentially establishing further wild populations in other areas.
In Myanmar, Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary and Shwesettaw Wildlife Sanctuary were established specifically to protect R. e. thamin (Salter and Sayer 1986), but little management has been undertaken and despite promising initial efforts, management effectiveness appears to be decreasing (Myint Aung 1990; W.J. McShea pers. comm. 2008). Deer were found on the outskirts of only one other protected area, Alaungdaw Kathapa National Park, but protection efforts were never extended to cover the appropriate area, and the majority of the remnant area occupied by the species are likely to be outside protected areas (McShea et al. 2000; W. McShea pers. comm. 2008). A number of reintroductions have taken place into enclosed sites such as Hlawga Wildlife Park, using animals from Rangoon Zoo and the wild. In 1995, an ecological study of radio-collared R. e. thamin was initiated in Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary by the Smithsonian Institution, and a community education project commenced later that year to raise local awareness of the deer and the wildlife sanctuary (Wemmer 1995). The Wildlife Division surveys the population annually using a basic line transect method. Conservation measures needed were recently assessed to include extending the protected areas network (McShea et al. 2000) but in the interim the most pressing needs seem to be to prevent further deterioration at Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary and to salvage the Shwesettaw Wildlife Sanctuary, if this is possible.
McShea et al. (2005) argued that "only Cambodia, with 11% suitable forest protected, has placed sufficient dry dipterocarp forest under protected status. Other Southeast Asia countries have not recognized dry dipterocarp forest as a significant ecotype worthy of conservation status". It is certainly true that this forest type has been seen as a low priority in the conservation planning of all range states, but consideration that a country has placed 'sufficient' of any habitat type under protected status is subjective and a variety of measures can be used. In this case, 'sufficiency' was judged on the basis of proportion of a country's total suitable habitat that has been nominally protected. An alternative would be to consider factors like the actual amount of protected habitat, and whether this is enough to represent the range of biotic variation within the country; whether such habitat is in large enough blocks to remain ecologically functional into the long term, and whether protection is largely nominal or is genuinely effective. The last dichotomy is likely to be the chief determinant of whether Eld's deer will survive. Considering that no range states yet have existing protected areas which have secured the species on a long-term footing (although there are promising developments in several countries), and considering the speed with which populations can decrease, priority is necessary at present to concentrate most conservation actions for Eld?s deer on securing existing protected areas for key populations which have real potential for success. Determining this potential will reflect situational factors as much or more than ?traditional? biological factors such as current Eld?s deer status within them. Eld?s deer could potentially persist in habitat mosaics of forest and agriculture, as they still do in some areas of Myanmar and Cambodia (McShea et al. 2000; T. D. Evans pers. comm. 2007), but cultural predisposition to hunting and competing land uses make it unlikely that poaching can be controlled, or habitat management developed, without the context of a protected area, in most range countries (India and perhaps Myanmar being the most likely exceptions).
There are large captive populations of the species, estimated in 2003 to number 180 R. e. eldii, 1,100 R. e. thamin, 23 R. e. siamensis (non-Hainan stock) and 280 R. e. siamensis (Hainan stock), but most captive groups are not managed with conservation in mind (Siriaroonrat 2004). There is some scope for using these animals in reintroduction programmes, particularly in Thailand where Eld?s deer is nationally extinct yet the country is now probably in ?the best financial and bureaucratic position? of all range states to conserve landscape-scale field populations of the species (McShea et al. 2005).
© International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources
Source:
IUCN
Trusted
Conservation
© Wildscreen
Source:
ARKive
Trusted
Relevance to Humans and Ecosystems
Benefits
Economic Importance for Humans: Negative
Rucervus eldii is known to feed heavily on the cultivated crops of the local farmers. These deer are a major destroyer of crops, and are considered by locals to be a significant agricultural problem.
Negative Impacts: crop pest
© The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
Source:
Animal Diversity Web
Trusted
Economic Importance for Humans: Positive
Eld's deer are hunted as game animals and are used as a food source. They are prized as a game animal because of their antlers and hides. There have been cases when these deer have been used for "traditional" medicinal products. Oftentimes, Els's deer are poached for this purpose. In addition to these destructive uses, Eld's deer have become a major zoo animal, especially since their populations are decreasing in the wild.
Positive Impacts: food ; body parts are source of valuable material; source of medicine or drug ; research and education
© The Regents of the University of Michigan and its licensors
Source:
Animal Diversity Web
Trusted
Wikipedia
Eld's Deer
Eld's deer (Panolia eldii)[2], also known as the thamin or brow-antlered deer, is an endangered species of deer indigenous to southeastern Asia.[1] The species was first discovered by westerners in Manipur in India in 1839. The original scientific name Cervus eldi was coined in 1844[3] in honour of Lt. Percy Eld – a British officer.[citation needed] There are three subspecies of the Eld's deer:[1]
- Panolia eldii eldi: The Manipuri brow-antlered deer is found in Manipur, India. It is called sangai in Manipuri.
- Panolia eldii thamin: The Burmese brow-antlered deer is found in Myanmar, and westernmost Thailand. Described by Lydekker in 1915.
- Panolia eldii siamensis: The Thai brow-antlered deer is found in Cambodia, China, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam. Should perhaps be treated as a separate species.[4] The population on the Chinese island of Hainan is sometimes considered another subspecies, P. e. hainanus, but this is not supported by genetic evidence.[5]
Contents |
Appearance
The following measurements have been reported for the Eld's deer:[6][7][8][9]
- Head–body length: 150–180 cm (59–71 in)
- Shoulder height is 110–125 cm (43–49 in)
- Tail length is 20–30 cm (8–12 in)
- Weighs 125–175 kg (276–386 lb)
- The antler length is 99 cm (39 in)
The deer are generally of medium size and are similar to size and shape of the Barasingha. The species have very regal and graceful Cervus physique. Its legs are thin and long, has a long body with a large head on a thin neck. The throat of the males have a thick mane of long hair. Stags are bigger and heavier than the females. Their coat, rough and coarse, changes colour with the season; in summer the colour is [reddish brown while in winter it turns into dark brown with males tending to be darker than the females. The tail is short in length and rump has no distinct patch. Despite these features, they're actually related to the Père David's deer[2]The antlers, bow or lyre shaped, don't grow upwards but tend to grow outwards and then inwards; a smaller branch grows towards the front of the head. The brow tine is especially long and noticeable. The Brow-antlered deer is so named since they have a long brow tine.They shed their antlers every year with the largest size attained during the breeding season.[6][8][9]
Conservation status
The conservation status of three subspecies of Eld's deer are described country wise:
India
The Keibul Lamjao National Park (KLNP) covering an area of 40 km2 (15.4 sq mi)of marshland called the Phumdis within the larger Loktak Lake was gazetted in 1977 specifically to protect the Cervus eldi eldi or the Sangai in Manipuri language. Over time, public awareness and local support have evolved for conserving the subspecies of the endemic endangered Elds' deer. Concerted actions have been initiated to stop encroachment of the park and adequate security arrangements have been made to stop poaching. This fact is very somberly presented in a story form in a popular children's magazine called Chandamama, which gives a first person symbolic narrative by the affected 'deer' itself. The final conclusion by the deer quoted, below, concisely puts the security provided in the park in a proper perspective appreciation.[10]
Thanks to these youngsters who live nearby", he said. I was happy and felt indebted to the youngsters for saving our lives. My friend added that these people really loved and respected the Sangai deer. They believed that killing the Sangai was an unpardonable sin. According to a Manipuri legend, the Sangai are the link between humans and nature. So, killing us would mean breaking a bond. My friend informed me that people concerned about animals like us have formed a group. They teach others to protect animals, too.
The news that people are trying their best to save the phumdis, deer like me, and the Loktak Lake, infuses new hope in me. How nice of them!' I thought.
Anyway, it is getting dark and my friend and I have to return to our herd. And those of you who are around can enjoy our dancing gait as we trot back home. It would be great if I could meet you again. We could dance together at KLNP, if you can make it here some time!
The home range of Brow-antlered deer in the park is confined to 15–20 km2 (5.8–7.7 sq mi) in south–western part of the lake where Phumdis on which the deer thrive are abundant. A study conducted of the proportion, on the basis of body weight of stag, hind and fawn, is reported to be 4:2:1. The Sangai distribution dictated by shelter and availability of food is high near Toyaching, Pabotching and Yang Kokchambi area.[11]
A census conducted by the wildlife wing of the Forest Department in 1975, 1990, 2000 and 2003 has shown that the Eld's Deer (Sangai) population was 14, 76, 162 and 180 respectively. The 2000 survey of 162 deer comprised 54 stags, 76 hinds and 32 fawns.[11][12] The reports of 2004 indicate a figure of 182 as referred in another section here. This shows that the subspecie in Manipur is on the rise.
A successful captive breeding programme is underway at the Alipore Zoological Gardens in Kolkata and many specimens of the deer have been bred here.[6][7]
Burma
For protection of the thamin species of the Eld's deer, Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary and Shwesettaw Wildlife Sanctuary (both protected sanctuaries) and Alaungdaw Kathapa National Park were chosen. Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary with an area of 104 sq mi (269.4 km2) in Myanmar's central plains, 125 sq mi (323.7 km2)northwest of the city of Mandalay has Indaing deciduous broadleaf forest dominated by Dipterocarpus tuberculatus and is the habitat for four species of deer: thamin, muntjac (Muntiacus muntjac), hog deer (Cervus porcinus), and sambhar (Cervus unicolor). Subject to indiscriminate hunting in the past (till the ownership of guns was controlled after 1960s), the thamin, highly threatened, now has a population of about 1,000. Initially, the Smithsonian National Zoo acquired a few thamin for observations and subsequently shifted a few to its Conservation and Research Center at Front Royal, Virginia for biological study.[1][13] For a cross–check of the biological studies done at the research center, the Smithsonian Institution selected the Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary, a protected park. Special studies on the Thamin deer were conducted by the conservation scientists headed by Christen Wemmer of the Smithsonian. They gathered a lot of details on the biology and survival of the species by duly correlating with the changes that occurred in the ecology of the region of the Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary. Under the research project study, the ecology of Thamin and a series of training courses in biodiversity were organised. The Thamin's life cycle studies on radio–collared 11 male and eight female deer, supported by field studies by the scientists, revealed that.[13]:
- Its life cycle was well tuned to the seasonal rhythm of its environment
- An average group size of 2.5 per 1.6 km2 (0.6 sq mi) deer (mother with young) appeared to be the basic social unit
- Males were in velvet when they were in bachelor groups,
- After new grass sprouts in the ashes of February and March fires they gathered to graze on tender shoots
- Males moved through the herds seeking receptive females
- March and April were the months of rut
- Males with their newly hardened antlers were in a state of anorexia and sexual obsession during this period
- They operated in a specific home range of about 3.5 sq mi (9.1 km2) and 2.7 sq mi (7.0 km2)
- When food was short some animals migrated into farmland for a few months before returning to the park and during day they hid in small patches of degraded forest and at night they forayed into the croplands
Smithsonian National Zoological Park, which has been closely associated with the preservation of the Cervis eldii eldii Thamin deer, has in its conclusive observations stated:[14]
Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary (CWS) in Myanmar (Burma) protects the largest population of the endangered Eld's deer left in the world. It also represents one of the largest remaining patches of dipterocarp forest–a dry forest that is one of the most threatened and least protected forest types globally. Local people rely on these forests for their livelihood. The forests provide wood, food, shelter, and medicine. Restricting people's access to these forests by declaring them protected is probably not a sustainable solution and will put greater burden on lower income households potentially increasing poverty. However, if people continue to use and abuse forests unregulated they will disappear and with them the Eld's deer and many other species.
But with external funding for such protection drying up the efforts had not yielded encouraging results and the conclusion was that conditions were not conducive even to protect the protected parks given the political and funding situation in the country.
The picture is not encouraging in Cambodia, Lao PDR and Viet Nam either. The Burmese brow-antlered deer is 'Near Threatened' and still occurs in reasonable numbers.
Thailand
The situation of protected areas for the Eld's deer is much worse in Thailand and along its triborder area with Lao PDR and Cambodia; it is feared that it may be difficult to prevent the “decline and likely extirpation of Eld's deer from the wild in Thailand”.[1]
Other countries
In Cambodia, Lao PDR and Viet Nam, Eld's deer was hunted for traditional medicinal trade (particularly of this subspecies) and to meet demand for captive animals (especially from zoos) and forest habitat was degraded (deforested) to meet agriculture and infrastructural developments. The subpopulation in Hainan considered as a subspecies by Chinese conservationists was almost extinct in the wild.[1]
Assessment
In the last over 200 years of known history, the number of this species has declined substantially. The species categorization as per IUCN is EN, which is based on estimated rates of the decline of this species assessed in three generations (supposed to be at least 15 years period) for all the species and the average value is reported to be in excess of 50%. Based on this assessment IUCN has categorized the specie EN (Endangered). In this assessment for determining the specie-level, the numbers in India were considered to be numerically small (also found to be increasing) and hence the numbers of wild populations only of Eld's deer Thamin in Myanmar and Siamensis of Cambodia, Lao and Viet Nam were considered. The decline in population has been mainly attributed to hunting. In the case of the Myanmar thamin, the decline is discernible but not striking. The categorization is considered a middle of the ground situation considering the extensively diverse conditions and conservation trends in the geographically isolated and distinct populations of this species.[1][8]
Brief particulars of the three species
- Breeding and gestation period (conception to birth)
Female Eld's deer are generally found alone or in pairs with their young. But during the mating season females and their young gather in herds of up to 50 individuals. Males also move around singly except during mating season. When rutting takes place, males compete with each other to gain control of a harem of females that they can then mate with. After a long gestation period, normally, a single calf is born. The young ones have white spots at birth which fade away as it grows; they are weaned at 7 months of age, become sexually mature from 18 months of age onwards. The gestation period for three species are defined.[1][8][9]
- For Manipur deer, it is 220 to 240 days with calving between October and end of December
- For the Burmese deer Thamin it is 220 to 240 days with calving between October and November
- For the Siamensis deer in Thailand, Laos, Cambodian Siamese deer the gestation period is from 220 to 240 days with calving between October and November
Numbers in the wild
In India, the Eld's deer species called Sangai locally, is confined to the peculiar floating bog called Phumdis in Loktak Lake and is numbered at less than a few hundred animals. The subspecies 'siamensis', which occupied the vast monsoon forests from Thailand to Hainan was extinct in Thailand, were very few numbers in Laos and Cambodia, and almost extinct in Vietnam. A few hundred deer were protected in a large enclosure in Hainan Island, China.[6][1][13] The estimated figures are:
- 180 animals (2004) of Rucervus eld eldi or Sangai in Manipur
- 2,200 (United Nations estimate) – 1992 survey for Rucervus eldi thamin of Burma and Thailand
- In low tens (2004) – for Rucervus eldi siamensis, considered as possibly extinct in Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam.
Numbers in captivity (zoos)
In 2003, the estimated number of captive animals of the three subspecies in zoos were:[1]
- 180 Panolia eldi eldi
- 1100 Panolia eldii thamin
- 23 Panolia eldii siamens.
Peculiarities
Peculiarities to each subspecies include the following.[1]
- Panolia eldi eldi which in Manipur is Wetland associated. It has adaptations of the hooves (feet) to move easily in their marshland (boggy ground) habitat of phumdis. It lives in significantly different ecology vis-à-vis other subspecies and in divergent morphology. Antlers shed every year and reach their largest size during the breeding season.
- The Panolia eldi thamin of Burma and Thailand are not associated with wetland and live in three forest types: indaing forest (dominated by the tree Dipterocarpus tuberculatus) equivalent to Deciduous Dipterocarp Forest (Dipterocarp trees which belong to the family Dipterocarpaceae are resinous trees that are found in the old world tropics) of Indochina and Thailand; deciduous forests of dry (thandahat); and mixed (teak).
- The Panolia eldii siamens of Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam are not associated with wetland. They are found in Deciduous Dipterocarp Forest.
Habits
Some observations on the habits of Eld's deer common to all three sub species are a) active most of the time, seek shelter from the midday sun and migrate for short periods seeking water in the dry season and food in the growing season, b)seek areas that are seasonally burned in search of new grasses that grow after the burn, c) their diet comprises a variety of grasses, herbaceous plants, and shoots, grasses, fruit and wetland plants and they poach into cultivated crops to graze and browse in nearby fields of rice, lentils, maize, peas and grape.[6][7][1][15][1]
Threats
They are hunters' favourite game – as prized game – because of their impressive antlers and hides that are in demand in the local markets. They are widely hunted for food; it is believed that they were hunted to feed the army during many Asian wars. Their population has declined due to intense development activities necessitating reclamation of land for grazing, cultivation and fish farming, in all countries. In Burma, deforestion of the diperocarp forests is cited as a reason for the threat faced by the thamin deer. The habitat available for their protection is very limited; only 1% of the protected forests are suitable for its protection in South Asia. Even in protected areas the animals are poached. Another striking problem is finding adequate funds and political will to protect the species. The species have a fragmented distribution and are therefore at risk from inbreeding and loss of genetic variation.[6]
Gallery
Panolia eldii eldii
From Disney's Animal Kingdom
From Disney's Animal Kingdom
Skull of brow-antlered deer, Panolia eldii. Natural History Museum Leiden.
ZOO Prague
ZOO Prague
ZOO Prague
ZOO Prague
ZOO Prague
References
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m Timmins, R.J. & Duckworth, J.W. (2008). "Rucervus eldii". IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4. International Union for Conservation of Nature. http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/4265. Retrieved 10 March 2011.
- ^ a b Pitraa, Fickela, Meijaard, Groves (2004). Evolution and phylogeny of old world deer. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 33: 880–895.
- ^ "Cervus eldii (Eld's Brow-Antlered Deer)". ZipCode.com. http://zipcodezoo.com/Animals/C/Cervus_eldii/. Retrieved 2009-04-04.
- ^ Groves (2006). The genus Cervus in eastern Eurasia. European Journal of Wildlife Research 52: 14-22.
- ^ Balakrishnan, Monfort, Gaur, Singh and Sorenson (2003). Phylogeography and conservation genetics of Eld's deer (Cervus eldi). Molecular Ecology 12: 1-10.
- ^ a b c d e f "Eld's deer (Cervus eldi". ARKieve: Images of Life on Earth. http://www.arkive.org/elds-deer/cervus-eldii/. Retrieved 2009-04-05.
- ^ a b c "Sangai Deer (Cervus eldii eldii)". National Zoological Park, Mathura Road, New Delhi, India. http://nzpnewdelhi.gov.in/sangai-deer.htm. Retrieved 2009-04-05.
- ^ a b c d "Thamin or Brow-antlered Deer Cervus eldi[dead link]". World Deer. http://www.worlddeer.org/thamin.html. Retrieved 2009-04-04.
- ^ a b c Richard Lydekker (1996). The Great and Small Game of India, Burma, and Tibet. Asian Educational Services. pp. 456. ISBN 8120611624, 9788120611627. http://books.google.co.in/books?id=_eQA6LDdpiQC&pg=PA235&lpg=PA235&dq=Burmes+thamin&source=bl&ots=Lm4Hk5__FN&sig=gE57YFP6DhGSiz_K22q78k37be0&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA238,M1. Retrieved 2009-04-05.
- ^ "Dance, Deer Sangai". Chandamama. 2008-03-20. http://www.chandamama.com/story/stories.php?mId=2&cId=5&sbCId=52&stId=548. Retrieved 2009-04-06.
- ^ a b S. Sangsit (2003). "Dancing Deer of Manipur". News Letter, Wild Life Institute of India, Volume 10, number 3. http://www.wii.gov.in/publications/newsletter/autumn2003/fromthewild.htm. Retrieved 2009-04-05.[dead link]
- ^ "'Sangai' threatened by unbridled poaching". the Hindu. 2003-03-30. http://www.hinduonnet.com/2003/03/30/stories/2003033004401000.htm. Retrieved 2009-04-05.
- ^ a b c Christen Wemmer. "The Thamin and a Place Called Chatthin". Smithsonian National Zoological Park. http://nationalzoo.si.edu/Publications/ZooGoer/2000/5/thaminandchatthin.cfm. Retrieved 2009-04-05.
- ^ "Conservation GIS Projects:People and the Forests of Chatthin Wildlife Sanctuary in Myanmar". Smithsonian National Zoological Park. http://nationalzoo.si.edu/ConservationAndScience/ConservationGIS/projects/thamin/peopleandforests.cfm. Retrieved 2009-04-05.
- ^ "Cervus eldii M'Clelland,1842". Biology. Encyclopedia of Life. http://www.eol.org/pages/308524?category_id=217. Retrieved 2009-04-04.
Source:
Wikipedia
Unreviewed
Disclaimer
EOL content is automatically assembled from many different content providers. As a result, from time to time you may find pages on EOL that are confusing.
To request an improvement, please leave a comment on the page. Thank you!
