Conservation of bats 685
codes for cave visitors (Hutson et al., 1988) and guano har- vesters (IUCN SSC, 2014). Nevertheless, information about the location of caves
and the species they support, population estimates, local threats and conservation activities remains insufficient in most tropical regions, particularly in Asia. Information is needed to identify areas with the highest conservation needs (Furey & Racey, 2016; Tanalgo et al., 2018). In India, human disturbance and artificial illumination in cave tour- ism sites are known to have caused the decline of the bat population in Borra cave in southern India (Srinivasulu & Srinivasulu, 2003) and Kotumsar and Dandak caves in cen- tral India (Biswas et al., 2011). Here I make recommenda- tions for conservation of bats inhabiting Gupteswar cave tourism and pilgrim site in eastern India. I gathered infor- mation on the seasonal abundance and reproductive phen- ology of bat species and on tourism activity. I also evaluated the knowledge and attitudes of local people and tourists towards bats inhabiting the caves.
Study area
Gupteswar cave tourism and pilgrimage site (Fig. 1) lies in the Koraput district of Odisha state, eastern India, adjoining Kanger Valley National Park of neighbouring Chhattisgarh state. The area is within the riparian zone of Gupteswar re- serve forest, which is tropical mixed deciduous vegetation (Champion & Seth, 1968). Such habitats are often charac- terized by a highly heterogeneous vegetation structure with multiple layers of stratification, providing a wide range of foraging niches for bats (Struebig et al., 2008). The area re- ceives a mean annual rainfall of 1,522 mm and temperature varies from aminimum of 12 °C during winter (January) to a maximum of 38 °C in summer (May). There are five multi- chambered and multi-entrance limestone caves (Fig. 1b; Gupteswar, Swargadwara, Parabhadi 1, Parabhadi 2 and Dha- baleswar), within 80–295 m of each other. Gupteswar and Swargadwara are illuminated with electric bulbs throughout the day and night. All five caves have sacred importance for the local villagers and therefore are major pilgrimand tourism sites. Tourists visit from both nearby areas and neighbouring
states.Hunting and persecution of bats in the caves are strictly prohibited by the local people because of the associated sacred beliefs.
Methods
Bat surveys The study was carried out over 12 months during September 2016–August 2017, with field support from local people and volunteers. Surveys were on 2 consecutive days in each month. Estimation of the abundance of bats in each cave
and investigation of their reproductive phenology was car- ried out on the first day, and monitoring of visits and assess- ment of people’s knowledge of and attitude towards bat conservation were carried out on the second day. In areas of the caves used for roosting, I captured bats
using a scoop net, mounted on an extendable rod when re- quired, recorded morphological measurements and charac- ters for identification, and released the bats immediately afterwards. Species were identified using Bates & Harrison (1997) and Srinivasulu et al. (2010). I examined the reproduc- tive status of all captured bats, following Racey (2009). Care was taken to avoid harming the bats, following the protocols described by Mitchell-Jones & McLeish (2004). No voucher specimens were collected. I used the direct roost countmeth- od (Thomas & Laval, 1988) for counting the total number of bats in each cave. For this, I divided each cave into sections and systematically counted the number of individual bats roosting, using a spotlight to ensure no areas were missed and there was no double counting. Counting of bats was early in the morning, prior to capturing them and when they were less active and there were no visiting tourists. As I was unable to identify and count all of the individual roosting bats there may have been unintended biases in the counts. As it is difficult to identify bat species without capture, the total counts of bats in each cave were categorized by family only.
Visitation
Visitation was monitored by counting the number of groups and individuals visiting the caves. A volunteer assigned to each cave monitored tourists during 7.00–17.00 on each survey day, with a total effort of 600 hours of monitoring throughout the caves during the study period. The number of people in each group and their time of entry into the cave was recorded. The appearance of one person in each group was memorized, so that their group’s exit time could be re- corded and thus the time spent by that group in the cave cal- culated. If a group comprising N individuals visited n caves, I considered the total number of individual entries to be N× n. Activities of the visitors inside the caves were also monitored and noted.
Knowledge and attitudes
Using a semi structured questionnaire (Supplementary Material 1) I opportunistically interviewed people visiting the cave complex, if they were willing to be interviewed, to examine their knowledge of bats and their attitudes towards their conservation. Conway et al. (2015) and Debata et al. (2016a) used a similar non-random selection of subjects for attitude surveys. The questionnaire included five state- ments (Table 1) that examined the knowledge of respon- dents on ecological importance, habitats and threats, and
Oryx, 2021, 55(5), 684–691 © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S003060531900098X
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164
