Recovering small populations of threatened species is an important global conservation strategy. Monitoring the anticipated recovery, however, often relies on uncertain abundance indices rather than on rigorous demographic estimates. To counter the severe threat from poaching of wild tigers (Panthera tigris), the Government of Thailand established an intensive patrolling system in 2005 to protect and recover its largest source population in Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuary. Concurrently, we assessed the dynamics of this tiger population over the next 8 years with rigorous photographic capture-recapture methods. From 2006 to 2012, we sampled across 624-1026 km(2) with 137-200 camera traps. Cameras deployed for 21,359 trap days yielded photographic records of 90 distinct individuals. We used closed model Bayesian spatial capture-recapture methods to estimate tiger abundances annually. Abundance estimates were integrated with likelihood-based open model analyses to estimate rates of annual and overall rates of survival, recruitment, and changes in abundance. Estimates of demographic parameters fluctuated widely: annual density ranged from 1.25 to 2.01 tigers/100 km(2) , abundance from 35 to 58 tigers, survival from 79.6% to 95.5%, and annual recruitment from 0 to 25 tigers. The number of distinct individuals photographed demonstrates the value of photographic capture-recapture methods for assessments of population dynamics in rare and elusive species that are identifiable from natural markings. Possibly because of poaching pressure, overall tiger densities at Huai Kha Khaeng were 82-90% lower than in ecologically comparable sites in India. However, intensified patrolling after 2006 appeared to reduce poaching and was correlated with marginal improvement in tiger survival and recruitment. Our results suggest that population recovery of low-density tiger populations may be slower than anticipated by current global strategies aimed at doubling the number of wild tigers in a decade.

No abstract

Primate population assessments provide the basis for comparative studies and are necessary prerequisites in determining conservation status. The most widely used assessment method is line transect sampling, which generates systematic data quickly and comparatively inexpensively. In contrast, the presumably most reliable method is long-term monitoring of known groups, which is both slow and costly. To assess the reliability of various analytical methods, we compared group and population densities for white-handed gibbons (Hylobates lar carpenteri) and Phayre's leaf monkeys (Trachypithecus phayrei crepusculus) derived from transect walks with those from long-term group follows at Phu Khieo Wildlife Sanctuary, Thailand. Our assistants and we regularly walked a 4-km transect over 30 mo (480 km total), resulting in 155 gibbon sightings and 125 leaf monkey sightings. We then estimated densities via 1) DISTANCE and 2) the Kelker method based on perpendicular distances (PD) or animal-to-observer distances (AOD). We compared the 3 estimates to values based on known home ranges (95% kernels), accounting for home range overlap, combined with group size data. Analyses of line transect data consistently overestimated group densities for both species, while underestimating group size for leaf monkeys. Quality of results varied according to the group size and spread of each species. However, we found, in accordance with previous studies, Int J Primatol (