A Study on Distribution, Habitat Use and Conservation Status of Himalayan Musk Deer (Moschus chrysogaster) in Askot Wildlife Sanctuary, India

Kailash Chandra¹, Dinesh K.Sharma², Vijay Shridhar¹ and Kusum Arunachalum^1,

¹School of Environment and Natural Resources, Doon University, Dehradun, India-248001

²Department of Zoology, HNB Garhwal Central University Badshahithaul, Tehri Garhwal, India-249199

Cite this paper:
Kailash Chandra, Dinesh K.Sharma, Vijay Shridhar and Kusum Arunachalum. A Study on Distribution, Habitat Use and Conservation Status of Himalayan Musk Deer (Moschus chrysogaster) in Askot Wildlife Sanctuary, India. Applied Ecology and Environmental Sciences. 2021; 9(2):193-202. doi: 10.12691/aees-9-2-11

Abstract

The population of Himalayan musk deer (Moschus leucogaster) synonym Moschus chrysogaster has declined in recent decades and reached an endangered status in its distribution range. The distribution of Himalayan musk deer is very restrictive to Himalayas of Northern India, Nepal, Bhutan and China hence has low population. Musk deer family is being hunted for their musk pod due to high demand in international markets specially in China and North East Asia for their cosmetic and pharmaceutical use. Due to its habitat loss and large scale poaching the species has become endangered. The species is nocturnal, crepuscular and elusive which makes it difficult to study its distribution and habitat use pattern. The present study was carried out in Dharchula range (about 100 sq. km) in Askot wildlife sanctuary (WLS), Uttarakhand, India from August 2017 to May 2019. We used trail sampling and silent drive count method to estimate the distribution, abundance, and habitat use pattern. A total 63 trail transects and 8 Silent Count Drive (SDC) walks were laid in fir mixed, temperate mixed, birch mixed and pure birch forest at different aspect, slope and elevation. We recorded 10 individuals and 39 pellet groups on 63 trail and 8 SDC walks totaling 169 km effort registering an overall encounter rate of 1.18±0.20 individuals/km. We used mixed-effect models to characterize relationships between deer presence-absence data and habitat variables. The study confirmed that musk deer uses fixed defecation sites at higher elevations (3,000-4,300 m) throughout seasons and years. This species was found to use slope ranging between 20° and 55° and were found most abundant between 30° and 45° slope. The largest fraction of musk deer presence was observed in South west aspect and lowest in Northern aspect. The birch mixed forest recorded highest proportion of total musk deer followed by fir mixed forest. The distribution of musk deer was concentrated between 3,500 to 4,000 m a.s.l. A significant difference in density estimates of Himalayan musk deer was observed across the seasons. The encounter rate was higher 1.39±0.13 during autumn and low 0.66±0.22 during winter. It was observed that the species have suffered heavy decline in population in Askot WLS due to large scale collection of a medicinal fungus (Ophiocordyceps sinensis) locally called Keeda Jadi. Recently Ophiocordyceps sinensis also declared as vulnerable species by IUCN due to over exploitation of this fungus in this region. There is an urgent need for conservation plan for musk deer by strengthening the existing local institutional mechanism such as Van Panchayat and Gram Panchayat and integrating the interest of local community in sharing of benefits of the resources generated from the forest.

Keywords:
habitat transects distribution encounter rate Communitye

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Green MJ (1986) The distribution, status, and conservation of the Himalayan musk deer Moschus chrysogaster. Biological Conservation 35(4): 347-375.
[2]	Flerov, C.C. (1930). On the classification and the geographical distribution of the genus Moschus (Mammalian, Cervidae), Ann. Mus.Zool.Acad.Sci.USSR, 31, 1-20.
[3]	Flerov, C.C. (1951). Fauna of the USSR, I, Mammals: musk deer and deer; Moscow, USSR Academy of Sciences (Translated from Russian by Israel Program for Scientific Translation, 1960).
[4]	Timmins, R. J., & Duckworth, J. W. (2015). Moschus leucogaster. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T13901A61977764. [Online]. Retrieved from http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/13901/0. Accessed 20 October 2017.
[5]	Wilson, D. E. M., & Russell, A. (2011). Handbook of the mammals of the World. Volume 2: Hoofed Mammals. Barcelona, Spain: Lynx Edicions.
[6]	Feng, W., You, Y., Yong, H., Li, G., & Gu, Q. (1981). A historical examination on the musk gland of Moschus chrysogaster. Journal of Zoology, 2, 33-35.
[7]	Jiang, Z., Meng, Z & Wang, J. 2002. Report for the Musk market survey. Endangered Species Scientific Commision of the People’s Republic of China. Beijing.
[8]	Singh, P. B., Shrestha, B. B., Thapa, A., Saud, P., & Jiang, Z. (2018). Selection of latrine sites by Himalayan musk deer (Moschus leucogaster) in Neshyang Valley, Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal. Journal of Applied Animal Research, 46, 920-926.
[9]	Harris, R.Moschus chrysogaster. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016:e. T13895A61977139.
[10]	Sathyakumar Rawat, Johnsingh (2015) Order Artiodactyla Family Moschidae Evolution, Taxonomy and Distribution.
[11]	Meng, Q., Li, H., & Meng, X. (2012a). Behavior pattern as the indicator of reproductive success of Alpine musk deer. Iranian Journal of Veterinary Research, 13, 276-281.
[12]	Yijun ZHOU, Xiuxiang MENG, Jinchao FENG, Qisen YANG, Zuojian FENG, Lin XIA and Luděk BARTOS. Review of the distribution, status and conservation of musk deer in China.Folia Zool. - 53(2): 129-140, 2004.
[13]	Green MJB (1985) Aspects of the ecology of the Himalayan musk deer (Doctoral dissertation, University of Cambridge).
[14]	Sathyakumar, S. 1994. Habitat ecology of major ungulates in Kedarnath Musk Deer Sanctuary, Western Himalaya. Ph.D. Thesis, Saurashtra University, Rajkot. 242 pp.
[15]	Vinod, T., & Sathyakumar, S. (1999). Ecology and conservation of mountain ungulates in the great Himalayan national park, western Himalaya. An ecological study of the conservation of biodiversity and biotic pressures in the Great Himalayan National Park Conservation Area—an eco-development approaches. FREEP-GHNP, 3.
[16]	Ilyas (2007). Status, conservation and aspect of ecology of musk deer 9 Moschus chrysogaster) in Kumao and Garhwal Himalayas, Uttaranchal, India. Final technical report of DST funded project, AMU, Aligarh, India.
[17]	Ilyas O. (2014). Status, habitat use and conservation of Alpine musk deer (Moschus chrysogaster) in Uttarakhand Himalayas, India. Journal of Applied Animal Research 43(1): 83-91.
[18]	Dorji, S., Vernes, K., & Rajaratnam, R. (2011). Habitat correlates of the red panda in the temperate forests of Bhutan. PLoS ONE, 6, 6-11.
[19]	Grumbine, R. E., & Pandit, M. K. (2013). Threats from India’s Himalaya dams. Science, 339, 36-37.
[20]	Thapa, A., Hu. Y, & Wei, F. The endangered red Panda (Ailurus falgens): Ecology and conservation approaches across the entire range. Biological conservation, 220,112-121, 2018.
[21]	Dhar U &Rawal R. S. Protected area network in the Indian Himalayan region: Need for recognizing values of low profile protected areas.Current Science, 175-184, 2001.
[22]	Samant S. S, Dhar U and Rawal R. S (1998). Biodiversity status of a protected area in West Himalaya: Askot Wildlife Sanctuary. The International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 5(3), 194-203.
[23]	Kandpal V &Sathyakumar S (2010) Distribution and relative abundance of mountain ungulates in Pindari Valley, Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve, Uttarakhand, India. Galemys 22(1): 277-294.
[24]	Manel, S., Williams, H. C., & Ormerod, S. J. (2001). Evaluating presence-absence models in ecology: The need to account for prevalence. Journal of Applied Ecology, 38, 921-931.
[25]	Yadav N., Down to Earth:., 16 December 2019: Himalayan ‘gold rush’: Growing livelihood reliance on lucrative and vulnerable trade., https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/wildlife- biodiversity/himalayan-gold-rush-growing-livelihood-reliance-on- lucrative-and-vulnerable-trade-68453.
[26]	Groves C. P., Wang Y. &Grubb P. 1995. The taxonomy of Moschus. Acta TheriologicaSinica 15(3) 181-197 (in Chinese with English abstract).
[27]	Bhattacharya T. & Sathyakumar S. Studies on animal-habitat interactions in the buffer zone of Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve. Report Wildlife Institute of India, 2007.
[28]	Kattel, B. (1993). Ecology of the Himalayan musk deer in Sagarmatha National Park, Nepal. Ph.D. thesis, Colorado State University, USA.
[29]	Shrestha, B. B., & Meng, X. (2014). Spring habitat preference, association and threats of Himalayan musk deer (Moschus leucogaster) in Gaurishankar Conservation Area, Nepal. International Journal of Conservation Science, 5, 535-546.
[30]	F. Jiang, J. Zhang, H. Gao, Z. Cai, X. Zhou, S. Li, T. Zhang(2019). Musk deer (Moschus spp.) face redistribution to higher elevations and latitudes under climate change in China, Science of the Total Environment (2019).
[31]	Abbas, F., Rooney, T. P., Mian, A., Bhatti, Z. I., & Haider, J. (2015). The Distribution, Population Status, and Wildlife Product Trade of Himalayan Musk Deer in Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan, Journal of Bioresource Management, 2 (3).
[32]	Aryal, A., Raubenheimer, D., Subedi, S., &Kattel, B. (2010). Spatial habitatoverlap and habitat preference of Himalayan Musk Deer (“Moschus chrysogaster”) in Sagarmatha (Mt. Everest) National Park, Nepal. Current Research Journal of Biological Sciences, 2, 217-225.
[33]	Subedi et al. (2012). Habitat ecology of Himalayan Musk Deer (Moschus chrysogaster) in Manaslu Conservation Area, Nepal. International Journal of Zoological Research, 8, 81.
[34]	Wangdi et al.(2018). The distribution, status and conservation of the Himalayan Musk Deer Moschus chrysogaster in Sakteng Wildlife Sanctuary, Global Ecology and Conservation.