06_Thapamagar_05_21.indd UDC 599.735.38:574.2(541.35) HABITAT UTILIZATION BY ALPINE MUSK DEER, MOSCHUS CHRYSOGASTER (ARTIODACTYLA, MOSCHIDAE), IN KHAPTAD NATIONAL PARK, NEPAL T. Th apamagar1,2*, S. Bhandari1,3, H. R. Acharya4, B. Awasthi5,6, K. Th apa Magar7, D. R. Bhusal8 , D. Youlatos9 1Natural Science Society, Kirtiur-5, Kathmandu, Nepal 2Himalayan Biodiversity Network Nepal, Bharatpur-11, Chitwan, Nepal 3Morgan State University, Baltimore, MD, 21251 USA 4Department of National Park and Wildlife Conservation, Babarmahal, Kathmandu, Nepal 5CAS Key Laboratory of Tropical Forest Ecology, Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Mengla,Yunnan 666303 China 6Department of Zoology, Siddhanath Science Campus, Tribhuvan University, Mahendranagar,Nepal 7Biodiversity Research and Conservation Society, Kathmandu, Nepal 8Central Department of Zoology, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur, Kathmandu, Nepal 9Aristotle University of Th essaloniki, School of Biology, Department of Zoology, Th essaloniki, Greece *Corresponding author: E-mail: tilakmagarj@gmail.com T. Th apamagar (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7554-844X) S. Bhandari (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2933-4883) H. R. Acharya (https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1257-9307) B. Awasthi (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8288-2603) K. Th apa Magar (https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7969-4302) D. R. Bhusal (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5448-1530) D. Youlatos (https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8276-727X) Habitat Utilization by Alpine Musk Deer, Moschus chrysogaster (Artiodactyla, Moschidae), in Khaptad National Park, Nepal. Th apamagar, T., Bhandari, S., Acharya, H. R., Awasthi, B., K., Th apa Magar, K., Bhusal, D. R., Youlatos, D. — Th e Alpine musk deer is one of the least studied species that is distributed throughout an alpine ecosystem. Th e population of musk deer is declining because of anthro- pogenic pressure. Our study was conducted to understand the relationship between musk deer and their environments in the Khaptad National Park in western Nepal. We used a line transect survey to observe the pellets of the musk deer in the study site. Our study found that the pellets of the musk deer were found higher in the forested environment followed by open grassland, trails, and edge. Musk deer preferred an altitudinal range between 2,400 m and 3,200 m. Our study did not fi nd any signs of musk deer below 2,400 m and above 3,200 m. We also found that the pellets of musk deer were mostly associated with close distance to a water body; however, they were at a far distance from villages. Th e presence of livestock and human pressure could have been the reasons for musk deer to avoid edge areas. Anthropogenic pressure should be reduced in the musk deer habitats for long-term musk deer conservation in Nepal. K e y w o r d s : musk deer, Khaptad National Park, alpine ecosystem, distribution. Zoodiversity, 55(5): , 2021 DOI 10.15407/zoo2021.05.405 406 T. Th apamagar, S. Bhandari, H. R. Acharya, B. Awasthi, K. Th apa Magar, D. R. Bhusal, D. Youlatos Introduction Th e Alpine musk deer (Moschus chrysogaster) is one of the native species in the Himalayan regions of Nepal, Bhutan, China, and India (Kattel, 1992; Wemmer, 1998; Timmins and Duckworth, 2015; Singh et al., 2018). Th ey are distributed irregularly throughout the alpine ecosystem at an altitudinal range between 2,000 and 5,000 m. s. l. (Kattel, 1992; Khan et al., 2006; Subedi et al., 2012). Th e Alpine musk deer are solitary (Green, 1986) and inhabit moderate and steep slopes (Kattel and Alldredge, 1991; Zhixiao and Helin, 2002) with moderate canopy cover (Anwar and Minhas, 2008; Ilyas, 2015; Syed and Ilyas, 2016). Th ey prefer forests of oak, fi r, rhododendron, blue pine, juniper, as well as grasslands (Green, 1986; Ilyas, 2015; Syed and Ilyas, 2016). However, they select defecation sites in the fi r forest and appear to avoid the blue pine and open grassland (Singh et al., 2018; Ilyas, 2015; Zhixiao and Helin, 2002). Alpine musk deer population has been declining because of anthropogenic pressure (Yang et al., 2003;Th apamagar et al., 2019) and climate change (Zhixiao and Helin, 2002; Qureshi et al., 2013; Singh et al., 2018). It is currently classifi ed as “Endangered˝ by the IUCN red list and is also designated as a protected species by the Government of Nepal under NPWC Act 1972. Th e Alpine musk deer population is under great pressure due to the over-exploitation of the musk pod (Zhixiao and Helin, 2002; Yang et al., 2003), triggered by high demands in the international black market of traditional medicine and perfume industries in China, India, and other countries (Green, 1986; Th apamagar et al., 2019). Th e male musk deer, which bears the musk pod, are the main target of poachers, but the snares kill indiscriminately male, female, and juvenile musk deer (Zhixiao and Helin, 2002; Zhou et al., 2004; Sheng and Liu, 2007). Poaching activities generally occur throughout the year, although winter is the most vulnerable season for the species (Dendup et al., 2018; Th apamagar et al., 2019). Besides poaching, musk deer are seriously aff ected by other anthropogenic activities, such as developmental activities, expansion of agricultural land, transhumance practices, and over-grazing that lead to habitat loss, and, in few parts of Nepal, attacks from feral dogs (Th apamagar et al., 2018). Th ese data indicate that habitat encroachment, degradation, and loss severely aff ect Alpine musk deer populations. However, there have been very few studies on Alpine musk deer habitat in Nepal. Th us, more research is required to identify the habitat types that Alpine musk deer prefer. Understanding habitat use by Alpine musk deer is even more vital in the highlands of Nepal, where Alpine musk deer and livestock share grazing grounds (Green, 1986; Th apamagar et al., 2018), increasing human-wildlife confl ict. Similar information is necessary for designing and implementing either local or national action plans for the protection and long- term conservation of the species in Nepal. To fi ll this gap, the present study investigates the distribution and associated environmental factors of the Alpine musk deer in the Khaptad National Park (KNP) in western Nepal. Study site and methods S t u d y s i t e Th e present study was carried out in the Khaptad National Park (hereaft er KNP) in western Nepal (29°17´41˝ N, 81°13´ 43˝ E) (fi g. 1). It covers an area of 225 km2 at an average altitude of 3,000 m a .s. l. and is rich in fl oral and faunal diversity, that has not been systematically studied yet (Cameron, 1995). KNP consists of sub-tropical, temperate, and sub-alpine ecosystems, hosting a large diversity of plant species including Quercus, Betula, Rhododendron, Pinus, Taxus, etc. (Duwadee and Kunwar, 2001; Kunwar and Duwadee, 2003; Kunwar et al., 2015). In terms of mammalian diversity, the park is the prime habitat for wild boar (Sus scrofa), barking deer (Muntiacus vaginalis), yellow-throated marten (Martes fl avigula), golden jackal (Canis aureus), Himalayan black bear (Ursus thibetanus), dhole (Cuona alpinus), and alpine musk deer (Moschus chrysogaster) (Shrestha, 1997; Majupuria and Majupuria, 2006). D a t a c o l l e c t i o n a n d a n a l y s i s Th is study was carried out between October 2018 and February 2019.We used the line transects survey to detect the pellets of Alpine musk deer throughout the study site (Sutherland, 2006). A total of 46 transects were used. Transects varied in length from 1km to 1.5 km. Distance between transects was set at a minimum of 0.5 km. Th is study covered altitudes between 2,200 m and 3,300 m. a. s. l. (fi g. 1). Field survey was restricted to daytime hours, between 10:00 and 15:00. For the purposes of the present study, detected Alpine musk deer pellets were classifi ed into four categories: (a) very fresh: shiny black with a high amount of moisture, (b) fresh: shiny black but with less amount of moisture, (c) old: grayish-black without any shine, and (d) very old: discolored dried and cracked (Singh et al., 2018). Pellet categories were also double-checked by the experienced nature guide. Each pellet was considered as a single independent observation. For every detected pellet, we recorded the coordinates and several habitat parameters: (a) habitat type, classifi ed as forest, open grassland, trail/hill, and edge. Moreover, we recorded the distance from the water body and human settlement, classifi ed as very close (0–2 km), close (2.1–4 km), and far (> 4 km). We used ANOVAs to determine statistically signifi cant diff erences between the use of habitat parameters. Additionally, we laid a total of 46Use plots (U) and 35 Availability plots (A) throughout the study area (Subedi et al., 2012). Th e Use plots were set at 50 m from a detected musk deer pellet, and Availability plots were set at a random direction at 150 m of the use plots (Aryal et al., 2010). If by chance, Availability plots contained musk deer pellets, they were counted as Use plots. To identify habitat preference or avoidance used the Ivlev´s 407Habitat utilization by Alpine musk deer, Moschus chrysogaster, in Khaptad National Park, Nepal electivity index (IV) [IV= (U %–A %)/( U %+A %)] (range –1 to +1), where negative values indicate avoidance, positive values indicate a preference, and values close to 0 indicate random use (Ivlev, 1961; Aryal, 2009). Results We observed a total of six individuals of Alpine musk deer in the forested areas of KNP. We detected a total of 76 pellet groups (range: 1–3; average 1.1; ± 0.41 SD), found in all the examined sites (Triveni, Sahasralinga, Seleko Lek, Dhaule dhunga, and Buddha dhunga) of the study area (fi g. 1). During the study, most pellets were old (45 %) and very old (28 %). Only a small proportion were either fresh (19 %) or very fresh (8 %). Our study showed that all pellets recorded between 2,400 and 3,300 m. We did not fi nd any pellets or any other Alpine musk deer sign above 3,200 m and below 2,400 m. More- over, Ivlev´s index indicates that Alpine musk deer preferred altitudes between 3,000 and 3,200 m (fi g. 2). Most pellets were found signifi cantly more frequently in forested habitat (40 %), com- pared to open grassland (31 %), trails/hills (18 %), and edge (10 %) (F = 12.7, d. f. = 15, p < 0.0001). Additionally, most pellets (62 %) were located close to water bodies, followed by very close (20 %) and far (18 %) (F = 34.4, d.f. = 20, p < 0.0001). Similarly, 69 % of pel- lets was found far from human settlements, followed by close (21 %) and very close (10 %) (F = 47.0, d. f. = 20; p < 0.0001). Discussion Th e present study showed that the Alpine musk deer is found in all the examined sites in KNP (Triveni, Sahasralinga, Seleko Lek, Dhauled hunga, and Buddha dhunga). As there was no previous study on the distribution of the Alpine musk deer in KNP, our study was necessary to identify the distribution of the species in the area as suggested by Aryal and Subedi (2011) in their basic outlines for KNP. Moreover, we showed that in KNP, defecation sites were signifi cantly related to forests, close distance from water bodies, and far distance from human settlements. Th ese sites are most likely related to dense humid vegetation cover and less anthropogenic distur- bance. Th ese results are support- ed by the fi ndings of Aryal et al. (2005) in Sagarmatha National Park, Karki (2008) in Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve, Joshi (2011) in Mustang District, in Nepal, and of Ilyas (2015) in nearby Uttara- khand Himalayas (India), where animals and pellets were primar- ily found in relatively dense and less human-disturbed environ- ments. Musk deer probably se- lect undisturbed areas to mainly avoid anthropogenic pressure, such as poaching and agro-pas-Fig. 1. Study area, the Khaptad National Park, Nepal. 408 T. Th apamagar, S. Bhandari, H. R. Acharya, B. Awasthi, K. Th apa Magar, D. R. Bhusal, D. Youlatos toral activities. Similarly, in KNP, musk deer mainly used forested areas, as also supported by Aryal (2005), Aryal et al. (2010); Subedi et al. (2012), and Khadka and James (2016). Th is study also found that the Alpine musk deer prefer altitudes between 3,000–3,200 m followed by 2,800–3,000 m, whereas they avoid altitudes below 2,400 m and above 3,200 m. However, Subedi et al. (2012) found that 3,601–3,800 m was the most preferred elevation in Manaslu Conservation Area, and Singh et al. (2018) had observed that defecation sites were located between 3,200–4,200 m in the Annapurna Conservation Area. Th ese contrasting results may be due to topographic diff erentiation between the diff erent study areas. KNP has a maximum elevation of 3,300 m with the musk deer using habitats between 1,800–3,200 m. Alpine musk deer absence below 2,400 m may be related to the presence of increased anthropogenic activities (Aryal et al., 2010; Subedi et al., 2012; Khadka and James, 2016; Th apamagar et al., 2019). Moreover, this absence may be further related to the presence of large predators. Although we did not detect any predator signs during our fi eld study, carcasses of deer have been frequently reported in the range of large predators (Duwadee and Kunwar, 2001; Bhandari et al., 2017; Bhandari et al., 2020). On the other hand, the absence of the species above 3,400 m may be related to reducing the availability of closed forested habitats and of plant food sources due to harsh and extreme conditions. Conclusions Th is study showed that in KNP, the Alpine musk deer is found in habitats, at altitudes between 2,400–3,200 m, which are forested, close of water bodies, and far from human settlements. Th ese fi ndings most likely indicate that, in lower altitudes, increased anthropogenic activities, such as poaching, agriculture, or livestock, limit the presence of Alpine musk deer in KNP. In middle elevations, Alpine musk deer avoids human settlements and use the safety of dense forests close to water bodies, where more food is available. Lastly, in high elevations, the lack of available forested habitats and available food sources in higher altitudes limit the presence of Alpine musk deer. All these factors may be challenging for the sustainable conservation of the Alpine musk deer in the KNP. As KNP represents one of the potential habitats for the Alpine musk deer population in Nepal, it requires more eff orts on conservation management. Th is needs to take into account not only the well-being of the species but also consider the local communities and their active involvement and support. Fig. 2. Ivlev´s habitat electivity index of the musk deer in the Khaptad National Park, Nepal. 409Habitat utilization by Alpine musk deer, Moschus chrysogaster, in Khaptad National Park, Nepal Th is research was funded by the Ruff ord Foundation, UK. We thank the Department of National Park and Wildlife Conservation, Ministry of Forest and Environment for the permission letter. We, also thank the local guide Ramesh Khadka and the staff of Khaptad National Park, who provided invaluable support during the data collection. References Anwar, M., Minhas, R. A. 2008. Distribution and Population Status of Himalayan Musk Deer (Moschus chryso- gaster) in the Machiara National Park, AJ and K. Pakistan Journal of Zoology, 40 (3). Aryal, A., 2005. Status and distribution of Himalayan Musk deer ‘Moschus chrysogaster´in Annapurna Conser- vation Area of Manang District, Nepal. A report submitted to ITNC, UK. Aryal, A. 2009. Habitat ecology of Himalayan serow (Capricornis sumatraensis ssp. thar) in Annapurna Con- servation Area of Nepal. Tiger paper, 34 (4), 12–20. Aryal, A., Raubenheimer, D., Subedi, S., Kattel, B. 2010. Spatial habitat overlap and habitat preference of Hi- malayan Musk Deer (Moschus chrysogaster) in Sagarmatha (Mt. Everest) National Park, Nepal. Current Research Journal of Biological Sciences, 2, 217–225. Aryal, A., Subedi, A. 2011. Th e conservation and potential habitat of the Himalayan Musk Deer, Moschus cryso- gaster, in the protected areas of Nepal. Int. J. Conserv. Sci., 2, 127–141 Bhandari, S., Morley, C., Aryal, A., Shrestha, U. B. 2020. Th e diet of the striped hyena in Nepal´s lowland re- gions. Ecology and Evolution, 10 (15), 7953–7962. Bhandari. S., Chalise, M. K., Pokhrel, C. P. 2017. Food habits of the tiger (Panthera tigristigris) in Chitwan Na- tional Park, Nepal. European Journal of Ecology 3 (1), 80–84. Cameron, M. 1995. Biodiversity Conservation and Economic Development in Nepal´s Khaptad National Park Region: Untouchables as Entrepreneurs and Conservation Stewards. Himalaya, the Journal of the Associa- tion for Nepal and Himalayan Studies, 15 (2), 16. Dendup, P., Namgay, Lham, C. 2018. Winter distribution and poaching of Himalayan musk deer Moschus chrysogaster and Moschus leucogaster in Jigme Dorji National Park, Bhutan. International Journal of Con- servation Science, 9, 193–198. Duwadee, N. P. S., Kunwar, R. M. 2001. Botanical survey of Khaptad National Park and buff er zone area, far western Nepal. Botanica Orientalis, 165–170. Green, M. J. 1986. Th e distribution, status and conservation of the Himalayan musk deer Moschus chrysogaster. Biological Conservation, 35, 347–375. Ilyas, O. 2015. Status, habitat use and conservation of Alpine musk deer (Moschus chrysogaster) in Uttarakh and Himalayas, India. Journal of Applied Animal Research, 43, 83–91. Ivelv, V. S. 1961. Experimental Ecology of the feeding of Fishes. Yales University Press, New Haven. Joshi, P. 2011. Himalayan Musk Deer in Mustang, Nepal: A study on species confi rmation and potential distribu- tion. M.Sc. Th esis. Central Department of Botany, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, Nepal. Karki, M. B. 2008. Distribution and Population Status of Himalayan Himalayan Musk Deer (Moschus chrysogas- ter, Hodgson 1839) in Dhorpatan Hunting Reserve, Nepal. M.Sc. Th esis. Central Department of Zoology, Tribhuwan University, Kirtipur, Kathmandu, Nepal. Kattel, B. 1992. Ecology of the Himalayan musk deer in Sagarmatha National Park, Nepal. Ph.D. thesis, Colo- rado State University, USA. Kattel, B., Alldredge, A. 1991. Capturing and handling of the Himalayan musk deer. Wildlife Soc. B., 19, 397– 399. Khadka, K. K., James, D. A. 2016. Habitat selection by endangered Himalayan musk deer (Moschus chrysogas- ter) and impacts of livestock grazing in Nepal Himalaya: Implications for conservation. Journal for Nature Conservation, 31, 38–42. Khan, M., Baba, M. A., Choudhury, A. R., Mansoor, M. 2006. A Comparative Gross Anatomical Study on the Tongue of Musk Deer (Moschus moschiferus) and Goat (Capra hircus) by Massarat Khan. Zoo´s print, 21 (6), 19–20. Kunwar, R. M., Acharya, R. P., Chowdhary, C. L., Bussmann, R. W. 2015. Medicinal plant dynamics in indig- enous medicines in farwest Nepal. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 163, 210–219. Kunwar, R. M., Duwadee, N. P. S. 2003. Ethnobotanical notes on fl ora of Khaptad National Park (KNP), far- western Nepal. Himalayan Journal of Sciences, 1 (1), 25–30. Majupuria, T. K, Majupuria, R. K. 2006. Wildlife and protected areas of Nepal. Craft sman Press Ltd., Bangkok, Th ailand, 1–549. Qureshi, B. D., Anwar, M., Hussain, I., Beg, M. A. 2013. Habitat utilization of Himalayan musk deer (Moschus chrysogaster) in the Musk Deer National Park Guraiz, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan. Th e Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences, 23, 1366–1369. Sheng, H. L., Liu, Z. X. 2007. Th e musk deer in China. Th e Shanghai Scientifi c & Technical Publishers, Shanghai. Shrestha, T. K. 1997. Mammals of Nepal, with reference to those of India, Bangladesh, Bhutan and Pakistan. Steven Simpson Natural History Books, Hingham, United Kingdom, 1–371. 410 T. Th apamagar, S. Bhandari, H. R. Acharya, B. Awasthi, K. Th apa Magar, D. R. Bhusal, D. Youlatos Singh, P. B., Shrestha, B. B., Th apa, 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. Subedi, A., Aryal, A., Koirala, R. K., Timilsina, Y. P., Meng, X., Mckenzie, F. 2012. Habitat ecology of Himalayan musk deer (Moschus chrysogaster) in Manaslu Conservation Area of western Nepal. International Journal of Zoological Research, 8 (2), 81–89. Sutherland, W. J. 2006. Ecological census techniques a handbook. 2nd edition. Cambridge University Press, UK. Syed, Z., Ilyas, O. 2016. Habitat preference and feeding ecology of alpine musk deer (Moschus chrysogaster) in Kedarnath Wildlife Sanctuary, Uttarakhand, India. Animal Production Science, 56, 978–987. Th apamagar, T., Bhandari, S., Ghimire, K. C., Bhusal, D. R. 2019. Th reats to endangered musk deer (Moschus chrysogaster) in the Khaptad National Park, Nepal. Folia Oecologica, 46 (2), 170–173. Th apamagar, T., Magar, K. T., Pandey, M., Bhandari, S., Bhusal, D. R. 2018. Habitat preferences and conserva- tion status of Himalayan musk deer (Moschus chrysogaster) in Langtang National Park, Nepal. Journal of Ecology & Natural Resources, 2 (6), 1–7. Wemmer, C. 1998. Deer, Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. IUCN/SSC Deer specialist Group, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge. Yang, Q., Meng, X., Xia, L. and Feng, Z. 2003. Conservation status and causes of decline of musk deer (Moschus spp.) in China. Biological Conservation, 109 (3), 333–342. Zhixiao, L., Helin, S. 2002. Eff ect of habitat fragmentation and isolation on the population of alpine musk deer. Russian Journal of Ecology, 33 (2), 121–124. Zhou, Y., Meng, X., Feng, J., Yang, Q. 2004. Review of the distribution, status and conservation of musk deer in China. Folia Zoologica, 53, 129–140. Received 23 February 2021 Accepted 1 September 2021