INTERVENTION SUMMARY

The widespread and persistent illegal and unsustainable hunting of tigers and large ungulate prey by snares in Nam Et-Phou Louey National Protected Area (NEPL NPA) in Lao PDR was a significant problem, rapidly depleting the populations of globally threatened and endemic species in this critical biodiversity area. Poaching, coupled with prey depletion and habitat loss, were driving the Indochinese tiger populations to extinction. This intervention focused on the establishment of a law enforcement strategy to protect the NPA, coupled with a community-based outreach and support to deter poaching. The enforcement focused on joint patrols that consisted of rangers and locally-recruited villagers. The community outreach program, referred to as “passive enforcement”, focused on raising awareness among villagers through direct engagement, and building knowledge and support for conservation rules. The intervention was promising, as while foot patrol coverage substantially increased, the area covered grew significantly, the team removed thousands of snares, and infraction rates per patrol day declined over time, hunting by actors from outside the area continued to drive some illegal activities. The intervention also achieved greater awareness among local communities and improved community members’ attitudes toward law enforcement.

INTERVENTION DETAILS

What was the problem?

Illegal hunting of tigers and snaring of large ungulate prey in Nam Et-Phou Louey National Protected Area (NEPL NPA) in Lao PDR. Poaching, coupled with prey depletion and habitat loss, were driving the Indochinese tiger population to extinction.

What was the Intervention and How was it Implemented?

Law Enforcement Program: This intervention focused on the establishment of a law enforcement strategy to protect the NPA. First, the project created a protected buffer zone, a “Totally Protected Zone” (TPZ), which was large enough to sustain a viable tiger and prey population. The project also developed and disseminated hunting regulations specific for this area, according to which the TPZ was designated as a no-hunting area under the national protected area law, prohibiting all forms of wildlife extraction, including subsistence and commercial. Following this, the project trained and deployed foot patrol teams that were composed of government enforcement staff and village-based enforcement officers selected from communities near the TPZ. These teams conducted foot patrols across selected hotspots of illegal activity, and were equipped with SMART tools for the collection of data on patrol routes, snares removed, signs of hunting, and illegal camps. (Increase the Risks - extend guardianship, strengthen formal surveillance).

Community Outreach: This intervention focused on community outreach efforts that aimed to raise awareness and understanding of TPZ rules and protected area boundaries; foster community support and compliance by explaining the rationale for conservation efforts to community members; and encourage voluntary compliance within villages. These efforts targeted groups more likely to engage in hunting, such as adult males and youth, and the expectation was that increased awareness and support would drive down illegal hunting. (Remove Excuses - alert conscience, assist compliance).

Was the Intervention Effective, Ineffective, or Promising?

The intervention was promising, as wildlife-related infraction rates declined significantly (by ~30%) per patrol day over a six-year period. Moreover, community awareness about the TPZ rules increased dramatically, with over 90% of surveyed villagers understanding the hunting ban. There were also observed behavioral changes among villagers, such as increased reporting of violations and decline in perceived social acceptability of hunting within the TPZ. Nevertheless, the intervention’s effectiveness highly depended on external (NGO) funding and support, raising concerns about sustainability. Enforcement coverage was also incomplete, as it was not only limited in scope to the TPZ only area, but some parts of the TPZ were patrolled infrequently or not patrolled at all. Moreover, commercial poaching by actors external to the villages remained an unresolved problem. Importantly, no direct measurement of wildlife population outcomes was undertaken, leaving the actual impact of this intervention on conservation largely unknown.

How do We Know?

The intervention was promising because it demonstrated tangible reductions in illegal hunting behaviors and improved community awareness of and compliance to rules. Nevertheless, several constraints, including the lack of adequate funding from both state and external sources, staff capacity and turnover rates, and inadequate enforcement guidelines, prevented the project from achieving its fullest potential.

Were Conservation Outcomes Measured?

No. The data collected did not allow for the assessment of changes in wildlife populations.

While this specific intervention show promise, it is important to note that the Indochinese tiger population is now considered to be functionally extinct in Laos PDR.  

ASSESSMENT

The intervention's law enforcement and conservation outreach efforts were effective in reducing, although not eliminating, illegal hunting and snaring activities in the protected area.

The intervention applied two main mechanisms of change:

Increase the Risk - The project targeted hunters around the TPZ who hunted and snared both ungulates and tigers. The intervention assumed that law enforcement intervention that involved zoning, increased capacity, and increased patrol coverage inside and outside TZP would result in increase in arrest/warning/fine, which would, subsequently, deter offenders.

Remove Excuses - Increased communication about laws and penalties for hunting worked to change attitudes and behaviors toward wildlife conservation by ensuring community awareness about the rule and consequences for non-compliance.

The project assessed the flora within the region, the region's geography (such as access paths) and environment, as well as conducted an analysis of the threats to tigers and their prey, such as illegal hunting driven by international and domestic demand. The project also described how factors like government capacity, external NGO support and funding, and prior conservation engagement influenced the effectiveness of the interventions, as well as how these were addressed through adaptive management.

The case study provided details about the implementation, including the seven-year timeline, resources, training, and partnerships with government and non-government agencies. The partnerships included:

• Watershed Management and Protection Authority (WMPA), which was the main implementing agency for protecting the TPZ. The Authority also managed the design and delivery of joint enforcement patrols.

•Wildlife Conservation Society, which was the project's technical and logistical partner, who engaged in training and capacity building in patrolling.

•Village Authority and Local Community Members, who were the frontline actors in both enforcement and outreach.

•Nakai-Nam Theun National Protected Area Management Unit, which played an oversight role.

The effectiveness of the interventions was systematically monitored through patrol coverage, infraction detection, and outreach visits.

The approximate recurring cost of expanding foot patrol teams and ranger stations to cover Totally Protected Zone (TPZ) was $690,000 USD ($US 1.15 per hectare) per annum. The case study also noted that informants received cash rewards from the fines that were collected from successfully apprehending persons engaged in wildlife crime. There was no cost/benefit analysis.

SCP COLUMNS

Extend guardianship Strengthen formal surveillance
Alert conscience Assist compliance

ADDITIONAL DETAILS

Citation

Johnson et al. (2012/2016)

Year Range

2003-2010

Country

Lao PDR

Landscape

Grassland,Rainforest,Forest

Target Species

Multiple species

Problem type

Hunting, Poaching, Snaring

Source: Johnson, A., Vongkhamheng, C., Saypanya, S., Hansel, T., & Strindberg, S. (2012). Using systematic monitoring to evaluate and adapt management of a tiger reserve in northern Lao PDR. Wildlife Conservation Society. Johnson, A., Goodrich, J., Hansel, T., Rasphone, A., Saypanya, S., Vongkhamheng, C., & Strindberg, S. (2016). To protect or neglect? Design, monitoring, and evaluation of a law enforcement strategy to recover small populations of wild tigers and their prey. Biological Conservation, 202, 99-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.08.018.