Conflict Tiger Management Guidelines for the Sundarbans

Abstract

The Bangladesh Sundarbans is one of the most conflicted tiger habitats in the world. Human tiger conflict (HTC) is a common phenomenon where tigers persist resulting in deaths and injuries of both people and tigers, as well as livestock losses. Such incidents have led to negative attitudes towards tigers among local communities, making the implementation of tiger conservation actions challenging. With respect to the objectives and strategic actions of Bangladesh Tiger Action Plans (2009-2017 and 2018-2027), it is necessary to determine the response steps and improve
coordination among actors for better quality and speedier responses in real-time HTC situations.

This manual provides a set of guiding principles and clear direction by clarifying roles and responsibilities across all actors for conflict management situations. The guiding principles are: In a conflict situation, (i) a human’s life takes priority over a tiger’s life, complying with existing legislation; and (ii) a tiger’s life takes priority over a livestock animal’s life; (iii) the level of conflict will remain at a minimum level; (iv) conflict management aims to reduce further human suffering; and (v) tiger suffering; and (vi) successful conflict management requires the positive participation of all actors.

To provide clear direction and processes for managing conflict situation, the guidelines define conflict tigers based on certain criteria such as whether: (i) the tiger has killed two or more people inside the forest; (ii) the tiger has injured or killed one or more people inside the village as a result of an unprovoked attack; (iii) the tiger has injured or killed two or more livestock inside a village; and (iv) the tiger has entered into a village on two or more occasions. In addition, the manual provides systematic diagrams that clarify roles and responsibilities of all actors in each step of managing
conflict situations, following the guiding principles and possible scenarios based on field experience. While the set processes can be adjusted to suit unique situations, the guiding principles must be followed, with clear justification for adjusting process communicated and agreed by the involved parties.

The manual also highlights potential challenges and provides recommendations for improving the knowledge base to better manage HTC and other emerging situations like climate change and disasters. Overall, the manual aims to improve the quality and speed of responses to real-time HTC situations by clarifying response steps for all actors, promote tiger conservation, and reduce negative attitudes towards it.

Full text

Conflict Tiger Management Guidelines for
the Sundarbans
Bangladesh Forest Department
Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change
Dhaka, Bangladesh
December 2023

Published by
Bangladesh Forest Department
and WildTeam
Funded by
KfW through IUCN’s Integrated
Tiger Habitat Conservaon Programme
Photo credit
WildTeam
Front cover
WildTeam
All photos are copyrighted for reproducon
which can be done only with the prior
permission of WildTeam.
Suggested citaon
Conflict Tiger Management Guidelines for
the Sundarbans. 2023. Bangladesh Forest
Department and WildTeam. 32 pages.
ISBN : 978-984-35-9025-1
Conflict Tiger Management Guidelines for
the Sundarbans
ii

iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This document has been enriched by reviews and inputs from the colleagues from the Bangladesh
Forest Department, Sundarbans Reserve Forest community stakeholders, and experts from the
naonal and internaonal community.
Thanks are due to Md. Amir Hosain Chowdhury, Chief Conservator of Forests, Bangladesh Forest
Department, for his guidance in the preparaon of the final dra of this document. Md. Jahidul Kabir
(FD), Mihir Kumar Doe (FD), Abu Naser Mohsin Hossain (FD), Md. Belayet Hossain (FD), Nirmal
Kumar Paul (FD), M.A. Hassan (FD), Rana Deb (FD), Md. Abu Zafar and Chrisne Tansey from
WildTeam made valuable comments to enrich the document.
The final version was prepared by Chrisna J Greenwood, Md. Mahbubul Alam, Adam CD Barlow,
Md. Anwarul Islam, Md. Abdul Aziz, and Md. Anwar Hossain.
Bangladesh Forest Department deserve special thanks for their support. KfW funded this publicaon
through IUCN’s Integrated Tiger Habitat Conservaon Programme (ITHCP). We gratefully
acknowledge their support.

iv
CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..iii
ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE TEXT ........................................................................................................ v
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................ 1
1. INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 2
2. GUIDING PRINCIPLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 6
3. CONFLICT TIGER DEFINITION ................................ ................................ ............................ 8
4. PROCESS FOR MANAGING TIGERS IN CONFLICT SITUATIONS............................................. 9
5. KEY CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................ ................................ .. 19
6. APPENDICES ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 20
Appendix 1. Guidelines to support managers in determining if incidents belong to the same ger or
more than one ger ................................................................................................................. 20
Appendix 2. Guidelines for definion of a conflict zone....................................................................... 21
Appendix 3. Hazing techniques ............................................................................................................. 22
Appendix 4. Guidelines for ger isolaon and rehabilitaon ............................................................... 22
Appendix 5. Consideraons regarding fing gers with radio or satellite collars .............................. 24
Appendix 6. Consideraons regarding permanent removal of gers .................................................. 25
Appendix 7. Human ger conflict data ................................................................................................. 25
7. LITERATURE CITED ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 26

v
ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE TEXT
BFD
Bangladesh Forest Department
CMC
Co-Management Commiee
CPG
Community Patrol Group
ETRT
Emergency Tiger Response Team
FTRT
Forest Tiger Response Team
HTC
Human Tiger Conflict
NGO
Non-governmental Organisaon
SRF
Sundarbans Reserve Forest
VTRT
Village Tiger Response Team

1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Bangladesh Sundarbans is one of the most conflicted ger habitats in the world. Human ger
conflict (HTC) is a common phenomenon where gers persist resulng in deaths and injuries of both
people and gers, as well as livestock losses. Such incidents have led to negave atudes towards
gers among local communies, making the implementaon of ger conservaon acons
challenging. With respect to the objecves and strategic acons of Bangladesh Tiger Acon Plans
(2009-2017 and 2018-2027), it is necessary to determine the response steps and improve
coordinaon among actors for beer quality and speedier responses in real-me HTC situaons.
This manual provides a set of guiding principles and clear direcon by clarifying roles and
responsibilies across all actors for conflict management situaons. The guiding principles are: In a
conflict situaon, (i) a human’s life takes priority over a ger’s life, complying with exisng
legislaon; and (ii) a ger’s life takes priority over a livestock animal’s life; (iii) the level of conflict
will remain at a minimum level; (iv) conflict management aims to reduce further human suffering;
and (v) ger suffering; and (vi) successful conflict management requires the posive parcipaon of
all actors.
To provide clear direcon and processes for managing conflict situaon, the guidelines define
conflict gers based on certain criteria such as whether: (i) the ger has killed two or more people
inside the forest; (ii) the ger has injured or killed one or more people inside the village as a result of
an unprovoked aack; (iii) the ger has injured or killed two or more livestock inside a village; and
(iv) the ger has entered into a village on two or more occasions. In addion, the manual provides
systemac diagrams that clarify roles and responsibilies of all actors in each step of managing
conflict situaons, following the guiding principles and possible scenarios based on field experience.
While the set processes can be adjusted to suit unique situaons, the guiding principles must be
followed, with clear jusficaon for adjusng process communicated and agreed by the involved
pares.
The manual also highlights potenal challenges and provides recommendaons for improving the
knowledge base to beer manage HTC and other emerging situaons like climate change and
disasters. Overall, the manual aims to improve the quality and speed of responses to real-me HTC
situaons by clarifying response steps for all actors, promote ger conservaon, and reduce
negave atudes towards it.

2
Box 1. Actors for managing HTC
situaons:
Bangladesh Forest Department
(BFD)
Community Patrol Group (CPG)
Co-Management Committee (CMC)
Village Tiger Response Team (VTRT)
Forest Tiger Response Team (FTRT)
Emergency Tiger Response Team
(ETRT)
Local community members
NGO staff
Local government
1. INTRODUCTION
The coexistence of gers and humans has a long-standing history (Bhaarai 2009), with human ger
conflict (HTC) being a common phenomenon in areas where gers persist (Schwerdtner and Bernd
2007, Bhaarai 2009). The Sundarbans (Fig. 1), a naturally occurring connuous mangrove forest in
the Ganges-Brahmaputra delta, is a prime example of this, with a parcularly high level of HTC in the
region (Barlow 2009). Spanning over 10,263 km2, the Sundarbans is the largest connuous mangrove
forest in the world distributed across Bangladesh and India. The Sundarbans Reserve Forest (SRF) of
Bangladesh covers approximately 6,017 km2, constuting nearly half of Bangladesh’s remaining
natural forest. While there is no permanent human habitaon inside the SRF, about 2 million people
live alongside the SRF in 8 sub-districts (upazilas), with most villagers from the 76 border villages
directly relying on the SRF's natural resources, such as fish, crabs, and honey, for their livelihood
(Dhar 2011, Inskip et al. 2013).
Due to the dependency of local communies on SRF resources, and the close proximity of villages to
the SRF, HTC is the major issue for ger conservaon in this landscape (Fig. 1). Every year in the
region approximately 50 people, 60-80 livestock, and 1-3 gers are either injured or killed as a
consequence of HTC (Rahman et al. 2009, Barlow et al. 2013). These incidences have reduced to a
very low level in recent mes (Fig. 2). However, any loss of human life and livestock can have a
devastang impact, both emoonally and economically, on the affected family. The impact of HTC
leads to negave atudes towards gers within local communies and thus makes the
implementaon of ger conservaon acons challenging (Löe and Röskaft 2004, Goodrich 2010,
Goodrich et al. 2011).
The Bangladesh Forest Department (BFD) formulated the Bangladesh Tiger Acon Plan (BTAP), to
outline conservaon goals, objecves, and acvies for 2009-2017 (Ahmad et al. 2009), this has
since been updated for the subsequent 10 years
(Khan et al. 2018). One of the BTAP objecves is to
minimize human ger conflict, with an associated
strategic acon to develop HTC migaon acvies
and supporng protocols to reduce ger, human, and
livestock killings (Ahmad et al. 2009). With respect to
the BTAP's objecves and strategic acons, it is
necessary to dramacally improve the quality and
speed of response to deal with real-me ger
incidents. Increasing the efficiency and speed of
responses in real-me HTC situaons can be achieved
by determining the response steps (Figs. 3 and 4) and
improving coordinaon amongst actors (Box 1) by
clarifying, agreeing, and communicang roles and
responsibilies.

3
The objecve of this document is, therefore, to provide:
 A set of guiding principles to give overall direcon across all actors in all conflict
management situaons.
 A set of processes for managing each type of conflict incident.
 Clear direcon regarding roles and responsibilies for conflict ger situaons.
This document does not include technical details on first aid for human injuries caused by gers,
ger capture, immobilizaon, collaring, or euthanasia. Neither does this document cover the other
aspects of HTC management such as compensaon support, medical assistance, livelihood support,
or preventave measures such as awareness acvies, work safety knowledge, and livestock
management.
The guidelines outlined in this document are based on exisng knowledge and can be updated
periodically to reflect changes in the knowledge base and management approaches.

4
Figure 1. Levels of HTC around the Sundarbans (data recorded 2008-2022 by WildTeam).

6
2. GUIDING PRINCIPLES
These principles underpin all conflict management acvies. They also provide guidance in new
scenarios that might arise, and which are not included in the decision trees in this document. The
guiding principles are outlined in Box 2.
Box 2. Guiding principles for conflict management acvies.
A human’s life takes priority over a ger’s life in a conflict situaon: However, acons
must comply with exisng legislaon such as the Wildlife Act.
A ger’s life takes priority over a livestock animal’s life in a conflict situaon.
Conflict management aims to reduce further human suffering: For example, acve
management of the ger must be started at the first opportunity to prevent further
aacks on humans and to prevent the death of the ger where possible. Delay in
response costs human lives and ger lives.
Conflict management aims to reduce ger suffering: Through the applicaon of animal
welfare pracces and by starng acve management of the ger at the first opportunity
to prevent the ger from being killed or from being killed inhumanely.
Successful conflict management requires the posive parcipaon of all actors: This is
necessary to ensure effecve, collaborave conflict management between actors.

7
The first ever rescue of a female ger from a village called Kadamtala of Satkhira range of
Sundarbans on February 19, 2011. The gress strayed into the village which was then successfully
rescued and released back to the forest by the Forest Department and Village Tiger Response Team
(VTRT).

8
3. CONFLICT TIGER DEFINITION
A ger is defined as a conflict ger if it meets any of the below criteria:
 The tiger has killed two or more people inside the forest: Results of a study in the SRF
suggest that approximately 50% of the gers that kill people, kill only one person (Barlow
2009). It is possible that the gers that only aack once are doing so as a result of a ger
protecng itself, its cubs, or its food. Alternavely, a ger may kill a person opportuniscally,
rather than hunng humans (McDougal 1987). Whatever the reason, these gers are not
classed as “conflict gers” as they may not reoffend, so there is no benefit from taking
further acon to manage them. If the ger kills more than two humans inside the forest,
however, then this may be an indicaon that the ger is acvely hunng humans and is
likely to aack humans again, and therefore should be classified as a conflict ger (Barlow et
al. 2013).
 The ger has injured or killed one or more people inside the village as a result of an
unprovoked aack: Tigers that have injured or killed people inside the village in response to
a crowd of people taunng the ger or trying to harm it are not counted as a conflict ger,
because in this case the ger is acng in self-defense. However, a ger is classified as a
conflict ger if it has entered a village and injured or killed a person as a result of an
unprovoked aack, because (considering the circumstances) it is likely that this ger will
aack again.
 The ger has injured or killed two or more livestock animals inside a village: The threshold
of killing two or more livestock animals is set to allow for the chance that the ger that
injures or kills one livestock animal may not connue to kill another. Once a ger has killed
two or more livestock animals, however, then that is an indicaon that the ger is likely to
aack again and can therefore be classed as a conflict ger. The definion includes only
livestock that are killed inside the village. If a ger kills livestock that is inside the forest, then
(a) the livestock is in the ger’s territory so the ger cannot be blamed for killing the
livestock and (b) the livestock should not be in the forest in the first place because livestock
grazing is illegal.
The ger has entered into a village on two or more occasions: If the ger has entered a
village on two or more occasions it is classed as a conflict ger because it is likely to connue
to enter the village and possibly aack a human or livestock.

The following process diagrams outline the steps to follow for each type of ger conflict incident that occurs either inside a village (Fig. 1) or inside the forest (Fig. 2). Indicave "me elapsed" has
been included for some of the process steps.
Figure 3. Process diagram for managing conflict ger situaons that occur inside a village.
START >>>
START >>>
Inside Forest Incidents
6. An i njured tiger is in a village.
7. A tiger is in a villag e and too fa r from the
forest t o be scared ba ck.
8. A tig er in a village and is surrounded by
un manageabl e crowd.
9. A tig er killing livesto ck on a reg ular basis
from a p articular villa ge.
10. A tiger has killed/i njured one or more
people in a unpro voked situati on.
11. An i njured tiger has st rayed in a village .
12. A tig er already h as identified as a
conflict t iger.
END
A. Sca re the tiger
back to the forest
B. Monitor the
area to identify
further in cidents
END
START >>> 1. A tig er is in a village and is n ear enoug h
to the forest to be s cared back.
2. A tiger has been sighted inside a village
but is n ot there now.
3. A tiger has killed o ne or more livestock in
a singl e attack and no concurre nt incident
has happene d.
4. A tiger has killed/i njured a pers on in a
provoked situation.
5. A tig er already h as identified as a non
conflict t iger.
No
Yes
END
C2. Cap ture and
immobili se tiger
C9. Permanently
remove the tiger
from fore st
END
C8. Reh abilitate
in isolation facility
C7.
Rehabilitation
and release are
possible?
No
Yes
C4. Collar and
release th e tiger
C5. Und ertake
24h moni toring of
the tiger i ncluding
aversive
conditioning
C6. E stablish
Conflic t Zone
Level 2
Time elap sed: As per an aesthesia recovery time
Time elap sed:
As long as it
takes to
capture
the tiger an d
Time elap sed:
These steps
happe n
simultaneous ly
C1. Establish
Conflict Zone
Level 1
C. Activ e tiger manage ment to reduce fu rther human and tige r suffering
Inside village incidents
C3.
Does the tiger
pass health
check?
9
4. PROCESS FOR MANAGING TIGERS IN CONFLICT SITUATIONS

10
C3.
Does the tiger
pass health
check?
C9. Perman ently
remove the tiger
from fore st

11
It is important to note, however, that there are many factors influencing each conflict ger situaon,
so the process to be followed may somemes need to be tailored to a specific situaon as long as
the guiding principles are sll followed and there is clear jusficaon for adjusng a process. So, a
discussion would help to make people aware of this.
Addional informaon to explain each process step is as follows:
A. Scare the ger back to the forest
This opon is carried out if the ger in the village is close enough to the forest to be scared back to
the forest without causing danger to people and the ger. Best pracce is to keep the crowd well
away from the ger and to first clear the area between the ger and the forest before trying to scare
it back to the forest using hazing techniques. The roles and responsibilies for this opon are listed
in Table 1. If a ger is too far from the forest or there are people in between the ger and the forest,
then scaring the ger back to the forest becomes dangerous for humans and the ger alike.
Table 1. Roles and responsibilies for scaring the ger back to the forest
Designaon
Responsibilies
Responsible actor
Crowd managers
Physically (but peacefully) keep the crowd at a
safe distance from the ger.
VTRT, CMC, local law
enforcement agencies,
BFD
Crowd
communicator
Instruct the villagers to support the management
acon by dispersing from the crowd or keeping a
safe distance away.
Inform villagers about the situaon and
management response as they develop.
Local government
(chairman and members)
Tiger scarers
Communicate with crowd managers.
Scare the ger back to the forest.
VTRT, CMC, BFD
B. Monitor the area to idenfy further incidents
If the ger is not a conflict ger, then there is no benefit in managing the ger directly. Data from all
incidents will be recorded in a central database and monitored to watch for paerns which could
lead to the idenficaon of a conflict ger. The roles and responsibilies for this management
opon are listed in Table 2. See Appendix 1 for guidance about how to determine if two incidents
belong to the same ger or separate gers.
Table 2. Roles and responsibilies for monitoring the area to idenfy further incidents
Designaon
Responsibilies
Responsible actor
HTC data collectors
Record all HTC incidents
BFD, VTRT, CPG, Experts,
Experienced NGO
HTC data managers
Collate, analyse, and report on HTC data
BFD, Experienced NGO,
Experts

12
Box 3. Conflict zones
A conflict zone is defined as an area in
which people are at risk of ger aack
both in forests and villages. The smallest
administrave unit of the Sundarbans
(compartment) can be declared as a
conflict zone for in forest cases. For village
cases the adjacent area of the village can
be declared a conflict zone. Conflict zones
are delineated in terms of compartments,
with the number and locaon of
compartments being determined by the
distribuon of conflict incidents.
Compartments are chosen to delineate
conflict zones because compartments are
large enough to contain one or more ger
territories and are an already established
administrave unit.
C1. Establish conflict zone level 1
This acvity happens when intensive management of an area is required to prevent further loss of
humans, livestock, and the ger’s life. This acvity includes:
 Defining a “conflict zone” and seng rules to
stop people from entering this zone at any
me, day, or night (Box 3).
 Placing prominent markers to mark the
boundaries of the zone, e.g., red flags on
trees and on posts driven into the mud.
 Patrolling the “conflict zone” to
communicate and enforce the rules
prevenng access.
 Dispatching a team to spread awareness
among local people so that they know (a)
that a conflict zone level 1 has been set up,
(b) the whereabouts of the conflict zone, and
(c) the rules restricng entry to that zone.
It is recommended that the conflict zone level 1 is
maintained as such unl the ger has been captured
or zero conflict incidents have occurred in the area
for at least a month. The roles and responsibilies for
this management opon are listed in Table 3. See
Appendix 2 for guidance about how to define a conflict zone.
Table 3. Roles and responsibilies for establishing conflict zone level 1
Designaon
Responsibilies
Responsible actor
Conflict zone
designator
Define conflict zone area on map with input from
HTC monitoring team
Concerned Range Officer
(ACF) of BFD
Conflict zone
managers
Place physical markers along boundary of conflict
zone.
Patrol conflict zone and enforce conflict zone
rules.
Communicate zone area and rules to community
and local Forest Department staff.
BFD staff, FTRT, CPG
C 1.1 Monitor the ger's movements
This acon will involve camera trapping to track the ger's movements and collect ancillary
informaon on the ger's body condion. Informaon obtained from this step will help support
future actions involving capture and immobilizaon of the ger.
The roles and responsibilies for this management opon are listed in Table 4.

13
Table 4. Roles and responsibilies for monitoring the ger’s movement
Designaon
Responsibilies
Responsible actor
Tiger monitoring
team
Track the ger's movements and behaviour
BFD officers and staff,
Experienced NGO (if any),
VTRT, CPG, experts (if any)
C2. Capture and immobilize ger
For technical guidance on how to capture and immobilize a ger see the associated Wild ger
capture and immobilizaon manual (Lewis et al. 2012). The roles and responsibilies for this
management opon are listed in Table 5.
Table 5. Roles and responsibilies for ger immobilisaon and relocaon
Designaon
Responsibilies
Responsible actor
Tiger capture team
Immobilise and capture the ger
Emergency Tiger Response
Team (ETRT)
C3. Does the ger pass health check?
This step involves a thorough examinaon of the ger in order to ascertain the best course of acon
e.g., if the ger is fit enough for immediate release, requires rehabilitaon or permanent removal
from the wild. The examinaon should be carried out by experienced wildlife veterinarians and/or
trained wildlife biologists (Goodrich 2010).
If the ger meets any of the following criteria, then it should be considered unfit for release:
 Has impaired physical condion: The ger is badly injured, lost its eyes, emaciated,
dehydrated, diseased, or otherwise too
old to survive (catch prey) on its own.
 Is showing dangerous behaviour: The
ger is connuously coming back to
villages or aacking people inside the
forest despite all aempts to prevent it
from doing so.
If the ger is found to be unfit for release, then it
cannot be immediately released back into the
forest because the ger:
 Will suffer (be in considerable pain) due to
its bad physical condion
 Will suffer (through starvaon) due to an
inability to hunt
 May re-enter a village and be killed by a crowd of villagers, or aack villagers and livestock
 May be killed covertly by villagers e.g., by poisoning
 May spread any disease to other gers in the populaon (CITES 1997, IUCN 2000)
Box 4. Implicaons of a lactang gress
A lactang gress implies that she has
dependent cubs living in the forest
somewhere. Cubs are reliant on their
mother's milk from birth unl the cubs are
about 6 months of age (Sunquist and Sunquis
2002). During the lactaon period, cubs are
unable to source their own food and will die
without their mother's milk. Therefore, any
decision regarding what to do with the gress
must take into account the presence of her
cubs and their inability to survive in the forest
on their own without her.

14
If a ger is lactang (and therefore has dependent cubs living somewhere in the forest) (Box 4) and
fails a health-check, then it will sll not be released because the ger will in any case not be fit
enough to provide food for itself or its cubs. However, in this situaon (or if a lactang gress has
otherwise been killed) then an aempt should be made to capture the cubs (Box 5), but only if there
are rehabilitaon or safari/zoo facilies available that meet internaonal standards for animal
welfare.
The roles and responsibilies for this management opon are listed in Table 6.
Table 6. Roles and responsibilies for checking the health of ger
Designaon
Responsibilies
Responsible actor
Tiger health
assessor
Conduct health check to determine if the ger is
fit or not for release
Wildlife vet or
experienced wildlife
biologist from the BFD or
Experienced NGO and
experts (if any)
Tiger release
authority
Provide authorisaon to release or not release a
ger based on the assessment of the ger health
assessor
BFD
C4. Radio or satellite collar and release the ger
Collar the ger if it is not already collared. If the ger is already collared, then take the opportunity
to check the condion of the collar and make any adjustments/replace the baery if needed. See
Appendix 5 to understand the consideraons regarding fing gers with radio or satellite collars.
There are two opons for release:
 For gers which are believed to be territory holders: Release the ger within or as near as
possible to the area believed to be its territory. This is because gers are territorial and
there are gers all over the SRF. This means that there is likely to be lile or no
available/empty territories in the forest. Therefore, if a ger is released at locaon far away
from where it was captured, then it will likely meet with the territory holder of that other
area and be injured or killed through fighng or leave that area to return to its own territory.
Box 5. Locang cubs
Locang cubs is a difficult and potenally dangerous exercise. However, locang cubs can be
aempted by either:
Tracking the female ger's secondary signs (pugmarks) back into the forest to see if that
leads to the cubs.
Searching for cub tracks by boat or on foot within the area close to where the gress was
captured.
Any efforts to locate cubs should be stopped aer 5 days, because aer that me the cubs are
likely to have died. It is also very important to ensure that cubs not associated with the captured
gress are captured by mistake.

15
If at some point in the future, a ger populaon survey indicates areas that are empty of
gers or have a skewed sex rao, this will likely be due to a threat such as ger poaching,
prey poaching, or habitat destrucon. Therefore, a ger should not be released in an empty
area because it will likely meet with the same threats and therefore the same fate as the
previous occupant (IUCN 1987). This has happened with gers in other countries e.g., Russia
(Goodrich and Miquelle 2005).
 For gers which are believed to be transient animals: Release in another area of the forest
far away from human habitaon.
 For gers which are believed to be cubs or juveniles: Release these gers very close to the
capture site as they are dependent on their mother providing them with food to survive.
The roles and responsibilies for this management opon are listed in Table 7.
Table 7. Roles and responsibilies for collaring and releasing the ger
Designaon
Responsibilies
Responsible actor
Tiger collar fier
Fit collar
Wildlife vet or
experienced wildlife
biologist from BFD or
experienced NGO and
experts
Tiger collaring
authority
Provide authorisaon to collar the ger
BFD
C5. Connuous monitoring of the collared ger including aversive condioning
A team should track the ger’s movements for 24-hours per day. If the team observes that the ger
is approaching people/a village area, then the team will then use hazing techniques to scare the ger
back to the forest to ensure human and ger safety. Also, this monitoring will help enable the forest
resource users to avoid the ger’s locaon. See Appendix 3 for more on hazing techniques.
It is important to note that 24-hour monitoring of the collared ger does not remove the risk of
further aacks. There are factors out of the control of managers including: the high human
populaon adjacent to the forest, the ease of access to the forest, the high number of forest users,
and that individual ger might be unresponsive to aversive condioning. The roles and
responsibilies for this management opon are listed in Table 8.
Table 8. Roles and responsibilies for 24-hour monitoring of the collared ger
Designaon
Responsibilies
Responsible actor
Tiger monitoring
team
Monitor ger's movements.
Warn forest users of ger's locaon.
Haze ger if it threatens to enter a village or
aack a forest user.
Experienced wildlife
biologist and field staff
from the BFD or
experienced NGO and
ETRT/VTRT/CPG

16
C6. Establish Conflict Zone Level 2
This acvity happens when the conflict ger has been collared and released back into the area. The
ger is now being monitored 24-hours per day, so the risk of aack is reduced, but the ger is sll
present in the area, so people must remain alert. Within a conflict zone level 2 the following rules
apply:
 People can only enter in their boats and are not allowed to set foot on land
 People must not enter the conflict zone unless absolutely necessary
 Entry is only allowed during daylight
 People can only enter as part of a group
Managing the conflict zone level 2 includes the following:
 Defining and delineang the conflict zone
 Patrolling the conflict zone to enforce the rules
 Communicang with the local villagers and authories to ensure there is awareness of the
conflict zone level 2 rules and acvies
It is recommended that the conflict zone level 2 is maintained for the duraon of the life of the
collared ger. The roles and responsibilies for this management opon are listed in Table 9.
Table 9. Roles and responsibilies for establishing conflict zone 2
Designaon
Responsibilies
Responsible actor
Conflict zone
designator
Define conflict zone area on map with input from
HTC monitoring team
Range Officer (ACF) of
BFD
Conflict zone
managers
Place physical markers along boundary of conflict
zone
Patrol conflict zone and enforce conflict zone
rules
Communicate zone area and rules to community
and local Forest Department staff
Local BFD staff, CPG/
FTRT
C7. Rehabilitaon and release are possible?
In order for rehabilitaon to be possible, the following three factors must be met:
 A ger isolaon and rehabilitaon facility of internaonal standards is available in the
SRF: The ger isolaon and rehabilitaon facility must meet the criteria outlined in Appendix
4.
 The ger’s condion is treatable: Some animals which are in bad physical condion may be
unlikely to survive in their present state if le untreated, but they might have a good chance
of recovery to hunng fitness if they are treated at a ger isolaon and rehabilitaon facility
(Goodrich et al. 2001).
 It is possible to collar and monitor the ger aer release: The ger can only be released if
post-release monitoring is guaranteed (IUCN 1995). For gers, this is done by fing them
with a collar and monitoring for 24-hours a day, 7 days a week. If there is insufficient
manpower and equipment to collar and monitor the ger, then the ger cannot be released

17
as it will be a risk to people and to the ger itself. In this case go to step C9, permanently
remove the ger from the forest. An injured ger that is not idenfied as a conflict ger can
be released aer successful rehabilitaon without collaring.
The roles and responsibilies for this management opon are listed in Table 10.
Table 10. Roles and responsibilies for rehabilitang and releasing ger
Designaon
Responsibilies
Responsible actor
Tiger rehabilitaon
authority
Provide authorisaon to rehabilitate the ger
BFD (including
experienced wildlife vet)
C8. Rehabilitate in isolaon facility
In this step, the ger is rehabilitated in the ger isolaon and rehabilitaon facility which meets the
criteria outlined in Appendix 4. The ger is deemed ready for release once it has been restored to
hunng fitness. Hunng fitness can be defined as the capacity and behaviour to collect or hunt food
or prey from nature. The roles and responsibilies for this management opon are listed in Table 11.
Table 11. Roles and responsibilies for rehabilitang ger in isolaon facility
Designaon
Responsibilies
Responsible actor
Tiger isolaon and
rehabilitaon
facility managers
Isolate, treat, and rehabilitate the ger unl it is
fit for release
BFD (including
experienced wildlife vet)
Tiger release
authority
Provide authorisaon to release the ger
BFD (including
experienced wildlife vet)
C9. Permanently remove ger from forest
This step is reached if earlier steps have confirmed that the ger cannot be released because there is
a high risk that the ger may:
 Aack humans
 Suffer due to its bad physical condion and inability to hunt
 Be killed by villagers
 Not be able to be rehabilitated
Therefore, there is no choice but to remove the ger from the forest permanently. The opons
available for permanent removal are:
 Keep the ger in a safari park or zoo that meets internaonal animal welfare standards.
 Mercy killing: Also known as euthanasia, the opons for euthanasia have been described in
the Wild ger capture and immobilisaon manual (Lewis et al. 2012) and as per arcle 8(1)
of Wildlife (Conservaon and Security) Act, 2012. For details see Appendix 6.
The roles and responsibilies for this management opon are listed in Table 12.

18
Table 12. Roles and responsibilies for permanently removing ger from forest
Designaon
Responsibilies
Responsible actor
Tiger removal to
safari park or zoo
authority
Provide authorisaon for removing the ger to a
safari park or zoo
BFD
Tiger removal team
Removing the ger to a safari park or zoo
BFD (including
experienced wildlife vet),
Experienced NGO, wildlife
vet, VTRT
Tiger euthanasia
authority
Provide authorisaon for euthanizing the ger
BFD
Tiger euthanasia
specialist
Euthanize the ger
BFD (including
experienced wildlife vet)
A female ger was successfully rescued from the village Anghara of Khulna range of Sundarbans on
January 14, 2012, by Bangladesh Forest Department, Village Tiger Response Team (VTRT) and Forest
Tiger Response Team (FTRT).

19
5. KEY CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Efficient management of human ger conflict (HTC) situaons requires effecve and mely
coordinaon among pares (Box 1) with varying roles in managing the situaon. Bangladesh Forest
Department (BFD), as the legal guardian managing the forest and its resources, should be leading the
process in a HTC situaon, together with other relevant pares. However, BFD is suffering from
inadequate finance and lack of skilled manpower, or access to modern technologies and equipment
for tackling current and future novel problems.
Novel problems due to climate change may have widespread impacts on wildlife, ecosystem
funconality, and human livelihoods through changes in temperature and precipitaon regimes,
changes in seasonality, increased salinity, sedimentaon, and sea-level rise (Ghimire & Vikas 2012).
Disasters like cyclones and unusual dal surges may cause injuries or death of gers and their prey
species. It is imperave to prepare our exisng and next generaon manpower with the advanced
analycal skills for beer management of our resources and to tackle novel problems.
To overcome the above key challenges, the following steps should be taken:
 Establish a specialised team under the Wildlife Management and Nature Conservaon
Division, Khulna. The team should consist of trained vets and compounders who can provide
vital support during HTC situaons.
 Develop a workflow within each field-based range team of the BFD and assign a key person
to collaborate with other stakeholders to manage and respond to HTC situaons.
 Training on how to migate the human-wildlife conflict be arranged for the four range-based
teams.
 Acquire analycal capabilies to remove dependency on commercial soware by using free
open-source programming languages such as R and Python. Enhance skills for government
staff, NGOs, community supporters, and future generaons through quantave training
sessions from people who have received higher degrees from overseas and are experts in
the field. The same approach can be taken to up-skill for climate change analyses.
 A wildlife rehabilitaon centre be built for wildlife in the Sundarbans.
 Establish a framework of systemac documentaon of HTC management for future use in
computaonal analyses.
 Strengthen SMART Patrolling for law enforcement as well as monitoring wildlife species
including gers and their prey species.
 Promote co-management acvies and conduct awareness programs.
 Involve and coordinate acons with community members, development partners, local
NGOs, and relevant stakeholders.
The heavy dependence of local communies on forest resources has created a situaon where
human-ger-conflict (HTC) connues to persist in the Sundarbans. As long as people rely on the
forest for their livelihoods and essenal needs, the risk of encountering gers and conflicts between
humans and wildlife remains. To address this issue, it is crucial to priorise the creaon of
alternave livelihood opportunies for the communies living around the Sundarbans. By offering
alternave sources of income and livelihood opons, such as sustainable agriculture, eco-tourism, or
skill development programs, pressure on the forest’s resources can be reduced.

20
6. APPENDICES
Appendix 1. Guidelines to support managers in determining if
incidents belong to the same ger or more than one ger
It is difficult to be 100% certain that mulple incidents (human or livestock aacks) belong to the
same ger without clear evidence, for example, photographic evidence confirming matching stripe
paerns. However, for management purposes, in order to prevent loss of human, livestock, and
ger life, it is necessary to deduce if mulple incidents are aributable to one or mulple gers. This
deducon needs to consider the following:
For a territory holder, if the second incident happens within an area that matches the size of a
territory, then a reasonable assumpon would be that it is the same ger carrying out the aacks.
However, when a ger aacks it is usually unclear as to whether the ger is female or male, so to be
conservave, the larger territory size of the male ger instead of the female ger can be used i.e.,
32km2 (Table 13). Likewise, territory holders can live for several years, and, because of the high
numbers of forest resource users and livestock, these gers will have mulple opportunies to
aack humans or livestock. Therefore, if a second ger aack incident occurs within a 32 km 2 area
within a 6-month period it seems reasonable to assume that both incidents are aributable to the
same ger. If the incidents occur within the 32 km2 area but more than 6 months apart, then it is
reasonable to assume that the incidents are aributable to more than one ger.
However, transient gers may move over larger distances because they are not restricted to a
territory that they are defending. If incidents are being carried out by a transient, therefore, it is
more difficult to deduce that the incidents are aributable to the same ger. An inspecon of the
paern (locaon and me) of incidents is required to determine if there is a reasonable chance that
the incidents are aributable to the same ger. For example, mulple incidents may start to form a
paern which shows a possible transient ger moving along the forest village boundary in a cert ain
direcon.
Finally, considering that gers in the SRF probably move a maximum of about 11.3 km in 24 hrs (and
probably a lot less) (Barlow 2009), then it may be possible to use the me and distance between
incidents to deduce if it is possible or not that those incidents could have been carried out by the
same ger.

21
Table 13. Available ger territory size and daily movement data for Sundarbans gers
Type of ger
Sundarbans data
Territorial female
The mean distance moved is 3.6 km/day within its territory, with a
maximum of 11.3 km/day for one ger and 10 km/day for a second
ger. A mean female territory size is 14.2 km2 (Barlow 2009, Barlow
et al. 2011).
Territorial male
There is no data available for male territory sizes in the SRF. So, for
the me being, male: female rao data available from Nepal (Smith
and McDougal 1991) can be used to calculate a male territory size.
In Nepal the rao is 1 male: 2.25 females (Smith and McDougal
1991). Using the mean female territory size of 14.2 km2 from the SRF
(Barlow 2009, Barlow et al . 2011) and the Nepal rao gives a male
territory size of 32 km
2
.
Young female transient
No data
Young male transient
No data
Old female transient
No data
Old male transient
No data
Appendix 2. Guidelines for definion of a conflict zone
The smallest administrave unit of the Sundarbans (compartment) can be declared as a conflict zone
in forest cases and for village cases the adjacent compartment of the village can be declared a
conflict zone.
A “conflict zone” is defined as an area in which people are at risk of ger aack. We cannot be sure
if a conflict ger is a territory holder or a transient animal which makes it difficult to work out the
area in which the ger is operang i.e., the conflict zone. Nonetheless, managers sll need to
determine a conflict zone so that they know where to patrol.
 For a ger which is suspected to be a transient animal - transient animals can move as
many as 11km/day (Barlow 2009, Barlow et al. 2011) and in any direcon.
 For a ger which is suspected to be a territory holder - The territory size of a female
Sundarbans ger is between 12 and 40 km2 (Barlow 2009). Therefore, it is esmated that the
territory size of a male ger is between 36 and 160 km2 (Barlow et al . 2011) based on the
knowledge that a male ger includes three to four female gers in his territory. We usually
cannot usually be certain about the sex of the ger, so we must be conservave and assume
it is a male ger in order to take the larger area.

22
Appendix 3. Hazing techniques
Hazing is a method of negave associaon that safely compels a ger to move away from humans.
These techniques can restore a ger’s natural avoidance of humans and minimise the interacons.
The basic hazing techniques are:
 Stand tall, make yourself big, shout, move your hands
 Use air whistle, fire crackers
 Use water guns, color guns.
Do not run from the ger as it may smulate its hunt/chase mechanism.
Appendix 4. Guidelines for ger isolaon and rehabilitaon
Creang isolaon and rehabilitaon facilies that meet best pracce standards is necessary to
increase the chance of achieving successful ger re-introducons into the wild. Overall, the facilies
need to provide for both the basic and higher needs of the ger, including social, mental, physical,
and emoonal needs. The objecve is, therefore, to create an interacve habitat that allows the
ger to live its life most closely aligned with a ger’s life in the wild (Forman et al. 2001) and that
meets the 5 freedoms of animal welfare (Box 6). To achieve this objecve the following minimum
basic criteria should be met.
 The facility must meet internaonal animal welfare standards.
 The facility should be located within the SRF and as far away as possible from human
habitaon or tourist spots to minimise the ger’s exposure to disturbances that may
otherwise interfere with its rehabilitaon and recovery.
 The rehabilitaon enclosures will be as large as possible and contain natural wild habitat.
 The rao of ger to enclosure will be 1:1 to simulate the solitary existence of gers in the
wild.
 There will be solid concrete walls that are at least 4 m high so that the gers are not
disturbed by people or other gers.
 There will be a one-metre internal wire mesh overhang extending at a 45-degrees angle
from the boundary of the enclosure, along with at least one strand of electric wire.
 The facility will have large rehabilitaon enclosures.
 Wildlife veterinarian(s) who are specially trained in wildlife veterinary medicine will be
available at this facility to provide treatment as required for the duraon of the ger’s stay.
 There will be a holding/treatment block placed separately from the rehabilitaon
enclosures. This will contain a room big enough for full anaesthesia and examinaon, and a
small outside paddock.
In addion to the design of the facilies, best pracce for care and handling of the gers should be
followed based on the below minimum criteria:

23
Box 6. The 5 freedoms of animal welfare:
1. Freedom from hunger or thirst by ready access to fresh
water and a diet to maintain full health and vigour
2. Freedom from discomfort by providing an appropriate
environment including shelter and a comfortable resng area
3. Freedom from pain, injury or disease by prevenon or
rapid diagnosis and treatment
4. Freedom to express (most) normal behaviour by providing
sufficient space, proper facilies, and company of the animal's
own kind
5. Freedom from fear and distress by ensuring condions and
treatment which avoid mental suffering
 The ger should receive
its inial check-up and
treatment at the
holding/treatment
block.
 Once treated, the ger
should be shied to the
complete isolaon of
the rehabilitaon
enclosure for however
long it takes for any
wounds to heal and
unl the ger is
restored to hunng
fitness and therefore ready for release.
 The ger should not be kept for a long me in the facility. The ger should be restored to
hunng fitness by specialist veterinary treatment as quickly as possible and then released
back into the wild.
 The only human contact should be from the wildlife veterinarian who will check on the
ger’s condion and provide treatment as required.
 Food and water should be put in the enclosure discreetly, i.e., without direct human-ger
contact.
 No other contact between humans and the ger should be permied, because the more
human contact the ger experiences, the more likely it is to lose its fear of humans and
reduce the chances of a successful release.
Not meeng all the above criteria is likely to result in:
 Mental and physical suffering to any ger kept at the facility
 An increased chance of a ger surviving aer being released into the wild from the facility
 An increased chance of a ger being involved in human ger conflict incidents aer its
release
Informaon sources for the above guidelines include Forman et al. (2001), Goodrich et al. (2001),
Goodrich and Miquelle (2005), and Sarah Chrise, coordinator of managed conservaon breeding
programmes for gers in European zoos & Manager of Tiger Zoo Programme in Russia (pers.
comm.).

24
Appendix 5. Consideraons regarding fing gers with radio or
satellite collars
Fing animals with radio or satellite collars to track the animal's movements is a common approach
used by wildlife managers and sciensts. Being able to follow a ger’s movements in real-me
enables a monitoring team to ancipate and react to situaons that may otherwise harm the ger,
humans, or livestock. Deciding to collar or not collar a ger, however, requires consideraon of the
effects to both humans and the gers.
Releasing a ger without a satellite collar means that the ger's locaon, movements, and behaviour
cannot be monitored, which in turn may lead to:
 An increased chance of the ger being poached
 An increased chance of the ger straying into a village and being injured or killed by villagers
 An increased chance of the ger aacking livestock or humans
Releasing a ger with a satellite collar means that the ger's locaon, movements, and behaviour
can be monitored, which may lead to:
 A decreased chance of the tiger being poached
 If the ger is poached, then there may be an increased chance of catching the poachers,
which may result in saving gers lives that would otherwise be lost should the poachers
connue to be acve
 A decreased chance of the ger straying into a village and being injured or killed by villagers
 A decreased chance of the ger aacking livestock or humans
Releasing a ger with a satellite collar may also provide the following benefits:
 An improved understanding of conflict ger behaviour/paerns, which may help to design
more effecve human ger conflict management approaches
 Improved understanding of ger resource needs
 Improved understanding of threats to gers
To ensure the ger's welfare needs are met and that it is able to fully express its natural behaviour in
the wild, strict guidelines should be followed relang to the size and fing of collars, and the related
process for ger immobilisaon (Lewis et al. 2012). Likewise, the collaring should ensure adherence
to the 5 freedoms of animal welfare (Box 6).

25
Appendix 6. Consideraons regarding permanent removal of gers
The two opons for permanent removal of a ger from the SRF are removal to a safari park/zoo and
euthanasia. Selecon of either opon should ensure adherence to the 5 freedoms of animal welfare
(Box 6), and the following consideraons:
Permanent removal to a safari park/zoo:
 This should only be done if the facility in queson meets internaonal standards for animal
care. Otherwise, the ger is likely to be exposed to physical harm or mental stress.
Permanent removal by euthanasia:
 This opon is always a last resort but may be necessary to ensure the ger does not suffer
undue physical or mental stress that it would otherwise be exposed to by being housed in
facilies that do not meet internaonal standards for animal care. Euthanasia can be done
quickly and painlessly if best pracce guidelines are followed (Lewis et al. 2012).
Appendix 7. Human ger conflict data
Human Tiger Conflict Summary
Year Number of human incidents Number of ger incidents Number of livestock
incidents Total
incidents
Dead
Injured
Total
Dead
Injured
Stray
Total
Dead
Injured
Total
2008 28 9 37 1 0 0 1 31 0 31 69
2009 42 10 52 2 0 4 6 15 0 15 73
2010 36 18 54 2 0 14 16 16 0 16 86
2011 34 19 53 1 0 2 3 20 1 21 77
2012 36 11 47 2 0 73 75 136 8 144 266
2013
4
2
6
0
0
16
16
37
17
54
76
2014
2
4
6
0
1
3
4
21
2
23
33
2015
0
2
2
0
0
6
6
4
3
7
15
2016
0
0
0
0
0
7
7
4
0
4
11
2017
3
2
5
0
0
6
6
7
0
7
18
2018
0
0
0
1
0
2
3
5
2
7
10
2019
0
2
2
0
0
6
6
1
2
3
11
2020
0
0
0
0
0
3
3
2
2
4
7
2021
6
1
7
0
0
1
1
2
1
3
11
2022
1
3
4
0
0
0
0
6
4
10
14
Total incidents
192
83
275
9
1
143
153
307
42
349
777

26
7. LITERATURE CITED
Ahmad, I. U., C. J. Greenwood, A. C. D. Barlow, M. A. Islam, A. N. M. Hossain, M. M. H. Khan, Smith, J.
L. D.2009. Bangladesh Tiger Acon Plan 2009-2017. Bangladesh Forest Department, Ministry of
Environment and Forests, Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh, Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Barlow, A. C. D. 2009. The Sundarbans ger: Adaptaon, status, and conflict management. PhD
Thesis, University of Minnesota, USA.
Barlow, A. C. D., J. L. D. Smith, I. U. Ahmad, A. N. M. Hossain, M. Rahman, and Howlader, A. 2011.
Female ger (Panthera gris gris) home range size in the Bangladesh Sundarbans: the value of this
mangrove ecosystem for the species’ conservaon. Oryx 45:125-128.
Barlow, A. C. D., I. U. Ahmad. Smith, J. L. D. 2013. Profiling Tigers (Panthera gris) to Formulate
Management Responses to Human-Killing in the Bangladesh Sundarbans. Wildl. Biol. Pract., 2013
December 9(2): 30-39.
Bhaarai, B. R. 2009. Human-Tiger (Panthera gris gris) conflict in Bardia naonal park, Nepal. PhD
Thesis, Ernst Moritz Arndt University of Greifswald.
CITES 1997. Guidelines for the disposal of confiscated lives specimens of species in the Appendices.
(Resoluon Conf. 10. 7, adopted at the 10th Meeng of the Conference of the Pares, Harare
(Zimbabwe), 9 to 20 June 1997).
Dhar, S. 2011. Impact of Climate Change on the Salinity Situaon of the Piyali River, Sundarbans,
India. Journal of Water Resource and Protecon, 3: 495-503.
Forman J. M., L. N. Claude, A. M. Albright, Lima, M. 2001. The design of enriched animal habitats
from a biological engineering perspecve. Transacons of the ASAE, 44(5): 1363–1371.
Ghimire, M. K., & Vikas, M. 2012. Climate change-impact on the Sundarbans, a case study.
Internaonal Scienfic Journal: Environmental Science, 2(1), 7-15.
Goodrich, J. M., L. L. Kerley, B. O. Schleyer, D. G. Miquelle, K. S. Quigley, Y. N. Smirnov, I. G. Nikolaev,
H. B. Quigley, and Hornocker, M.G. 2001. Capture and chemical anesthesia of Amur (Siberian) gers.
Wildlife Society Bullen 29, 533-542.
Goodrich, J. M., and Miquelle, D. G. 2005. Translocaon of problem Amur gers (Panthera gris
altaica) to alleviate ger-human conflicts. Oryx 39: 454–457.
Goodrich, J. M. 2010. Human-ger conflict: A review and call for comprehensive plans, Integrave
Zoology 5: 300-312.

27
Goodrich, J. M., I. Seryodkin, D. G. Miquelle, and Bereznuk, S. L. 2011. Conflicts between Amur
(Siberian) gers and humans in the Russian Far East. Biological Conservaon 144: 584–592.
Inskip, C., Ridout, M., Fahad, Z., Tully, R., Barlow, A., Barlow, C. G., Islam, M. A., Roberts, T., and
MacMillan, D. 2013. Human-Tiger Conflict in Context: Risks to Lives and Livelihoods in the
Bangladesh Sundarbans. Hum Ecol. 10.1007/s10745-012-9556-6.
IUCN. 1987. The IUCN Posion Statement on Translocaon of Living Organisms.
IUCN. 1995. IUCN/SSC Guidelines for Re-Introducons. Prepared by the SSC Re-introducon
Specialist Group. Approved by the 41st Meeng of the IUCN Council, Gland Switzerland, May 1995.
IUCN. 2000. IUCN Guidelines for the Placement of Confiscated Animals (approved by the 51st
Meeng of the IUCN Council, Gland, Switzerland, February 2000).
Khan, M. M. H., Ahsan, M. M., Jhala, Y. V., Ahmed, Z. U., Paul, A. R., Kabir, M. J., Morshed, H. M., and
Hossain, A. N. M. 2018. Bangladesh Tiger Acon Plan 2018-2027. Strengthening Regional
Cooperaon for Wildlife Protecon (SRCWP) Project. Bangladesh Forest Department, Ministry of
Environment and Forests.
Lewis, J., M. M. Alam, T. K. Dey, and Barlow, A. C. D. 2012. Bangladesh Tiger Acon Plan Manual:
Wild ger capture and immobilisaon. Wildlife Trust of Bangladesh.
Löe, J. and Röska, E. 2004. Large Carnivores and Human Safety: a review. AMBIO: A Journal of the
Human Environment 33: 283-288.
McDougal C. 1987. The man-eang ger in geographical and historical perspecve. Tilson R.L. & Seal
U.S. (eds.) Tigers of the world: The biology, biopolics, management, and conservaon of an
endangered species, Noyes Publicaons, Park Ridge, New Jersey, pp 435-446.
Rahman, H. A., Barlow, A. C. D., Greenwood, C. J., Islam, M. A. and Ahmad, I. U. 2009. Livestock
depredaon by ger on the edge of the Bangladesh Sundarbans: A technical report, Wildlife Trust of
Bangladesh.
Schwerdtner, K. and Bernd, G. 2007. A conceptual framework for damage compensaon scheme.
Biological Conservaon 134: 354-360.
Smith, J. L. D. and McDougal, C. 1991. The contribuon of variance in lifeme reproducon to
effecve populaon size in gers. Conservaon Biology 5, 484-490.
Sunquist, M. and Sunquis, F. 2002. Wild Cats of the World. University of Chicago Press, London. 359-
340.