# The Carnivore Community in a Dry Tropical Forest Mosaic in Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuary, Thailand

> In a patch of dry forest in central Thailand, researchers pieced together a community of 21 carnivores, from leopards and tigers to civets and otters, largely from spoor, scrapes and droppings along roads and trails. Leopard droppings showed a strong taste for barking deer, while smaller carnivores lived on rats, lizards, insects and fruit.

Summary by Kersey Lawrence, Original Wisdom. Updated 9 November 2026. Page: https://www.originalwisdom.com/tracking-literature/1991-rabinowitz-walker-carnivore-community-dry-tropical/

## Citation and access

- **Authors:** Alan R. Rabinowitz and Susan R. Walker
- **Year published:** 1991
- **Journal or source:** Journal of Tropical Ecology
- **Full citation:** Rabinowitz, A. R. and Walker, S. R. 1991. The carnivore community in a dry tropical forest mosaic in Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuary, Thailand. Journal of Tropical Ecology 7(1): 37–47.
- **DOI:** 10.1017/S0266467400005034
- **Access status:** Publisher link only
- **Where to find it:** https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266467400005034

## Tags

- **Species:** Mammals > Asian golden cat; Mammals > Asian small-clawed otter; Mammals > Asiatic black bear; Mammals > Binturong; Mammals > Clouded leopard; Mammals > Common palm civet; Mammals > Crab-eating mongoose; Mammals > Dhole; Mammals > Golden jackal; Mammals > Hog badger; Mammals > Jungle cat; Mammals > Large Indian civet; Mammals > Large-spotted civet; Mammals > Leopard; Mammals > Leopard cat; Mammals > Masked palm civet; Mammals > Small Indian civet; Mammals > Small-toothed palm civet; Mammals > Sun bear; Mammals > Tiger; Mammals > Yellow-throated marten
- **Region:** Asia > Thailand
- **Tracking:** Scat; Sign surveys; Tracking; Tracks; Tracks and signs identification
- **Behaviour and ecology:** Behaviour; Carnivore coexistence; Feeding; Habitat selection; Predation; Scavenging
- **Methods and technology:** Chi-square test; Descriptive statistics; Direct observation
- **Data type:** New field data
- **Observer qualification:** Not reported
- **Discipline:** Behaviour and ecology; Wildlife tracking
- **Year published:** 1991

## Detailed keywords

- **Species:** Studied: the carnivore community, 21 species in five families found in the study area: Asiatic jackal (Canis aureus), Asian wild dog or dhole (Cuon alpinus), Asiatic black bear (Selenarctos thibetanus), Malayan sun bear (Helarctos malayanus), yellow-throated marten (Martes flavigula), hog badger (Arctonyx collaris), small-clawed otter (Aonyx cinerea), small Indian civet (Viverricula malaccensis), large Indian civet (Viverra zibetha), large spotted civet (Viverra megaspila), small-toothed palm civet (Arctogalidia trivirgata), common palm civet (Paradoxurus hermaphroditus), masked palm civet (Paguma larvata), binturong (Arctictis binturong), crab-eating mongoose (Herpestes urva), leopard cat (Felis bengalensis), jungle cat (Felis chaus), Asian golden cat (Felis temminicki), clouded leopard (Neofelis nebulosa), Asiatic leopard (Panthera pardus; spotted and black colour phases) and tiger (Panthera tigris). Recorded nearby in the sanctuary but not in the study area: Burmese ferret-badger (Melogale personata), smooth-coated otter (Lutra perspicillata), Javan mongoose (Herpestes javanicus), fishing cat (Felis viverrina) and marbled cat (Felis marmorata). Food remains found in faeces: at least 34 mammal species from 16 families, including barking deer (Muntiacus muntjak), sambar deer (Cervus unicolor), wild boar (Sus scrofa), macaques (Macaca nemestrina and Macaca spp.), crestless Himalayan porcupine (Hystrix hodgsoni), hog badger (Arctonyx collaris), pangolin (Manis javanica), yellow rajah rat (Maxomys surifer) and bay bamboo rat (Cannomys badius). Listed by scientific name only: Presbytis phayrei, Presbytis cristata, Hylobates lar, Atherurus macrourus, Paguma larvata, Arctictis binturong, Canis aureus, Rhizomys sumatrensis, Ratufa bicolor, Callosciurus spp., Callosciurus flavimanus, Petaurista petaurista, Petaurista spp., Menetes berdmorei, Tamiops mcclellandi, Hylopetes phayrei, Lepus peguensis, Tupaia glis, Hylomys suillus, Crocidura spp., Leopoldamys sabanus, Rattus rattus, Mus spp., Chiropodomys gliroides and a fruit bat (Pteropodidae). Also birds, lizards, monitor lizard, snakes, crabs, fish, insects, earthworms, fruit seeds and grass. Large carcasses in the area: banteng (Bos javanicus) and gaur (Bos gaurus), neither found in faeces.
- **Location and habitat:** A 100 km² study area around Khao Nang Rum Research Station, in the eastern part of Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuary (2575 km²), central Thailand, with parts of the Huai Chang Tai and Huai Ai Yo stream systems. Mostly 400–600 m, rising to 1350 m on Khao Khieo Mountain. A dry tropical forest mosaic: mixed deciduous forest (33%), dry deciduous dipterocarp forest kept open by annual fires (23%), dry evergreen forest (35%) and hill evergreen rain forest above 1000 m (7%). Dry season fires from December to March or April. The paper prints the sanctuary’s coordinates as 99°00’–99°30’N, 15°00’–15°45’E, with latitude and longitude apparently swapped.
- **Topics:** carnivore species richness; carnivore community structure; food habits and diet analysis from faeces; frequency of occurrence; prey size and predator size; large versus small carnivores; leopard diet; barking deer as main prey; rodents as prey of small carnivores; fruit eating by civets; scavenging; latrine sites; relative abundance from spoor, sightings and trapping; habitat mosaic and carnivore diversity; leopards versus tigers; road and trail bias in faecal sampling; forest management.
- **Statistics or models:** Descriptive statistics (frequency of occurrence as the percentage of all identified prey items). A chi-square test (X² = 9.24, df = 1, p = 0.002) supporting the split of faeces into large (2 cm or more in average diameter) and small (under 2 cm) carnivore faeces, matching carnivores over and under 10 kg. Inconsistency: the number of small carnivore faeces from the study area is given as 657 in Table 4 and later in the text, but as 571 in the sentence reporting the 33% murid rodent figure.
- **Data type:** New field data, collected 1987 to 1989. Faeces from the study area (438 large and 657 small carnivore faeces) compared with faeces from other parts of the sanctuary (167 large, 98 small). Climate data from 1983 to 1987.

## Synopsis

### 1. What they did

Little was known about the carnivore communities of south-east Asia. Between 1987 and 1989, the authors surveyed which carnivores lived in a 100 km² patch of dry tropical forest around Khao Nang Rum Research Station in Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuary, Thailand, and what they ate.

- Which carnivores were there. They used box traps set along roads and trails where carnivore spoor had been seen, their own sightings and those of workers, and identification of spoor. They regularly walked roads, trails and waterways to collect and record faeces, scrapes and tracks.

- What they ate. They identified hair in the faeces by eye or under the microscope against a reference collection of skins, and other remains such as rodent jaws and teeth, pangolin, lizard and snake scales, hog badger claws, primate nails, barking deer hooves, feathers, and crab and insect shells.

- Large and small carnivores. Because most faeces could not be assigned to one species, they sorted them by size: 2 cm or more across for large carnivores, under 2 cm for small carnivores (under 10 kg).

- Comparison. Faeces and sightings from other parts of the sanctuary were compared with those from the study area.

### 2. What they found

The carnivores

- 21 carnivore species from five families lived in the study area, and five more were recorded in nearby parts of the sanctuary.

- Spoor and sightings of large cats, mostly leopards, were the most common evidence of larger carnivores. Capture and tracking (from the first author’s earlier study) showed four resident leopards (three spotted, one black) and one resident tiger.

- Dholes left less evidence than the large cats, but sightings suggested at least twice the leopard density. They were seen six times, mostly alone, once as a pair, and once as a pack of “about ten” feeding on a sambar deer.

- Signs of the Malayan sun bear were seen more often than of the Asiatic black bear, which was reported only once. Both bears seemed uncommon.

- The Asian golden cat and clouded leopard were each seen only once, but tracks showed at least one medium-sized cat regularly using roads and trails.

- Leopard cats, Asiatic jackals and some civets were the small carnivores most often seen, or whose spoor was most often seen, along roads and trails.

- A latrine site, believed to be from the small-clawed otter, held faeces containing only crab remains.

Large carnivore diet (438 faeces)

- Barking deer made up 44% of identified prey.

- Macaques, sambar deer, wild boar, crestless Himalayan porcupine and hog badger together made up 31.3%.

- Faeces from other parts of the sanctuary showed similar preferences.

- Tigers and leopards were seen feeding on a banteng killed by hunters, and tiger and leopard tracks showed feeding at a gaur carcass, yet neither species was found in faeces.

- 63% of large carnivore faeces in the study area, and 84% outside it, were known to be from large cats, mainly leopards.

Small carnivore diet (657 faeces)

- Murid rodents made up 33% of identified prey. The yellow rajah rat and the bay bamboo rat together made up 22.4%.

- Non-mammal prey made up 21.3%, over half of it lizards and insects.

- Seeds from edible fruits made up 12.4% of food items. At least 10% of small carnivore faeces were known to be from civets.

### 3. What they concluded

- The diverse carnivore community reflects an abundant and diverse prey community, with prey in a range of size classes.

- Barking deer may be eaten more than other hoofed animals because leopards, which left most of the large faeces, prefer prey under 50 kg. Sambar, gaur and banteng are larger and less common, and wild boar were sparse, partly because illegal hunters targeted them.

- Large meals from big carcasses may leave few identifiable remains in faeces, which could explain the missing gaur and banteng and part of the “unknown” category.

- Collecting faeces along roads and trails biases the results toward carnivores that use those routes, especially for large carnivores.

- Some large prey in small carnivore faeces may come from jackals and civets scavenging large carnivore kills.

- Mostly solitary dholes may point to a diet with many small prey and smaller home ranges.

- The forest mosaic allows open-woodland and dense-forest species to live side by side, but its patchiness may restrict small, specialized species. Leopards outnumbered tigers in the study area, the reverse of other parts of the sanctuary, because leopards can use trees, survive on smaller prey, hunt in burnt and regrowing areas, and need less water.

### 4. How tracking was or was not used

Spoor identification was one of three ways the authors assessed which carnivores were present and how common they were. They walked roads, trails and waterways to record faeces, scrapes and tracks, and set box traps where carnivore spoor had been seen. Tracks were the evidence for a medium-sized cat using roads and trails, for tiger and leopard feeding at a gaur carcass, and (as “observed evidence”) for the tiger, sun bear and small-clawed otter in the species list. Faeces were assigned to large or small carnivores by diameter. Earlier “capture and tracking” of the large cats is cited from Rabinowitz (1989); the paper does not say what kind of tracking that was.

### 5. Tracker or observer certification

Not reported. The paper does not say who identified the spoor and faeces. Field assistants are thanked by name, and some species records rest on sightings by workers.

### 6. Other technologies, skills or innovations

- Microscopic hair comparison against a reference collection of skins at the National Research Council of Thailand.

- Identification of other remains in faeces (teeth, scales, claws, nails, hooves, feathers, shells) using museum specimens, keys and distribution maps.

### 7. Implications for conservation (from the paper)

- Carnivores are often more severely affected than other animals as parks become smaller and more heavily used, so understanding carnivore communities is essential for tropical forest management and conservation.

- Carnivores are among the most wide-ranging and specialized members of the wildlife community, yet among the least understood. Detailed knowledge of the carnivore community is critical for a balanced, long-term forest management policy for any protected area.

### 8. Implications for tracking (Original Wisdom's observations)

_These are Original Wisdom's observations, not the authors'._

- The paper shows how much of a carnivore community survey rests on tracks and signs: spoor, scrapes, faeces and a latrine site filled in species that were rarely or never seen.

- Sorting faeces by diameter is a simple, coarse tool; the authors’ own caution about road and trail bias is a reminder that where trackers look shapes what they find.

## Cite this summary

Lawrence, K. 2026. Summary of: The Carnivore Community in a Dry Tropical Forest Mosaic in Huai Kha Khaeng Wildlife Sanctuary, Thailand (Rabinowitz and Walker, 1991). Original Wisdom, Tracking Literature. https://www.originalwisdom.com/tracking-literature/1991-rabinowitz-walker-carnivore-community-dry-tropical/