Wild versus domestic prey in the diet of reintroduced tigers (Panthera tigris) in the livestock-dominated multiple-use forests of Panna Tiger Reserve, India.

Grazing livestock in openly accessible areas is a common practice in the multiple-use forests of India; however, its compatibility with the reintroduction of tigers to these areas requires examination. Here, we investigated the diet of tigers in a livestock-dominated multiple-use buffer zone of the Panna Tiger Reserve, India. We hypothesised that the presence of feral cattle, along with open-access grazing practices in multiple-use forests, would increase the incidence of predation on livestock by tigers, even when wild prey are available. We used generalised linear models to test whether predation of livestock versus wild animals was influenced by (1) the sex and age class of tigers, (2) season, and (3) the distance of prey from the core-zone boundary of the reserve. Overall, sub-adult tigers and male tigers killed more livestock than wild prey, even when wild prey was available. In the winter and rainy seasons livestock were killed in higher numbers in the buffer zone than in summers, this may be because of the seasonally changing livestock herding patterns in the area. Further, with increasing distance from the core-zone boundary, all tigers killed more livestock, possibly because livestock were more easily accessible than wild prey. Our results show that open-access and unregulated livestock grazing is not currently compatible with large carnivore conservation in the same landscape. Such practices will lead to an increase in negative tiger-human-livestock interactions. In conclusion, we suggest the need to encourage locals to corral valuable cattle, leaving feral/unwanted livestock for tigers. This simple strategy would benefit both local inhabitants and tiger conservation in the multiple-use forests of India.

Linking land use with pesticides in Dutch surface waters.

Compared with other European countries The Netherlands has a relatively high level of pesticide consumption, particularly in agriculture. Many of the compounds concerned end up in surface waters. Surface water quality is routinely monitored and numerous pesticides are found to be present in high concentrations, with various standards being regularly exceeded. Many standards-breaching pesticides exhibit regional patterns that can be traced back to land use. These patterns have been statistically analysed by correlating surface area per land use category with standards exceedance per pesticide, thereby identifying numerous significant correlations with respect to breaches of both the ecotoxicological standard (Maximum Tolerable Risk, MTR) and the drinking water standard. In the case of the MTR, greenhouse horticulture, floriculture and bulb-growing have the highest number as well as percentage of standard-breaching pesticides, despite these market segments being relatively small in terms of area cropped. Cereals, onions, vegetables, perennial border plants and pulses are also associated with many pesticides that exceed the drinking water standard. When a correction is made for cropped acreage, cereals and potatoes also prove to be a major contributor to monitoring sites where the MTR standard is exceeded. Over the period 1998-2006 the land-use categories with the most and highest percentage of standards-exceeding pesticides (greenhouse horticulture, bulb-growing and flower cultivation) showed an increase in the percentage of standards-exceeding compounds.

The contribution of neighbouring countries to pesticide levels in Dutch surface waters.

Compared with other European countries, Dutch consumption of pesticides is high, particularly in agriculture, with many of the compounds found in surface waters in high concentrations and various standards being exceeded. Surface water quality is routinely monitored and the data obtained are published in the Dutch Pesticides Atlas. One important mechanism for reducing pesticide levels in surface waters is authorisation policy, which proceeds on the assumption that the pollution concerned has taken place in the Netherlands. The country straddles the delta of several major European rivers, however, and as river basins do not respect national borders some of the water quality problems will derive from neighbouring countries. Against this background the general question addressed in this article is the following: To what extent do countries neighbouring on the Netherlands contribute to pesticide pollution of Dutch surface waters? To answer this question, data from the Pesticides Atlas for the period 2005-2009 were used. Border zones with Belgium and Germany were defined and the data for these zones compared with Dutch data. In the analyses, due allowance was also made for authorised and non-authorised compounds and for differences between flowing and stagnant waters. Monitoring efforts in the border zones and in the Netherlands were also characterised, showing that efforts in the former are similar to those in the rest of the country. In the border zone with Belgium the relative number of non-authorised pesticides exceeding the standards is clearly higher than in the rest of the Netherlands. These exceedances are observed mainly in flowing waters. In contrast, there is no difference in the relative number of standard-exceeding measurements between the border zones and the rest of the Netherlands. In the boundary zones the array of standard-exceeding compounds clearly deviates from that in the rest of the Netherlands, with compounds authorised in the neighbouring countries but not in the Netherlands, such as flufenacet, featuring prominently. The share of the neighbouring countries in the total number of exceedances in the Netherlands is roughly proportional to the relative area of the border zones. Although there is a certain influx of pesticides from across national borders, the magnitude of the problem appears to be limited.

Similarities and differences between measured and predicted concentrations of pesticides in Dutch surface waters.

In order to have a thorough evaluation of the progress and effectiveness of Dutch crop protection policy, both model predictions and measured pesticide concentrations in surface waters are considered. To this purpose, monitoring data obtained by various water boards and other monitoring institutes were processed. Data were aggregated over a two year time period and over space (at 1x1 km-grid). A geographic view is given in the Dutch Pesticides Atlas (www.pesticidesatlas.nl). The model used for the predictions was the Dutch National Environmental Indicator NMI version 2 (www.nmi.alterra.nl) that has input data regarding spray drift data, crop interception, soil and climate and many more. Information on aggregation steps over time and space, grid sizes, information on crop areas was geared to one another for both instruments. Results on measured pesticide concentrations in surface waters and model predictions were compared to each other at the national scale. For this study, 10 different cases were selected covering a large range of pesticides' characteristics and pesticides' use. In 60% of the cases, the results were largely in agreement with each other when expressed as absolute numbers of measurements exceeding the environmental quality standard. This is very accurate and useful for policy purposes. Based on concentrations and on the order of magnitude, no significant agreement between measurements and model predictions was found. Differences were explained by various factors, and an overview of predominant systematic differences between the measurements and the model predictions was presented. Using both measurements and model predictions in supporting environmental policy evaluations is warranted, because of higher Weight-of-Evidence. Combining both can assist in optimizing the knowledge on pesticides behaviour, fate and ecological problems and therefore this is the preferred evaluation method.

Risk mapping of pesticides: the Dutch atlas of pesticide concentrations in surface waters: www.pesticidesatlas.nl.

Many pesticides are being measured in surface water. To promote the use of monitoring data in the process of risk mapping, post-registration, and improvement of water quality, a free available Internet tool has been developed to present all measurements of pesticides in surface water on the level of individual active ingredients in a spatial framework: the Dutch pesticides atlas (www.pesticidesatlas.nl). With this communication tool one can easily get maps concerning where a pesticide is being measured, observed and possibly constitutes a problem over the years. Pesticide concentrations are being compared with environmental standards and maps can been made of each pesticide at a national level. The pesticide maps have been linked with GIS land use data. At present statistical correlations can be made between crop areas and pesticides concentrations in the water. Moreover, predictions can be made where a pesticide might be exceeding environmental standards. Policy makers, chemical industry (product stewardship), NGO's and farmers can use the maps as a tool for communication and improving environmental quality. The atlas is also being used to evaluate the effectiveness of pesticide policy over the years. In this contribution the methodological background of the pesticides atlas is presented.

Atlas of pesticide concentrations in Dutch surface waters: a pilot study.

A pilot study was conducted to explore the potential for geographically mapping concentrations of individual pesticides in Dutch surface waters and compiling these maps into a National Pesticide Atlas. This atlas could be used for various purposes: 1) To see where specific pesticides are monitored, observed and find out whether these are problematical. 2) To explore the relationship between environmental pesticide levels and land use, using the results as feedback to improve national pesticide admission procedures (post-registration review) 3) To review the quality of the present Dutch pesticide monitoring system. For the study we used measured data for the years 1997 and 1998, preparing maps for six illustrative pesticides. The data are presented on a grid scale of 5x5 km2. Pesticide concentrations are compared with three standards: the EU drinking water standard, the maximum tolerable risk (MTR) level and the admission standard set by the Dutch Pesticide Admission Board (CTB). The results show that all these pesticides can be satisfactorily mapped at the national level and that for most of the compounds investigated a useful relationship can be established between environmental concentration and land use. The maps also serve to show up gaps in the present pesticide monitoring system. The study yielded several new insights, among them that standards were found to be exceeded in areas and at times of the year not anticipated on the basis of land use and pesticide use statistics. As a follow-up to this pilot study a new project has been started to develop an internet version of the pesticide atlas for all measured pesticides in The Netherlands.