Report from: Xavier Al-Mateen, Ain Alias, Neil Furey, Nina R. Ingle, Kendra Phelps, Jodi L. Sedlock, Dave Waldien
The 2nd International Southeast Asian Bat Conference held June 2011 in Bogor Indonesia presented the Southeast Asia Bat Conservation and Research Unit (SEABCRU) Cave Bat Priority group with a unique opportunity to collect and share information on the status of cave bats throughout Southeast Asia. At the Cave Bat Priority Session, we distributed a questionnaire to assess the overall level of threat to cave bats, as well as the respondent’s knowledge on cave bats within his or her country of expertise. The following report summarizes the results of the questionnaire, and represents our first step in a long-term effort to collate existing knowledge on Southeast Asian cave bats, identify gaps in our knowledge, and assess the status of cave bats in each of the Association of Southeast Asian (ASEAN) countries.
A total of 55 questionnaires were filled out, representing bat experts with expertise from 17 countries, including Indonesia (11 questionnaires), Malaysia (8), Thailand (5), Japan (4), Philippines (7), Taiwan (4), Vietnam (4), Cambodia (2), Laos (2), East Timor (1), India (1), Myanmar (1), Nepal (1), New Guinea (1), Pakistan (1), Papua New Guinea (1), and Singapore (1).
A major challenge to conserving cave bats in these countries is a lack of knowledge and awareness of the importance of cave bats. Even among experts, only 5% reported having extensive knowledge on cave bats within their country of expertise (n = 55).
Ninety-four percent (n=52) of respondents reported overall moderate to high levels of threat to cave bats within their countries of expertise. The top 5 major threats identified by respondents were deforestation (80% of questionnaires), cave tourism/caving (74%), cave bat hunting/collection (65%), limestone quarrying (56%) and guano mining (44%).
Other challenges to cave bat conservation that were identified included geographical barriers, political differences, funding, lack of public awareness on the importance of bats, problems of communication especially in countries with many languages, lack of information on cave bats, few experts on cave bats, and the limited time and lack of willingness among bat researchers to share data.
Almost half of respondents had no suggestions on conferences or venues within the country where cave bat conservation or research can be discussed. Venues mentioned included meetings of professional societies of biologists, meetings of cavers, and multidisciplinary conferences on karst (Indonesia and Vietnam). Groups that were identified as important to involve in cave bat research and conservation included government authorities (local- and national-level), conservation and land management agencies, Universities, non-governmental organizations especially international conservation NGOs, professional organizations of biologists, and caving groups.
Of the respondents who were aware of laws governing management of caves (n = 35) and cave bats (n = 45), more than half reported that no laws were in place in their country of expertise. In Malaysia and Taiwan, all but one respondent from each country concurred that caves and cave bats are afforded no formal protection. On the other hand, 100% of respondents with expertise from the Philippines and Thailand indicated that governmental organizations provide protection for caves and cave bats. Respondents with expertise from Vietnam were divided as to whether such protection exists. We will explore this further to confirm which countries have laws to protect caves and cave bats.
Overall, the results of the questionnaire emphasize just how little we know about the status of cave bats in Southeast Asia. Networking and sharing what data is available on cave bats is a necessary first step to conserve these important species.
