Report on PATCA fieldtrip May 2007
Aidan Maccormick June 2007
Introduction
The biodiversity work conducted during the fieldtrip to the proposed PATCA area
19th – 20th May 2006 was limited to botany, ornithology and mammals as the
biologists working with entomology, herpetology and ichthyology were not present.
The principal aim of the work was to develop suitable survey methods for collecting
baseline biodiversity data for each of the groups by expanding on the work covered in
the workshop. In addition, the survey methods needed to be statistically robust and
suitable for biodiversity monitoring taking into account the number of biologists
available for each group, proposed PATCA area, number of fieldwork days available,
level of information required and the need to cover a representative number of
habitats and altitudinal zones.
I chose to develop a series of survey techniques that would generate species lists and
relative abundances for each group at each survey site. Also the data would give
habitat and altitudinal associations and most importantly provide a baseline of
biological diversity which could be monitored.
Summary
Firstly the success of the fieldwork was severely limited by the absence of the
biologists responsible for entomology, herpetology and ichthyology. Also because the
time spent discussing survey protocols during the workshop in Bishkek was reduced
and proceeded very slowly it was difficult for me to develop and work towards an
agreed survey design for each group during the workshop.
In general it was great to work with the biologists in the field as they were very
knowledgably and passionate about their subject area and had a lot of fieldwork
experience.
For brevity I have decided to provide a list of the main points followed below by a
separate discussion of the work with the birds and the mammals:








The biologists showed great note taking skills
The mammalogist and ornithologist had very good field identification skills
It would have been ideal if more biologists for each group could have been
trained in the survey methods
Poor motivation to be at study sites early and begin data collection early
Profound lack of group communication regarding what sites were to be
surveyed, what time in the morning the vehicle would leave for the study sites
and what time in the afternoon the biologists would be picked up and from
what location
The mammologist needs new binoculars
A great deal of resistance to novel data collection methodologies
The botanists had an exemplary technique for describing the floral community
quantitatively
Bird work
I was lucky to work with Sergey who is very knowledgeable and very passionate
about the region’s birds. His field identification skills were excellent and he showed
great note taking skills. After introducing the McKinnon’s listing technique at the
workshop I worked closely with Sergey in the field. We worked most mornings
together going over important aspects of the methodology, rules for recording data
and general approaches to data collection. Initially the work appeared to be going very
well with Sergey taking great care in noting all the required information. However
there appeared to be strong reluctance to proceed with anything that appeared too
different from Sergey’s normal approach to fieldwork.
The biggest problem was Sergey’s almost complete refusal to return to a site second
time to continue and expand on the data collected the previous day. Also, data
collection always started late on every morning for a number of different reasons and
he would often stop surveying to search for nests and ring nestlings.
Multiple early visits to field sites are required for almost all quantitative survey
technique for birds and I had a struggle explaining that the bird data required for the
PATCA project was more than just a series of simple species lists collected from a
random series of multiple sites visited throughout the day. Towards the end of the
fieldtrip Sergey did appear to understand the approach to surveying that we were
trying to implement and was enthusiastic in filling in the daily data sheets and asking
questions regarding data collection.
Mammal work
Seit-Kazey showed great field skills and was very able in his ability to locate
mammals and their presence through tracks and signs. My original plan was to try and
develop a listing technique for the mammals with Seit-Kazey to provide species lists
and relative abundances for each site. But it became apparent quite early on that
mammal diversity and the number of mammals directly observed were very low and
the listing method wouldn’t be the best option. Instead I decided to develop a data
collection technique that would provide a good species list for each survey site and an
encounter rate for those species that were either detected or observed relatively often.
As Seit-Kazey has excellent note taking skills it was easy to agree on rules for data
collection such as noting all tracks, noting coordinates, distances observed etc. but
because the data he collected was quasi-quantitative it was a difficult struggle to
persuade him to subtly alter some of his approaches to note taking that would allow us
to extract quantitative data from his notes.
The main problems with developing a mammal survey methodology was convincing
Seit-Kazey of the need to collect data from a site or an area on more than one
occasion and poor motivation to start surveying early in the morning when activity
levels for most diurnal mammals are highest. As the need for a translator was crucial
for working with Seit-Kazey the process of developing a survey methodology was
much slower than it was with Sergey although by the end of the field trip I was
confident that we had a decent methodology. One final point is that Seit-Kazey really
needs a good pair of new lightweight binoculars. The pair he has at the moment are
completely unaligned, the optics are scratched and they are too heavy to carry all day.
Proposed minimum strategy for biodiversity data collection and monitoring
The amount of time available for data collection during this summer is limited and in
order to collect useful data at a number of locations representative of the PATCA area
the survey sites need to be chosen carefully, surveyed adequately using the agreed
survey methods with good coordination between each of the groups. For the 20 days
of fieldwork in June and July I would propose that each group agrees to survey a
minimum of at least 8 – 10 different sites (see proposed list below). The botanists
have more time for fieldwork and can survey additional sites but they need to conduct
surveys at all the sites that the biologists survey. More sites could be surveyed if there
is time or if the fieldwork period can be extended. It is very important that the sites
should cover a broad altitudinal range and include a good number of different habitat
types within the proposed PATCA area.
It should be stressed that each site should cover a defined area and a single broad
habitat type with restricted limits e.g., riverine scrub stretching along a 10km section
of Kyzylsu or a 5km by 5km area of grassland in the Alai Valley basin. Each site
needs to be surveyed fully for each biological group, although the Ichthyologists
might require access to a nearby water source if a proposed study site doesn’t contain
lakes or rivers. If the Ichthyologists are not happy with this approach they need to
coordinate their activities closely with the other groups to ensure that at least a good
proportion of the study sites are nearby. It is crucially important that time and effort
are not wasted on random stops for ad hoc species lists or to conduct other activities
such as bird ringing or searches for species of personal interest to individuals.
However if the data to be collected would be of unique importance and value to the
PATCA area e.g., stopping to look for otter tracks along a few easily accessible river
sites, it could be justified.
Each site needs to be surveyed fully by each group which should be a minimum of
two full days of fieldwork, with early starts for the ornithologist and mammalogist.
This is very important as we need to collect enough data to provide relative
abundance estimates which we can use as a monitoring baseline. In addition at least
two visits will give us a more complete species list for the site.
I also strongly recommend that the biologists camp at, or nearby, the study sites so
work can be conducted early and time isn’t lost travelling to and from each site to
accommodation in some distant village. Ideally there would be someone in charge of
the camp the whole time, preparing the food and looking after equipment, which
would be in addition to a driver.
I am not sure how the Tajik biologists will be integrated with the fieldtrips but it is
very important that each group collects data using the same techniques. If the tajik
botanists or biologists need to spend a few days in the field with the Kyrgyz scientists
it should be coordinated and planned well in advance.
In conversations with many of the biologists it was made clear that there are a number
of publications and specimen collections providing data on the presence and
distribution of species within the proposed PATCA area. It is important that this data
is somehow, and at some stage, incorporated into a biodiversity database for PATCA.
If there are funds to data base existing data it would provide an invaluable resource to
guide decision making and future management plans. For the biologists and botanists
conducting the fieldwork the clear distinction between data collected using the agreed
survey methods and species lists taken from previous work and bibliographic searches
needs to be clearly separated (after reading the publication for the western tian shan I
was unsure whether the species lists and biodiversity distribution maps came from
recent fieldwork or bibliographic reviews or a combination of the two). Finally all
biologists need to be happy with the survey methods with an agreed procedure and
timescale for filling in the data sheets from notebooks in the field and handing in the
data sheets to someone in the PATCA office in Bishkek.
Survey sites
The following is a proposed list of potential survey sites that would provide a broad
knowledge of the biodiversity that PATCA would protect covering the main habitats
found within the two ecoregions as defined by the WWF (Gissaro-Alai open
woodlands - PA0808 and Pamir alpine desert and tundra - PA1014). The list of sites
has been formed after discussion with the biologists and issues raised during the work
shop in Bishkek. Each group has its own priorities, for example the Ichthyologists
would like to work both in the upper stretches of the Koksu in the north-eastern
section of the proposed PATCA (Kashgar-Tarim watershed) and the tributaries of
Kyzylsu (Amu-Darya watershed) as there might be different fish communities and
perhaps endemics, while the ornithologist would like to work in the relict Picea
woodlands near the border with China. Therefore the biologists should discuss,
coordinate and plan a field survey timetable together before they leave for the field to
ensure a productive use of the short time available for field surveys.
 Relict Picea forest along Koksu, NE boundary of PATCA (c.3,500m)
A site should be found that has relatively intact stands of Picea (Picea
schrenkiana??).
 High alpine (c. 4,000m)
The site could be located anywhere within the proposed area with short meadows
and a far amount of rock exposure.
 High pasture: 2 sites (c. 3,000 – 3,500m)
Either a north or south facing slope, preferably both if there is time, typical of the
main Alai Valley, or perhaps two similar pastures but with different grazing
pressure.
 Low pasture (2,500 – 3,000m)
A site in the lower tributaries of Kyzylsu such as along the Koksu valley (west of
Daraut-Kurgan) with rich soils and relatively high grazing pressure.
 Mixed woodland (2,500 – 3,500m)
A site of mixed broadleaf and juniper woodland. Ideally a site that is extensive
and of good quality if at all possible with tall old-growth trees and a diverse
ungrazed understory.
 Alai Valley Basin, grassland & wetlands: 2 sites (c. 3,000m)
The easternmost section of the Alai Valley has some extensive wetlands and
grasslands due south of Sary-Tash (and accessible from either side of the main
highway to Tajikistan ) that need to be explored. If there is time perhaps a dry
grassland site and a wet site with lots of standing water and pools.
 Riverine thickets (2,500 – 3,000m)
Along the Alai Valley there are extensive tracts of buckthorn (Hippophae sp)
dominant scrub found along the Kyzylsu. A site needs to be chosen that would be
a good representative site for this habitat in the PATCA area.
 Riverine gravel (2,500 – 3,000m)
The Alai valley has wide stretches of gravel with various stages of colonisation by
plants. A site should be chosen that all groups can realistically work well and that
would be representative of the habitat found across that Alai Valley basin.