Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Management of human-macaque conflicts at Angke Kapuk Residential Area and
surroundings June 2011
A partnership of:
BKSDA DKI Jakarta
and
IAR Indonesia Foundation
With the Financial support from:
List of Abbreviations BKSDA : Balai Konservasi Sumber Daya Alam – Agency for Natural Resources Conservation GIS : Geographical Information System IAR-I : International Animal Rescue-Indonesia NGO : Non Governmental Organization MAAS : Muara Angke Animal Sanctuary PF : Muara Angke Protected Forest NTP : Angke Kapuk Natural Tourism Park AKF : Angke Kapuk Forest and Surrounding PIK : Pantai Indah Kapuk Estate GIS : Geographic Information System JGM : Jakarta Green Monster (NGO) PIKH : Pantai Indah Kapuk Hospital IMReD IPB : Mangrove Research and Development Institute of Bogor
Agricultural University
Table of Contents
1. Objective and activities 7
2. Introduction 8
2.1. Background 8
2.2. Human-macaque conflicts 10
2.3. Angke Kapuk Forest 11
2.3.1. Biodiversity 11
2.3.2. Socio-economic data 11
3. Methods 12
3.1. Literature research 12
3.2. Population survey (preliminary study) 12
3.3. GIS Mapping 13
3.4. Macaque population monitoring (secondary survey) 14
3.5. Evaluation of M.A. river 15
3.6. Questionnaire distribution 15
3.7. Socialisation with the public 16
4. Results 16
4.1. Population surveys (preliminary study) 16
4.2. GIS mapping 17
4.3. Population monitoring (secondary survey) 21
4.3.1. Long tailed macaque groups 21
4.3.2. Potential food source for macaques in AKF 23
4.3.3. Conflict potential 25
4.4. M.A. river analysis 26
4.4.1. Changes in water flow 27
4.4.2. Alteration of function 27
4.4.3. Garbage 27
4.4.4. Water pollution 27
4.4.5. Angke river contamination impact on M.A.A.S 28
4.5. Questionnaire results 29
4.6. Awareness campaign socialisation with the public 30
5. Discussions 31
6. Recommendations 33
7. Graphic material on the human-macaque conflict in MA 35
8. References 37
APPENDIX
Appendix 1: questionnaires 39
Appendix 2: Flora and Fauna in AKF 41
Appendix 3: Socio-economic data 47
Appendix 4: macaque population survey data 49
1. OBJECTIVES AND ACTIVITIES
1. To formulate a strategy to study the conflict situation between people and
long-tailed macaques at Muara Angke. .
2. To determine the main causes for the existence of the conflict between
macaques and humans in the Muara Angke area based on proper field data.
3.To implement a strategic solution based on field data findings that would
address the problem of a human macaque conflict that would reduce and later
on relieve the problem completely.
4. To create awareness amongst the residents and visitors on the presence of
macaques as a native species in Muara Angke; and the consideration that living
within proximity of the forest comes a consequence the inhabitants of animals.
5. To develop a comprehensive and effective complaint channel when people
come across macaques at human settlements that could lead to a conflict
situation
5. To develop a comprehensive report on methods and a strategy to address
human wildlife conflicts that could be available internationally and serve as a
guide to other organizations facing a similar situation.
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 Background
Angke Kapuk Forest (AKF) is a conservation area located in the North of
Jakarta. Although the forest area is not large, diversity in flora and fauna is high.
One common primate species in this area is the long-tailed macaque (Macaca
fascicularis). Since the development of Pantai Indah Kapuk Estate residential area
around MAAS and PF, there have been numerous reports about human-macaque
conflicts. As the numbers of complaints during the last few years were on the
rise, the Agency for Natural Resources Conservation (BKSDA) with jurisdiction in
MAAS, a subdepartment of Jakarta BKSDA (DKI), was forced to take action.In mid
2009, Yayasan IAR Indonesia (IAR) was requested by the Agency for Natural
Resources Conservation in Jakarta (BKSDA), to assist in the capturing and
translocation of a number of Long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis) in the
area of Muara Angke. The reason for this, according to this agency, was that
undocumented complaints were made about macaques coming within close
proximity to housing areas and becoming a nuisance to the public.
In October and November 2009, as IAR did not take any action, BKSDA started
capturing macaques in this area. A minimum of 30 macaques were captured, and
taken to the BKSDA facility, Tegal Alur Rescue centre in Jakarta. This facility was
not equip for such a large number of macaques thus there was no appropriate
housing enclosures for these macaques. Due to this unfortunate situation, most
of the macaques had to remain in small transport cages for quite a long
period.Since then, BKSDA has several times requested that IAR translocate these
macaques to another area or as a second option, move the macaques to the IAR
rescue facility in Ciapus, Bogor. Despite the continuous effort from IAR to try and
stop more capturing of wild macaques and further moving them to the IAR
facility, BKSDA through the central office in Jakarta, the Department of
Biodiversity Conservation (KKH), in April 2010 issued a letter to IAR requesting
the immediate transfer of these macaques in Tegal Alur to the IAR facility
alluding in this letter the intention for continuous capturing. Soon after, on the
15th of April of 2010 IAR translocated 16 macaques from Tegal Alur to the IAR
facility.
During the standard protocol for quarantine at IAR, all macaques were tested for
tuberculosis (TB) as per international standards for animal handling and medical
guidelines and standard operating procedures. Prior to testing at the IAR facility,
none of these individuals had been subjected to any testing at the previous
centre. Thus, far the IAR facility had not had an outbreak of TB at the centre.
However, results from a few of these macaques showed positive towards several
TB tests and also for malaria tests. Following protocols and to avoid the spread of
this zoonotic disease to animal personnel, all 16 macaques had to be euthanized.
In the mean time, IAR Indonesia also received requests from residents of the
Pantai Indah Kapuk Estate, submitted through BKSDA DKI Jakarta, to handle the
macaque conflict around AKF. In order to understand more in depth and the
extent of this situation, a conflict management strategy for a long-term solution
to the problem was suggested by IAR. With the financial assistance by BUAV UK,
IAR-I started an in-depth survey in order to find out the nature of the human-
macaque conflict in the area of Angke Kapuk Forest and surroundings (AKF), as
well as formulate possible solutions. IAR-I and BKSDA East Jakarta agreed on a
technical partnership on the “effort in management of the conflicts between
humans and long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis) in the area of Angke
Kapuk Forest and surroundings”. The MoU was made official on the 1st of
December 2010 for a six month term.
One of the main objectives of this study was to find out whether the macaque
population in Angke Kapuk forest and surroundings was indeed overpopulated
and whether the carrying capacity of this forest was over. Finding clear evidences
that this population of macaques is not over the habitat carrying capacity will be
considered a strong argument to avoid culling or translocation of these
macaques.
2.2 Human-macaque conflicts
Human animal conflicts (HAC) are on the rise in Indonesia due to habitat
reduction and human encroachment. Scientific evidence thru surveys have
proven that human- wildlife conflicts are increasing (Conover and Decker, 1991).
When humans encroach on an ecosystem,, changes are made by introducing
new species of plants and animals (Messmer, 2000). Changes such as these effect
the habitation of animals within the ecosystem.
Long-tailed macaques are amongst the most ecologically diverse primates,
inhabiting a wide range of habitats and being highly opportunistic omnivores
(Wheatley, 1999; Fooden 1995; Poirier & Smith, 1974). Macaque populations in
proximity of humans often obtain part of their diet from anthropogenic sources
(Sha et al., 2009). This often leads to a close interface between humans and
macaques, often resulting in conflicts.
2.3. Angke Kapuk Forest (AKF)
Angke Kapuk Forest (AKF) is a conservation area in Indonesia with high
biodiversity, including mangrove forests and diverse fauna including a wealth of
bird species, mammals and reptiles. It consists of the Muara Angke Animal
Sanctuary, Natural Tourism Park, and Muara Angke Protected Forest.
Muara Angke Animal Sanctuary (MAAS), although the smallest animal sanctuary
in Indonesia, supports 91 species of birds and five species of mangrove. The total
area is 25,02 ha and it is geographically located between 6°06′ – 6°10′ South
Latitude and 106°43′ -106°48′ East Longitude.
Natural Tourism Park (NTP) is a conservation area of 99.82 ha which is open to
visitors, focusing on ecotourism. NTP is located at 106°43′ -106°45′ East
Longitude and 6°05′ -6°07′ South Latitude. The borders of NTP are:
On the west: embankment owned by Forestry, Marine and Agriculture
Department of DKI Jakarta Province.
On the south: access road to radar tower and community land.
On the east : PIK and PF
On the north : beach
NTP is a wetland dominated by mangrove as the main vegetation. This area has
been changed into an embankment. Mangrove takes up to 40% of the
vegetation.
Muara Angke Protected Forest (PF) with an area of 44.25 ha is under the
authority of Forestry, Marine and Agriculture Department of DKI Jakarta
Province. PF is located alongside a beach of 5 km in length and 100 m in width.
Functions of this area include:
- To protect from beach abrasion, an erosion of the beach caused by sea
waves.
- To prevent sea water infiltrating to the land
- As food and breeding area for fish
- Form a buffer for wind for inland.
- As a habitat and food source for wild animals, especially birds
- An area to preserve mangrove trees.
2.3.1. Biodiversity of AKF
Secondary data was collected in order to determine the biodiversity of
the area. Amongst the mammal species long-tailed macaques are the only
primate species found today in this habitat; squirrels and five different species of
bats can be found as well. According to biodiversity surveys carried out by
Jakarta Green Monster (Fauna and Flora International- Indonesian programme)
in 2010, 104 species of birds could be found in this habitat. , as one endemic
species of this habitat (see appendix 2).
As for the biodiversity of Flora, up to eight species of mangrove can be found ,
but also other species such as tropical almond, coconut, amongst others (see
appendix 2).
2.3.2 Socio-economic data (literacy level and active population)
According to data from Kelurahan Pluit, Kecamatan Penjaringan Jkt-Utara
of December 2010 (appendix 3), only about 1,3% in the people in this sub-district
has no school, while 4,2% would not have finished the elementary school. 14,6%
has university studies.
The main occupation/job is private, government or military (41,2%) while 8% of
the population are fisherman. 2,8% of the population are unemployed and 1,8%
are poor.
Data on PIK, the housing complex in which one of the conflicts takes place, was
not available. In general in this area the economic status is high, the Mediterania
housing complex is quite luxurious and demographic data was not public domain.
3. METHODS
3.1 Literature research
In order to gather general information on the study area, we undertook a
literature review to compile available data on the following:
- geographical data on community borders, data on space usage and land cover
(housing and embankment).
- information about biodiversity of the forest; animal species and their protection
status in AKF.
- Socio-economical factors at AKF.
3.2 Population survey (Preliminary study)
Long-tailed macaque population surveys were performed from 6-8 December
2010 and 14-16 December 2010. The purpose of the population surveys was to
establish primary data collection on:
- gathering data and information on the latest condition of long-tailed
macaques in AKF.
- establishing populations, distribution and group composition of long-tailed
macaques in AKF
- Identifying possible conflict between long-tailed macaques and humans and
their causes.
Surveys were undertaken in all forest areas which reportedly belong to the home
range and distribution of the long-tailed macaque. Here, the Visual Encounter
Survey (VES) Method was used. VES are conducted by observers walking through
a designated area for a prescribed time, visually searching (in a systematic way,
e.g. transects), for animals. The number of animals encountered are noted along
with time elapsed during the survey. Observations were carried out in the
morning and afternoon during the monkey’s active period to increase the chance
of sightings.
Furthermore, surveys were taken in surrounding residential areas using a
transect survey method. Observation in the nearby settlement made by using
transects in advance to conduct the observation made it easier for the survey
team to conduct the surveys.
Data recorded during the surveys include location of encounter, macaque
population count (quantitative survey); and behavioural observations to
establish the most common activities carried out by the macaques. Fruit and
plant species which are potential food items for macaques; sightings of animal
species other than long-tailed macaques were also noted. Data collection about
numbers for each group was repeated at three different occasions at different
times of day.
3.3 Geographical Information System (GIS) mapping
To determine land area and land cover, maps have been created using.
The purpose of GIS mapping was to establish the percentage and location of the
total area which is served as a natural habitat for the long-tailed macaques. This
is very important, because the size of macaque habitat is an essential factor in
determination of the potential (maximum) population size. Combined with the
population estimates obtained during the field surveys, it allowed us to
determine the potential for conflict and the existence or non-existence of
macaque overpopulation in the area. For that some calculations were carried out
to find out the carrying capacity of this habitat.
GIS mapping on landcover and homerange of long-tailed macaques inside AKF
was made using the data that was obtained. Method used for mapping the area
of NTP, AS and PF of Muara Angke was based on Satellite Image Interpretation.
The satellite image was obtained from the latest Google Earth. The classification
of different ground classes was done by differentiating an object by its texture,
colour and appearance. In that way, the information about land cover and usage
was obtained. Ground checks were carried out to validate the appearance of the
object identified from satellite. Ground checks were carried out on the 9th and
10th of April 2011 were carried out on 38 spots spreading from the area of NTP,
MAAS and PF.
3.4 Population monitoring (Secondary study)
Population monitoring took place from 23-29 March 2011. This
monitoring activity served as a reassertion from the previous population surveys
undertaken in December 2010. The population monitoring was done in the same
locations as the population surveys. The purpose of the population monitoring
was as follows:
-Reassert the results from the macaque population surveys that took place in
December 2010.
- Establish group composition (age and sex)
- Establish home range of macaque groups
- Establish daily activity patterns between 06.00 and 18.00
- Locate potential food sources and establish food potential
- Photographic evidence (resting tree, activities, conflict potential with
community, open garbage for easy access, unsuitable garbage bins, etc)
- Delimiting the area
- Gather information about the long-tailed macaques from different sources;
residents, visitors, NGOs, and Rangers.
The method used during population monitoring was the same as the population
survey, the Visual Encountered Survey. Not only the number of macaques was
recorded, also behavioural data were taken using the focal animal sampling
technique. With this method, one individual macaque is observed and all
activities and behaviour are recorded during a time interval of 10 minutes. The
data from individuals will be considered as representative for group activity
(Fachrul, 2006). Observation was divided into 3 periods:
a. Morning : 06.00-10.00
b. Noon : 10.00-14.00
c. Afternoon : 14.00-18.00
Recording time was ten minutes during the interval all criteria and activity that
happened was observed and recorded. The activity patterns observed were
grouped in one behaviour series, such as:
a. Rest : sit, lay and stand
b. Moving: walking, jump, and climb
c. Eat: hold, pick, put inside the mouth
d. Social Activity: Play, mating, grooming, and vocalization.
Data gathered during the survey comprises: encounter spots where macaques
were seen; activities carried out by them; and number of individuals. Fruit plant
species and other type of plant which appear to be potential as natural food for
the macaques were also recorded. Encounters of other animals other than the
long-tailed macaques were also recorded.
To determined homerange of each group, the team used minimum convec
polygon method by connecting outer encounter spots with Macaca fascicularis.
3.5 Evaluation of the Muara Angke River
Jakarta Green Monster (JGC) programme organised by Fauna and Flora
International Indonesian Programme, focuses its activities in Muara Angke
protected areas and MAAS. They suggested that the Angke River is the cause of
the problem of macaques coming to the residential area. Therefore, an
observation and evaluation of the importance of this river as well evaluate the
link between macaque presence and the river.
3.6 Questionnaire distribution
Questionnaires were used as a tool to determine how residents perceived
the presence of long-tailed macaques in their immediate living environment. The
questionnaire (see Appendix 1) was given to a representative as a sample of the
total community. Target respondents of the questionnaire were residents from
the nearby community and visitors. The questionnaire consisted of 14 questions,
to find out the extent of knowledge on the existence and function of the
conservation area; the presence of macaques and their ecological function;
conflict potential; and perceived sources of these conflicts. Total respondents
amounted to 84 people (22 community and 62 visitors). Statistical data was
inserted into Microsoft Excel and later using SPSS 17.0 was analysed using stats
test Fishers Exact Test.
Some obstacles in distributing the questionnaire included:
Incomplete data about members of the community: no data about the people
living in the housing area was available
Denied permission from the Management of PIK housing with the excuse that
they were uncomfortable with IAR –I staff approaching the residence.
3.7 Socialization with the public.
Another field activity in this program was the awareness and education
campaign to nearby communities and visitors, with the purpose to increase
awareness on ecological functions of the conservation area and its animals
especially the long-tailed macaque.
4. RESULTS
4.1 Population Survey (Preliminary study)
The number of long-tailed macaques encountered during the population
surveys were a total of 106 macaques between five different areas. This was
plotted in a satellite map (Fig. 1). The distribution of individuals from each area
was expressed in Table 1.
Fig 1: Map showing the different areas NTP, PF,MAAS and Pluit Residence. Area 1 represents macaques from NTP, 2 represents macaques at PF, 3 shows a church that borders PF and MAAS, 4 and 5 represents macaques at MAAS and area 6 represents macaques from the Pluit residence.
Table 1: Macaque population distribution in Muara Angke based on areas MAAS, PF, NTP and Pluit residence.
Area on Map Location Total
1 NTP 3 individuals
2 PF 17 individuals
4 PF - MAAS 25 individuals
5 MAAS 45 individuals
6 Pluit Residence 16 individuals
4.2 GIS mapping
GIS mapping of the 4 four areas MAAS, PF and NTP (Fig. 2) was divided
into seven categories of land cover which are grassy area, apple mangrove
vegetation (Sonneratia sp), mangrove vegetation (Rizhopora sp), nypa
vegetation (Nypa sp), waste, buildable land and bodies of water. From the
result of plant species, Rizhopora was the most dominating species and is highly
distributed throughout the entire study area, especially around PF, with a
percentage of 35,09%. Apple mangrove, widely present in the area, is one plant
species that macaques often consume.
Fig 2: GIS map of the land cover at the Angke Kapuk Forest (MAAS, PF and NTP)
The land at MAAS (Fig. 3) was found to be dominated by apple mangrove with a
percentage of 38,95%, then swamp or water mostly covered by common water
hyacinth 25,87%, mangrove species 22,05%, Nypa 10,64% and 2,5% consist of
grass species and garbage. Combined with food potential for long-tailed
macaques, we hypothesised that MAAS could be classified as an ideal habitat for
long-tailed macaques .
Fig 3: GIS map of the land cover at Muara Angke Animal Sanctuary
The land use map of PF (Fig 4) shows an area dominated by mangrove plants
56,52%, water 24,71%, Nypa 6,63%, grass 5,51%, apple mangrove 4,15% and
others 3%. Out of these, macaques especially liked the Acacia plants, grey
mangrove, grape-alike plants and apple mangrove. This area holds potential to
bee an appropriate macaque habitat; the survey showed that macaques hardly
left the area to look for food elsewhere, suggesting sufficient food source.
NTP used to be an embankment location, but now served as an ecotourism area.
The distribution at NTP (Fig 5) despite being an area for mangrove rehabilitation
was still dominated by water by 71,31% of the total area, while mangrove
vegetation only took up 19,97% of the land leaving the rest for buildings. With
an area of 99,98 ha this area was found to only inhabited four individuals which
meant food was abundant and low on the possibility of a conflict occurring.
Fig 4: GIS map of the land cover at the Protected Forest (PF) area.
Fig 5: GIS map of the land distribution at the National Tourism Area (NTP)
4.3 Population Monitoring (Secondary study)
4.3.1 Long-tailed macaque (Macaca fascicularis) Groups
Observation on the long-tailed macaque groups were carried out twice,
by population survey (December 2010) and population monitoring (March 2011).
Findings obtained during the population monitoring were taken as the final
population count since it was the latest and more thorough method. Results
from the survey and monitoring shows that there are ten groups inside and
outside of the AKF area with a total member of 191 individuals. Data on the age
group of these individual, area, and number is represented in the tables in
appendix 4.
Fig 6 represents the macaque groups inside and outside the AKF protected area
as well as the homerange of each group. The homerange was established by
observing the furthest point at which a member of each group was
spotted.There were five groups inside the protected area and three groups
outside the area.From the macaques inside the area there are found to be large
groups in area marked 4 and 5 of the map, where each had about two sub-
groups. From the home range seen there is a clear difference between group 5 in
PF and group 1 in NTP. Group 5 has 50 individuals in an area of 14,03 ha while
Group 1 consist of four individuals in an area of 15,87 ha. This meant that Group
1 had more space per individual as compared to Group 5. This is very important
information when considering conflict areas. Carrying capacity of macaques
within an area is closely related to the degree of conflict that can occur due to
migration of animals as a result of lack of space.
Groups inside the protected area :
Group No 1: in a total area of 99,82 ha there are only four macaques, with
enough natural food potential and very little conflict potential.
Group No. 2: is at the area of station two of PF, composed by 18 macaques with
a smaller home range, because this area is directly bordered by the sea and also
because of restricted movement of the macaques due to the presence of dogs
which are used for security reasons. Based on information from the residencial
security authorities, these dog were intentionally kept at specific locations to
prevent macaques from coming inside the housing area.
Group No 3: located in the PF area where there is station No. 3 guarded by
officers from Ocean and Agriculture Department of DKI Jakarta. The total
number of members in group 3 was estimated at 27 macaquess. Their movement
started from the edge of the western area up to half of the area where they
could come into contact with members in group 4.
Group No 4 consist of 48 macaques which is divided into two sub-groups that
share a wide home range when searching for food. The areas are PF where their
resting site is, located around security station 3 and in the area of Angke river
group. The home range of this group is wide starting from the border of river up
to the area where they look for food around station 2.
Group No. 5 is the largest with a total number of 50 macaques which is divided
into two groups. These two groups were easily differentiated by two individuals
with permanent physical markings therefore they were called “handless” (cut-off
hand) and “mata satu” (one eyed) also referred to as ‘Jeggers’ group. These
groups shared the same resting area inside the area of MAAS but have different
areas to look for food. “Handless” group had a home range from MAAS up to
Regina Caeli Church and entrance gate of Mediterania PIK complex housing,
while “mata satu” group or usually called as “Jegger” group had a home range
from the resting area up to security station 1 (office of MAAS) up to the entrance
of MAAS.
Groups outside the protected area:
Group No. 6 located around Pluit housing, particularly across the MAAS which is
separated by the Angke River. There are 32 macaquess in this group with a home
range from the park inside the housing (300-400 meters) up to the border of
Angke river also crossing the bridge of Angke River alongway the river to the
south.
Group No.7: composed by four macaques located at the park near Cengkareng
River on the back of PIK hospital. They are also seen active on the street and
possibly they might have their resting area around security station three in PF.
Group No. 8: is the group monitored outside the area. This group located around
the stranded building alongway the mainstreet of PIK with an area of
approximately 6 ha. Information from forest rangers reveal that group 8 consist
of eight individuals (six adults and two babies).
Fig 6: Population distribution of macaque groups and home range within and outside
the forest protected area.
4.3.2 Potential food source for long-tailed macaques at AKF
Macaque population distribution is dependent on the potential food
available in the area. From one week of observation, repeated three times a day,
it was observed that there were 18 natural plants mostly consumed as food.
Parts of the plants eaten are the leaves, fruits, stalk, bark, root, flowers, topmost
and innermost part of a palm (umbut), etc. Potential plants that were consumed
by macaques varied based on the plant composition in the area. Besides natural
food, the macaques also ate from easily available garbage, either directly from
the common bin or from domestic garbage bins in front of houses. They also
consumed garbage that was available in the Angke River.
An inventory of plants and potential food sources for long-tailed macaques was
made at the four different locations, in order to establish the availability of food
for the macaques.
NTP: Plant and food potential in this area include: Rizhopora sp, whitelead tree,
grey mangrove, apple mangrove, mango, starfruit, sawo and garbage from
housing areas.
PF: The dominant edible plant species for macaques in this area is Rhizopora sp.
Other potential food sources include Acacia, grey mangrove, sea hibiscus, white
lead tree, and insects such as ants and termites that live on the trees.
MAAS: Apple mangrove, nypa and common water hyacinth are the dominant
plant species that can be food source for the macaques. Other food sources are:
grey mangrove, milky mangrove, weeping fig, Rhizophora sp and tropical
almonds, as well as insects and garbage from the Muara Angke River.
Pluit Residence: Long-tailed macaques in the Pluit Residence often feed on fruit
trees planted by the community, including Otaheite gooseberry, mango, water
mango, coconut, banana, tamarind, tropical almond and bamboo. Furthermore,
the macaques feed on the offerings which are placed on the street as part of a
daily religious ritual.
The MAAS group relied heavily on garbage for daily food. For group “Handless”
the intensity of foraging in the area of Pluit Residence was seen (almost) every
afternoon from 3 p.m. up to around 6 p.m. Indonesian western time. Besides
garbage, they also got food from people in cars who stopped to feed the
macaques usually with nuts, bread or crackers. For “Jegger”’s group most of their
time was spent getting food from garbage bins around the MAAS office (security
station no 1 BKSDA office), forest rangers and from food given by visitors. We
believe that one reason this continues to happen was due to a lack of
information given to the public to not feed the macaques. From this study, it was
found that many of the macaques around the Angke Kapuk Forest ate garbage
either found at residential areas or carried by the Angke River. Around 40% of
total time of foraging was spent at garbage disposal sites where they were found
to eat almost anything such as leftover rice, fruit skin, fruit, coconut, vegetables,
bread, etc.
4.3.3 Conflict potential and information from public regarding macaques
After meeting some officials and members of the public personally, we
were able to get a better understanding of where people felt the problem with
the macaques arose from. According to security officers of the Pluit residency,
complaints from residents about macaque disturbance were believed to be not
severe. After speaking to some residents from the area, they mentioned that the
macaques were seen on average, around once a week; mostly in the park or
basketball courts.
While the management of PIK (Mr. Tuko the Security Coordinator) claimed that
the existence of macaques was disturbing and a nuisance, no accurate data
(when, who, where and documentation) backing up this claim was provided to
us. This indicates the importance of accurate documentation of each individual
complaint, for which a standard form designed for this could be used to
understand the extent of the situation in which a complaint was made. For
example, one person could complaint for coming in visual contact with a
macaque while another would complaint only if the animal was in close
proximity with a human. It was clear from our discussions with the housing
management that they just wanted the macaques to be relocated out of the
area.
According to a kindergarden teacher (Ms. Evelyn) from BPK Penabur School,
located about 10 meters from PF, macaques would come into the school facility
occasionally but she had never seen then damage public facilities or physically
disturb any students. According to ranger officials, macaques that came in close
contact with people were previously captive, and was believed to have been
released in the area by owners from outside the housing complex or escaped.
From IAR’s own experience with pet macaque, owners would usually give then
up when a macaque reached sexual maturity which usually led then to become
aggressive thus making them unsuitable pets or if they got too big. Ex- captive
macaques were often identified by a permanent mark around their abdomen
caused by previously being chained or tied by a rope at the waist, a common way
to kept a pet macaque. These macaques were unable to join the wild group, and
roamed around residential areas in close proximity to people due to previous
exposure to humans. The following are reports of ex-captive macaques that were
seen (identified by permanent marking around waist) in the area that was a
cause of conflict.
On 12 March 2011, a macaque attacked people on a boat on Angke
River, at the border of MAAS and PF. The macaque was said to be
aggressive and had a rope around his abdomen.
One of the four individuals found behind PIK Hospital (no. 7 on the
distribution map) has a rope around his abdomen.
Pig-tailed macaques (Macaca nemestrina) around the location of BPK
Penabur School and St. Nicholas International School located in front
of the border of PF. Pig-tailed macaques are not indigenous to the
Java Island and are brought in from Sumatera to be kept as pets.
One individual macaque with a permanent marking around his waist
lives alongside Sudiyatmo toll.
4.4 Muara Angke river analysis
Angke River is one of the rivers used as a waterways from province to
province through Jakarta. Upstream of Angke river is Semplak, Bogor regency,
West Java and ends at Jakarta Gulf. Total area of the Angke River is estimated at
54,267 ha. Angke River flows through Jakarta with a length of about 35 km and
flows up to northern Jakarta where many people are residence near the river.
According to Government Decree KDKI Jakarta No. 582 year 1995 about in the
area of DKI Jakarta, riverflow systems are divided into two developing areas:
(1) Western Developing Area (from upstream river of Jakarta up to Cengkareng
Drain) which includes a body of water group C which is usually used for fishery
and animal husbandry; and (2)Center Developing Area (from water gate of
Cengkareng Drain up to the end of Angke river) is included as body of water
group D which is use for agriculture, urban industry and power plant for
industrial energy (NKLD DKI Jakarta, 2000). Home littering, industrial waste, and
houses have reduced both the quality and the quantity of the Angke river; it
reduced from 25m width and 12 m deep in the 1960s, to 10m width and 1 m
deep right now (Kali Angke Health Study). This leads to frequent flooding of
settlements nearby the Angke River.
4.4.1 Changes in water flow
Previously, the estuary for Angke river was located on Angke estuary;
however, since the Cengkareng Drain was built in 1980’s, Angke River ends in
Cengakareng Drain Estuary. Consequently, the river does not flow anymore,
rather has become stagnated. The water has turned black and dark, with
resulting lack of oxygen - essential for the production of bacteria that kill litter
and waste. Currently, the river is often compared to a black, reeking gutter
4.4.2 Alternate Function of a Land
River banks are estimated to be reduced between 28% and 35 % due to
usage of river banks for housing and industry.
4.4.3 Garbage
According to the Cleaning Service report (2005), total waste disposed
from all Jakarta covered an area of 27.966 m3. Based on the fact that 65,05% is
organic waste and 34,95% is non organic waste, it is concluded that this garbage
comes mostly from domestic sources. A large part of the garbage in Angke river
is disposed by people living near the river. IAR Indonesia investigated the
garbage situation along the Angke river from Pesing Poglar bridge until the end
of Angke river, and identified five spots of garbage piles. People living along the
river dispose their waste into the river, while the intersection of Angke river with
West Flood canal brings garbage from Pesanggrahan via Ciliwung river and
Mookervart channel. It is obvious why Muara Angke has become one of the most
polluted places along the North coast of Jakarta.
4.4.4 Domestic water Pollution
From the water pollution monitoring report by BPLHD DKI Jakarta year
2005, the parameters of water pollution measured in Pantai Indah Kapuk (body
of water type D) shows that the water quality does not fulfil many parameters
such as dissolved oxygen, mercury, phosphate and more (see Table 2).
4.4.5 Angke River Contamination Impact at MAAS
From an ecosystem point of view, contamination of the Angke River
indirectly caused a reduction in the quality of land and water. One ecosystem
that had been seriously impacted from the contamination of the Angke River is
MAAS in DKI Jakarta Province. Right now this Animal Sanctuary is threatened by
the increased human activity nearby. This caused indirect and direct pressure on
the area. The riverflow of Angke River brings 1000 m3 of garbage each day which
gets casted in MAAS. After a big flood in Jakarta in February 2007, four tons of
plastic garbage were gathered while for non-plastic garbage was 206 Kg. About
95% of the garbage found were household plastics. Mangrove ecosystem and
the flora and fauna in MAAS are threatened by the amount of garbage around
the area.
The impact of this it multiple including changing wildlife behaviour, such as
feeding patterns – especially seen in long-tailed macaques. Whereas before,
these macaques ate mangrove fruits, with the increasing availability of garbage,
these animals now opt to feed on waste instead. This leads to health risks, for
example due to the swallowing of plastic which can affect their digestion system
and can cause death. Water birds are also effected the same way.. An even more
worrying problem is the chemical contamination from non organic rubbish
especially from metals causing a the high level of contamination inside the area
that will affect the life of the mangrove ecosystem itself
Table 2: Status on quality of parameters that were tested at the Angke River in Pantai
Indah Kapuk Bridge in 2005
Parameter Unit Average Quality
Standard Status
Dissolved
Oxygen mg/L 0,95 3
Not fulfilling
quality standards
Mercury mg/L 0,0008 0,0005 Not fulfilling
quality standards
Phosphate mg/L 1,21 0,5 Not fulfilling
quality standards
BOD mg/L 13,42 20 Fulfilling quality
standards
COD mg/L 34,84 30 Not fulfilling
quality standards
Coliform colony/100
mL
8,63 x
106 2 x 104
Not fulfilling
quality standards
Source : BPLHD Propinsi DKI Jakarta, 2005
The potential impacts of river contamination are evident in Angke River and
MAAS. Water quality is seriously decreasing and survival of flora and fauna as
well as the mangrove ecosystem are under threat. The reduced water quality
and impacts have negative consequences for people living within the area.
4.5. Questionnaire Results
It was found that 27% of residents knew they lived near a conservation
area, and 86% of the residents claimed to understand what the function of the
area is. This implies that although the community understand the importance of
a conservation area, awareness is needed on the fact that there is a conservation
area close to their home. 73% of the community and 53% of visitors said to
ignore macaques when they came in contact with them, higher than the amount
of people that choose to feed the macaques (4%). Only 18% of the residents
claimed to ever have been disturbed by macaques, against 57% for visitors.
Visitors feel disturbed when macaques beg for food or even steal their food. 77%
of the community and 57% of visitors have seen macaques looking for food in
garbage disposal areas. Majority of respondents – 50% of residents and 74% of
visitors did not see the signs which prohibited the public to feed the macaques.
With regards to relocation 50% of the residents requested for the macaques to
be relocated to a different area, while50% of visitors opted for them to be
placed in rehabilition centres. A further analysis using statistical test (Fishers
Exact Test) to find an association between findings was carried out with 2
significant difference found. There was a significant amount (p<0.05) of residents
that noticed the signage on macaques as compared to visitors, in which visitors
noticed it more than residents. The second significant finding (p<0.05) was that
there was an increased negative perception of the macaques that was related to
high visual contact at garbage sites. This meant that the more people saw
macaques around garbage sites the more likely an ill feeling towards them
occurred. Thirdly, there was a significance (p<0.05) in positive attitude towards
macaques which was related to less negative encounters with macaques.
4.6. Awareness campaigns/ Socialization with the public.
The awareness activities were carried out four times for three target groups:
26 March 2011. Awareness activities with visitors of MAAS about the
importance of reducing garbage disposal, an activity in collaboration with
ransformasi Hijau Jakarta and attended by 100 people. Participants came
from various places (SMAN 32 Jakarta, Kehati, Jerami, students from
University of Indonesia and members of Jakarta Bird Watchers). The activity
started with cleaning non-organic garbage and some common water hyacinth
around MAAS, and ended with an overall evaluation. Transformasi Hijau
Jakarta gave information about the problems with garbage from Jakarta. IAR
Indonesia gave information on the long-tailed macaques and problems in
their habitat.
3 April 2011. Two session meetings with the residents of PIK housing, about
40-45 attendants. This activity was given to the students of a Sunday School
in Regina Caeli Church, located directly next to the MAAS. The age ranged
from 8-11 years old. The students learned about animal welfare, macaques
and how to behave around macaques and why..
9 April 2011. Activities with visitors of MAAS on bird watching community
WTM (Weekend Tanpa ke Mall-Weekend Without Going to the Mall)
participated by 50 people. This program is held every 2 weeks. The activity
started with bird watching until 11 am then continued with informative
presentations followed by question-answer session. Organisations that tool
part were:
1. SBI (Sahabat Burung Indonesia- Friend of Indonesian Bird) presented by
Irma Dana about species and existence of birds in the area.
2. Transformasi Hijau presented by Fadil about garbage awareness,
problems and dangers of garbage to human.
3. IAR-Indonesia presented by Ayut Enggeliah E. about long-tailed
macaques and what to do when they are around. Some questions coming
from participants were: ”What to do when we are close to a group of
macaques?” and ”Why do macaques attack?”
5. DISCUSSION
a. Registration of complaints
For a proper and correct evaluation of the conflict, it is important that
complaints from residents, visitors and other sources are handled correctly and
noted accurately. It is important to record data with respect to: who is reporting,
who is receiving the information, what is the complaint, location, time, and
chronology of the event. It is important to realize that the number of complaints
is only part of the story; the number of people who complain and what the
complaint is regarding are usually of greater significance. It has also been
acknowledged that disturbance to public facilities can cause a negative
perception of people towards the macaques. This includes presence of macaque
groups in public areas, such as: biting electrical and telephone cables, roaming
public roads around Pluit and PIK Housing, and foraging at garbage disposal
areas. In fact, after an interview with security officers of Pluit residents, it was
found that complaints from residents about macaques is not severe.
Approaching the residents directly revealed that most people did not see the
macaques that often, only about once a week in the park or basketball court. To
the contrary, the management of the PIK housing complex (responding the
Coordinator of Security) revealed that the presence of macaques is disturbing for
the neighbours although no data on where, who and when these disturbances
happened. It was obvious that in this area the residents want the macaques out
of the surroundings of their houses.
It was also found that most of the conflict macaques were actually not wild
macaques from the forest habitat, but ex-pet macaques that once were
abandoned by the owners. When people keep macaques as pets, often once the
macaque reaches sexual maturity and becomes aggressive, people abandon and
release macaques in areas such as Muara Angke. As this ex-captive macaques are
used to live with people, they do not fear humans and are more prone to cause
problems and are more difficult to integrate in wild macaque groups.
b. Overpopulation and Carrying capacity
Overpopulation was defined in this study was when the total number of
long-tailed macaques exceeded the ideal number compared to the total area of a
certain habitat. According to Lesson et al. 2004, analysing the data obtained on
population the carrying capacity is calculated as follows:
The potential feeding area is calculated as 19,59 ha. The total macaque
population in SMMA is 50 individuals so that the area per individual is 0,39 ha.
In a wild habitat in which the food resources is only natural resources is 1000kg
biomasa/km2. As the average weight of a macaque is 3-4kg, this means 300-400
individuals/km2 which is about 3 to 4 individual/ha (Lesson et al. 2004).In SMMA
the calculation of the carrying capacity would come as follows: 3 individuals x
19,59 ha = 58,77 individuals to 4 individuals x 19,59 ha = 78,36 individuals.
High density will increase tension and aggression among the members of a
population (Alikodra 2002). The average population density of long-tailed
macaques in MAAS is two individuals per ha, the average density of PF is also 2
individuals / ha (90 individual/45 ha), while in NTP 1 individual / 24 ha (4
individuals/99 ha). Like MAAS, PF, NTP fits the carrying capacity of macaques
with the area. However, for the group outside the area especially at the Pluit
housing their carrying capacity of 22 individuals per ha is way above the average
density and this plays a part in causing conflicts between people. Fighting for
territory because their number is increasing per group would also be a concern.
c. Easy access to human food
Although the number of macaques meet the carrying capacity of the area
and have abundant natural food available, easy human garbage seems to be an
attraction to them. The macaques are moving towards urban areas since garbage
is available from garbage bins that can be easily opened by the macaques.
Garbage along the river also serves to attract them to forage around the river.
Furthermore, feeding of the macaques by people only habituated them to
getting food from people. There is not enough understanding and socialization
about the prohibition to feed macaque. Punishments and fines should be given
to anyone caught feeding macaques whether it is inside or around the area of
community settlement
6. Recommendations
The following recommendations are based on the findings from the field
study. Both short-term and long-term actions are needed to effectively tackle the
conflict issues.
6.a. Short Term
1. Translocation of previously owned macaques or macaques within the housing
area that have a potential to disturb community and public facilities. To take
direct action when there is a complaint and to prioritise information for data
taken from the AKF area.
2. Providing warning signs/ boards to prohibit feeding macaques in the area of
MAAS, PF and NTP. Establish punishment or fines with BKSDA for offender found
feeding or dumping unwanted macaques. Also providing a contact number for
the public to call and complaint about conflicts or macaque disturbance. These
sign boards will have to be placed at appropriate areas that will be easily visible
and can be most effective.
3. Provide closed garbage bins or special macaque proof bins around all areas
where macaques were getting food from garbage to hinder macaques from
getting to the rubbish.
4. Provide awareness campaigns on the existence of macaques inside the area,
importance of keeping the area clean, role of the macaques in the ecosystem,
the importance of conserving the area to different levels of the community
(ranger, housing management/ security, community and visitors).
5. To present this report and findings to the competent authority (BKSDA Jakarta) in
order to collaborate in a common strategy that allows to reduce the number of
complains on human macaque conflict in the area and also to keep these
macaques in their habitat.
6.b. Long Term
1. Provide better buffer zones between conservation areas and housing areas.
Example would be to not plant fruit trees around the area that would attract
macaques. Another possibility would be to plant thorny cactus close to each
other at the border/fence. Urge BKSDA and housing management to not plant
any kind of plants that macaques like near the border fence or around residential
areas that are close to the conservation area, like white leadtree, fruitplant, etc.
7. GRAPHIC MATERIAL ON THE HUMAN-MACAQUE CONFLICT IN ANGKE
People feeding macaques inside the area.
Macaques entering the vicinity of a community
Macaques foraging for food amongst garbage inside the area/ ranger office and
Angke River
PF area, Group No. 2 (people feeding macaques with the presence of security
officers of PIK ).
Pluit Housing, example of a house that has placed fruits and food outside as a
religious offering (small red structure next to window on first floor).
Inappropriate garbage disposals and garbage bins that are not macaque proof.
Example of a closed garbage bin in PIK Katri, that is macaque proof.
8. REFERENCES
Aldrich-Blake, F.P.G 1976. Long Tailed Macaque dalam D.J. Chivers. 1980. Malayan Forest Primates. Plenum Press, New York
Alikodra HS. 2002. Pengelolaan Satwaliar. Jilid I. YPFK. Bogor.
BPLHD - Badan Pengelolaan Lingkungan Hidup DKI, Jakarta2005
Daniels, S.E, and Walker, G.B. 2001. Working throught Environmental Conflict: The Colaborative Learning Approach. Praeger Publishers, Wesport. Connecticut.
Fachrul,F.M. 2006. Metode Sampling Bioekologi. Jakarta : PT. Bumi Aksara Kantor statistik DKI Jakarta dan Biro LH DKI Jakarta (NKLD-DKI Jakarta), 2000 Kelurahan Pluit, Kecamatan Penjaringan Jkt-Utara, Desember 2010 Lekagul and Mc. Neely. 1977. Mammals of Thailan, Kurusapha. Ladprao Press,
Bangkok.
Lesson C, Kyes RC., Iskandar E. 2004. Estimating population density of Longtailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis) on Tinjil Island, Indonesia, using the line transect sampling method. Jurnal Primatologi Indonesia 4(1):7-14.
Piorier, F. E. and Smith, E.O. 1974. The Crab-Eating Macaque (Macaca
fascicularis) of Angaur Island, Palau, Micronesia. Folia Primatology 22: 258-306
Van der Pijl, L. 1982. Principles of dispersal in higher plants. Spinger-Verlag.
Berlin, Germany. 161 pp
Wandia I N. 2007. Struktur dan Keragaman Genetik Populasi Lokal Monyet Ekor Panjang (Macaca fascicularis) di Jawa Timur, Bali, dan Lombok. Disertasi. PRM. IPB. Bogor. 2007.
Wheatley BP. 1989. Diet of Balinese temple macaquess, Macaca fascicularis. Kyoto University Overseas Research Report of Studies on Asian Non-Human Primates. Kyoto University Primate Research Institute. No. 7:62-75.
APPENDIX 1. Questionnaire
Dialog with community and filling the questionnaire
Questionnaire
List of Question (Questionnaire): Date : Name : Age : Female/Male : Religion : 1. Do you know that there is a conservation area around your housing estate?
a. Yes, where……. b. No
2. Do you know the function of conservation area?
a. Yes b. No
3. If your answer for number 2 is (yes), you can pick more than one answer.
Function of Conservation Area? a. Animal habitat b. Prevention from abration c. Absorbing carbon d. A Place to throw garbage e. A place to dumb animal f. Water absorbsion Area
4. Have you ever been to conservation area?
a. Yes b. No
5. Where do you put your garbage can at your house?
a. In front of the house (outside/at the yard), opened garbage can b. In front of the house (inside a container), closed garbage can c. Outside, in particular place
6. Have you ever seen group of macaques near your house? a. Yes, where……… b. No
7. What would you do if you see a group of macaques near your house?
a. Ignore b. Keeping them away c. Give food d. Others: ………………………..
8. Are the macaquess ever disturbed you or your family? a. Yes b. Never c. Others: …………………………
9. If your answer at number 8 is (yes) Have you ever seen the macaques near the garbage can? a. Yes b. Never c. Others: ………………………..
10. Have you ever seen a group of macaques looking for food near the garbage can?
a. Yes b. Never
11. Have you ever seen anybody feed the macaques? a. Yes b. Never
12. Have you ever heard or seen any sign to not feed the macaques?
a. Yes b. Never
13. Do you think those group of macaquess disturbed you and your family?
a. Yes b. No c. Others: ………………………….
14. If your answer at number 13 is (yes)
What do you think we should do with them? ………………………………..
Thank you for your participation
APPENDIX 2: Flora and Fauna in AKF
Bird Species Around AKF
No
Indonesian
Name Scientific Name English Name Status
1
Pecuk padi
kecil Phalacrocorax niger Little Cormorant
2
Pecuk padi
hitam
Phalacrocorax
sulcirostris
little black
cormorant
3 Pecuk ular asia
Anhinga
melanogaster Oriental darter Protected
4 Cangak abu Ardea cinerea Grey heron
5 Cangak merah Ardea purpurea Purple heron
6
Bambangan
hitam Dupetor flavicollis Black bittern
7
Bambangan
kuning Ixobrychus sinensis Yellow bittern
8
Bambangan
merah
Ixobrychus
cinnamomeus Cinnamon Bittern
9 Blekok sawah Ardeola speciosa Javan pond heron Protected
10 Kokokan laut Butorides striatus Little heron
11
Kowak malam
kelabu Nycticorax nyticorax Night heron
12 Kuntul besar Egretta alba Great egret Protected
13 Kuntul kecil Egretta garzetta Little egret Protected
14 Kuntul kerbau Bubulcus ibis Cattle egret Protected
15 Kuntul perak Egretta intermedia Intermediate egret Protected
16 Bangau Bluwok Mycteria cinerea Milky stork Protected
17 Itik benjut Anas gibberifrons Grey teal
18 Belibis batu Dendrocygna javanica
Lesser Whistling
Duck
19
Elang alap
nipon Accipiter gularis
Japanese
sparrowhawk Protected
20 Alap-alap sapi Falco moluccensis Spotted Kestrel Protected
21 Kareo padi
Amaurornis
phoenicurus
White breasted
waterhen
22 Mandar batu Gallinula chloropus Common moorhen
23 Mandar besar Porphyrio porphyrio Purple Swamphen
24 Tikusan Merah Porzana fusca
Ruddy-breasted
crake
25
Tikusan alis
putih Porzana cinerea
White-browed
crake
26 Dara laut tiram Sterna nilotica Gull-billed Tern Protected
27
Dara laut
jambul Sterna bergii Great Crested Tern Protected
28 Trinil pantai Tringa hypoleucos
Commom
Sandpiper
29 Terik Asia Glareola maldivarum Oriental Pranticole
30 Tekukur biasa Streptopelia chinensis Sppoted dove
31 Punai gading Treron vernans
Pink-necked green
pigeon
32 Pergam hijau Ducula aenea
Green Imperial
Pigeon
33 Pergam laut Ducula bicolor
Pied Imperial
Pigeon
34 Dederuk jawa
Streptopelia
bitorquata Island collared-dove
35 Uncal buau Macropygia emiliana Ruddy cuckoo-dove
36 Perkutut Jawa Geopelia striata Zebra Dove
37 Betet biasa Psittacula alexandri
Red breasted
Parakeet
38
Kangkok
melayu Cuculus fugax
Hodgson's Hawk-
Cuckoo
39 Wiwik kelabu Cacomantis merulinus Plaintive Cuckoo
40 Kedasi Chrysococcyx basalis Horsfield's Bronze
Australia Cuckoo
41
Bubut pacar
jambul
Clamantor
coromandus
Chestnut-winged
Cuckoo
42
Bubut alang-
alang Centropus bengalenis Lesser coucal
43 Bubut jawa Centropus nigrorufus Sunda coucal
44 Cabak kota Caprimulgus affinis Savannah Nigthjar
45 Walet linchi Collocalia linchi Cave swiftlet
46
Walet sarang
putih Collocalia fuchipaga Edible-nest swiftlet
47
Walet sarang
hitam Collocalia maxima Black-nest Swiftlet
48
Walet palem
asia Cypsiurus balasinensis Asian palm swift
49 Kapinis rumah Apus affinis Little swift
50 Cekakak Cina Halcyon pileata
Black-capped
Kingfisher Protected
51 Cekakak sungai Todirhamphus chloris Collared kingfisher Protected
52 Cekakan suci Todirhamphus sanctus Sacred Kingfisher Protected
53 Cekakak Jawa Halcyon cyanoventris Javan Kingfisher Protected
54 Raja udang biru Alcedo coerulescens
Small blue
kingfisher Protected
55
Raja udang
meninting Alcedo meninting
Blue-eared
kingfisher Protected
56 Kirik-kirik laut Merops philippinus
Blue-tailed Bee-
eater
57 Caladi tilik Picoides moluccensis Sunda woodpecker
58 Caladi ulam Dendrocopus macei
Fulvous breasted
woodpecker
59
Layang-layang
api Hirundo rustica Barn swallow
60 Layang-layang Hirundo tahitica Pacific swallow
batu
61
Layang-layang
rumah Delichon dasypus Asian House-martin
62 Kapasan kemiri Lalage nigra Pied triller
63 Sepah kecil
Pericrocotus
cinnamomeus Small minivet
64 Cipoh kacat Aegithina tiphia Common lora
65
Merbah
cerukcuk Pycnonotus goiavier
Yellow vented
bulbul
66 Cucak kutilang Pycnonotus aurigaster
Sooty headed
bulbul
67 Cucak kuning
Pycnonotus
melanicterus
Black-crested
Bulbul
68
Empuloh
janggut Alophoixus bres
Grey-cheeked
Bulbul
69
Srigunting
gagak Dicrurus annectans Crow-billed drongo
70
Kepodang
kuduk hitam Oriolus chinensis Black naped oriole
71
Tangkar
cetrong Crypsirina temia
Racket tailed
treepie
72
Gelatik batu
kelabu Parus major Great tit
73
Kucica
kampung Copsychus saularis Magpie Robin
74 Kipasan belang Rhipidura javanica Pied fantail Protected
75 Sikatan bubik Muscicapa dauurica
Asian Brown
Flycatcher
76 Remetuk laut Gerygone sulphurea
Golden bellied
gerygone
77 Cinenen pisang Orthotomus sutorius Common tailorbird
78 Cinenen jawa Orthotomus sepium Olive-backed
tailorbird
79 Cinenen kelabu Orthotomus ruficeps Ashy tailorbird
80 Perenjak coklat Prinia polychroa Brown prinia
81 Perenjak rawa Prinia flaviventris Yellow-belied prinia
82 Perenjak jawa Prinia familiaris Bar winged prinia
83 Perenjak padi Prinia inornata Plain prinia
84 Cici padi Cisticola juncidis Zitting cisticola
85
Kerak basi
ramai
Acrocephalus
stentoreus
Clamarous reed-
warbler
86 Cikrak kutub Phylloscopous borealis Arctic Warbler
87 Kicuit kerbau Motacilla flava Yellow Wagtail
88 Kekep babi
Artamus
leucorhynchus
White-breasted
wood swallow
89 Bentet kelabu Lanius schah Long-tailed shrike
90 Jalak putih Sturnus melanopterus
Black winged
starling Protected
91 Jalak cina Sturnus sturninus
Purple-backed
Starling
92 Kerak kerbau Acridotheres javanicus Javan mina
93
Perling
kumbang Aplonis panayensis
Asian Glossy
Starling
94
Jalak tunggir
merah Scissirostrum dubium Finch-billed Myna
95
Burung madu
sriganti Nectarinia jugularis
Olive backed
sunbird Protected
96
Burung madu
kelapa Anthreptes malacenis
Plain-throated
sunbird Protected
97
Burung madu
bakau Nectarinia calcostetha
Copper-throated
Sunbird Protected
98 Cabai jawa Dicaeum trochileum
Scarlet headed
flowerpecker
99 Kacamata biasa Zosterops palpebrous Oriental white eye
100 Kacamata laut Zosterops chloris
Lemon-bellied
white-eye
101 Burung gereja Passer montanus
Eurasian tree
sparrow
102 Bondol jawa
Lonchura
leucogastroides Javan munia
103
Bondol oto
hitam Lonchura ferruginosa Chesnut Munia
104 Bondol peking Lonchura punctulata
Scaly breasted
munia
(Data 2010: JGM)
i. Reptile Species
Reptile species in the area include:
a. Monitor lizards (Varanus salvator)
b. Frogs and toads (Anura Sp.)
c. House lizards (Gekko gecko)
ii. Mammal Species
Mammal species in the area include:
a. Long-tailed macaque (Macaca fascicularis)
b. Squirrel
c. Rat
d. 5 species of bats:
- Lesser Short-nosed Fruit Bat (Cynopterus brachyotis)
- The Horsefield's Fruit Bat (Cynoptenus horsfieldi)
- Cecandu pisang-besar (Macrogterssus soninus)
- The Long-tongued Nectar Bat (Macroglossus minimus)
- The Painted Bat (Kerivoula picta)
iii. Mangrove Species
Mangrove species in the area include:
a. Grey mangrove (Avicennia marina)
b. Tropical mangrove trees (Rhizophora mucronata dan Rhizophora stylosa)
c. Apple mangrove (Sonneratia alba), nypa (Nypa frutican)
d. Large-leafed mangrove (Bruguiera gymnorrhiza)
e. Crabapple mangrove (Sonneratia caseolaris)
f. Mangrove fern-warakas (Acrosticum aureum)
g. Tengar (Ceriops sp.)
h. Milky mangrove (Exocecaris agallocha)
Other mangrove vegetation species are:
a. Sea holly (Acanthus ilicifolius)
b. Mangrove fern-Piai raya (Acrotichum aureum)
c. Sea Hibiscus (Hibiscus tiliaceus).
Type of beach and riverside vegetation:
a. Ballnut (Callophylum inophyllum)
b. Coconut (Cocos nucifera)
c. Tropical Almond (Terminalia catappa)
d. Manan Rattan Palm (Callamus mannan)
APPENDIX 3: socio-economic data
Literacy level and employment: Pluit village
Education / Job
Sex
Total Male Female
Total Residents 24338 22422 46769
Total Head of Household 13573 2721 16293
Highest Education
a. No education 226 244 470
b. Elementary- not graduated 713 846 1559
c. Elementary- graduated 2566 3392 5958
d. Junior High School 5568 4887 10455
e. Senior High School 7258 5724 12982
f. University 3366 2006 5372
Occupation
a. Farmer 0 0 0
b. Private employee/government employee/Military 8164 5721 13865
c. Trader 6976 3993 10969
d. Fisher 2689 0 2689
e. Farm labourer 0 0 0
f. Pensioner 559 237 797
g. Carpenter 24 0 24
h. Unemployed 607 352 959
i. Government scheme for people under the line of poverty 356 252 608
j. Others 915 2818 3733
School drop outs 0 0 0
(Data Desember 2010: Kelurahan Pluit, Kecamatan Penjaringan Jkt-
Utara)
13
Demographic data.
Age
Indonesian Non-Indonesian
Overall Male Female Total Male Female Total
0 – 4 1636 1653 32898 0 0 0 3289
5 – 9 1753 1678 3429 0 0 0 3429
10 – 14 1701 1652 3353 0 0 0 3353
15 – 19 1813 1629 3442 0 0 0 3442
20 – 24 1766 1593 3359 3 1 4 3363
25 – 29 1809 1677 3486 2 3 5 3491
30 – 34 1899 1718 3617 2 4 6 3623
35 – 39 1894 1652 3546 3 2 5 3551
40 – 44 1794 1624 3418 4 4 8 3426
45 – 49 1843 1521 3364 5 5 10 3374
50 – 54 1686 1499 3185 7 3 10 3185
55 – 59 1766 1551 3317 5 4 9 3326
60 – 64 1617 1401 3018 4 3 7 3025
65 – 69 742 777 1519 3 2 5 1524
70 – 74 486 601 1087 4 7 11 1098
74 and up 89 154 243 2 4 6 249
Jumlah 24294 22380 46674 44 42 86 46760
(Data December 2010: Kelurahan Pluit, Kecamatan Penjaringan Jkt-
Utara)
APPENDIX 4: macaque survey data
Macaca fascicularis Group inside the Area
Group Location
Total & Composition
Total
Bab
y
Juvenil
e
Mal
e
Sub-
adul
t
Femal
e Sub-
adult
Mal
e
Adul
t
Femal
e
Adult
1 NTP
4
indv 1 1 1 1
99,82 Ha
2 PF 44,25 Ha
18
indv 1 5 4 3 5
Security
station 4
3 PF 44,25 Ha
27
indv 5 3 2 7 10
security
station 3
4 PF 44,25 Ha
31
indv 2 6 5 10 7
security
station 2 1 ?
Angke River
17
indv 3 2 7 5
PF
5
MAAS /
Church
35
indv 2 7 15 5 6
(handless)
MAAS 25,02
Ha
15
indv 1 4 5 4 3
security
station 1
(Jengger)
Description of Macaca fascicularis group outside Area
6 Pluit Housing
22
indv 3 4 4 6 5
7
Cengkareng
River
4
indv 4
8 PIK Kantri
8
indv 2 6
Description of Macaca fascicularis Distribution Map (additional PF group/security station 4, 18 individual) 10th February 2011
No Location
Total & Composition
Food Conflict
Potential Total Baby Male Juvenille
Female Juvenille
Male Sub-adult
Female Sub-Adult
Male Adult
Female Adult
1 NTP 3 individual 1 1 1
Garbage, mangrove
Have no conflict
99,82 Ha apple,Rizhopora potential with
White Leadtree, adequate
Orange, Mango, food potential
Mangosteen, coconut
2 PF 17 2 2 2 5 6 Garbage, White Leadtree
Alarming, based on the location which has
44,25 Ha individual Akasia, Apple No barrier
mangrove, with
security station 3 Insect
Housing and school
(ants & termites)
Where food potential can trigger them to multiply
3 PF 18 individual 3 4 2 5 4
44,25 Ha
security station 4
4 PF 17 individual 2 2 2 5 6
Garbage, Akasia, White Leadtree
Alarming, based on the location which has
44,25 Ha Apple mangrove,
No barrier with
security station 3 Insect
Housing and school
(ants & termites)
Where food potential can trigger them
to multiply
5 PF 18 individual 3 4 2 5 4
44,25 Ha
security station 4
6 Church Always look for food
From the garbage
5 AS/PF 25 individual 4 4 3 1 8 5
Garbage from Angke River
Home range around
Grey mangrove riverside of Angke River
Sea hibiscus
1Km, not have potential conflict
Because of adequate food
6 AS/PF 25 individual 4 4 3 1 8 5
Garbage from Angke River
& far from settlement
Grey mangrove Sea hibiscus
7 AS 45 individual 4 5 4 5 12 15
Common water hyacinth
Spreading all over area of AS
Security station 1
Rizhopora, apple mangrove
Look for food from visitors.
White leadtree, grey mangrove
Entering housing to look for
BKSDA Office garbage (Security station 1)
Food from garbage
Up to Mediterania/PIK
Housing
8 Pluit 16 individual 1 6 2 3 2 2
Otaheite gooseberry
Narrow location (housing plant)
10X300m Sawo, banana, With adequate
food
Water apple, coconut,
The activities are
Saman fruit Only look for food
Garbage from Angke River
Grooming & mating
Offerings from house
