Map_thumbnail_large_font

Hemigalus derbyanus 

Scope: Global
Status_ne_offStatus_dd_offStatus_lc_offStatus_nt_onStatus_vu_offStatus_en_offStatus_cr_offStatus_ew_offStatus_ex_off

Translate page into:

Taxonomy [top]

Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family
Animalia Chordata Mammalia Carnivora Viverridae

Scientific Name: Hemigalus derbyanus
Species Authority: (Gray, 1837)
Common Name(s):
English Banded Civet, Banded Palm Civet
Taxonomic Notes: The taxonomy of Banded Civet has not been recently reviewed. Two proposed subspecies in particular have small ranges on the Mentawai islands, and might have conservation needs; of these H. d. minor has been generally acknowledged as valid, but H. d. sipora was combined with H. d. derbyanus from Sumatra by Pocock (1933); the validity of uniting these subspecies is unclear (Schreiber et al. 1989).

Assessment Information [top]

Red List Category & Criteria: Near Threatened ver 3.1
Year Published: 2015
Date Assessed: 2015-03-03
Assessor(s): Ross, J., Brodie, J., Cheyne, S., Chutipong, W., Hedges, L., Hearn, A., Linkie, M., Loken, B., Mathai, J., McCarthy, J., Ngoprasert, D., Tantipisanuh, N., Wilting, A. & Haidir, I.A.
Reviewer(s): Duckworth, J.W. & Schipper, J.
Contributor(s): Azlan J., M., Duckworth, J.W., Hon, J., Shepherd, C. & Than Zaw
Justification:
Banded Civet has a large geographic range that includes Borneo, Sumatra (including the Mentawai Islands), Peninsular Malaysia, Peninsular Thailand and Peninsular Myanmar. Across its distribution it occurs over a wide elevation range. Camera-trap surveys, particularly in Malaysian Borneo and Sumatra, have recorded Banded Civet frequently relative to other carnivores. They indicate that it is forest dependent, but can tolerate some habitat disturbance, although there is no evidence that it can survive in agricultural plantations. Continuing loss of natural forest throughout its range makes it reasonable to assume that its population is in decline. The decline rate, driven by loss of habitat compounded by hunting, is difficult to assess and possibly varies much within its range, but it is unlikely that overall it is exceeding 30% (the threshold for Vulnerable) over three generations (taken as 15 years; Pacifici et al. 2013). It is assumed to be more likely to be around 25%, thereby qualifying the species for Near Threatened (nearly meets criteria A2, A3 and A4).
Previously published Red List assessments:

Geographic Range [top]

Range Description:Banded Civet occurs in the Sundaic subregion: in Peninsular Myanmar (Pocock 1939), Peninsular Thailand (Kitamura et al. 2010, Chutipong et al. 2014), Malaysia (Peninsular: e.g., Kawanishi and Sunquist 2004, Hedges et al. 2013; Malaysian Borneo: e.g., Mathai et al. 2010, Matsubayashi et al. 2011), Indonesia (Mentawai Islands [Sipora Island, South Pagai Island], Kalimantan, Sumatra; e.g., Schreiber et al. 1989, Holden 2006, Samejima and Semiadi 2012) and Brunei (Bennett 2014). The northernmost Thai record is from 12°53′N (Chutipong et al. 2014) and the northernmost in Myanamr is from 10°09′N (Than Zaw et al. 2008). Several sources list Banded Civet for Vietnam, but no credible evidence of wild occurrence has been traced and it is unlikely to occur there naturally.

There are no recent records in Myanmar (Than Zaw et al. 2008). It has been camera-trapped at several locations in peninsular Thailand (Chutipong et al. 2014) and Malaysia (Hedges et al. 2013, S. Mohamad pers. comm. 2014). On Borneo, it is one of the most frequently detected small carnivores in most spot-lighting and camera trap surveys in Sabah, where it has been recorded across the state (Payne et al. 1998, Brodie and Giordano 2011, Ross et al. in prep. a). It is also one of the more frequently detected species in Sarawak (e.g. Mathai 2010). In Kalimantan it has not been recorded in the peat-swamp forests of Sabangau National Park (Cheyne et al. 2010), but it has been detected in peat swamp forest in Berbak National Park, Sumatra (ZSL Indonesia programme pers. comm. 2014). In Sumatra, Holden (2006) detected the species infrequently in lowland primary forest in Kerinci Seblat National Park; however in Bukit Barisan Selatan National Park it is found commonly at higher elevations (McCarthy and Fuller 2014, H. Wibisono pers. comm. 2014).

It has been found from sea-level up to 1,660 m a.s.l. (WWF-Malaysia pers. comm. 2014).
Countries occurrence:
Native:
Brunei Darussalam; Indonesia (Kalimantan, Sumatera); Malaysia (Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah, Sarawak); Myanmar; Thailand
Additional data:
Extreme fluctuations in area of occupancy (AOO):Unknown
Continuing decline in extent of occurrence (EOO):UnknownExtreme fluctuations in extent of occurrence (EOO):Unknown
Extreme fluctuations in the number of locations:Unknown
Upper elevation limit (metres):1660
Range Map:Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.

Population [top]

Population:Holden (2006) speculated that Banded Civet might typically be rare where it is found. However, Payne et al. (1998) stated that it was the second-most commonly recorded civet in the forests of Sabah and more recent surveys suggest that it is still relatively common in many areas across the state (Ross et al. in prep. a). All evidence suggests that it is forest dependent and so the population is likely to be in decline. Although it has been detected in logged forest (Ross et al. in prep. a) it is likely to occur at lower densities in these areas (Brodie et al. 2014a,b).
Current Population Trend:Decreasing
Additional data:
Continuing decline of mature individuals:Yes
Extreme fluctuations:UnknownPopulation severely fragmented:No
Continuing decline in subpopulations:Unknown
Extreme fluctuations in subpopulations:UnknownAll individuals in one subpopulation:No

Habitat and Ecology [top]

Habitat and Ecology:Banded Civet has been found at elevations up to 1,660 m (WWF-Malaysia pers. comm. 2014). Most records traced by Jennings et al. (2013) were from below 900 m, although this could simply reflect low survey effort at higher elevations within most of its range. Where effort has been made in high-elevation areas it has been found to occur commonly well over 900 m. For example, in Crocker Range National Park, Sabah, Malaysia, it was detected at 75% of camera-trap stations and was the second-most frequently recorded civet; camera-traps in this survey were set between 383 and 1,452 m a.s.l. with 66% of them above 900 m a.s.l. (A.J. Hearn, J. Ross and D.W. Macdonald pers. comm. 2015). At high elevations in the Kelabit Highlands, Sarawak and the Ulu Baram, Sarawak, Banded Civet was the most frequently recorded civet; at high elevations in the Ulu Padas, Sabah, it was the most frequently recorded carnivore (J. Brodie et al. pers. comm. 2014). Banded Civet has been recorded in primary forest (e.g., Wells et al. 2005, Chutipong et al. 2014), logged forest (e.g., Brodie and Giordano 2011, Wilting et al. 2010, Mathai et al. 2010, Hedges et al. 2013) and infrequently from oil palm plantations (A.J. Hearn and J. Ross pers. comm. 2014; Yue et al. in prep.) and acacia plantation landscapes (Belden et al. 2007), but abundance is likely to be lower in modified habitat (Brodie et al. 2014a,b). In Sabah it was shown that its proportion of area occupied was greatly affected by the past logging histories and the species was distributed much more widely and was recorded more often in less disturbed, well managed forest reserves than in forests where conventional logging had caused greater disturbance (Sollmann et al. in prep).

It is nocturnal (Lekagul and McNeely 1977, Ross et al. in prep. b). Davis (1962) found in Borneo that over 90% of its diet was insects, and no analysed stomach contents contained fruit or leaves.
Systems:Terrestrial
Continuing decline in area, extent and/or quality of habitat:Yes
Generation Length (years):5
Movement patterns:Not a Migrant

Use and Trade [top]

Use and Trade: Banded Civet is taken as part of general mammal hunting for food across its range. There is no evidence of specific targeting by hunters.

Threats [top]

Major Threat(s): Habitat loss and degradation have been assumed to be major threats to Banded Civet (Schreiber et al. 1989). Reduction in primary forest has proceeded very fast throughout the lowland Sundaic region in the last 20 years, particularly at lower elevations (e.g. Holmes 2000, BirdLife International 2001, Jepson et al. 2001, McMorrow and Talip 2001, Lambert and Collar 2002, Kinnaird et al. 2003, Curran et al. 2004, Fuller 2004, Eames et al. 2005, Stibig et al. 2014). This will have caused population declines. Local occurrence of Banded Civet in Borneo is lower in logged areas than in unlogged areas (Brodie et al. 2014a,b). The Mentawai populations are impacted by economic development as human settlements expand into civet habitat, which also may result in conflicts since this species will prey on domestic livestock such as chickens (Schreiber et al. 1989). Hunting, often for trade, also threaten this species. Because Banded Civet spends a lot of time on the ground, it is exposed to snares and other traps. The species is hunted for food by some people in Sabah (Murphy 2007). Banded Civet has recently been recorded in the pet trade in Indonesia and is sometimes captured, possibly opportunistically, for display in zoos and wild animal collections (C.R. Shepherd pers. comm. 2014).

Conservation Actions [top]

Conservation Actions: Banded Civet is listed on CITES Appendix II; additionally, it is protected by national law in Malaysia and Thailand. The Mentawai subspecies were listed as Threatened in the IUCN Action Plan for the Conservation of Mustelids and Viverrids (Schreiber et al. 1989). The species has been recorded in many protected areas across its range (Chutipong et al. 2014, Ross et al. in prep. a, WWF-Malaysia pers. comm. 2014).

Classifications [top]

1. Forest -> 1.6. Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Moist Lowland
suitability:Suitable season:resident major importance:Yes
1. Forest -> 1.8. Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Swamp
suitability:Suitable season:resident major importance:No
1. Forest -> 1.9. Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Moist Montane
suitability:Suitable season:resident major importance:Yes
14. Artificial/Terrestrial -> 14.3. Artificial/Terrestrial - Plantations
suitability:Marginal season:unknown 
14. Artificial/Terrestrial -> 14.6. Artificial/Terrestrial - Subtropical/Tropical Heavily Degraded Former Forest
suitability:Marginal season:unknown 
2. Land/water management -> 2.1. Site/area management
4. Education & awareness -> 4.3. Awareness & communications
5. Law & policy -> 5.4. Compliance and enforcement -> 5.4.2. National level
5. Law & policy -> 5.4. Compliance and enforcement -> 5.4.3. Sub-national level

In-Place Research, Monitoring and Planning
  Action Recovery plan:No
  Systematic monitoring scheme:No
In-Place Land/Water Protection and Management
  Conservation sites identified:Yes, over part of range
  Occur in at least one PA:Yes
  Area based regional management plan:No
  Invasive species control or prevention:Not Applicable
In-Place Species Management
  Harvest management plan:No
  Successfully reintroduced or introduced beningly:No
  Subject to ex-situ conservation:No
In-Place Education
  Subject to recent education and awareness programmes:Unknown
  Included in international legislation:Yes
  Subject to any international management/trade controls:Yes
2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.1. Shifting agriculture
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Minority (<50%) ♦ severity:Negligible declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 4 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.2. Small-holder farming
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Negligible declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 5 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.3. Agro-industry farming
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Rapid Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 7 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.2. Wood & pulp plantations -> 2.2.1. Small-holder plantations
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Minority (<50%) ♦ severity:Negligible declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 4 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.2. Wood & pulp plantations -> 2.2.2. Agro-industry plantations
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Minority (<50%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 5 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.3. Livestock farming & ranching -> 2.3.2. Small-holder grazing, ranching or farming
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Minority (<50%) ♦ severity:Negligible declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 4 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

5. Biological resource use -> 5.1. Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals -> 5.1.1. Intentional use (species is the target)
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Negligible declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 5 
→ Stresses
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality

5. Biological resource use -> 5.1. Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals -> 5.1.3. Persecution/control
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Minority (<50%) ♦ severity:Negligible declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 4 
→ Stresses
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality

5. Biological resource use -> 5.2. Gathering terrestrial plants -> 5.2.2. Unintentional effects (species is not the target)
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Negligible declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 5 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

5. Biological resource use -> 5.3. Logging & wood harvesting -> 5.3.3. Unintentional effects: (subsistence/small scale)
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Negligible declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 5 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

5. Biological resource use -> 5.3. Logging & wood harvesting -> 5.3.4. Unintentional effects: (large scale)
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 6 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

7. Natural system modifications -> 7.2. Dams & water management/use -> 7.2.10. Large dams
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Minority (<50%) ♦ severity:Negligible declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 4 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.2. Species disturbance

3. Monitoring -> 3.1. Population trends
3. Monitoring -> 3.4. Habitat trends

Bibliography [top]

Bennett, E.L. 2014. The first locality records of Banded Civet Hemigalus derbyanus and Masked Palm Civet Paguma larvata from Brunei Darussalam. Small Carnivore Conservation 51: 90–91.

BirdLife International. 2001. Threatened birds of Asia: the BirdLife International Red Data Book. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK.

Brodie, J. and Giordano, A. 2011. Small carnivores of the Maliau Basin, Sabah, Borneo, including a new locality for Hose's Civet Diplogale hosei. Small Carnivore Conservation 44: 1–6.

Brodie, J.F., Giordano, A.J., Dickson, B., Hebblewhite, M., Bernard, H., Mohd-Azlan, J., Anderson, J. and Ambu, L. 2014a. Evaluating multispecies landscape connectivity in a threatened tropical mammal community. Conservation Biology: doi: 10.1111/cobi.12337.

Brodie, J.F., Giordano, A.J, Zipkin, E.F., Bernard, H., Mohd-Azlan, J. and Ambu, L. 2014b. Correlation and persistence of hunting and logging Impacts on tropical rainforest mammals. Conservation Biology: doi: 10.1111/cobi.12389.

Cheyne, S.M., Husson, S.J., Chadwick, R.J. and Macdonald, D.W. 2010. Diversity and activity of small carnivores of the Sabangau Peat-swamp Forest, Indonesian Borneo. Small Carnivore Conservation 43: 1–7.

Curran, L.M., Trigg, S.N., Mcdonald, A.K., Astiani, D., Hardiono, Y.M., Siregar, P., Caniago, I. and Kasischke, E. 2004. Lowland forest loss in protected areas of Indonesian Borneo. Science 303: 1000-1003.

Davis, D.D. 1962. Mammals of the lowland rainforest of North Borneo. Bulletin of the National Museum of Singapore 31: 1–29.

Duckworth, J.W. 1997. Mammals in Similajau National Park, Sarawak, in 1995. Sarawak Museum Journal 51: 171-192.

Eames, J. C., Htin Hla, Leimgruber, P., Kelly, D. S., Sein Myo Aung, Saw Moses and Saw Nyunt Tin. 2005. The rediscovery of Gurney's Pitta Pitta gurneyi in Myanmar and an estimate of its population size based on remaining forest cover. Bird Conservation International 15: 3–26.

Fuller, D.O. 2004. Deforestation is out of control in Indonesia. Environmental Review 11: 8-16.

Hedges, L., Clements, G.R., Aziz, S.A., Yap, W., Laurance, S., Goosem, M. and Laurance, W.F. 2013. Small carnivore records from a threatened habitat linkage in Terengganu, Peninsular Malaysia. Small Carnivore Conservation 49: 9–14.

Holden, J. 2006. Small carnivores in central Sumatra. Small Carnivore Conservation 34/35: 35-38.

Holmes, D. 2000. Deforestation in Indonesis: a review of the situation in Sumatra, Kalimantan and Sulawesi. World Bank, Jakarta, Indonesia.

IUCN. 2015. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2015-4. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. (Accessed: 19 November 2015).

Jennings, A.P., Mathai, J., Brodie, J., Giordano, A.J. and Veron, G. 2013. Predicted distributions and conservation status of two threatened Southeast Asian small carnivores: the Banded Civet and Hose's Civet. Mammalia 77: 261–271.

Jepson, P., Jarvie, J.K., Mackinnon, K. and Monk, K.A. 2001. The end for Indonesia's lowland forests? Science 292: 859.

Kawanishi, K. and Sunquist, M.E. 2004. Conservation status of Tigers in a primary rainforest of Peninsular Malaysia. Biological Conservation 120(3): 329–344.

Kinnaird, M.F., Sanderson, E.W., O'Brien, S.J., Wibisono, H.T. and Woolmer G. 2003. Deforestation trends in a tropical landscape and implications for endangered large mammals. Conservation Biology 17(1): 245–257.

Kitamura, S., Thong-Aree, S., Madsri, S. and Poonswad, P. 2010. Mammal diversity and conservation in a small isolated forest of southern Thailand. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology 58: 145–156.

Lambert, F.R. and Collar, N.J. 2002. The future for Sundaic lowland forest birds: long-term effects of commercial logging and fragmentation. Forktail 18: 127–146.

Lekagul, B. and McNeely, J.A. 1977. Mammals of Thailand. Association for the Conservation of Wildlife, Bangkok, Thailand.

Mathei, J., Hon, J., Juat, N., Peter, A. and Gumal, M. 2010. Small carnivores in a logging concession in the Upper Baram, Sarawak, Borneo. Small Carnivore Conservation 42: 1–9.

Matsubayashi, H., Bernard, H. and Ahmad, A.H. 2011. Small carnivores of the Imbak Canyon, Sabah, Malaysia, Borneo, including a new locality for the Hose’s Civet Diplogale hosei. Small Carnivore Conservation 45: 18–22.

McCarthy, J.M. and Fuller, T.K. 2014. Records of small carnivores from southern Sumatra. Small Carnivore Conservation 51: 59–63.

Mcmorrow, J. and Talip, M.A. 2001. Decline of forest area in Sabah, Malaysia: Relationship to state policies, land code and land capability. Global Environmental Change-Human & Policy Dimensions 11: 217-230.

Miettinen, J., Shi, C. and Liew, S.C. 2011. Deforestation rates in insular Southeast Asia between 2000 and 2010. Global Change Biology 17: 2261–2270.

Murphy, A. 2007. An evaluation of subsistence hunting in the community of Buayan-Kionop, Sabah. Final Report to the Rufford Foundation.

Pacifici, M., Santini, L., Di Marco, M., Baisero, D., Francucci, L., Grottolo Marasini, G., Visconti, P. and Rondinini, C. 2013. Generation length for mammals. Nature Conservation 5: 87–94.

Payne, J., Francis, C.M. and Phillipps, K. 1998. A field guide to the mammals of Borneo (3rd reprint). The Sabah Society, Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia.

Pocock, R.I. 1933. The rarer genera of oriental Viverridae. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London '1933'(4): 969-1035.

Pocock, R.I. 1939. The Fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma, Mammalia. Taylor & Francis, Ltd., London, UK.

Samejima, H. and Semiadi, G. 2012. First record of Hose’s Civet Diplogale hosei from Indonesia, and records of other carnivores in the Schwaner Mountains, Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Small Carnivore Conservation 46: 1–7.

Schreiber, A., Wirth, R., Riffel, M. and Van Rompaey, H. 1989. Weasels, Civets, Mongooses and their Relatives. An Action Plan for the Conservation of Mustelids and Viverrids. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.

Stibig, H.-J., Achard, F., Carboni, S., Raši, R. and Miettinen, J. 2014. Change in tropical forest cover of Southeast Asia from 1990 to 2010. Biogeosciences 11: 247–258.

Wilting, A. and Fickel, J. 2012. Phylogenetic relationship of two threatened endemic viverrids from the Sunda Islands, Hose’s Civet and Sulawesi Civet. Journal of Zoology, London 288: 184–190.

Wilting, A., Samejima, H. and Mohamed, A. 2010. Diversity of Bornean viverrids and other small carnivores in Deramakot Forest Reserve, Sabah, Malaysia. Small Carnivore Conservation 42: 10–13.


Citation: Ross, J., Brodie, J., Cheyne, S., Chutipong, W., Hedges, L., Hearn, A., Linkie, M., Loken, B., Mathai, J., McCarthy, J., Ngoprasert, D., Tantipisanuh, N., Wilting, A. & Haidir, I.A. 2015. Hemigalus derbyanus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: e.T41689A45216918. . Downloaded on 27 August 2016.
Disclaimer: To make use of this information, please check the <Terms of Use>.
Feedback: If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown on this page, please provide us with feedback so that we can correct or extend the information provided