117

Negative Impact of an Invasive Small Indian Mongoose
Herpestes javanicus on Native Wildlife Species and Evaluation ofa Control Project in Amami-Ohshima and Okinawa Islands, Japan
Fumio YAMADA1* and Ken SUGIMURA2
1

Department of Wildlife Biology, Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute (FFPRI),
PO Box 16, Tsukuba-Norin, Ibaraki 305-8687, Japane-mail: fumio@ffpri.affrc.go.jp
2
Department of Forest of Management, FFPRI, PO Box 16, Tsukuba-Norin,
Ibaraki 305-8687, Japan*corresponding author

Abstract
The small Indian mongoose, Herpestes javanicus (Family Herpestidae, Order Carnivora,
Mammalia), is one of the most urgent species to eradicate among invasive mammals in Japan.
Recently, the Japanese government has begun full-scale control of the mongoose as a model casefor conserving the biodiversity of Japan’s subtropical islands. We review and assess the impactsof the mongoose and control practices on Amami-Ohshima Island and Okinawa Island based onrecently acquired information. On Amami-Ohshima Island, a total of 9,960 mongooses were
captured under the full-scale project of the Ministry of the Environment which ran for four years
from 1999 to October 2003. According to the April 2002 mongoose census taken after three yearsof full-scale implementation, the population was estimated to be 1/4 (1,500-2,000 mongooses) lessthan in 1999. However, our investigation revealed that the remaining mongooses in the mountainous area are having negative impacts on native species, especially on the Amami rabbit, Pentalagus
furnessi. People who are involved with the full-scale mongoose project should recognize that theinvestment in the project, at least regarding the number of traps and trapping period, is incredibly
low at this stage and funding should be increased to achieve the goal. Further eradication projects
should take into consideration the low density and partial distributions of the mongoose populationin mountainous areas.
Key words: Amami-Ohshima Island, eradication, introduction, native animals, Okinawa Island, small
Indian mongoose

1. Introduction
The small Indian mongoose Herpestes javanicus(Family Herpestidae, Order Carnivora, Mammalia) is
a small carnivore and native to an area stretching from
Iraq through northern India to southernmost China andIndonesia, the Malay Peninsula, Hainan and Java
(Nowak, 1999). The external characteristics typicallyshow a sexual dimorphism as follows: mean head andbody length of 302 mm for females and 336 mm formales, tail length 223 mm for females and 241 mm formales, and mean body weight 456 g for females and673 g for males on Amami-Ohshima Island (Abe,1991). Both its habitat range and its population size
are the largest among the Herpestidae family, so thespecies is thought to be highly adaptable to a wide
Global Environmental Research8(2)/2004: 117-124
printed in Japanvariety of natural environments. The mongoose was
widely introduced by people in order to control pest
species such as rats and snakes in the West Indies
during the early 1870s, and in the Hawaiian Islands
and other areas including Japan later on (Simberloff,2001).
In Japan, more than 40 species of exotic mammals
have been identified so far (Ikeda, 2002). The main
exotic predatory mammals (Order Carnivora) include
the domestic dog, Canis familiaris; Siberian weasel,
Mustela sibirica; domestic ferret, M. putorius furo;American mink, M. vison; raccoon, Procyon lotor;
masked palm civet, Paguma larvata; and domestic cat,
Felis catus. In addition, the Japanese weasel, M. itatsi;
red fox, Vulpes vulpes shrencki; raccoon dog,
Nyctereutes procyonoides; and Japanese marten,©2004 AIRIES118

F. YAMADA and K. SUGIMURA

Martes melampus melampus, have been colonizedfrom their areas of indigenous distribution in Japan to
non-native areas such as the Ryukyu Islands,
Hokkaido and other places. Since the mongoose is
one of the most urgent species to eradicate among
invasive mammals in Japan, the Japanese government
has recently started full-scale control of the species asa model case for preserving the unique biota ofJapan’s subtropical islands.
This paper reviews the impacts of the mongooseon native wildlife species and evaluates the effects offour years of the control project on Amami-Ohshima
and Okinawa Islands.

2. The Worst Invasive Species in the World
The first instance of introducing mongooses to an
island was in 1872, when four males and five females
were brought to Jamaica from Calcutta. They werereleased on Espeut’s Spring Garden Estate, where thepopulation established itself and reproduced within a
few months (Simberloff et al., 2000). Mongoosesthat were bred in Jamaica were sent to Cuba, Puerto
Rico, Grenada, Barbados and Santa Cruz (Trinidad),as well four to eight individuals that were sent to St.
Croix in 1882-1884 (Fig. 1). In 1883, 72 individuals
from Jamaica were released on Hawaii Island and additional individuals were transported from the West
Indies in 1885. The offspring of these early populations were released to other islands, i.e. Maui,
Molokai and Oahu. In 1883, a pair of mongooses
was sent from Calcutta to the Fiji Islands. In 1900,
16 males and three females were released on Mauritius from an unknown location in India. In 1910, 17
individuals including six males, six females and fiveindividuals of unknown sexes were trapped in what is
now Bangladesh and taken to Okinawa Island by Dr. S.
Watase (Kishida, 1931). The latest instance of
release on an island was on Amami-Ohshima Island,
where 30 individuals were released, derived from
Okinawa Island in 1979. Most of those islands weredeveloped extensively for plantation agriculture, andmongooses were introduced in order to control rats toprevent crop damage.
Although mongooses were acclaimed for killingrats in the initial stage of the introductions, they
gradually became one of the worst pest species by
preying on poultry and damaging various crops evenmore severely than the rats had done. In addition,mongooses prey on native animals, so even pioneer
populations were responsible for the extinction or
endangerment of many wildlife species on most of theislands, because the native animals were not resistantto predation by invasive mammals such as mongooses,
as their populations had evolved in the absence of
predatory mammals. Therefore, in 2000 the small
Indian mongoose was designated as one of theWorld’s 100 Worst Invasive Alien Species (IUCN,
2000).

3. History of Introduction on Okinawa andAmami-Ohshima Islands
Okinawa Island is 1,202 km2 in area and its highest
peak is 503 m in elevation. Forests cover 40% of theisland, and are especially concentrated in the north.
The northern part of the island has many threatened
species that are endemic to the Ryukyu Archipelago,
located in the southwesternmost part of Japan.
Amami-Ohshima Island, which is 150 km from

Fig. 1 The historical route of repeated introduction of mongooses fromtheir native area to colonized areas (from Simberloff et al., 2000).
Native lands in south Asia are shaded with oblique lines.

Impacts and Control of Mongoose

Okinawa Island, is 710 km2 in area, with a maximum
elevation of 694 m, and is 86% forested. The island
has also many endemic and threatened species. The
Habu, Trimeresurus flavoviridis, a dangerously venomous pit viper, inhabits these and other islands withhigher elevations in the Ryukyu Archipelago. Local
people are terrified of the snake because of the highfrequency of encounters and severe bite-induced injuries. The snake can be encountered on farmlands,
along roads, and even in the vicinity of residential
areas. On Amami-Ohshima Island, for instance,
3,600 people were bitten from 1954 to 1998, 50 ofthem fatally (Kagoshima Prefecture Office, 1999).
A variety of means to reduce the incidence ofsnakebite and fatalities have been successively employed, such as capturing, poisoning, alteration of
habitat around housing, and serum development.
Biological pest control has also been employed to reduce the populations of snakes and their principal
prey, the black rat, Rattus rattus. On AmamiOhshima Island, before releasing the small Indianmongoose, 871 Japanese weasels, Mustela itatsi, wereintroduced as snake and rat predators during
1954-1958, but none of them survived. More than
2,000 weasels were released on eight other small

119islands of the Amami archipelago during the same
period. They failed to colonize six islands including
snake-infested Amami-Ohshima Island, but did colonize three islands where there were no snakes. Thisis thought to be due to competition for the same preyas the snakes and also predation by the snakes because
they are both nocturnal (Hayashi, 1979). In contrast,
the small Indian mongoose has successfully colonizedAmami-Ohshima Island.
In 1910, four mongooses were released on
Okinawa Island to control snakes and rats and fourothers were released on Tonaki Island (1 km2 in area)
by Dr. S. Watase who had brought them from India(Kishida, 1931). Since then, the mongoose has been
expanding its distribution from the release site inNaha City, in the southernmost part of Okinawa Island,
toward to the north. Sometime around 1990 itreached the northern forests, where there are many
endangered species (Fig. 2). In contrast, the mongooses on Tonaki Island died out relatively soonafter their release.
In 1979, it is said that 30 mongooses were released
to control snakes around a new facility opened for
public education in a forested suburb of Naze City on
Amami-Ohshima Island (Fig. 3). However, there isFig. 2 Locations of Naha City on Okinawa Island, Tonaki Island andNaze City on Amami-Ohshima Island (a, b), and the invasion of
the mongoose into the forest in the northern part of Okinawa Island
after 1990, which many endangered species inhabit (c). In 1910,
only four mongooses were originally released to control venomous
snakes in Naha City. Their offspring reached the northern area
over 80 years later.

Fig. 3 Release site of mongooses at Naze City in
1979 and current distributions of mongooses.

120

F. YAMADA and K. SUGIMURA

no official record of the release. Since then, themongoose has been expanding its distribution fromthe release site, covering an approximately 10 km
radius by 1989 and a 20 km radius by 1997, encompassing half of the mountainous areas occupied bymany threatened species, such as the Amami rabbit,
Pentalagus furnessi. The rate of range extension isestimated to be ca. one kilometer per year. After 20
years the population was estimated to be 5,000-10,000
mongooses in 1999 (Environment Agency, 1999). A
mtDNA analysis by Sekiguchi et al. (2001) indicatedthat the original mongooses on Amami-OhshimaIsland came from Okinawa Island.

4. Negative Impacts on Agricultural Crops
and Poultry
The mongoose has caused great damage to crop
production (taros, sweet potatoes, melons, watermelons, loquats, etc.) and poultry on both islands. On
Amami-Ohshima Island, for instance, economic losses
caused by the mongoose rapidly increased, then declined slightly as follows: 1994 (US$7,000), 1995
(US$32,000), 1996 (US$64,000), 1997 (US$110,000),
1998 (US$100,000) and 1999 (US$80,000). Some
farmers trapped mongooses to protect their crops before the local government began controlling mongooses in 1993. On Okinawa Island, 17 of the 100
egg farmers and four of the six chicken farmers reported damage caused by mongooses between 1990
and 1999 (Ogura, 2001). In the northern and central
parts of Okinawa Island, the ratio of farmers who haddamage to the total number of farmers was higher thanthat in the southern part, presumably because ofhigher mongoose density as well as the number offarmers there.

5. Negative Impacts on Native Species
On Amami-Ohshima Island, the mongoose, which
invaded mountainous areas in the mid 1980s, has had
a predatory impact on the native animals living there

as Table 1 indicates. On the other hand, there has
been no clear evidence that the mongooses prey on thesnakes (Abe et al., 1999; Environment Agency, 1999;
Yamada et al., 2000). According to our analysis,
insects (40%), other invertebrate animals (90%), amphibians and reptiles (60%), mammals (20%), andbirds (15%) were found in 89 mongoose pellets collected in the habitat of the Amami rabbit (Yamada etal., 2000). Eight percent of the pellets contained
traces of Amami rabbit. The mongoose preys chiefly
on insects and birds throughout the year, but on amphibians and reptiles more frequently in summer andon mammals in winter. Recent changes in the distribution and abundance of the Amami rabbit suggestthat the mongoose has reduced rabbit populations(Sugimura, 1998; Sugimura et al., 2000; Sugimura,
2002; Sugimura et al, 2003; Sugimura & Yamada,2004) (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4 Reduction of the area of the endangered Amami
rabbit’s habitat after invasion of mongooses on
Amami-Ohshima Island. Note the sharp reduction in
the northern area of the distribution of the Amami
rabbit in 2002-2003 compared with 1993-1994, which
was caused mainly by mongoose predation.

Table 1 Threatened native species categorised by IUCN on Amami-Ohshima Island and other islands that have been recorded in
the diet of the mongoose. Identified mongoose food items are marked with an asterisk.
Category
CriticallyEndangered
Endangered

MammalCrocidura orii 2
Diplothrix legata 1*
Tokudaia osimensis 1*
Pentalagus furnessi 1*

Vulnerable
Lower Risk

Crocidura horsfieldii
watasei*

Birds
Zoothera dauma major 1,2ReptilesRana ishikawae 2?

Scolopax mira*
Dendrocopos leucotos
owstoni 1,2
Dendrocopos kizuki amamii
Erithacus komadori 1*
Garrulus lidthi 1,2*
Columba janthina
janthina 1

Amphibians

Japalura polygonata*
Eumeces barbouri*
Achalinus werneri
Calliophis japonicus
japonicus 2*
Cyclophiops semicarinatus*

Other native
species
1: Japanese Natural Monument. 2: Endemic or main population on Amami Island.
Food species were cited from Environment Agency (1999) and Yamada et al. (2000).

Tylototriton anderson
Rana amamiensis
Rana subaspera 2
Cynops ensicauda

Impacts and Control of Mongoose

As for native bird species, Sugimura (2002) concluded that populations of purple jay, Garrulus lidthi,
and Ryukyu robin, Erithacus komadori, had been reduced by the mongoose invasion, for the following
reasons. First, a statistical analysis indicated that
their numbers decreased in the areas where mongoose
capture rates were high, while no decrease wasobserved in the other areas where capture rates were
low. Second, the two species are frequently observed
on forest floors, where they feed on insects and acorns.
In contrast, populations of other species, such as thewhite-backed woodpecker, Dendrocopos leucotos;
pygmy woodpecker, Dendrocopos kizuki; and browneared bulbul, Hypsipetes amaurotis, which spend mostof their time in the canopy layer, did not decrease after
the mongoose invasion.
On Okinawa Island, an investigation by the
Okinawa Prefecture Office and the Yamashina Institute for Ornithology showed that the Okinawa rail,
Gallirallus okinawae, was severely affected by mongooses because the rail had disappeared wherever themongoose was captured in the northern part of
Okinawa Island (Tanahara, 2002). However, southof this area, Ogura et al. (2002) found that mongooses
preyed on a variety of animals such as birds, mammals, amphibians and arthropods.

6. Mongoose Control
In the 1980s, local scientists on Amami-OhshimaIsland carried out ecological studies of mongoose
populations mostly near the release areas (Abe et al.,1999). The local government, the Naze City Office,began to trap mongooses in order to reduce crop damage in farmlands around Naze City from 1993 and the
Yamato Village Office began trapping in 1995.
Fifteen to twenty trappers with 10-30 traps each captured as many as 1,100-1,500 mongooses during thepest control period of seven to nine months (MayMarch) (Fig. 5). Four or five skillful trappers captured approximately 60%-80% of those mongooses.
Recognizing the predation impact of the mongooseon endangered animals on Amami-Ohshima Island,
the Ministry of the Environment of Japan’s central
government carried out preliminary investigations
from 1996-1999 into the possibility of eradicatingmongooses from the whole island. The investigations assessed the following: expansion of distribution,
reproduction, food habits, estimated population size

121

and annual growth rate (5,000-10,000 individuals and30%, respectively, in 1999), and techniques for eradication by cage traps and wooden box traps using fishsausage as bait. Based on the results obtained fromthe pilot investigations, the Ministry of the Environment decided to begin a full-scale project to eradicate the mongoose from the whole island in 2000, employing two methods: 1) massive reduction of population using many traps during a short period (three
years) over the whole island (annual target reductionof 4,000-5,000, including both the number caught
around farmlands by the local governments, and thenumber trapped in mountainous areas by the Ministryof the Environment), and 2) long-term eradication
until the species became extinct.
On Amami-Ohshima Island, a total of 9,960 mongooses were captured by the full-scale project of the
Ministry of the Environment from October 2000 to
October 2003, including the number of mongooses
trapped by local governments (Fig. 5). This included
2,025 animals caught under pest control measures and7,419 under the eradication project of the Ministry of
the Environment. The total number of traps usedduring the four-year period ranged from 30,000 to
165,000 each year and the number of trappers ranged
from 40 to 131 (Table 2). According to the April
2002 mongoose census conducted after the full-scale
project had been going for three years, the population
was estimated to be one-quarter (1,500-2,000 mongooses) less than it had been in 1999 (Ishii, 2003).
However, the amount of reduction is thought to be

Fig. 5 Number of mongooses trapped by control projects on
Amami-Ohshima Island.

Table 2 Number of trappers for pest control and for the full-scale control project, and number of traps/day on
Amami-Ohshima Island.
Number of
Number of trappers Number of trappers
Substantial
Number ofYeartrappers for pest
for full-scale
overlapping both
number oftraps/day bycontrol
project
projectstrappers
both
2000
32
26
16
42
43,000
2001
17
124
10
131
165,000
2002
6
46
6
46
147,000
until August, 2003
3
40
5
40
30,000
Total
58
236
37
259
385,000(from the Ministry of the Environment)

122

F. YAMADA and K. SUGIMURA

skewed because the census was conducted in areas
where the mongoose density became extremely low
due to continuous trapping.
Trappers were paid a bounty of US$20 per mongoose by either the pest control or the eradication project upon taking the tails to either office, and a total of
US$78,000 was spent on bounties on the island byboth governments in the first year (2000). However,some trappers lost their incentive to trap because reduced capture efficiency after the first year, so thebounty was raised 80% to US$36 and a total of
US$123,000 was spent on bounties in the second year
(2001), and US$67,000 in the third year (2002).
Therefore, a total of US$268,000 was spent on bounties for 9,960 mongooses captured during four yearsof the full-scale project. In 2003, the bounty wasraised again to US$45 to increase trapper motivation,and three full-time trappers were employed for capturing mongooses living in low density area in the mountains.
On Okinawa Island, a total of 1,290 mongooses
were captured by the projects of both the Okinawa
Prefecture Office and the Ministry of the Environment
from October 2000 to July 2003. Trapping techniques are too labor intensive for use over large areas,so the capture ratio was very low because the mongoose density in the northern part was very low, andthe trappers had to check their traps every day because
non-target animals including feral cats, rats, robins,
rails, and others are also captured (Tanahara, 2002).

7. Monitoring the Effect of the Full-scale
Project
It is necessary to monitor the remaining mongooses and the effect of eradication on restoring thenative species. Some native species, such as the
Amami rabbit, the Amami woodcock Scolopax mira,
and others, are being monitored by some scientists as
is the effect of mongoose removal on rats and native
species of Amami-Ohshima Island, (Ishida et al.,2003a; 2003b; Sugimura et al., 2003; Yamada et al.,2003). According to our investigation of the remaining mongooses conducted by auto-sensor camera during the full-scale project, the frequency of mongooses
was high (7.9%) in the northern area (Naze City and
Yamato Village, site A in Fig. 6(c), and medium(3.0%) in the southern area (Sumiyo Village, site D in
Fig. 6(c) where rabbit density was high. Mongooses
were also detected by the cameras in the areas wheretrappings had been discontinued due to low incentiveof trappers or prohibition by landowners. In addition,
our investigation also found that a mongoose enteredinto the breeding nest of a rabbit in daytime in the low
mongoose density in the south (Fig. 7). Furthermore,
the rabbit population, which was investigated during
2002-2003, was found to be rapidly decreasing anddisappeared in less than eight years in relatively
high-density mongoose areas, especially in the north(Fig. 4). These results indicate that if a small population of mongooses, even only one mongoose, re-NativeSpeciesdensity

Site

Mongoosedensity

A

high

low

high

B

high

high

none

C

low

high

none

D

low

high

none

Agriculture

Fig. 6 Differences in frequency of numbers of photographs of mongooses and rabbits at each site, A-D,
revealed by 30 auto cameras (c), placed at sites (A-D) of different density of mongooses and native
species on Amami-Ohshima Island during the full-scale project (a, b). (Yamada et al., 2003).

Impacts and Control of Mongoose

123

Fig. 7 A mongoose entering a breeding nest (arrows) of the endangered Amami
rabbit, recorded by auto-sensor cameras on Amami-Ohshima Island during thefull-scale project (Yamada et al., 2003). A mother visited the breeding nest
at 23:05 pm on December 25 and 02:42 am on December 26, 2002 (a). A
mongoose entered into the breeding nest at 09:15 on December 28. The tailand hindfoot of the mongoose were observed at the entrance of the nest (b).
The mongoose left the nest at 09:17 on December 28 (c).

mains in rabbit habitat, the rabbit will become extinct
due to predation by mongooses not only on adult rabbits but also on juveniles inside the breeding nest.
Therefore, it is necessary to eradicate mongooses in
the habitat of the rabbit and to prevent their invasion
into other rabbit habitat.

8. Problems and Conclusion
Because crop damage was not observed recently
following the reduction of mongoose populations due
to trapping, the pest control program of the local government was ceased in January 2004. In addition,
the number of trappings rapidly decreased in 2003
(Table 2). However, our auto camera investigations
have revealed that the mongoose persists in the farmlands and in non-trapping areas in the mountains.
On the other hand, compared to the successful eradication in Britain of the coypu (Gosling, 1989), a large
exotic rodent that was invading semi-aquatic environments, the total number of traps (385,000) in the
full-scale mongoose control project on AmamiOhshima Island for four years was only 24% of that
(1,600,000) in the eight-year coypu control project.
Furthermore, trapping efforts in the coypu control
project increased relatively as the density of target
animals became low and was continued for three years
after no captures to confirm the eradication of the
coypu. Eradication of the mongoose is thought to be
more difficult than that of the coypu because ofdifferences in biological and ecological characteristics,
such as reproduction properties, food habits andhabitat preference. People who are involved with thefull-scale mongoose project should realize that theinvestment in the project, at least in the number oftraps and trapping period, is incredibly low at thisstage and must be increased to achieve the goal oferadication.
However, there are many problems remaining to besolved in the full-scale project on Amami-OhshimaIsland and the northern area of Okinawa Island.
Although there have been a few recent studies on controlling mongooses using chemicals in Hawaii (Smithet al., 2000) and on management implications on
Mauritius (Roy et al., 2001), there have been no successful measures for mongoose eradication in areascolonized by mongooses so far (Simberloff, 2001).
The cases described here in Japan are recent andconstitute the first trial of mongoose eradication.
There are many difficulties to overcome to accomplish
eradication on both islands (Yamada, 2002). For
instance, on Amami-Ohshima Island, the target area islarge in size, and is difficult to approach due to highmountains with steep slopes, and there are many endangered species including snakes. Furthermore, itwill be necessary to 1) integrate the pest control anderadication project programs to establish year-roundtrapping and a strategy for eradication; 2) monitor theefficiency of eradication measures; 3) introduce anddevelop more effective techniques; 4) monitor the effects on recovery of the endemic animals and on theecosystems, including rat control; and 5) exchange
information with experts in other countries. A continuous and increased supply of money and manpower

124

F. YAMADA and K. SUGIMURA

as well as public information and research work will
be necessary to achieve the goal of the project.
In additional projects, eradication of patches ofmongooses surviving in low-density, mountainous
areas must consider. It is obvious that more effective
measures are necessary to eradicate this invasive
predator in order to protect the Amami rabbit andother native animals on Amami-Ohshima Island as
well as in the northern area of Okinawa Island.

Acknowledgement
The authors thank S. Abe of the Ministry of theEnvironment, Dr. S. Hattori of Tokyo University, and
Y. Handa, R. Yamashita, Y. Takatsuki, T. Nogami, Y.
Abe, H. Katsu and H. Kawaguchi of the Mammalogical Society of Amami for their help in the field investigation and encouragement. We also thank the
Ministry of the Environment (formerly the Environment Agency), the Japan Wildlife Research Centerand the World Wildlife Fund Japan for their financial
support.
References
Abe. S. (1991) Classification of the mongoose colonized on
Amami-Ohshima Island. Chirimosu, 2(1): 1-16.(in Japanese)
Abe, S., Y. Handa, Y. Abe, Y. Takatsuki and H. Nigi (1999)
Food habits of feral mongoose (Herpestes sp.) on
Amamioshima, Japan. In: G.H. Rodda, Y. Sawai, D. Chiszar
and H. Tanaka, eds., Problem Snake Management, Cornell
University Press, Cornell, pp. 372-383.
Environment Agency (1999) Report on the investigation of themongoose for eradication on Amami-Ohshima Island. 51p.
(in Japanese)
Gosling, M. (1989) Extinction to order. New Scientist, 4:44-49.
Hayashi, Y. (1979) Animals of the Ryukyu Archipelago, withspecial reference to the Habu snake and the Amami rabbit.
Kagaku, 49: 616-619. (in Japanese)
Ikeda, T. (2002) A list of exotic mammals in Japan. In:
Murakami O. and I. Washitani, eds., Handbook of Alien
Species, Chijinshokan, Tokyo, pp. 298-299. (in Japanese)
Ishida, K., M. Takashi, T. Saitoh and E. Usami (2003a)
Changes in the relative density of the Amami woodcock(Scolopax mira). Strix, 21: 99-109. (in Japanese)
Ishida, K., T. Miyashita and F. Yamada (2003b) Ecosystemmanagement considering community dynamics: A case-studyof Amami-oshima Island. Japanese Journal of Conservation
Ecology, 8: 159-168. (in Japanese)
Ishii, N. (2003) Controlling mongooses introduced to
Amami-Oshima Island: A population estimate and program
evaluation. Japanese Journal of Conservation Ecology, 8:73-82. (in Japanese)
IUCN (2000) 100 of the World’s Worst Invasive Alien Species.
Aliens, 12. 11p.
Kagoshima Prefecture Office (1999) Annual report of thecontrol of the Habu snake. 60p. (in Japanese)
Kishida, K. (1931) Professor Watase and the import ofmongooses. Zoological Science 43: 70-78. (in Japanese)
Nowak, R. M. (1999) Walker`s Mammals of the World. 6th ed.
The Johns Hopkins University Press. Baltimore and London.

Ogura, G. (2001) Fundamental study of the management ofmongooses introduced into Okinawa Island, with specialreference to identification of species, damage census, growth,
reproduction and control measures. Nagoya University
Doctorial Thesis, 183p. (in Japanese)
Ogura, G., T. Sasaki, M. Toyama, K. Takehara, M. Nakachi, O.
Ishibashi, Y. Kawashima and S. Oda (2002) Food habits ofthe feral small Asian mongoose (Herpestes javanicus) and
impacts on native species in the northern part of Okinawa
Island. Mammalian Science, 41: 53-62. (in Japanese)
Roy, S. S., C. G. Jones and S. Harris (2001) An ecological basis
for improving mongoose management on Mauritius. In: C. R.
Veitch and M. N. Clout, eds., Turning the Tide: theeradication of invasive species. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland,
pp. 266-273.
Sekiguchi, K., F. Inoue, T. Ueda, G. Ogura and Y. Kawashima(2001) Genealogical relationship between introducedmongooses in Okinawa and Amamiohsima Islands, Ryukyu
Archipelago, inferred from sequences of the mtDNA
cytocrome b gene. Mammalian Science 41: 65-70. (inJapanese)
Simberloff, D., T. Dayan, C, Jones and G. Ogura (2000)
Character displacement and release in the small Indianmongoose, Herpestes javanicus. Ecology, 81: 2086-2099.
Simberloff, D. (2001) Eradication of island invasives: practicalactions and results achieved. Trends in Ecology & Evolution,
16: 273-274.
Smith, D. G., J. T. Polhemus and E. A. VanderWerf (2000)
Efficiency of fish-flavored Diphacinone bait blocks forcontrollingsmall
Indianmongoose(Herpestes
auropunctatus) populations in Hawai'i. 'Elepaio, 60: 47-51.
Sugimura, K., S. Sato, F. Yamada, S. Abe, H. Hirakawa and Y.
Handa (2000) Distribution and abundance of the Amami
rabbit Pentalagus furnessi in the Amami and Tokuno Islands,
Japan. Oryx, 34: 198-206.
Sugimura, K. (1998) The estimation of the population level ofthe Amami rabbit (Pentalagus furnessi) and its declining
trend. Papers on Environmental Information Science, 12:251-256. (in Japanese)
Sugimura, K. (2002) Changes in the population level of birds
and Amami rabbit in relation to their habitat change in the
Amami Island. Papers on Environmental Information
Science, 16: 121-126. (in Japanese)
Sugimura, K., F. Yamada and A. Miyamoto (2003) Population
trend, habitat change and conservation of the unique wildlife
species on Amami Island, Japan. Global Environmental
Research, 7: 79-89.
Sugimura, K. and F. Yamada (2004) Estimating population sizeof the Amami rabbit Pentalagus furessi based on fecal pelletcounts on Amami Island, Japan. Acta Zoologica Sinica, 50:
519-526.
Tanahara, N. (2002) Current conditions and problems withmeasures for dealing with mongooses in Okinawa Island.
In: K. Murakami and I. Washitani, eds., Handbook of Alien
Species in Japan, Chijinshokan, Tokyo, pp. 20-21. (inJapanese)
Yamada, F., K. Sugimura, S. Abe and Y. Hanada (2000) Present
status and conservation of the endangered Amami rabbit
Pentalagus furnessi. Tropics, 10: 87-92.
Yamada, F. (2002) Impacts and control of introduced small
Indian mongoose on Amami Island, Japan. In: Veitch, C. R.
and Clout, M. N., eds., Turning the Tide: the eradication ofinvasive species. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, pp. 389-392.
Yamada, F., K. Sugimura and S. Abe (2003) Reduction of
Amami rabbit populations after the invasion of mongooses
into rabbit habitat. Abstract of the Annual Meeting of theMammalogical Society of Japan: 64. (in Japanese)(Received 25 February 2004, Accepted 9 December 2004)