DOCSLIB.ORG

Wildlife Migratory Corridors and Dispersal Areas

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

This report provides a vivid depiction of the state of Kenya’s conservation connectivity both within and outside protected areas, complete with maps and information on historical and recent wildlife migratory routes and corridors on the Kenya rangelands and coastal terrestrial ecosystems. The report is organized under seven major themes: an introductory overview, a brief treatment on the importance of biodiversity conservation for human well-being, and on the Kenya Vision 2030 flagship project on the environment; objectives and study areas; understanding animal movements and connectivity; the methodological approach to conservation connectivity, and the conservation connectivity framework (CCF); migratory routes and corridors for conservation (drivers, pressures, states, impacts, responses, constraints, opportunities, and strategies for securing habitats already interfered with by human activities); infrastructure development, and climate change impacts; and recommendations and a roadmap. Despite the crucial role of migratory routes and corridors in ensuring connectivity of core habitats with critical dispersal areas, these conservation linkages CORRIDORS AND DISPERSAL AREAS • WILDLIFE MIGRATORY continue to be degraded or lost to human activities, imperilling the integrity of ecosystems and increasing human-wildlife conflicts, hampering efforts to promote eco-tourism,, and impoverishing local communitys’ livelihoods, both of which reduce the speed to meet the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This worrying situation can be attributed largely to multi-faceted anthropogenic pressures. The report also provides a set of options for securing conservation connectivity outside protected areas, based on harmonious co-existence between humans and wild animals, and on enabling people to benefit from the preservation of vital ecosystem goods and services. WILDLIFE MIGRATORY CORRIDORS It is envisaged that this report will serve as an importance reference tool for policy makers, legislators, wildlife managers, land-use planners, conservation stakeholders, development partners, pastoralist communities, and landowners residing in wildlife areas. AND DISPERSAL AREAS Kenya Rangelands and Coastal Terrestrial Ecosystems Rangelands and Coastal Terrestrial Kenya Kenya Rangelands and Coastal Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources Terrestrial Ecosystems P. O. Box 30126-00100, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254 20 2730808/9; +254 20 2725707; +254 20 2725707 Email: [email protected]; Website: http://www.environment.go.ke WILDLIFE MIGRATORY CORRIDORS AND DISPERSAL AREAS: Kenya Rangelands and Coastal Terrestrial Ecosystems Kenya Vision 2030 Flagship Project “Securing Wildlife Migratory Routes and Corridors” WILDLIFE MIGRATORY CORRIDORS AND DISPERSAL AREAS This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-profit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. The Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources (MENR), Directorate of Resource Surveys and Remote Sensing (DRSRS), and Kenya Wildlife Servise (KWS) would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this report as a source. This report will be updated continuously as new migratory routes and movement corridors are identified. No use of this publication may be made for re-sale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from the MENR, DRSRS and KWS. ISBN: 978-9966-107-19-0 Copyright © 2017 Government of the Republic of Kenya All rights reserved For bibliographic and reference purposes, this publication should be referred to as: Gordon O. Ojwang’, Patrick W. Wargute, Mohammed Y. Said, Jeffrey S. Worden, Zeke Davidson, Philip Muruthi, Erustus Kanga, Festus Ihwagi and Benson Okita-Ouma (2017). Wildlife Migratory Corridors and Dispersal Areas: Kenya Rangelands and Coastal Terrestrial Ecosystems DISCLAIMER The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, the Government of Kenya or the institutions collaborating in this project. The map presentations do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of collaborating institutions above concerning the legal status of any territory, county, or area of its authorities, or the delineation of its boundaries. Trademark names, logos, symbols and acronyms are used in an editorial fashion with no intention of infringement on copyright laws. All Correspondence: The Principal Secretary Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources P. O. Box 30126-00100, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254 20 2730808/9; +254 20 2725707; +254 20 2725707 Email: [email protected]; Website: http://www.environment.go.ke The Director Directorate of Resource Surveys and Remote Sensing (DRSRS) P. O. Box 47146-00100, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254 20 6009013/27/79; Fax: +254 20 6009705 Email: [email protected]; Website: http://www.drsrs.go.ke The Director General Kenya Wildlife Service P. O. Box 40241-00100, Nairobi, Kenya Tel: +254 20 6000800; Fax: +254 20 6003792 Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.kws.go.ke Table of contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS VI MESSAGE FROM THE FIRST LADY VII FOREWORD VIII PREFACE IX ACRONYM AND ABREVIATIONS X PRODUCTION AND EDITORIAL TEAMS XI EXECUTIVE SUMMARY XVI INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND XVIII CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 1 1.1. Global and Continental Biodiversity 1 1.2. Kenya’s Biodiversity 2 1.3.Relevance and Importance of Biodiversity 3 1.4. Trends in the Population of Wildlife in Kenya 4 1.5. Vision 2030 on Securing Wildlife Migratory Routes and Corridors 6 1.6. Study Approach and Report Organization 6 CHAPTER 2: OBJECTIVES AND STUDY AREA 8 2.1. Objectives 9 2.2. Study Areas 9 Southern Kenya Rangeland Ecosystems 9 2.2.1 (A). Nairobi National Park and Athi-Kaputiei Ecosystem 9 2.2.1(B). Masai Mara Ecosystem 10 2.2.1(C). Tsavo Ecosystem 11 2.2.1(D). Amboseli Ecosystem - West Kilimanjaro Area 11 2.2.1(E). South Rift Ecosystem 12 2.2.1(F). Eburu Forest Ecosystem and Lakes Naivasha-Elementaita-Nakuru Conservation Areas 12 Northern Kenya Rangeland and Coastal Terrestrial Ecosystems 12 2.2.1(G). Greater Ewaso Ecosystem 13 2.2.1(H). Turkana-Mt. Elgon Ecosystem 14 2.2.1(I). North-Eastern Rangeland and Coastal Terrestrial Ecosystems 15 CHAPTER 3: UNDERSTANDING MOVEMENTS AND CONNECTIVITY 17 3.1.Animal Movements - Dispersal and Migrations 17 3.2. Biological Significance of Animal Movements and Theory 17 3.3.Definition and Importance of Corridors 18 3.4. Wildlife and People: Conflicts and Conservation 19 3.5. Key Wildlife Species 19 3.5.1. African Elephant (Loxodonta africana, Blumenbach) 20 3.5.2. Wildebeest (Connochaetes taurinus mearnsi) 21 3.5.3. Burchell’s Zebra (Equus burchelli, Gray) 22 3.5.4. Grevy’s Zebra (Equus grevyi) 23 3.5.6. African or Cape Buffalo (Syncerus caffer) 25 3.5.7. Beisa Oryx (Oryx beisa beisa) & Fringe-eared Oryx (Oryx beisa callotis) 26 3.5.8. Topi (Damaliscus lunatus) 26 CHAPTER 4 METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH FOR CONSERVING CONNECTIVITY 28 4.1. Overview 29 4.2. Conservation Connectivity Framework (CCF) 29 4.2.1. Establishing the Context and Purpose – Need for Connectivity 29 4.2.2. Geographical Scope 30 4.2.3. Defining Goals and Objectives – Components of Connectivity (Species, Habitats and Processes) 31 III WILDLIFE MIGRATORY CORRIDORS AND DISPERSAL AREAS 4.2.4. Ecological Components 31 4.2.5. Data Needs and Requirements 31 4.2.6. Connectivity Mapping and Analysis 32 4.2.7. Conservation Connectivity Implementation Framework 33 4.3. Data Sources - Species Distribution and Movements 33 4.4. Geospatial Analysis and Modelling 34 4.4.1. Regional Species Richness and Densities 34 4.4.2. Species Distribution - Regional and Site (Ecosystem) Level 34 4.4.3. Dispersal Areas and Migratory Routes/Corridors 34 4.4.4. Threats to Conservation Connectivity 34 4.4.5. Current Interventions and Opportunities 34 CHAPTER 5: MIGRATORY CORRIDORS FOR CONSERVATION IN SOUTHERN KENYA RANGELAND ECOSYSTEMS 37 5.1.Migratory Corridors for Conservation in Southern Kenya Rangeland Ecosystems 37 5.1.1. Regional Species Richness 37 5.1.2. Regional Wildlife Densities 38 5.1.3. Regional Livestock Densities 39 5.1.4. Regional Wildlife Populations 39 5.1.5. Regional Distribution of Wildebeest 40 5.1.6. Regional Distribution of Burchell’s Zebra 41 5.1.7. Regional Distribution of Elephant 43 5.1.8. Regional Distribution of Giraffe 44 5.2. Ecosystem Patterns: Species Density Distribution 45 5.2.1. Population and distribution trends for Wildebeest in the Mara Ecosystem 45 5.2.2. Population and distribution trends for Burchell’s Zebra in the Mara Ecosystem 46 5.2.3. Population and distribution trends for Elephant in the Mara Ecosystem 47 5.2.4. Population and distribution trends for Giraffe in the Mara Ecosystem 50 5.2.5. Population and distribution trends for Buffalo, Burchell’s Zebra and Giraffe around Lakes Naivasha, Elementaita and Nakuru and in the Eburu Forest Conservation Area 51 5.2.6. Population and distribution trends for Wildebeest in the Athi-Kaputiei Ecosystem 53 5.2.7. Population and distribution trends for Plains Zebra in the Athi-Kaputiei Ecosystem 54 5.2.8. Population and distribution trends for Giraffe in the Athi-Kaputiei Ecosystem 55 5.2.9. Population and distribution trends for Wildebeest in the South Rift and Amboseli Ecosystem 56 5.2.10.Population and distribution trends for Plains Zebra in the South Rift and Amboseli Ecosystem 58 5.2.11. Population and distribution trends for Elephant in the South Rift and Amboseli Ecosystem 59 5.2.12. Population and distribution trends for Giraffe in the South Rift and Amboseli Ecosystem 61 5.2.13. Population and distribution trends for Burchell’s Zebra in the Tsavo Ecosystem 62 5.2.14. Population and distribution trends for Elephant in the Tsavo Ecosystem 63 5.2.15. Population and distribution trends for Giraffe in the Tsavo Ecosystem 65 5.3.Wildlife Dispersal Areas, Migratory Routes/ Corridors 66 5.4. Conservation Connectivity Threats in the Southern Kenya Rangeland Ecosystems 67 5.5.
Recommended publications
  • PROFILES of ATTRACTION SITES-ELGEYO MARAKWET. Tourist Attractions in Elgeyo Marakwet County Include Sports Tourism, Rivers, a Na

    PROFILES of ATTRACTION SITES-ELGEYO MARAKWET. Tourist Attractions in Elgeyo Marakwet County Include Sports Tourism, Rivers, a Na

    PROFILES OF ATTRACTION SITES-ELGEYO MARAKWET. Tourist attractions in Elgeyo Marakwet County include Sports Tourism, Rivers, A national reserve, waterfalls and the hills and escarpments. Rimoi National Reserve The National Reserve is a protected area in the kerio valley along the escarpment of the Great Rift Valley. The 66 square kilometers (25sq mi) reserve was created in 1983 and is managed by the Kenya Wildlife Service. The isolated Kerio Valley lies between the Cherangani Hills and the Tugen Hills with the Elgeyo Escarpment rising more than 1,830 meters (6,000ft) above the valley in places. The valley is 4,000 feet (1,200m) deep. It has semi-tropical vegetation on the slopes, while the floor of the valley is covered by dry thorn bush. The most comfortable time of the year is in July and August when the rains have ended and the temperatures are not excessive. The reserve is on the west side of the Kerio River, while the Lake Kamnarok National Reserve is on the east side. The reserve has beautiful scenery, prolific birdlife and camping site in the bush beside Lake Kamnarok. Gazzement of the conservation area was done to protect wildlife from rampant poaching which was going on at the time. A fence was also put up to address human wildlife conflicts. It provides unique geological scenery & biodiversity and is one of the few protected areas within the spectacular Kerio Valley. The main attraction is the groups of elephants, Culture and scenery of the Kerio valley. The Reserve has earth and gravel road network which make for an adventurous outing.
  • A Molecular Phylogeny of Equatorial African Lacertidae, with the Description of a New Genus and Species from Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo

    A Molecular Phylogeny of Equatorial African Lacertidae, with the Description of a New Genus and Species from Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo

    Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2011, 163, 913–942. With 7 figures A molecular phylogeny of Equatorial African Lacertidae, with the description of a new genus and species from eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo ELI GREENBAUM1*, CESAR O. VILLANUEVA1, CHIFUNDERA KUSAMBA2, MWENEBATU M. ARISTOTE3 and WILLIAM R. BRANCH4,5 1Department of Biological Sciences, University of Texas at El Paso, 500 West University Avenue, El Paso, TX 79968, USA 2Laboratoire d’Herpétologie, Département de Biologie, Centre de Recherche en Sciences Naturelles, Lwiro, République Démocratique du Congo 3Institut Superieur d’Ecologie pour la Conservation de la Nature, Katana Campus, Sud Kivu, République Démocratique du Congo 4Bayworld, P.O. Box 13147, Humewood 6013, South Africa 5Research Associate, Department of Zoology, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth, South Africa Received 25 July 2010; revised 21 November 2010; accepted for publication 18 January 2011 Currently, four species of the lacertid lizard genus Adolfus are known from Central and East Africa. We sequenced up to 2825 bp of two mitochondrial [16S and cytochrome b (cyt b)] and two nuclear [(c-mos (oocyte maturation factor) and RAG1 (recombination activating gene 1)] genes from 41 samples of Adolfus (representing every species), two species each of Gastropholis and Holaspis, and in separate analyses combined these data with GenBank sequences of all other Eremiadini genera and four Lacertini outgroups. Data from DNA sequences were analysed with maximum parsimony (PAUP), maximum-likelihood (RAxML) and Bayesian inference (MrBayes) criteria. Results demonstrated that Adolfus is not monophyletic: Adolfus africanus (type species), Adolfus alleni, and Adolfus jacksoni are sister taxa, whereas Adolfus vauereselli and a new species from the Itombwe Plateau of Democratic Republic of the Congo are in a separate lineage.
  • Kajiado County 2020 Short Rains Food and Nutrition Security Assessment Report

    Kajiado County 2020 Short Rains Food and Nutrition Security Assessment Report

    KAJIADO COUNTY 2020 SHORT RAINS FOOD AND NUTRITION SECURITY ASSESSMENT REPORT February 2021 A Joint Report by Kenya Food Security Steering Group (KFSSG) and Kajiado County Steering Group (CSG) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The 2020 Short Rains food security assessment was carried out by the county technical team with technical support from the Kenya Food Security Steering Group (KFSSG). The overall objective of the assessment was to objectively and with evidence provide food security situation in the county in a transparent manner following the 2020 Short Rains taking into account the cumulative effect of the previous seasons. The assessment provides recommendations for possible response options based on the situation analysis upon building consensus. Both quantitative and qualitative approaches were used during assessment including review of the existing data provided through checklists or otherwise and triangulating with field observations as well as both community and key informants interviews. Depressed rainfall was the key driver of food security in the county which resulted in below normal regeneration of pasture, recharge of water sources and crops yields. The COVID-19 epidemic negatively affected patterns of food supply and access as well as health- seeking behaviour in the county. Livestock diseases were also an important food security driver in the county. Since May 2020, livestock prices were sustained above the Long Term Average due to the reduced supply to the markets. Following the off-season rains in early January 2021, domestic water consumption has now normalized. Nutrition status of under-fives was better for the entire year as evidenced by the below long term average risk of malnutrition of 6.8 percent.
  • Preliminary Analysis of Correlated Evolution of Morphology and Ecological Diversification in Lacertid Lizards

    Preliminary Analysis of Correlated Evolution of Morphology and Ecological Diversification in Lacertid Lizards

    Butll. Soc. Cat. Herp., 19 (2011) Preliminary analysis of correlated evolution of morphology and ecological diversification in lacertid lizards Fèlix Amat Orriols Àrea d'Herpetologia, Museu de Granollers-Ciències Naturals. Francesc Macià 51. 08402 Granollers. Catalonia. Spain. [email protected] Resum S'ha investigat la diversitat morfològica en 129 espècies de lacèrtids i la seva relació amb l'ecologia, per mitjà de mètodes comparatius, utilitzant set variables morfomètriques. La mida corporal és la variable més important, determinant un gradient entre espècies de petita i gran mida independentment evolucionades al llarg de la filogènia dels lacèrtids. Aquesta variable està forta i positivament correlacionada amb les altres, emmascarant els patrons de diversitat morfològica. Anàlisis multivariants en les variables ajustades a la mida corporal mostren una covariació negativa entre les mides relatives de la cua i les extremitats. Remarcablement, les espècies arborícoles i semiarborícoles (Takydromus i el clade africà equatorial) han aparegut dues vegades independentment durant l'evolució dels lacèrtids i es caracteritzen per cues extremadament llargues i extremitats anteriors relativament llargues en comparació a les posteriors. El llangardaix arborícola i planador Holaspis, amb la seva cua curta, constitueix l’única excepció. Un altre cas de convergència ha estat trobat en algunes espècies que es mouen dins de vegetació densa o herba (Tropidosaura, Lacerta agilis, Takydromus amurensis o Zootoca) que presenten cues llargues i extremitats curtes. Al contrari, les especies que viuen en deserts, estepes o matollars amb escassa vegetació aïllada dins grans espais oberts han desenvolupat extremitats posteriors llargues i anteriors curtes per tal d'assolir elevades velocitats i maniobrabilitat. Aquest és el cas especialment de Acanthodactylus i Eremias Abstract Morphologic diversity was studied in 129 species of lacertid lizards and their relationship with ecology by means of comparative analysis on seven linear morphometric measurements.
  • Conserving Wildlife in African Landscapes Kenya’S Ewaso Ecosystem

    Conserving Wildlife in African Landscapes Kenya’S Ewaso Ecosystem

    Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press smithsonian contributions to zoology • number 632 Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press AConserving Chronology Wildlife of Middlein African Missouri Landscapes Plains Kenya’sVillage Ewaso SitesEcosystem Edited by NicholasBy Craig J. M. Georgiadis Johnson with contributions by Stanley A. Ahler, Herbert Haas, and Georges Bonani SERIES PUBLICATIONS OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION Emphasis upon publication as a means of “diffusing knowledge” was expressed by the first Secretary of the Smithsonian. In his formal plan for the Institution, Joseph Henry outlined a program that included the following statement: “It is proposed to publish a series of reports, giving an account of the new discoveries in science, and of the changes made from year to year in all branches of knowledge.” This theme of basic research has been adhered to through the years by thousands of titles issued in series publications under the Smithsonian imprint, com- mencing with Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge in 1848 and continuing with the following active series: Smithsonian Contributions to Anthropology Smithsonian Contributions to Botany Smithsonian Contributions to History and Technology Smithsonian Contributions to the Marine Sciences Smithsonian Contributions to Museum Conservation Smithsonian Contributions to Paleobiology Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology In these series, the Institution publishes small papers and full-scale monographs that report on the research and collections of its various museums and bureaus. The Smithsonian Contributions Series are distributed via mailing lists to libraries, universities, and similar institu- tions throughout the world. Manuscripts submitted for series publication are received by the Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press from authors with direct affilia- tion with the various Smithsonian museums or bureaus and are subject to peer review and review for compliance with manuscript preparation guidelines.
  • Towards a Housing Strategy to Support Industrial Decentralization: a Case Study of Athi River Town

    Towards a Housing Strategy to Support Industrial Decentralization: a Case Study of Athi River Town

    I TOWARDS A HOUSING STRATEGY TO SUPPORT INDUSTRIAL DECENTRALIZATION: A CASE STUDY OF ATHI RIVER TOWN HENRY MUTHOKA MWAU B.Sc.(Hons) Nairobi, 1986. \ A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PART FULFILMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS (PLANNING) IN THE UNIVERSITY OF NAIROBI. ;* * * N AND «eg<onal planning OFPA.TTVENT " A - U lT r & ARCHITECTURE, OCSICN -NO OEVFLOPMEn t ' ONIv. RSiTY OK NAlKOil ■“"'Sttrffftas ’ NAIROBI, KENYA (ii) DECLARATION This thesis is my original work and*has not been presented for a degree in any other university• Signed HENRY M. KWAU This thesis has been submitted for examination with my approval as University Supervisor, Signed DR. P.0. ONOIEGE (SUPERVISOR) *av*i*n t o „ ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study would not have been successful without the assistance of many people in various institutions. It therefore gives me pleasure to mention a few and express my sincere appreciation for their assistance. First, I would like to thank the Directorate of Personnel Management (DPM)|through the Department of Physical Planning, Ministry of Local Government and Physical Planning whose sponsorship made this work possible. Their collaboration with the department of Urban and Regional Planning, especially through the Chairman, Mr. Z. Maleche, University of Nairobi, made the training course successful. I am greatly indebted to Dr. P. 0. Ondiege, the project supervisor and lecturer in the department, for his guidance throughout the research work. Thanks go to Mr. P. Karanja, the then acting Town Clerk/Treasurer, at time of research work and Mr. Kyatha, both of Athi River Town Council, whose co-operation eased the field work task.
  • Conservation and Management Strategy for the Elephant in Kenya 2012-2021

    Conservation and Management Strategy for the Elephant in Kenya 2012-2021

    Conservation and Management Strategy for the Elephant in Kenya 2012-2021 Compiled by: Moses Litoroh, Patrick Omondi, Richard Kock and Rajan Amin Plate 4. Winds 2 Family crossing the Ewaso Ng’iro River, Samburu National Reserve - Lucy King, Save the Elephants ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, we thank the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) Director, Julius Kipng’etich and KWS Board of Trustees for approving this as a priority activity amongst the core business of KWS. Conservation and We also sincerely thank Keith Lindsay, Winnie Kiiru and Noah Sitati for preparing Management Strategy the background information and facilitating the eleven consultative for the Elephant stakeholder-workshops that were held across the country. This ensured the in Kenya views of as many stakeholders as possible were accommodated into this strategy document. Special thanks to all the stakeholders of the final strategy 2012-2021 development workshop, held at Mpala Research Centre, Nanyuki, which © Kenya Wildlife Service included representatives from United Republic of Tanzania; Uganda Government and the Government of Southern Sudan that finally formulated this National Elephant Management and Conservation Strategy. Our sincere gratitude also to the following individuals for reviewing the first draft : Munira Anyonge Bashir, Julian Blanc, Holly Dublin, Francis Gakuya, Ian Douglas-Hamilton, Ben Kavu, Juliet King, Lucy King, Margaret Kinnaird, Ben Okita, Lamin Seboko, Noah Sitati, Diane Skinner, Richard Vigne and David Western. Frontcover: We are greatly indebted to the following institutions for funding the formulation of this strategy : Born Free Foundation; CITES MIKE Programme; Darwin Initiative Plate 1. African Elephant. Samantha Roberts, Zoological / CETRAD; KWS; People’s Trust for Endangered Species; Tusk Trust; United States Society of London Fish and Wildlife Service; World Wildlife Fund (EARPO) and Zoological Society of London (ZSL).
  • Zambia Pitta Tour & Black-Cheeked Lovebird Extension 01 - 11 December 2015 Tour Leader Tertius Gous Photographs by Tertius Gous Taken on This Tour

    Zambia Pitta Tour & Black-Cheeked Lovebird Extension 01 - 11 December 2015 Tour Leader Tertius Gous Photographs by Tertius Gous Taken on This Tour

    Zambia Pitta Tour & Black-cheeked Lovebird Extension 01 - 11 December 2015 Tour Leader Tertius Gous Photographs by Tertius Gous taken on this tour www.birdingafrica.com Day 1: The first day was mostly a travel day as we departed from Livingstone at noon and traveled in a westerly direction to our lodge situated along the Zambezi River. Roadside birds seen during the journey consisted of Pied Crow, Helmeted Guineafowl, Yellow-billed Kite, Knob-billed Duck, White- browed Sparrow-weaver, Meve’s Starling and Hamerkop. We made a short birding stop in some well-developed mopane woodland where we recorded Southern Carmine and Blue-cheeked Bee- eaters, Red-breasted Swallow, Grey-backed Camaroptera, Brubru and White-crested Helmet- Shrike. Our lodge was situated along a quiet backwater of the Zambezi River and late afternoon birding produced good sightings of Southern Masked-Weaver, Holub’s Golden Weaver, African Jacana, African Openbill, White-faced Duck, Wire-tailed Swallow, White-winged Tern, while Little Rush Warbler and Luapula Cisticola called from the reed beds. Days 2 - 3: We were woken the next morning by the melodious calls of White-browed Robin-Chats emanating from the lush riverine vegetation and gardens of the lodge. Breakfast was served on a wooden deck overlooking the river and we soon got onto a Slaty Egret foraging along the shore, while the antics of Tilapia around their nesting circles in the river was fascinating to watch. The morning was alive with birds and our list was growing quickly with additions such as Red- billed Francolin, Swamp Boubou, Southern Grey- headed Sparrow, African Mourning Dove, Common Waxbill, nesting African Paradise-Flycatcher, Southern Brown-throated Weaver, Brown and Red- billed Firefinch, White- browed and Coppery-tailed Coucal, African Green Pigeon and Diderik Cuckoo.
  • Population Solver

    Population Solver

    Population Solver AiS Challenge Final Report April 3, 2002 Team Members: Matt Higgins Josh Neidigh Levi Valdez Executive Summary Populations of different species of animals are very important to many people in the United States. Some species of animals in the US are doing very well, while others are on the verge of extinction or have extremely small and unhealthy populations. Animals like the White Tail Deer and Snow Geese are doing very well, but others like the Californian Condor and Whooping Crane are not doing that great. Game populations are very important to game managers; they try to get all species at a reasonable population that is not too great nor to low. These people try to find different management plans that will work effectively and efficiently, both economically and environmentally. They also need to know what non-native species would harm native ones, and what non-invasive species would be a plus in our society. With some revision and adaptation this program could be of use to Game Managers and Biologists around the world to find good management plans and predict future populations. In the early 1960’s, the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish and the New Mexico State Game Commission began a program of exotic big game introduction to increase and diversify hunting opportunities. Habitats with low potential for native big game were targeted for exotic introduction. Over a nine-year period beginning in 1969, gemsbok (Oryx gazella) or oryx, a native of Africa, were released into creosote and mesquite brush land areas on the White Sands Missile Range.
  • The Use of Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and GIS in Identifying And

    The Use of Global Positioning Systems (GPS) and GIS in Identifying And

    TheThe useuse ofof GlobalGlobal positioningpositioning SystemsSystems (GPS)(GPS) andand GISGIS inin identifyingidentifying andand assessingassessing thethe ImpactImpact ofof thethe changingchanging landland usesuses onon thethe migratorymigratory corridorscorridors ofof NairobiNairobi NationalNational Park.Park. By Margaret Wachu Gichuhi. Research Fellow, Institute of Energy and Environment, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology, Thika, Kenya. UN/ESA Regional Workshop Lusaka Zambia 27/06/2006 1 IntroductionIntroduction • The Nairobi National Park (NNP) is a unique park located 5km from Nairobi City, the capital of Kenya. The park is bordered by Kajiado District to the south, Machakos District to the east, and Mbagathi River forms the south and southeastern boundaries . • This study will show how the changing land uses interferes with the migration and the breeding patterns of animals in the park and especially the wildebeest and the Zebras using GPS and G.I.S. • The study will create a buffer zone for conservation purposes. 2 LocationLocation ofof NairobiNairobi NationalNational ParkPark 3 TopicsTopics ofof DiscussionDiscussion Description of the study area: • Physical Geography. • Fauna and Flora. • Materials and Methods. • Results and discussions. • Conclusions and Recommendations 4 TopicTopic OneOne Description of the study area • Nairobi National Park was established in 1946 and is situated 5km south of Nairobi city. It covers an area of 117km2 . • The park has been fenced on all side except to the southern part where
  • Kenya, Groundwater Governance Case Study

    Kenya, Groundwater Governance Case Study

    WaterWater Papers Papers Public Disclosure Authorized June 2011 Public Disclosure Authorized KENYA GROUNDWATER GOVERNANCE CASE STUDY Public Disclosure Authorized Albert Mumma, Michael Lane, Edward Kairu, Albert Tuinhof, and Rafik Hirji Public Disclosure Authorized Water Papers are published by the Water Unit, Transport, Water and ICT Department, Sustainable Development Vice Presidency. Water Papers are available on-line at www.worldbank.org/water. Comments should be e-mailed to the authors. Kenya, Groundwater Governance case study TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE .................................................................................................................................................................. vi ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................................................ viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................................................ xi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................... xiv 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1. GROUNDWATER: A COMMON RESOURCE POOL ....................................................................................................... 1 1.2. CASE STUDY BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................................
  • Controlled Animals

    Controlled Animals

    Environment and Sustainable Resource Development Fish and Wildlife Policy Division Controlled Animals Wildlife Regulation, Schedule 5, Part 1-4: Controlled Animals Subject to the Wildlife Act, a person must not be in possession of a wildlife or controlled animal unless authorized by a permit to do so, the animal was lawfully acquired, was lawfully exported from a jurisdiction outside of Alberta and was lawfully imported into Alberta. NOTES: 1 Animals listed in this Schedule, as a general rule, are described in the left hand column by reference to common or descriptive names and in the right hand column by reference to scientific names. But, in the event of any conflict as to the kind of animals that are listed, a scientific name in the right hand column prevails over the corresponding common or descriptive name in the left hand column. 2 Also included in this Schedule is any animal that is the hybrid offspring resulting from the crossing, whether before or after the commencement of this Schedule, of 2 animals at least one of which is or was an animal of a kind that is a controlled animal by virtue of this Schedule. 3 This Schedule excludes all wildlife animals, and therefore if a wildlife animal would, but for this Note, be included in this Schedule, it is hereby excluded from being a controlled animal. Part 1 Mammals (Class Mammalia) 1. AMERICAN OPOSSUMS (Family Didelphidae) Virginia Opossum Didelphis virginiana 2. SHREWS (Family Soricidae) Long-tailed Shrews Genus Sorex Arboreal Brown-toothed Shrew Episoriculus macrurus North American Least Shrew Cryptotis parva Old World Water Shrews Genus Neomys Ussuri White-toothed Shrew Crocidura lasiura Greater White-toothed Shrew Crocidura russula Siberian Shrew Crocidura sibirica Piebald Shrew Diplomesodon pulchellum 3.