Saka, M. G., Zarto, S. T. and Gawaisa, G. S

Journal of Research in Forestry, Wildlife & Environment Vol. 8(4) December, 2016 http://www.ajol.info/index.php/jrfwe jfewr ©2016 - jfewr Publications 86 E-mail:[email protected] ISBN: 2141 – 1778 Saka et al , 2016

ASSESSMENT OF THE ABUNDANCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF WESTERN HARTEBEEST (Alcelaphus buselaphus) IN SOUTHERN SECTOR OF GASHAKA GUMTI PARK, NIGERIA

1Saka, M. G., 2Zarto, S. T. and 1Gawaisa, G. S.

1Department of Forestry and Wildlife Management, Modibbo Adama University of Technology, Yola, Adamawa State, Nigeria 2Gashaka Gumti National Park, Nigeria

ABSTRACT This study assessed the distribution and abundance of Western hartebeest (Alcelaphus buselaphus) in Gashaka Gumti National Park. Information on the abundance and distribution of Western hartebeest as well as their problems were examined. Stratified sampling procedure was adopted, in which three (3) line transects of 1 km length were laid at interval in each of the study area. The result revealed that Western hartebeest abound in each of the habitat, with a total population of 508 animals with a density of 1.92/km2. The ANOVA result shows no significant difference among the zones in terms animals composition and distribution of the studied species (P > 0.05). The present population structure of Western hartebeest is heavily a promising future in the park. It was observed that poaching, loss of habitat and cattle disturbance are the major environmental challenges threatening their survival. New strategy of anti-poaching patrols and public enlightenment should be adopted and recommended in order to address the environmental factors militating against the survival of Western hartebeest.

Keywords: Distribution, Assessment, Abundance, Western hartebeest, Anti-poaching

INTRODUCTION concept of conservation, which is the wise In Nigeria many wild animal species are maintenance and utilization of the earth becoming extinct as a result of changes in their resources is no more than the combination of natural habitats. An environmental organization these two ancient principles; the need to plan called Friends of the Earth has identified resources management on the basis of accurate Nigeria as one of the areas where tropical rain inventory; and the need to take protective forest is being lost at the rate of over 402,000 measures to ensure that resources do not hectares per annum. This is a serious threat to become exhausted (IUCN, 1986). Bolen and our tropical rain forest wildlife heritage (NEST, Robinson (1999) emphasized the human 1991). component, defining wildlife management as the application of ecological knowledge to Today, wildlife is under pressure everywhere populations of vertebrate animals and their plant and the major and current threats to wildlife loss and animal associates in a manner that strikes a and the most dangerous of all causes, is that of balance between the needs of these populations habitat destruction. According to Oates and and the need of the people. Several approaches Anadu (1982), in every minute over 20 hectares can be used to manage wildlife including of the world’s rain forest are destroyed and, if preservation, conservation, and management the devastation continues at this rate, most of (Anderson, 1999; Anderson et al., 2002). the forest will become waste land by the year 2015. Conservation is the management of Western hartebeest is a large high shoulder, human use of the biosphere so that it may yield deep-chested antelope with long legs, a short the greatest sustainable benefit to the present neck and a very long, narrow face. The horns generations while maintaining the potentials to are carried on hollow bases or pedicles and meet the needs and aspirations of future show considerable variation (45-83cm) from generations (Ayodele et al., 1999). The modern individual to individual and from region to

JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN FORESTRY, WILDLIFE AND ENVIRONMENT VOLUME 8, No. 4 DECEMBER, 2016 ASSESSMENT OF THE ABUNDANCE AND DISTRIBUTION OF WESTERN HARTEBEEST (Alcelaphus buselaphus) IN SOUTHERN SECTOR OF GASHAKA GUMTI PARK, NIGERIA 87

region. Coloration also shows considerable habitat, and also enable government to plan for regional variation (red black in Kalahari, tan in the general management of the species in order East Africa, and golden brown in West Africa) to boost game meat and sustainable utilization and also individual variation, especially in the of the resource. korkay from Ethiopia. According to Kingdon (1997), the weight measurement of male and The assessment of wild animal population such female varies: The female weight ranges as Western hartebeest is essential in order to between118-185kg, while that of male is measure progress and plan for future between 125-218kg male. conservation action. It is necessary to determine whether the utilization of the animal resources In an effort to protect global biodiversity and is truly sustainable or not. The study on the encourage the study, restoration, and sound abundance and distribution of western management of endangered species, the hartebeest in Gashaka Gumti National Park will International Union for the Conservation of help us to know the area or habitat type, the Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) and the species richness in the park. This will help in World Conservation Monitoring Centre determining the consequences of poaching, food (WCMC) maintain a global list of endangered shortage and disease outbreak, so as to facilitate and vulnerable animal species called the Red proper western hartebeest conservation in the List which assesses the status of, and threats to, park. The study aims to assess the abundance animal species worldwide. Also to add to this and distribution of western hartebeest in and other biodiversity databases, non- Gashaka Gumti National Park, Nigeria. governmental organizations such as Conservation International and World Wildlife METHODOLOGY Fund conduct periodic rapid assessments of Study Area wildlife species (Noss, 2007). Gashaka Gumti National Park is the largest and most diverse park in Nigeria, covering an area According to Wakirwa (1998) there is increased of approximately 6,671sq. km, and is split pressure particularly from farmers to eliminate between Adamawa and Taraba States. It’s wild animals such as Western hartebeest despite located in the Northeast of Nigeria between the government’s warnings and efforts to latitudes 6055’ and 8005’N, and between preserve the species. In Gashaka Gumti longitudes 11011’ and 12013’E with the Federal National Park the present population number of Republic of Cameroon as its eastern border Western hartebeest is not certain and the (Figure 1). The park’s name is derived from two population dynamics and sex ratios are of the region’s oldest and most historic unknown. Also their behaviour and general settlements: Gashaka village in Taraba State, ecology present a matter of speculations. The and Gumti village in Adamawa State. Gashaka lack of information on the general ecology of Gumti National Park was created (along with Western hartebeest in the study area makes their other seven national parks) by Decree No. 36 of conservation and management very difficult, August, 1991, and repealed by Decree N0. 46 of there is therefore, the need to study the 1999 (now Act) by the merging of Gashaka distribution and abundance so as to provide part Game reserve with Gumti Game Reserve of the information that will help in taking more (Magurba, 2002). accurate management decision on the species in the conservation area. The pattern of climatic zones in the study area is distorted by the influence exerted by highland Human encroachment into the wildlife habitat areas that are located throughout the region and for illegal activities such as poaching has been beyond (Pepeh and Nicholas, 2002). This contributing to the reduction in the population results in increased rainfall on the crests and of western hartebeest. The solution therefore is western flanks of these mountain ranges and embracing preservation, maintenance, low rain shadow to the east. Annual rainfall sustainable utilization, restoration and within the park ranges from 1200mm in the enhancement of the natural environment. These north to 3000mm in the southern region. Wet will go a long way checking the rate of season is normally experienced from April to environment deterioration and loss of wildlife November, and dry season from December to

JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN FORESTRY, WILDLIFE AND ENVIRONMENT VOLUME 8, No. 4 DECEMBER, 2016 Saka et al., 88 March. In December period, there is always a Chappal Waddi, lying on border with Cameroon low temperature at night time, and ranges from at 2,442m above sea level. The northern park 10-150C, while, in March and April, the area is made up of rolling hill up to 900 m temperature is as high as 400-430C in the above sea level (GGNP, 1998).There are three daytime. Temperature can be much cooler at basic soil types in the Park: soils derived from higher altitudes and during the harmattan period basement complex rocks; soils derived from that occurs from November to March (Pepeh volcanic rocks and those that are derived from and Nicholas, 2002).The region can be divided alluvial origin in river valleys (GGNP, 1998). into two major physiographic provinces. The The topographically induced rainfall regime or plains of the Benue valley which lie to the west pattern closely correlates with the vegetation and north of the region, predominantly below type of the region. Bawden and Tuley (1966) 300m above sea level and the Adamawa identified four main vegetation zones: Lowland Highlands situated to the south and East of the Rainforest, Montane Rainforest, Montane park. Thus, the southern sector is predominantly Forest, Grassland and Savanna Woodland. mountainous, with Nigeria’s highest peak, (Figure 2.)

Figure 1: Map of Gashaka Gumti National Park showing the study sites. Source: (GGNP Management Plan, 1998).

Figure 2: Vegetation Map of GashakaGumti National Park. Source: Nigeria Sat –X National Space Research and Development Agency (NARSDA, 2013)

Study Design and Data Collection Techniques Also, additional information were collected on The study was carried out in the Southern sector the sex of species, number of individuals of the park. Three (3) lines transect of 5 km sighted, sighting distance and the species distance long each were randomly laid in activities when first sighted. selected locations in the southern sector of the Data Analysis park as follow: The population density of A.buselaphus was i. Transect 1 – Mayo Kpa’a – Mayo Bam estimated, using the program DISTANCE 5.0 ii. Transect 2 – Maidanu Road – Mashayin (Thomas et al., 2006). Zafi iii. Transact 3 – Beacon 655 – Confluence of Half normal key model (Equation 1 and 2) as Mayo Kam and Mayo Jarandi discussed by Buckland et al,. (2001) and Thomas et al. (2009) were used to calculate the In addition, fifty (50) copies of abundance of Western Hartebeest in the study questionnaires were also administered to the five area. The model is of the form: (5) ranges of the southern sector of the park to Half-normal key K(y) = exp(-y**2/(2* solicit information about the park. A(1)**2)) ------(1) Half-normal key (K(y) = (y**2/(2* A(1)**2)) -- Western hartebeest inventory ------(2) Direct method of census was used. Line transects were established using a stratified Model evaluationThe half-normal key model random sampling procedures (Plumtre and was used to evaluate the density and abundance Reynolds, 1994). The transects were walked at of the western hartebeest in the study area. approximately 2.5km per hour,5 days in the Model with a lower value of Akaike Information month from March to May, counting all groups Criteria (AIC) was selected as the best equation. of western hartebeest sighted along the transect. In addition, one-way analysis of variance was The distance from the transect line to the centre used to test variation between species of the groups was estimated, and the number of distribution and the vegetation zones (Equation the animal sighted in the group was recorded 3). (Plumtre and Reynolds, 1994; White, 1994). Yijk= μ + TI + ∑ ij ------(3)

JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN FORESTRY, WILDLIFE AND ENVIRONMENT VOLUME 8, No. 4 DECEMBER, 2016 Saka et al., 90

Western hartebeest sighted, 95(74.80%) were Where: adults and the remaining 32(28.2%) were young Yijk = Total sum of observations. animals. Therefore, the extrapolation of the μ = General mean sighted hartebeest with the total land mass of the Tj = effect of j treatment Southern sector of park gave a total population ∑ ij = the error associated with the of 508Western hartebeest. The estimation of experiment animal abundance and density shows that, the Effective Strip Width (ESW) was 52.174m i.e. to RESULTS both left and right side of the transect. The Assessment of Abundance of Western density of the A. buselaphus in the study area Hartebeest in the Study Area was estimated as 1.92 per km2, with a standard The findings from this study indicated that there error of 0.40, while, the abundance was 13.00 are 127 Western hartebeest sighted in the with a standard error of 2.74 (Table 1). sampled area (1000 km2). Out of this 127

Table 1: Estimation of Animal Density and Abundance Parameter Point estimate Standard error A(1) 60.92 43.94 F(0) 0.19 0.40 P 0.86 0.18 ESW 52.78 10.98 D 1.92 0.40 N 13.00 2.74 Source: Field Survey 2014 shows that the model fit was less satisfactory, where: indicating no clear evidence of rounding in the A(I) = ith parameter in the estimated probability observation at the beginning of the observation density function(pdf) (less than 0.6). This indicates evidence of too F(0) = Value of pdf at zero for line transects few detection of animals close to the transect P = probability of observing an object in line, which was relative to what could have been defined area expected under the half normal model. Also, the ESW = Effective Strip Width (for line transects) histogram (Figure 3) shows the frequency = W*p distribution of the observed animals, with the red D = Density of animals line indicating the best fit function. The sighted N = Number of animals in specified area animals very close to the transect (Figure 4) are low in population, and increases with increase in Detection FCT/Global/ Plot distance (at highest distance of 40m), while, The result of the Quantile-quantile (Qq) plots of fewer animals were observed as the distance half normal model, fitted to the line transect data, increases up to 60m.

1.6

1.4

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4 uency (%) uency 0.2 Freq 0.0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Perpendicular distance in meters

Figure 3: Histogram showing the frequency distribution of Western hartebeest

The result of analysis of variance (ANOVA) the transects. This indicated that the animals are (Table 2) shows that, there is no significant widely and evenly distributed in the park. difference in the distribution of hartebeest among

Table 2: ANOVA for the Transect/Zones Source of Sum of Degree of Mean F Calc. P Value F Crit. Variation Square freedom square

Transect 12.9047 2 6.4523 0.7188 0.4936 3.2381n.s Error 350.0714 39 Total 362.9762 n.s = Not significant

Environmental Challenges hartebeest. Also 8 (16%) and 5 (10%) Out of the 50 copies of the questionnaire respondents attributed loss of habitat and administered, 37 respondents (74%) attributing disturbance by cattle as others environmental poaching to be the biggest environmental factors respectively (Appendix 1: Table 3). challenge threatening the survival of Western -

Figure 4: Number of Animals Sighted along the Transects.

JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN FORESTRY, WILDLIFE AND ENVIRONMENT VOLUME 8, No. 4 DECEMBER, 2016 Saka et al., 92 Table 3: Environmental Factors Affecting Western Hartebeest S/No Factor No. of respondent Percentage (%) 1 Poaching 37 74 2 Loss of habitat 8 16 3 Disturbance by cattle 5 10

DISCUSION the animal location. All these will help to arrive The result from this study indicate that the at good fit (Buckland et al. 1993). population density (d) of Western hartebeest is 1.92km2 with an abundance (n) of 13.00 and The study also revealed that frequency of the effective strip width (ESW) of 50.174m. This observation was very low close to the transact result shows an increase in the population of the and increase with increased in distance up to at W. hartebeest as against that reported by 40m beyond which it records fewer and fewer Gawaisa, (2006); Akinyemi and Kayode, (2011) observation to reach the maximum at the that the population density (d) of Western distance of60m. Beyond 60m the pattern of hartebeest was1.7 ± 0.4 km2 and 0.07km2 in observation was not so clear; this may due to GGNP and old Oyo National park respectively. visibility bias caused by visual impediments and The increase in the population density of the observer error. Hence, Bucklandet al. (2001), species implies that the awareness on wildlife suggested that truncating with caution at 60m conservation by the Government is yielding a that is about 5% of the observations is often positive result, as these has help in reduction in reasonable, so as to give good fit. The highest number of poachers and hunters terrorising the number of hartebeest was recorded along Mai park. Idanu road to Mashayin Zafi. However the result of the analysis of variance (ANOVA) indicated The findings from this study as indicated in there is no any significant difference among the Figure 6 shows the quantile fits known as transect, thus, the Western hartebeest are widely quantile-quantile (Q-Q) plot corresponding to and evenly distributed in the park. fits of a half normal line transact data. In this result the model fit seems less satisfactory Despite the fact that the population of Western indicating that there is no clear evidence of hartebeest is relatively modest, western rounding at the beginning of the observation hartebeest are still being faced with some (0.0-0.6) and in addition, the result shows environmental challenges. Hartebeest have evidence of too few detection (shown as dashed reduced markedly in number across their range, line, which represents the average number of as their distribution has been increasingly detection per area) close to the transect line, fragmented, as a result of poaching for meat and relative to what would be expected under the expansion of settlement and livestock (IUCN, half-normal model as presented by Buckland et 2001). As it has already occurred most of the rest al. (2001) which stated that in the plot of the fit of the species former range, are currently of a detection function model to the data if they decreasing because of poaching as it is occurring follow the same distribution, then a plot of the in the study area. The population is likely to quantiles of the first variable against the quantile become fragmented until they are confined to should follow a straight line (dash line and solid areas where there is effective control of poaching line). But here the fitted cumulative distribution and encroachment by livestock and settlement. function (cdf) is shifted systematically above In spite of the various anti-poaching patrol zero than the empirical distribution function techniques employed in order to curb the menace (edf). These suggest that proper care should be of poaching in the National Park, the prevalence taken whenever distance data is being collected, of poaching activities was very conspicuous and all record and calculation should be close to during this study, as poacher’s camps and foot accurate. Animals should be sighted and prints were found at certain part of the park. recorded quickly before they started running Gawaisa (2006) recorded also an evidence of away and ensure that distances are measured poaching activities in the park and these without errors. The method also require that a activities include foot prints of poachers, large number of transects are used and that the poacher’s camps and gun shots. Influx of cattle location of these is random and independent of into the park is also a problem of concern to the

survival of hartebeest. The incursion of cattle into the park in the dry season and of recent CONCLUSION raining season has forced the animals to hide in The family Acelaphinae in which the western secluded areas and also emigrate from the park. hartebeest A.buselaphus belongs is on the Gawaisa (2002) pointed out that each dry season, present global conservation focus. The increase large numbers of livestock from other parts of in pressure, particularly from hunters to the country are attracted to the park for pasture eliminate wild animal, such as western and water and this influx has caused the hartebeest, despite the government’s warning migration of some animals as a result of and efforts on conservation of wildlife species. disturbance. Deforestation around the park Therefore, there is a need for more knowledge results in habitat fragmentation which in turn on its abundance and the problem facing the results in animals migrating, dying or being species in protected areas. The proper killed, Gawaisa (2006). During the study, it was conservation and management of the species, it’s observed that many areas that used to be the habitat, ecology and abundance is necessary for buffer zone (land adjacent to the park) has been its sustainability in the protected areas such as cleared thereby reducing the home range and Gashaka Gumti National Park. habitat of some animals

REFERENCES Gawaisa S.G (2002). Population dynamics of Anderson, S.H (1999).Managing our Wildlife large mammals in the Savannazones and Resources. 3rdEdition. Prentice Hall, management programmes in Gashaka Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, USA. Gumti National Park, Nigeria. UnPub. Anderson,J.T., Grey G.F., Joseph, D.O. and M.Tech. Thesis, Federal University Army, B.S., (2002). The importance and Technology, Yola. use of wildlife management plans: An Gawaisa S.G (2006). Line Transact monitoring example from the Camp Davision of large mammals in SavannahZones of collective training area, West Virginia Gashaka Gumti National Park, Nigeria. A University, P.O Box 6125, Morgantown, report for the Nigeria Conservation WV 26056-6125, USA. Foundation Lagos. P. 19. Ayodele, I.A, Abe, AJ, Olaniyan, A.O., (1999). Gashaka Gumti National Park, (1998). A Essentials of Zoo Management. Jachin Management plan for developing the Publishers Ibadan, Nigeria. park and its supportzones prepared bythe Bawden, M.G and Tuley, P. (1966). The Land NCF and WWF-UK with support from Resources of Southern Sardauna and Department for International Southern Adamawa Provinces, Northern Development for the Federal Ministry Nigeria. 2nd edition. Land Resources of Agric. & Natural resources. Division, Tolworth. International Union for the Conservation of Bolen, E.G and W.L Robinson (1999). Wildlife Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN, Ecology and Management. 1986). Red List of threatened animals 4thedition.Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle conservation monitoring. Directory areas, River, New Jersey, USA. Gland Switzerland pp.10-34. Buckland, S.T., Anderson, D.R., Bonham, K.P. International Union for the Conservation of and Laake, J.L. (1993). Distance Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN, 2008). Sampling: Estimating Abundance of www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/817/0 Biological Populations, Chapman & Hall, IUCN DDC Antelope Specialist Group (2008): London, reprinted (1999) by Research .Alcelaphus buselaphus. In:IUCN2010. Unit for Wildlife Population Assessment, IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. St Andrews. Kingdon, J. (1997).The Kingdom Field Guide to Buckland, S.T., Anderson, D.R., Burnham, K.P, African Mammals. Natural WordAcademic Laake, J.L., Borchers, D.L. andThomas, Press Harcourt Brace and Company L. (2001). Introduction to Distance Publisher, San Diego pp.403-404. Sampling: Estimating Abundance of Magurba, B.L (2002). National Parks and their Biological Populations. Oxford Benefit to Local Communities in Nigeria. University Press.

JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN FORESTRY, WILDLIFE AND ENVIRONMENT VOLUME 8, No. 4 DECEMBER, 2016 94

Saka et al., 94

NARSDA, (2013). Nigeria Sat –X National Forest Reserve, Uganda. Journal of Space Research and Development Agency. Applied Ecology, 31: 631-641. Nigerian Environmental study/Action Thomas, L. Laake, J.L., Strindberg, S., Marques, Team-NEST (1991). The Threatened F.F.C, Buckland,S.T., Borchers,D.L., Environment. Anderson, D.R., Burnham, K.P, Hedley, Nigerian Environmental study/Action Team- S.L, Pollard, J.H. Bishop, J.R.B., NEST (1991). The threatened Marques, T.A (2006). Distance 5.0. Environment. A National Profile Release 2. Research Unit for Wildlife A National profile. NEST Publication., Population Assessment, University of St. Intect Printer limited. Ibadan Andrew, UK. Pp182-183. Thomas, L. Laake, J.L., Rexstad, E., Strindberg, Noss, R.F. (2007). “Endangered Species” S., Marques, F.F.C, Buckland,S.T Microsoft® Student 2008 Borchers D.L., Anderson, D.R Burnham, (DVD).Redmond, WA: Microsoft K.P, Nurt, M.L., Hedley, S.L Pollard, J.H Corporation, 2007. Bishop, J.R.Band Marques, T.A (2009). Oates, J.F. and Anadu, P.A (1982). Report on the Distance 6.0. Release. “x”1. Research surveys of rain forest primate in Southwest Unit for wildlife population Assessment, Nigeria. IUCN/SSC, Primate Specialist University of St. Andrew, UK. Group Newsletter. Pp. 2-7. Wakirwa, B. (1998). Elephant and its problems. Pepeh, K.Y and Nicholas, A. (2002). A Survey An annual report on animals of Sambisa - of African Wild Dog (Lycoan pictus) in Amshaka Game Reserve. Ministry of Gashaka Gumti National Park, Nigeria. A Agricultures and Natural Resources- report for GGNP, National Park Service, MANR Borno State. Pp. 2. Nigerian Conservation Foundation and White, L.J.T (1994) Biomass of rain forest WWF- UK. 1-47. mammals in the Lope Reserve, Gabon. Plumptre, A.J & Reynolds, V. (1994): The Journal of Animal Ecology, 63:499-512. impact of selective logging on theprimatepopulation in the Budongo

JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN FORESTRY, WILDLIFE AND ENVIRONMENT VOLUME 8, No. 4 DECEMBER, 2016