sign in sign up
<<
Home , Bird migration

Surveillance of migratory in Uganda

Progress Report

Requisition Officer: Funded by USAID Strategic Objective 7 (S07)

Contractor: Achilles Byaruhanga, Executive Officer

Company: NatureUganda

Duration of Project: January to August 2006 1. Introduction...... 3 2. Objectives of the project...... 3 3. Activity progress...... 3

Deliverable #1 . Description of migration patterns ...... 3 a) migration...... 3 b) Bird Migrations in Africa...... 7 c) Bird migrations in Uganda ...... 7

Deliverable #2. Progress on bird surveys and AI surveillance, January 2006...... 9 a) Preparations...... 9 b) Sample collection materials for diagnosis...... 9 c) Survey results...... 10 d) Fecal sample collection from roosting sites and dead birds...... 10

Figure 1: World Migrations described in terms of Flyways...... 5

Figure 2: Palearctic migration flyways in Africa ...... 6

Figure 3. Location of sites surveyed during the waterbird census, January 2006 ...... 8

Table 1. Sites surveyed showing total numbers of water birds recorded...... 12

Table 2: January feacal sample’s results for Avian Influenza diagnosis ...... 13

Figure 4: Comparative waterfowl numbers during the January counts since 1999...... 14

Table 3. Species that have been diagnosed with H5N1 in other parts of the world...... 15

Table 4: Distribution of samples collected...... 16

Table 5: Sample collection Materials...... 17

Appendix 1: Results of the Waterbird census showing sites and species recorded...... 18

Appendix 2: Financial Report for Waterfowl counts January 2006 22

2 1. Introduction Uganda contains over 1010 (half of all species found in Africa) different species of birds occupying the vast landscapes an d highly diverse habitats in Uganda , including but not limited to, and forests. The high diversity of habitats makes Uganda the richest country in terms of birds species compared to its size in Africa. Over 20% of the total number of species in the country are migrants.

2. Objectives of the project NatureUganda has been monitoring waterbirds at 18 major migration sites for over 10 years in Uganda, distributed in all parts of the country except northern Uganda. In January 2006, USAID Uganda supported the waterbird monitoring to carry out surveillance activities associated with migratory birds in Uganda in at least 18 resting and breeding in January and July 2006. The survey will produce a detailed analysis of migratory bird patterns in Uganda, a nd will report on epidemiological results from sampled diseased/dead birds and fecal material that will be collected during the surveys of January and July.

Specifically the surveys will accomplish the following; a. Provide a clear description of migrat ory bird patterns, including resting and breeding sites, within Uganda. This description should include high quality maps that demonstrate the spatial and temporal patterns and the sites of migratory bird species. b. Conduct bird surveys in January, 2006, in at least 18 sites within Uganda. These surveys will, in addition to estimates of bird numbers, provide a baseline for species composition and numbers, if any, of diseased or dead birds per site. c. Conduct bird surveys in July, 2006, in at least 18 sites within Uganda. These surveys will, in addition to estimates of bird numbers, provide a baseline for species composition and numbers, if any, of diseased or dead birds per site. d. Provide technical assistance in determining the cause of diseased or dead birds found during the bird surveys, or at other opportunistic occasions during the contract period. This technical assistance will include the collection of samples, the shipmen t of samples to appropriate laboratories for analysis, and the reporting on the results obtained.

3. Activity progress

Deliverable #1 . Description of migration patterns a) Bird migration

Bird migration is one of the world's most extraordinary wonders. Millions of birds travel thousands of miles, only to make the return j ourney a few months later. Birds move to areas to improve their chances of survival, usually because of climatic changes that provide better environment for feeding, or especially for rearing young. There is a corresponding return

3 movement at the end of th e breeding season. Although migrations remain a complex subject particularly for orientation, location of sites for fee ding or breeding or determining the general direction of movement, migration patterns for some birds have been determined using mark - recapture using rings or more recently using satellite location.

Figure 1 shows the general knowledge on migration patterns of migratory birds in the world based on some specific studies of groups of waders, and for families and laridea. The map shows different migration routes that connect different continent s, seas and oceans. The map gives a guide to the general movement of birds from one region to the other. It is very important to note that migration routes mix or overlap with each other in al l regions across the globe. This is very important particularly in disease transmission from bird populations in one region to the other , i.e. theoretically one individual bird can spread an infectious disease to the whole world. For example , the Black Headed that in big numbers in Uganda migrate to Europe, and Siberia regions for breeding and the region is the confluent of all major migration destinations (Wetlands International 2002). Figure 1 demonstrates overlap of all the migration routes in these regions. Another example is the Common Teal that occurs in Europe, Asia and Africa with a separate population in . However the two populations are linked by the overlap of the East Atlantic .

The bird migration patterns become even more complex when one narrows down into a specific region such as Africa . .Figure 2 shows the migration patterns and routes that connect Africa to Europe and Asia. There are different entry points into the continent but two major flyway s can be mapped out , i.e., the Western flyway through Europe and the Eastern flyway through Asia. Uganda lies along the eastern migration flyway into Africa described as the Mediterranean flyway. This pattern is comprise d of birds commonly referred to as p alearctic migrants. Palearctic migrants breed in the northern hemisphere or temperate region during summer and migrate to the southern hemisphere and central regions during winter.

However there are other migration patterns in Africa. These include intr a-African migrants that only move within the continent such as Marabou which range in the plains of East, Central, and West Africa . In addition, Abdim’s Storks range in semi -arid areas in western and eastern Africa and Blue migrate from s outhern Africa where they breed during the winter to central Africa during the summer. The Marabou storks seem to follow the dry seasons where there is availability of carrion to scavenge and the Abdim’s Storks follow the rains due to availability of insect fauna after the rains.

The importance of migration of species was brought into force in 1983 by the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), sometimes referred to as the Bonn Convention , with the aim to conserve terrestrial, marine and avian migratory sp ecies throughout their range . Under the CMS another protocol called the African -Eurasian waterbird Agreement (AEWA) became operational in 2000 between European, Asian and African states to protect the migratory waterbird species in these regions. The firs t convention to recognize the importance of these patterns however was the Ramsar Convention which was promulgated in 1971 to protect wetlands especially as waterfowl habitats.

4 Uganda is a signatory to all the above mentioned conventions and agreements. These multilateral instruments are in response to a need to protect migratory species in range countries and to recognize that effective conservation of migratory species requires concerted efforts from all range states.

Figure 1: World Migrations described in terms of Flyways

5 Figure 2: Palearctic migration flyways in Africa (Adapted from Wetlands International)

6 b) Bird Migrations in Africa

The migrants in Africa may be separated into three groups; Palearctic M igrants- These are species that migrate to the northern hemisphere particularly Europe, Asia and regions to breed during the summer months (May -July). These species migrate to the southern hemisphere during the north ern winter months (September –March). Millions of birds fly back and forth to breeding and wintering areas every year, providing one of the most spectacular and fascinating migrations in nature. These species include gulls, terms, raptors, , smal l waders, storks and and geese. Nevertheless large congregations of this group of migrants, especially first years (young birds), over -winter and stay in wintering ranges during migrations.

Migration ranges (flyways) have been determined and publi shed. These include the east Africa - west Asia flyway that brings most Palearctic birds to East Africa. These flyways mix and overlap in the breeding areas (Europe, arctic areas and Asia). Today this is the major concern that can spread the deadly avian influenza.

Intra-African Migrants The category of migrants comprise of migrants from the south and those that wonder around the continent. During the southern winter months some of the species migrate to the tropical regions and fly back to breed during s ummer. Such species include the Blue . These are few in number of species and individuals. Other species c omprise of migrants that wander around African continent. The species movements are triggered by rains and availability of . For example , storks follow the rains due to the resurgence of insects after a rainy period, but other species such as scavengers, follow the dry season due to carrion brought about by drought. c) Bird migrations in Uganda Uganda is highly diverse in terms of specie s with over 1010 known species in Uganda (Caswell et al 2005). Over 20% of these species are known to be migrants, palearctic or intra -african migrant species. Migrants are comprised of both waterbirds and non -waterbirds such forest or grassland species (Wilson 1995).

NatureUganda has been monitoring water birds at 18 sites for over 10 years to determine trends and population estimates for species in Uganda as well as contributing to the world data base for waterbirds managed by Wetlands International and World Bird database coordinated by BirdLife International. This information has also contributed to national research such as identification of Important Bird Areas in Uganda (Byaruhanga et al 2001), identification of Ramsar sites in Uganda (Byaruhanga 2003), Uganda (Carswell et al 2005) and data contributed to the national biodiversity database. The data have also established important sites for migratory birds in Uganda. Over 18 sites have been monitored bi-annually during the migration period (January) and non-migration period (July). Sites surveyed during the January 2006 waterbird census are shown in Figure 3.

Migratory birds in Uganda are linked to the Mediterranean flyway mainly using the basin for the movements and wintering in Asia, Eastern Europe and Siberia regions.

7 Figure 3. Location of sites surveyed during the waterbird census, January 2006 (Ref. To Table 3)

8 Deliverable #2. Progress on bird surveys and AI surveillance, January 2006 a) Preparations Before the January waterbird Counts exercise, a meeting for all participants was held on January 9th to evaluate the waterfowl counting process. The purpose of the meeting was for participants to know each other but also review the technical processes of counting birds and s ampling fecal materials for birds. The sampling of the fecal materials for bird s as an additional component in the waterfowl counts was explained as process to contribute to national Avian Influenza (AI) surveillance.

Achilles Byaruhanga of NatureUganda presented the protocol for water bird recording, requirements in terms of equipment, field gear and data recording. All the recording forms were reviewed and mastered by all participants. Team leaders for each team were selected based on knowledge of site s and birds as well as experience in waterbird counts . Achilles reviewed the status of Avian Influenza around in terms of transmission including bird species that have been diagnosed with the disease. Table 3 shows species identified as high risk species by Wetlands International in Europe because they have been found to be infected with H5N1. A second column has been included indicating high risk species that have been recorded in Uganda using available information. Only three species were recorded durin g the January waterbird counts indicated with double (see Appendix 1 for sites where those species were recorded). b) Sample collection materials for avian influenza diagnosis In addition, a microbiology expert was added to the team to handle fecal s amples or swabs . Dr. Denis Byarugaba of Makerere University presented the protocols for handling highly pathogenic microbes such as H5N1 and described and showed all collection and sampling materials required (Table 5).

Preliminary investigation to dete rmine the occurrence of HPAI among the migratory waterfowl birds in Uganda. This was part of the USAID funded project that will support waterfowl counts for January and July 2006.

The activities will include; Determine the reasons for mortality of bird s and identify species that are found dead in any of the surveyed sites during the waterbird census. Samples of tissues from dead birds or fecal materials from roosting sites shall be collected for further analysis. The purpose of this exercise is to determine by observation if there are unusual large kills of birds in the visited sites. Such observation may be a preliminary indication of the occurrence of bird flu and this can be followed up with a detailed investigation.

Samples will be taken from dead or captured sick birds as well as fecal materials. The samples will be transported in cool box on ice and delivered to a laboratory, where they will be kept at - 80°C until processed. Contact has been made with Faculty of Veterinary Medicine for storage of materials. Molecular techniques will be used in the detection and characteri zation of according to the current definitions of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) . Table 5 shows the required sample collection materials targeting about 400 samples.

9 All challenges as well as risks involved in the process were highlighted such as working in wetlands or water, riding in local boats and working for long hours in the field. Some members of the teams had no health insurance and NatureUganda re gistered them for 6 months health insurance cover for January to July 2006 when they will be participating in the waterfowl counts exercise. One important spin-off of this exercise and project is that of training. The participants have acquired skills in b iodiversity monitoring and sampling techniques through hands -on experience. c) Survey results A total of 92,457 of individual birds were recorded belonging to 104 species from 28 sites (Figure 3). Thanks to the support from USAID that enabled N atureUganda to survey 10 more sites than the 18 traditionally surveyed. Table 1 shows sites visited, the nearest town and the numbers of individual birds recorded. Appendix 1 lists the numbers of all the species recorded in different sites. Musambwa Islands recor ded the highest number of birds with 36,167 followed by Lutembe Bay with 16,979 . The figures demonstrate a small increase in numbers of birds recorded from last year ’s but low er than the 2004 count (Figure 4) . Th e slight increase is attributed to the incr eased number of sites surveyed and persistent low numbers in the last two counts could be attributed to low water levels in major sites particularly those around lake Victoria and a number of crater lakes in the rift valley that were complete ly dry such as Munyanyange, Nshenyi and Maseche Craters The crater lakes are usually rich in large numbers of waders and flamingoes. The number of sites surveyed increased from 20 in 2005 to 28 in January 2006 . In addition to bird counts, the N atureUganda team incorporated activities on bird flu surveillance. Each team was composed of bird experts and microbiology experts from Faculty of Veterinary Makerere University and a total of 288 fecal samples were collected (see Section D for details on fecal sampling). d) Fecal sample collection from roosting sites and dead birds Table 3 shows species identified as high risk species by Wetlands International in Europe because they have been found to be infected with H5N1. A second column has been included indicating high risk species that have been recorded in Uganda using available information. Only three species were recorded during the January waterbird counts indicated with double tick (see Appendix 1 for sites where those species were recorded). Table 3 shows species i dentified as high risk species by Wetlands International in Europe because they have been found to be infected with H5N1. A second column has been included indicating high risk species that have been recorded in Uganda using available information. Only th ree species were recorded during the January waterbird counts indicated with double tick (see Appendix 1 for sites where those species were recorded).

Two hundred eighty eight (288) samples were collected in viral transport medium containing antibiotics, from different areas of the country, distributed as indicated in Table 4. Fresh samples were taken from major roosting sites for migratory birds from the sites that have been monitored by Nature Uganda for the last 10 years. Two dead birds were encountere d during the survey, (one on Lake Kikorongo, Queen Elizabeth National Park , and a Black-headed in Kibimba Rice Scheme). Samples were transported on ice in cool boxes and were later frozen within 48 hours. They were transported and kept at –80OC awaiting analysis. No epidemiological signs such as sick birds or massive deaths were encountered or observed during the sampling.

10 The samples are stored at Makerere University Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Department of Microbiology and Parasito logy libratory. The National Task Force (NTF) on AI (for which NatureUganda is a member) recommended that all stakeholders work together, harmonize surveillance and sample analysis and share information. Arrangements have now been made with the Department of Disease Control (with national responsibility for AI surveillance) to transport the samples for analysis to Entebbe Virus Research Institute where the only Kit for AI diagnosis is currently located. Table 2 shows preliminary results from the analysis co nducted in July 2006. All the samples were tested and were negative except Numbers 192,176,186, 59, 199,65 whose results were inconclusive. These will be run again or re -tested to confirm the result. It should be emphasized though that being positive for T ype A does not mean that it is H5N1 because there are many Type A Influeza viruses which are low pathogenic. More samples will be tested as reagents get available.

At the same time NatureUganda will continue to liaise with the NTF surveillance subcommittee on surveillance and specimen identification.

11 Table 1. Sites surveyed showing total numbers of water birds recorded

Nearest Total species Site Town recorded 1 MFNP R.Nile Masindi 1344 2 Airstrip Ponds Rakai 338 3 Bagusa Crater Kasese 940 4 Banda Island Kalangala 521 5 Doho Rice Scheme Tororo 372 6 Kaku swamp Kyazanga 248 7 Kasenyi Crater Kasese 95 8 Kasenyi Landing Lake George Kasese 13 9 Kazinga Channel Kasese 3995 10 Kibimba Dam BUGIRI 405 11 Kibimba Rice Scheme BUGIRI 647 12 Kikorongo Crater Kasese 959 13 Kitobo Island Kalangala 6667 14 L.Bisina Kumi 175 15 L.Mburo Mbarara 1273 16 Lake Kashaka (KWR Kasese 80 17 Lutembe Bay Entebbe 16979 18 Lutoboka Bay Kalangala 566 19 Mabamba Bay Mpigi 469 20 MacDonald's Bay Mayuge 1860 21 Maseche Crater Kasese 32 22 Munyanyange Crater Kasese 31 23 Musambwa Islands Rakai 36157 24 Nakiwogo Entebbe 16267 25 Nshenyi Crater Lake Kasese 246 26 Nsherewe Island Kalangala 467 27 Samuka Island Jinja 1291 28 swamp Kasese 20 Grand Total 92457

12 Table 2: January feacal sample’s results for Avian Influenza diagnosis The samples were tested 03/07/06

NB: All the samples were tested and were negative except Numbers 192,176,186, 59, 199,65 whose results were inconclusive. It should be emphasized though that being positive for Type A does not mean that it is H5N1 because there are many Type A Influeza viruses which are low pathogenic. More samples will be tested as reagents get available.

Sample Result Sample Result Sample Result Sample Result number number number number 1 159 - ve 27 325 - ve 53 193 - ve 79 54 - ve 2 127 - ve 28 29 - ve 54 110 - ve 80 172 - ve 3 150 - ve 29 133 - ve 55 5 - ve 81 164 - ve 4 151 - ve 30 247 - ve 56 136 - ve 82 139 - ve 5 188 - ve 31 206 - ve 57 138 - ve 83 143 - ve 6 92 - ve 32 72 - ve 58 205 - ve 84 121 - ve 7 67 - ve 33 37 - ve 59 162 - ve 85 195 - ve 8 59 I 34 420 - ve 60 200 - ve 86 255 - ve 9 9 - ve 35 103 - ve 61 360 - ve 87 122 - ve 10 191 - ve 36 217 - ve 62 44 - ve 88 178 - ve 11 266 - ve 37 300 - ve 63 69 - ve 89 165 - ve 12 48 - ve 38 95 - ve 64 268 - ve 90 366 - ve 13 324 - ve 39 345 - ve 65 128 - ve 91 181 - ve 14 75 - ve 40 395 - ve 66 225 - ve 92 182 - ve 15 227 - ve 41 155 - ve 67 192 I 93 100 - ve 16 183 - ve 42 65 I 68 198 - ve 94 42 - ve 17 36 - ve 43 310 - ve 69 113 - ve 95 126 - ve 18 354 - ve 44 34 - ve 70 412 - ve 96 134 - ve 19 402 - ve 45 76 - ve 71 90 - ve 97 32 - ve 20 163 - ve 46 158 - ve 72 385 - ve 98 175 - ve 21 43 - ve 47 89 - ve 73 210 - ve 99 73 - ve 22 209 - ve 48 278 - ve 74 168 - ve 100 399 - ve 23 184 - ve 49 199 I 75 180 - ve 101 241 - ve 24 57 - ve 50 307 - ve 76 30 - ve 25 401 - ve 51 176 I 77 153 - ve 26 359 - ve 52 94 - ve 78 186 I

N/B: I= Inconclusive -ve=negative

13 Figure 4: Comparative waterfowl numbers during the January counts since 1999.

Waterbird numbers for January counts since 1999

275000 250000 225000 200000 175000 150000 125000 100000

Number of birds 75000 50000 25000 0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Year

14 Table 3. Species that have been diagnosed with H5N1 in other parts of the world.

Higher risk species Europe Previously recorded Uganda Greater White-fronted albifrons albifrons Ö Goose Anser anser Ö Lesser White-fronted Anser erythropus Ö Goose Mute Cygnus olor Ö Vanellus vanellus Ö Anas penelope Ö Ö Black-headed Larus ridibundus Ö ÖÖ Common Teal Anas crecca Ö Ö Anas platyrhynchos Ö Anas acuta Ö Ö

Garganey Anas querquedula Ö ÖÖ Anas clypeata Ö Ö Aythya ferina Ö Ö Tufted Aythya fuligula Ö Ö Anas strepera Ö

Red-breasted Goose ruficollis Ö Larus melanocephalus Ö Greater Cormorant Pharacrocorax carbo ÖÖ

15 Table 4: Distribution of samples collected Site No. of Samples Comments collected 1 Nshenyi 3 2 Kazinga Channel 11 3 Bagussa 9 4 Kazinga landing village 14 5 Kashaka landing site 12 6 Nakiwogo are 42 7 Kibimba Rice scheme 9 2 swabs from dead heron 8 L. Bisinia 9 9 Ssese Islands 3 10 Ssese islands (Banda) 10 11 Ssese islands (Kitoboka) 10 12 MacDonalds Bay 21 13 Samuka islands 38 14 Musambwa Islands 17 15 Kikorongo Crater 22 1 swab from dead stint 16 Lake George 19 17 Kasenyi 13 18 Lutembe 9 19 Rakai Ponds 17 20 Murchison Falls national Park 0 Total 288

16 Table 5: Sample collection Materials

Item Quantity Sterile cotton swabs 5 x 100pkg Viral transport medium -Brain heart infusion 1 x 500g -Bovine serum albumin 1 x 50g - Penicillin 10ml 100,000 IU -Streptomycin 1 x 50g -Amphotericin B 1 x 100mg -Gentamycin sulfate 1 x 1g -Kanamycin sulfate 1 x 5g Universal bottles 1 x 400 Cool boxes 5 x 1 Ice packs Gloves 10 x 100pkg Surgical blades 1 x 50pkg Disinfectant 3 x 1000ml Total

Next steps The next round of counts will take place in July 2006 covering the entire set of 28 sites and considering both bird monitoring and sampling for AI surveillance. NatureUganda will also continue to participate in the National Task Force for AI surveillance and through this process continue monitoring the national process particularly regarding results from domestic bird surveillance for AI. If the current status of AI occurrence in Uganda changes, then NatureUganda may adopt emergency measures to increase wild bird surveillance . NatureUganda will therefore maintain close communication with the partners, particularly USAID, in ‘watching the situation’. In the meantime one site , Lutembe Bay, will be monitored opportunistically between January and July for observation on bird populations. Lutembe Bay was chosen because it is near to Kampala and also is the only site containing all the three species (, Black -headed Gull and Greater Cormorant) that are labeled high risk species for AI.

17 Appendix 1: Results of the Waterbird census showing sites and species recorded

Site code Grand Species Name Air Bgs Bil Drs Kas Kcr Kch Kda Krs Kik Kil Bsn Klg Lmp mny Ksh Ltb Mbb Mcd Mas Msw Nak Nsh Nil Mfp Smk Sho Total

African 120 120

African Finfoot 5 5

African Fish 2 3 38 50 14 2 2 5 45 1 2 164

African Jacana 12 9 2 40 63

African Marsh Harrier 2 2 5 6 15

African open-billed 7 12 1 32 13 146 70 28 309

African Pygmy Goose 10 10

African Skimmer 195 195

African Spoonbill 1 3 8 1 13

Avocet 93 93

Black Crake 7 1 28 2 50 7 6 3 6 37 4 74 225

Black-crowned Night-heron 9 9

Black-headed Gull 6 21 1 6150 44 6222

Black-headed Heron 1 15 42 9 1 1 10 79

Black-tailed Godwit 17 17

Black-winged Stilt 349 32 102 12 87 20 49 1 1 5 243 42 2 55 9 17 4 1030

Blue-headed coucal 2 2

Cattle Egret 28 1 110 11 12 970 19 70 28 10 1259

Collared 100 9 13 122

Common Greenshank 3 2 8 13

Common 1 1

Common Sandpiper 4 2 1 37 10 28 37 12 5 54 190

Common Snipe 6 99 89 1 9 3 207

Curlew Sandpiper 48 53 9 3 255 15 383

Dimorphic Egret 23 60 1 11 15 18 128

Egyptian Goose 1 7 13 620 7 30 4 52 4 41 80 19 1 879

Eurasian Marsh Harrier 5 1 1 7

Falvous 283 8 9 13 313

Garganey 1032 1580 2612

Giant 1 4 5

Glossy Ibis 48 53 297 398

18 Goliath Heron 5 1 1 21 28

Great Cormorant 9 2 10 244 48 1 109 423

Great White Egret 55 6 24 57 1 1 1 2 2 39 1 189

Greater Cormorant 610 2 52 106 770

Green Sandpiper 8 1 9

Green-backed Heron 1 15 10 26

Greenshank 11 4 17 32

Grey Crowned 66 2 640 30 37 5 780

Grey Heron 4 8 24 3 2 21 1 63 64 4 4 139 1 32 2 372

Grey Plover 1 1

Grey-headed Gull 155 6048 33 32558 9481 48275

Gull-billed 98 4535 5 618 5256

Hadada Ibis 2 6 17 2 4 1 11 22 4 55 2 126

Hamerkop 5 1 117 1 2 2 22 6 3 5 3 167

Heuglin's Gull 2 3 5

Hottentot Teal 8 8 16

Jacana 15 15 30 10 6 1 47 46 170 kentish pulver 2 2

Kittlitz's Plover 1 44 131 12 22 15 225

Knob-billed Ducks 4 4

Lesser Black-backed Gull 84 2 22 14 69 191

Lesser 24 24

Lesser Jacana 33 33

Little Bittern 1 1 2

Little Egret 2 363 12 31 5 280 2 1 2 273 1 597 1110 2080 210 19 766 5754

Little 32 85 117

Little Stint 10 4 9 68 343 4 12 287 15 1 2 163 918

Long-tailed Cormorant 44 1 5 10 56 2 55 18 160 2224 312 192 314 3393

Long-toed Plover 2 20 6 3 2 97 100 27 21 278

Malachite Kingfisher 15 67 25 6 4 45 162

Marabou Stork 5 6 1 17 29

Marsh Sandpiper 4 21 4 20 57 26 20 2 4 2 24 184

Montagu's Harrier 1 1

Open-billed Stork 1 43 1 174 20 1 240

Osprey 2 5 7

19 Palm nut 4 2 6

Pied Kingfisher 569 15 123 817 6 8 3 309 1 1851

Pink-backed Pelican 82 2 4 12 17 15 7 139

Purple Gallinule 3 2 5

Purple Heron 45 80 1 2 2 2 1 10 143 purple swamphen 1 1

Red-knobbed 3 3

Ringed Plover 12 28 26 7 73

Rock Pratincole 1 9 10

Rofous-bellied Heron 1 1

Ruff 485 8 41 14 5 720 2 492 8 1775

Sacred Ibis 16 14 14 4 45 22 18 1 46 3 30 9 30 8 260

Saddle-billed Stork 2 2 8 12

Shoebill 32 1 2 35

Slender-billed Gull 66 7 1 74

Southern pochard 4 4

Spotted Redshank 2 2

Spur-winged Goose 3 3

Spur-winged Plover 11 12 2 2 32 330 6 6 2 4 4 8 7 16 77 4 523

Squacco Heron 4 5 2 65 6 11 5 7 62 35 41 11 58 312

Three-banded Plover 2 8 10 unidentified egrets 7 7

Unidentified waders 1 1

Water Thick-knee 28 219 7 12 5 2 2 275

Wattled plover 20 37 3 5 65

Whiskered Tern 3 3

White Pelican 8 11 18 37

White Stork 5 5

White-crowned Lapwing 2 2

White-faced Whistling Duck 24 8 9 18 22 81

White-fronted Plover 5 5

White-winged 90 30 2 1 5 2043 5 900 70 3146

Wood Sandpiper 2 5 22 3 7 107 102 14 211 9 3 485

Yellow wagtail 1 1

Yellow-billed Duck 12 1 108 30 103 254

20 Yellow-billed Egret 1 5 5 17 11 39

Yellow-billed Stork 22 19 4 5 35 14 99

Grand Total 338 940 521 372 868 95 3995 405 647 959 6667 175 13 1271 31 80 17545 469 1860 32 36157 16267 246 467 1313 1291 20 93044

Key -Mfp=MFNP R.Nile, Air=Airstrip Ponds, Bgs=Bagusa Crater, Bil=Banda Island, Drs=Doho Rice Scheme, Kas=Kaku swamp, Kcr=Kasenyi Crater, Klg=Kasenyi Landing Lake George, Kch=Kazinga Channel, Kda=Kibimba Dam, Krs=Kibimba Rice Scheme, Kik=Kikorongo Crater, Kil=Kitobo Island, Bsn=L.Bisina, Lmp=L.Mburo, Ksh=Lake Kashaka (KWR), Ltb=Lutembe Bay, Ltb=Lutoboka Bay, Mbb=Mabamba Bay, Mcd=MacDonald's Bay, Mas=Maseche Crater, mny=Munyanyange Crater, Msw=Musambwa Islands, Nak=Nakiwogo, Nsh=Nshenyi Crater Lake, Nil=Nsherewe Island, Smk=Samuka Island, Sho=Shoebill swamp

21 Appendix 2: Financial Report for Waterfowl counts January 2006 Avian flu Waterfowl sampling Vehicle Medical Date Details Amount Balance counts materials Mileage Insurance 1-Jan-06 Balanace bfwd 0 Purchase of sampling medium and kits for avian flu 1/19/2006 diagnosis1 3,705,000 -3,705,000 3,705,000 19-Jan-062 Waterfowl counts to western Uganda sites, QENP, etc 1,785,300 -5,490,300 1,785,300 Waterfowl counts Musambwa islands, sango bay 1,110,000 -6,600,300 1,110,000 Waterfowl counts at Mabamba bay 292,000 -6,892,300 292,000 Waterfowl counts at Lake Mburo National Park 779,200 -7,671,500 779,200 Waterfowl counts in Eastern Uganda including rice schemes 715,000 -8,386,500 715,000 Waterfowl countsat Lutembe Bay 786,500 -9,173,000 786,500 Waterfowl counts at MacDonalds Bay and Samuka Islands 978,000 -10,151,000 978,000 Waterfowl countsat Ssese Islands 1,144,000 -11,295,000 1,144,000 Waterfowl counts at Nyamuriro and kaku wetlands 884,000 -12,179,000 884,000 Waterfowl counts and avian sampling at MFNP to be carried out 969,700 -13,148,700 969,700 Medical insurance for participants during avian flu 24-Jan-06 sampling 3 1,610,400 -14,759,100 1,610,400 Mileage for use of NU vehicle for the entire counting exercise 4,602,000 -19,361,100 4,602,000 -19,361,100

Total 19,361,100 9,443,700 3,705,000 4,602,000 1,610,400

Notes. 1. Sampling materials were purchased before the field trips. However some of the materials such as cool boxes, ice packs, bottles, surgical instruments will be re-used in July and therefore the costs of sampling materials will be substantially lower in the July counts. 2. Waterbird counts trips are calculated at cost. It should be noted that some trips covered more than one site eg. Western Uganda trip covered 8 sites thus more days in the field. 3. During the participants meeting before the exercise, some members in the group expressed concern about the risks involved, particularly when dealing with infectious diseases. The concern raised the issue of medical insurance cover. We therefore undertook to insure the participants who did not have medical insurance, thus this budget line

22