DOCSLIB.ORG

DRAFT Ecological Impact Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
DRAFT Ecological Impact Assessment DRAFT Ecological Impact Assessment UITSIG BOERDERY TRUST CITRUS DEVELOPMENT NEAR KIRKWOOD, EASTERN CAPE PROVINCE. ECOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT Prepared for: UITSIG BOERDERY TRUST PO BOX 7, KIRKWOOD, 6120 042 230 0347 Prepared by: PORT ELIZABETH 36 PICKERING STREET NEWTON PARK 041 393 0700 Also in Cape Town, East London, Johannesburg, Grahamstown, Maputo (Mozambique) and Romsey (UK) www.cesnet.co.za December 2019 REVISIONS TRACKING TABLE CES Report Revision and Tracking Schedule Document Title: Draft Ecological Impact Assessment for the proposed Uitsig Boerdery Trust Citrus Development near Kirkwood, Eastern Cape Province. Client Name & Uitsig Boerdery Trust Address: Status: Draft Ecological Impact Assessment Issue Date: December 2019 Lead Author: Ms Nicole Wienand Reviewer: Dr Greer Hawley-McMaster Study Leader/ Registered Ms Caroline Evans Environmental Assessment Practitioner – Approval: No. of hard No. electronic Report Distribution Circulated to copies copies 18 September 2020 Report Version DECEMBER 2019 DRAFT ECOLOGICAL IMPACT ASSESSMET This document has been prepared in accordance with the scope of CES’s appointment and contains intellectual property and proprietary information that is protected by copyright in favour of CES. The document may therefore not be reproduced, used or distributed to any third party without the prior written consent of CES. This document is prepared exclusively for use by CES’s client. CES accepts no liability for any use of this document other than by its client and only for the purposes for which it was prepared. No person other than the client may copy (in whole or in part), use or www.cesnet.co.za rely on the contents of this document, without the prior written permission of CES. The document is subject to all confidentiality, copyright, trade secrets rules and intellectual property law and practices of South Africa. DRAFT Ecological Specialist Report Contact Details: Junior Botanical Specialist and Report Writer Name Ms Nicole Wienand Designation Junior Botanical Specialist, CES Phone: +27 41 393 0700 E-mail [email protected] CES 36 Pickering Street Newton Park Port Elizabeth 6070 www.cesnet.co.za Contact Details: Report Reviewer and quality control Name Dr Greer Hawley-McMaster Designation Principal Environmental Consultant Phone: +27 (43) 726 8313 E-mail [email protected] CES 25 Tecoma Street Berea East London 5214 www.cesnet.co.za CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services UITSIG BOERDERY TRUST CITRUS DEVELOPMENT ii DRAFT Ecological Specialist Report Contents of the Specialist Report The contents of this specialist report complies with the legislated requirements as described in Appendix 6 of the National Environmental Management Act (No 107 of 1998; NEMA) Regulations of 2014 (as amended) (GN R. 326 of 2017). SPECIALIST REPORT REQUIREMENTS ACCORDING TO APPENDIX 6 OF GN SECTION OF R. 982 OF 2014, AS AMENDED IN GN R. 326 OF 2017 REPORT 1. A specialist report prepared in terms of these Regulations must contain— (a) details of— Section 1 and (i) the specialist who prepared the report; and Appendix 3 (ii) the expertise of that specialist to compile a specialist report including a curriculum vitae; (b) a declaration that the specialist is independent in a form as may be Page 2 and 3 specified by the competent authority; (c) an indication of the scope of, and the purpose for which, the report was Section 2 prepared; (cA) an indication of the quality and age of base data used for the specialist Section 2.4 report; (cB) a description of existing impacts on the site, cumulative impacts of the Section 9 and proposed development and levels of acceptable change; Section 10.1 (d) the duration, date and season of the site investigation and the relevance Section 2.4 of the season to the outcome of the assessment; and 2.5 (e) a description of the methodology adopted in preparing the report or carrying out the specialised process inclusive of equipment and modelling Section 3 used; (f) details of an assessment of the specific identified sensitivity of the site related to the proposed activity or activities and its associated structures Section 7 and infrastructure, inclusive of a site plan identifying site alternatives; (g) an identification of any areas to be avoided, including buffers; Section 10.1.3 (h) a map superimposing the activity including the associated structures and infrastructure on the environmental sensitivities of the site including areas Section 2 to be avoided, including buffers; (i) a description of any assumptions made and any uncertainties or gaps in Section 2.5 knowledge; (j) a description of the findings and potential implications of such findings on Section 10 the impact of the proposed activity or activities; (k) any mitigation measures for inclusion in the EMPr; (l) any conditions for inclusion in the environmental authorisation; Section 10.2 (m) any monitoring requirements for inclusion in the EMPr or environmental and 10.3 authorisation; (n) a reasoned opinion— (i) whether the proposed activity, activities or portions thereof should be authorised; (iA) regarding the acceptability of the proposed activity or activities; and Section 10.3 (ii) if the opinion is that the proposed activity, activities or portions thereof should be authorised, any avoidance, management and mitigation measures that should be included in the EMPr, and where applicable, the closure plan; (o) a description of any consultation process that was undertaken during the course of preparing the specialist report; (p) a summary and copies of any comments received during any consultation Section 2.6 process and where applicable all responses thereto; and (q) any other information requested by the competent authority. N/A (No other information CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services UITSIG BOERDERY TRUST CITRUS DEVELOPMENT iii DRAFT Ecological Specialist Report has yet been requested) 2. (2) Where a government notice by the Minister provides for any protocol or minimum information requirement to be applied to a specialist report, the requirements as indicated in such notice will apply. CES Environmental and Social Advisory Services UITSIG BOERDERY TRUST CITRUS DEVELOPMENT iv DRAFT Ecological Specialist Report TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 PROJECT TEAM ................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Details and Expertise of the Specialists .............................................................. 1 1.2 Declaration ................................................................................................................. 2 2. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Project description .................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Project location .......................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Objectives and Terms of Reference ......................................................................... 6 2.4 Approach .................................................................................................................... 6 2.5 Assumptions and limitations .................................................................................... 7 2.6 Public consultation.................................................................................................... 7 3. ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ......................................................................... 9 3.1 Species of conservation concern ............................................................................. 9 3.2 Sampling Protocol ................................................................................................... 10 3.3 Vegetation Mapping................................................................................................. 10 3.4 Sensitivity Assessment ........................................................................................... 11 3.5 Biodiversity Regulators .......................................................................................... 12 3.6 Protected Areas ....................................................................................................... 13 3.7 Ecological Impact assessment ............................................................................... 13 3.7.1 Impact rating methodology .............................................................................. 13 4. RELEVANT LEGISLATION ................................................................................. 17 5. DESCRIPTION OF THE BIOPHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT .................................. 24 5.1 Climate ..................................................................................................................... 24 5.2 Topography .............................................................................................................. 24 5.3 Geology and Soils ................................................................................................... 25 5.4 Surface Water Features ........................................................................................... 27 5.5 Land Cover ............................................................................................................... 28 5.6 Vegetation and Floristics ........................................................................................ 29 5.6.1 SANBI Classification (Mucina et al., 2018) .....................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bibliography
    BIBLIOGRAPHY A ............................................................................................................................. 1106-1114 B ............................................................................................................................. 1114-1138 C .............................................................................................................................1138-1151 D ............................................................................................................................1152-1163 E, F .........................................................................................................................1163-1176 G, H........................................................................................................................1176-1207 I, J ..........................................................................................................................1207-1215 K ............................................................................................................................1215-1229 L .............................................................................................................................1229-1241 M ............................................................................................................................1241-1261 N, O........................................................................................................................1261-1270 P, Q .........................................................................................................................1270-1282
    [Show full text]
  • Systematic and Taxonomic Issues Concerning Some East African Bird Species, Notably Those Where Treatment Varies Between Authors
    Scopus 34: 1–23, January 2015 Systematic and taxonomic issues concerning some East African bird species, notably those where treatment varies between authors Donald A. Turner and David J. Pearson Summary The taxonomy of various East African bird species is discussed. Fourteen of the non- passerines and forty-eight of the passerines listed in Britton (1980) are considered, with reference to treatments by various subsequent authors. Twenty-three species splits are recommended from the treatment in Britton (op. cit.), and one lump, the inclusion of Jackson’s Hornbill Tockus jacksoni as a race of T. deckeni. Introduction With a revision of Britton (1980) now nearing completion, this is the first of two pa- pers highlighting the complexities that surround some East African bird species. All appear in Britton in one form or another, but since that landmark publication our knowledge of East African birds has increased considerably, and with the advances in DNA sequencing, our understanding of avian systematics and taxonomy is con- tinually moving forward. A tidal wave of phylogenetic studies in the last decade has revolutionized our understanding of the higher-level relationships of birds. Taxa pre- viously regarded as quite distantly related have been brought together in new clas- sifications and some major groups have been split asunder (Knox 2014). As a result we are seeing the familiar order of families and species in field guides and checklists plunged into turmoil. The speed at which molecular papers are being published continues at an unprec- edented rate. We must remember, however, that while many molecular results may indicate a relationship, they do not necessarily prove one.
    [Show full text]
  • Fisher, D. & Hunter, N. 2016. East African Rarities Committee Report 2013–2015. Scopus 36
    East African rarities committee report 57 East African Rarities Committee Report 2013–2015 David Fisher (Chairman) and Nigel Hunter (Secretary) on behalf of the EARC The East African Rarities Committee assesses records of new and very rare birds occurring in Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda and Rwanda. This includes up to the fifth record of any species from each of the four countries. Sightings of species for which there are fewer than five records for a country should be submitted to the EARC Secretary: Nigel Hunter, P.O. Box 24803, Karen 00502, Nairobi, Kenya. Email: nigelhunter@ timbale.org. Please contact the Secretary to obtain clarification of whether a record requires a submission and for guidance on what details to include in the submission. Past records of rare species are also sought in order to bring the EARC database up to date. Since the Committee’s last report in 2014 (Scopus 33: 87–91) the following records have been accepted: Forest Francolin Peliperdix lathami First record for Tanzania at Minziro Forest on 19 July 1987. Observed regularly on the forest floor and roosting up to 5m above the forest floor at night. Adult and juvenile birds were mist netted and photographed on at least two occasions (Howell 1987). One adult female specimen is currently housed in the AMNH, New York. Previously known only from southern and western Uganda in the Mabira Forest 1913-16, the Bwamba lowlands in 1967, and the Kibale Forest in 1985. Although not racially assigned, the Minziro birds appear to be heavier and longer-winged than typical schubotzi in Uganda (N.E.
    [Show full text]
  • Uganda and Rwanda: Shoebill Experience, Nyungwe’S Albertine Rift and Great Apes
    MEGAFARI 2: Uganda and Rwanda: Shoebill experience, Nyungwe’s Albertine Rift and Great Apes 27 July – 7 August 2010 (12 days), Leader: Keith Barnes, Custom trip Photos by Keith Barnes. All photos taken on this trip. The spectacular Green-breasted Pitta was the star of the show in Uganda. We found only the sixth-ever nest of this species and spent a few hours with it gathering valuable information on the breeding biology of this species. Here a male droops his wings and displays to a female on the ground. Introduction This was the first leg of our second Megafari of 2010 – a true trip of a lifetime for most of the participants. The main aims of the Uganda and Rwanda leg was to see a Shoebill stalking in deep Papyrus swamps, attempt to see the most unlikely scarce Central African denizen, Green-breasted Pitta, score a gamut of rainforest birds in both the lowlands of Kibale NP and then also the impressive montane forests of the incredible Nyungwe NP, and to see primates, and of course, the irrepressible great apes, Chimpanzee and Mountain Gorilla. Fortunately, we achieved all these aims, netting 346 bird species on this 12-day leg of the trip, of which only 9 were spent birding, as well as accumulating an incredible 652 bird species and 60 mammals in just over four-weeks of the Megafari. The Megafari was a boon for spectacular birds and we saw 32 species of bird of prey, 8 species of turaco, 7 species of kingfisher, 8 species of bee-eater, 9 species of hornbill, and 28 species of sunbird.
    [Show full text]
  • Ultimate Uganda
    The extraordinaire Shoebill gave fantastic views during the tour. (DLV. All photos taken by DLV and Bradley Hacker) ULTIMATE UGANDA 15/20 JULY (RWANDA EXTENSION) – 8 AUGUST 2018 LEADER: DANI LOPEZ-VELASCO and LIVINGSTONE KALEMA 1 BirdQuest Tour Report: Ultimate Uganda www.birdquest-tours.com For any world-travelling birder, a visit to Uganda should definitely be on the agenda. Why? The fabulous Shoebill is probably a good-enough reason to visit this magical, friendly and welcoming country, but there are many more, including a good selection of Albertine Rift endemics, with such megas as Grauer´s Broadbill or Green-breasted Pitta, as well as other difficult western African forest species. Together with some great mammal watching, with of course primates as the icing of the cake, in particular the mighty Eastern Gorillas and Chimpanzees. Combined with excellent accommodation and food, impressive scenery and a good road network, it´s easy to understand why this African country is undoubtedly one of my favourites in the whole world! Rwanda has a lot to offer too, Nyungwe forest is a wonderful and very birdy place, and in the bird front, the unique Red-collared Mountain Babbler stands out. By visiting the 2 countries, any visiting birder greatly increases the chances of seeing a very good selection of Albertine Rift endemics. This wonderful and rarely seen Green-breasted Pitta was one of the highlights of the tour. This year´s tour was, with over 580 species recorded, packed with highlights, but several stand out: Shoebill, of course, was one of the birds of the trip, and we succeeded in getting walk-away views both at Mabamba and Murchison Falls NP.
    [Show full text]
  • Filling the Knowledge Gaps – an Ecological Expedition to Central Tanzania
    Filling the knowledge gaps – an ecological expedition to central Tanzania Filling the knowledge gaps An ecological expedition to central Tanzania 21st January – 2nd February 2011 Jason Anderson, 5 Wilton House, St. Paul’s Cray Rd. Chislehurst, UK. BR7 6QG Jo Anderson. Ecological Initiatives, P.O. Box 425 Arusha, Tanzania Marc Baker. Ecological Initiatives, P.O. Box 425 Arusha, Tanzania. [email protected] Alessandra Soresina. www.alessandrasoresina.com [email protected] 1 Filling the knowledge gaps – an ecological expedition to central Tanzania TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. Introduction 3-9 1.1. Study aims and objectives 3-4 1.1.2. Study area 4-5 1.2. Tanzanian Bird Atlas 5-6 1.3. Tanzanian Mammal Atlas 6-7 2. Methodologies 8-11 2.1. Birds 8 2.2. Mammals 8-11 3. Results 12-18 3.1.1. Birds recorded during the survey 12 3.1.2. Birds not recorded during the survey 12-13 3.1.3. Note on mixed feeding flocks 13-14 3.2. Mammals 14-16 3.2.1 Camera Traps 17-18 4. Conclusions and recommendations 19-20 5. Bibiography 21 6. Appendices 22 Appendix I: Species list, Birds Appendix II: Species recorded during walking transects Appendix III: Mammal distribution maps Appendix IV: Camera trap locations Appendix V: Camera trap pictures Appendix VI: Sample Bird Atlas Information for selected species Appendix VII: Consultants 2 Filling the knowledge gaps – an ecological expedition to central Tanzania 1. INTRODUCTION For the past half-century or more, global conservation goals have focused on saving endangered species and establishing protected areas, which now cover approximately 10% of the earth's land surface.
    [Show full text]
  • Myrmecocichla Arnotti) in Tanzania Confirms the Race Collaris to Be a Valid Taxon
    J Ornithol DOI 10.1007/s10336-010-0548-2 ORIGINALARTICLE Geographically structured plumage variation among populations of White-headed Black Chat (Myrmecocichla arnotti) in Tanzania confirms the race collaris to be a valid taxon Robert Glen • Rauri C. K. Bowie • Susan Stolberger • Gary Voelker Received: 10 September 2009 / Revised: 10 May 2010 / Accepted: 9 June 2010 Ó The Author(s) 2010. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract A remarkable number of new vertebrate species and detailed observations of this chat in what we now know have been discovered in Tanzania in the last 30 years. to be the centre of its distributional range in Ruaha These discoveries have mainly been centred in the montane National Park, Tanzania. Our results suggest that all birds highlands, particularly the Eastern Arc Mountains. More from west of the Eastern Arc and southern Tanzanian recently, research in the often difficult to access interior of highlands are of the white-collared form, which we suggest Tanzania has begun to reveal a unique avian community should be accorded species rank and named Myr- with associated endemic taxa. One such endemic taxon is mecocichla collaris, the Ruaha Chat. the collaris race of the White-headed Black Chat Myr- mecocichla arnotti. First described by Reichenow in 1882, Keywords Myrmecocichla Tanzania Á Á collaris was found to be morphologically distinct from the Miombo woodland Africa Systematics nominate form, in that females possess a complete white Á Á collar. However, due to a lack of knowledge about the development of adult plumage, the distributional range, Introduction and the lack of diagnostic features among males of the different White-headed Black Chat races, collaris speci- Tanzania, a country of 937,062 km2, comprises a surface mens were generally considered aberrant, and the name relief that is far more varied than most other parts of the largely disappeared from the literature by 1910.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Zambian List: Update & Overhaul
    A new Zambian list: update & overhaul Latest leading taxonomies and nomenclatures and the consequences for the national Zambian list, Important Bird Areas and National Parks lists. Frank Willems Introduction Everybody has, without doubt, noticed the many differences in the names used (nomenclature) and bird species recognized (taxonomy) between the various lists and field guides. The Zambian list and Important Bird Area (IBA) & National Park (NP) lists (as managed by Pete Leonard for years and more recently by myself, on behalf of BirdWatch Zambia) have so far basically followed the nomenclature and taxonomy of Bob Dowsett and Francoise Dowsett-Lemaire as published in, for instance, the Birds of Zambia (Dowsett et al. 2008, hereafter referred to as BoZ) and the IBA book (Leonard 2005). A good few bird names have however gone “out of fashion” over time, often because of other names used for the same species elsewhere. Moreover, new insights (notably DNA techniques) have led to changes in taxonomy. For Zambian birders, this became overly clear with the publication of field guides like “Birds of Africa South of the Sahara” (Sinclair & Ryan 2003), which largely follow the standardized list compiled by the International Ornithological Committee (IOC, see www.worldbirdnames.org). A source of confusion and irritation for many... which confirms that it arguably makes sense to stick to one standardized worldwide list. But how do we all agree on the same list? The sets of criteria (when do we consider birds to be the same, or different, (sub)species?) behind the major lists including the IOC list, have often been argued not to be truly standardized, objective and repeatable.
    [Show full text]
  • Rwanda – Gorillas & Albertine Rift Endemics Trip Report
    Rwanda – Gorillas & Albertine Rift Endemics Trip Report 31 st May to 8 th June 2011 Trip Report Compiled by Tour Leader: Rainer Summers Tour Summary Trip Report - RBT Rwanda 2011 2 The tiny, landlocked nation of Rwanda has a very chequered recent past, a fact that seems to deter many potential travellers from visiting this magical land. The 1994 Genocide wrecked havoc, and in 100 days the country was quite literally torn to pieces. Bearing this in mind, it is nothing short of miraculous nowadays to see the condition of the land and the attitude of the people – Kigali is a clean, safe city with a viby atmosphere and friendly people. In terms of organisation and cleanliness, it puts to shame every other large city in East Africa, and on the whole there are not many places anywhere that can compete with Kigali with regards to cleanliness – the streets are spotless ! On the down side, however, Rwanda’s rich soils and position near the equator make it a very productive agricultural land, with the human populace having taken advantage of this fact and sadly removing virtually every piece of native habitat, aside from that found within the three national parks. The flight from Nairobi to Kigali routed us via Bujumbura, the capital of Burundi. What a scenic flight! Of particular interest were the northern tip of Lake Tanganyika and Rusizi National Park, both of which were clearly visible from the aeroplane. The Rusizi River is the home of what is thought to be Africa’s largest crocodile, a monstrous creature named Gustave who is supposed to measure around 6 metres in length! Our first morning in Rwanda dawned, and after some time spent at the Kigali Genocide Memorial, where we were treated to an in depth presentation about the horrors of the genocide (during which around a million people were shockingly slaughtered in 100 days), we made our way to Akagera National Park, the only piece of savanna protected in Rwanda.
    [Show full text]
  • Further Additions to the Avifauna of the Isunkaviola Plateau, Ruaha National Park, South-Central Tanzania, Emphasize Its Ornithological Importance
    Scopus 41(1): 24–34, January 2021 Further additions to the avifauna of the Isunkaviola Plateau, Ruaha National Park, south-central Tanzania, emphasize its ornithological importance Jasson R. John and Halima Kiwango Summary Isunkaviola Plateau is located in the western part of Ruaha National Park, south-cen- tral Tanzania, and is a remote and infrequently visited area. Previous ornithological work there has revealed some notable range extensions, and in this paper, we detail the results of surveys conducted in October 2019, to supplement species inventories provided by Glen et al. (2005) and Glen (2011). We provide detection probabilities for 114 species encountered during 55 census point counts, and document two spe- cies that are new for Ruaha NP; the Scaly Francolin Pternistis squamatus and Green Twinspot Mandingoa nitidula. Five additional species were also added to this list from mist netting. We categorize forest dependence for all species recorded on the plateau and indicate those with strong preference for higher altitudes. To date, a total of 148 bird species have been recorded within the Isunkaviola area, further illustrating the critical value of a small elevated and forested area within a broad savanna ecosys- tem. Given its unique avifauna, the Isunkaviola Plateau remains as an important birding site within Ruaha National Park, and therefore, improving accessibility and awareness will not only open the area for avitourism, but also encourage further biodiversity research. Keywords: Avitourism, forest-dependent bird species, high altitude miombo wood- land, Ruaha National Park Introduction The Isunkaviola Plateau is located in the remote western part of the Ruaha National Park (Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Uganda & Rwanda Trip Report
    Uganda & Rwanda Birds & Gorillas Trip Report 1st to 19th July 2014 Shoebill by David Hoddinott Trip Report Compiled by Tour Leader: David Hoddinott Trip Report - Uganda 2014 2 Tour Summary Uganda, the “Pearl of Africa” as it is often referred to, is a remarkable country of astonishing diversity. It is small in size, has a good road network, excellent infrastructure, great food, is friendly and peaceful, and – most importantly – has a staggering bird list of over 1000 species, plus the added benefit of amazing wildlife including Mountain Gorillas, Chimpanzees, tree climbing Lions, Leopard, Elephant, Buffalo and so much more; no wonder it’s rated as one of the top birding and wildlife destinations in the world! Our exciting adventure started off with a visit to Mabamba Swamp in search of the unique Shoebill. After a good deal of scanning two of Yellow-lored Bristlebill by David Hoddinott these stately birds were spotted some way off. Our local guides assisted us greatly in manoeuvring our canoes to gain a closer look and soon we were enjoying magnificent views, as can be seen in the photo above. Absolutely delighted we continue birding in this productive swamp situated on the edge of the vast Lake Victoria. Other notable sightings during our canoe trip included several Long-toed Lapwing, sought-after Lesser Jacana, a flock of White-winged Terns, confiding Malachite Kingfishers, beautiful Blue- breasted Bee-eaters, a very bold and showy Papyrus Gonolek and, just as we ended our boat trip, two fabulous Blue Swallows appeared, a most unexpected sighting and a great way to end off a marvellous start to our trip.
    [Show full text]
  • Herbivory and Biodiversity Conservation of the Savannah Habitats in Akagera National Park, Rwanda
    Herbivory and Biodiversity Conservation of the Savannah Habitats in Akagera National Park, Rwanda Callixte Gatali Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences Faculty of Science Doctoral thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Applied Environmental Science The thesis will be publicly defended on Friday 26th April, 2013, at 14 p.m., in Hörsalen, Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Carl Skottbergs gata 22B, Göteborg. Faculty opponent: Beth A. Kaplin, PhD, Dept. of Environmental Studies, Antioch University New England, USA. Examiner: Professor Ulf Molau, Dept. of Biological and Environmental Sciences, University of Gothenburg, Sweden. ISBN: 978-91-85529-56-8 http://hdl.handle.net/2077/32604 ISBN: 978-91-85529-56-8 Summarizing chapter for thesis is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/2077/32604 Cover page photography: Kjell Wallin © Callixte Gatali 2013 Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences University of Gothenburg, Sweden Printed by Ineko AB, Kållered Herbivory and Biodiversity Conservation of the Savannah Habitats in Akagera National Park, Rwanda Callixte Gatali Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences University of Gothenburg, 2013 ________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACT Savannahs make up about 20% of the world’s land surface, whereas African savannahs constitute 50% of the land area and have been used as parks to conserve nature and for outdoor recreation. However, conserving biodiversity in these ecosystems has been challenging due to increasing pressures, potential loss of habitat and species or lack of up-to-date data in some of the protected areas. In this thesis, I investigated the state of biodiversity in Akagera National Park (ANP), Rwanda, and factors affecting its distribution.
    [Show full text]