GROUND SURVEY OF LARGE TO MEDIUM MAMMALS IN

NAKASEKE DISTRICT CONCESSION AREA

UGANDA

Report prepared by

F. Wanyama, F. E, Kisame, A. Rwetsiba, I. Bwire, H. Agaba and N. Enyagu

UGANDA WILDLIFE AUTHORITY

November 2017 Table of Contents Table of Contents ------i List of Acronyms ------iii Acknowledgements ------iv Summary ------v CHAPTER 1: Survey of Wild Animals in District------1 Introduction------1 Objective of the survey ------4 CHAPTER 2: Census Method ------5 Survey design------5 Method used to count animals ------6 CHAPTER 3: Data Analysis and Results ------7 Data Analysis ------7 Results------8 Wild animal distribution maps ------9 Poaching ------13 CHAPTER 4: Discussion------17 Conservation status in the Area------17 Population trends ------19 Threats to Wildlife Conservation and Wildlife Enterprise programs ------21 Sustainability and prospects of wildlife conservation and wildlife enterprise program------21 CHAPTER 5: Conclusion ------22 Recommendations ------22 REFERENCES ------23 Appendix I: GPS start and end points (survey coordinates) for transects ------24 Appendix II: Ground Survey Data Sheet ------28 Appendix III: Ground Survey Crew------29

List of table

Table 3.1: Densities and population estimate of wild animals in , August 2017...... 8 Table 3.2: Species encountered in low numbers ...... 9 Table 4.1: Comparison of 2005 and 2015 Class areas...... 18 Table 4.2: Population trends and augmentation...... 19 Table 4.3: Areas proposed for excision from the concession area ...... 19

List of Figure

Figure 1.1: Location of Nakaseke district ------2 Figure 1.2: Map showing sub counties of Nakaseke district under concession agreement------4 Figure 2.1: Location of transects in Nakaseke concession survey zone ------5 Figure 3.1: The perpendicular distance data for bushbuck in Nakaseke survey zone with the fitted Hazard Rate Curve generated by DISTANCE. ------8 Figure 3.2: Species distribution map of bushbuck, reedbuck, duiker and vervet monkey------10 Figure 3.3: Species distribution map of Uganda kob, oribi and waterbuck------11 Figure 3.4: Locations of charcoal burning kilns in the district ------12 Figure 3.5: Charcoal burning activities------13 Figure 3.6: Bush meat seizure------14 i Figure 3.7: Bushbuck carcasses ------14 Figure 3.8: Poachers arrested and bushbuck caught by a snare ------15 Figure 3.9: Hunting gears------16 Figure 4.1: Land cover map of Nakaseke district survey area for 2005 and 2015 ------17 Figure 4.2: Area in Nakaseke district cleared for agriculture ------18 Figure 4.3: Proposed extent of the concession area in Nakaseke District ------20

ii List of Acronyms

CDS Conventional Distance Sampling GPS Global Positioning System KCA Kibale Conservation Area LMNP Lake Mburo National Park MECA Mt. Elgon Conservation Area MFCA Murchison Falls Conservation Area QECA Queen Elizabeth Conservation Area SRF Systematic Reconnaissance Flights UWA Uganda Wildlife Authority UWEC Uganda wildlife Education center UWSL Uganda Wildlife Safaris Limited

iii Acknowledgements

Uganda Wildlife Authority organized and carried out this survey of large to medium mammals in Nakaseke District. We are grateful to the Resident District Commissioner, Nakaseke District who gave the exercise a green light. We thank the Chief Wardens of KCA, MECA, LMNP, MFCA, QECA, in charges of UWEC, and ZIWA who timely provided the staff that undertook the survey. We thank the Ministry of Tourism Wildlife and Antiquities that seconded two staff (Mr. Candia Leone and Mr. Okiror Stephen Fred) who participated in the survey. Special thanks go to the Commandants of Singo and Military Barracks for the good working relations exhibited during the survey period. We take this opportunity to also thank the Chairman Ngoma Wildlife Association, Mr. Tumusiime James who was available for the entire survey exercise and for his mobilization of the local communities. We are also grateful for the Offier in Charge Ngoma Police Post who made sure that our fire arms were kept well and in good working condition.

Finally gratitude goes to the UWA field staff for their dedicated support during the entire field data collection exercise. The public relations they exhibited during the fieldwork helped enlighten the communities on their role in wildlife management.

iv Summary

The survey targeted medium to large mammal in Nakaseke district. It started by notification of the security and political leaders at the district and sub county level. Mobilization of resources and personnel, was then done to enable a smooth flow of the exercise.

The staff who carried out the survey were drawn from different protected areas all over Uganda and the survey crew camped in Ngoma town since it was deemed to be centrally place in the survey zone with easy access to all the transects.

The survey team was trained on the use of field equipment and the general ground survey procedures. The survey team was divided into 15 groups comprising of UWA staff and local communities from sub counties of Nakaseke. A total of 166 transects were traversed during the data collection period.

During the exercise, five wardens were attached to administer the data collection thereby ensuring that good quality data was being collected. This helped to train the participants in collecting quality data hence building a reliable ground survey team for UWA.

During the survey, farm owners and local communities interacted with were sensitized about the survey exercise and importance of wildlife management on their farms. Worth noting was that in most areas, communities were ignorant of the wildlife law and lacked information on sport hunting.

The wild animal population in the district have drastically reduced probably due to commercial poaching in the area and other land use change activities. Oribi’s which used to be in large numbers are almost completely decimated in the area. Species with some significant numbers were bushbucks, duikers and reedbucks. Poaching for wild meat in the area was evident through arrests made during the exercise. Poaching by charcoal burners and locals was majorly noticed in the sub counties of Kinyogoga and Kaweweta

There was notable land use change in the district were subsistence farmland more than doubled from what it used to be in year 2005. Woodland vegetation has also substantially reduced from its original status of 2005. It’s therefore noticeable that charcoal burning and land conversion for agriculture have caused habitat alteration of the area. The charcoal burning is done on commercial basis by communities hired by farm owners to clear the farms. In areas with heavy agriculture activities and settlement like Kapeka and Kito, animals have completely disappeared either through hunting of shifting due to loss of habitat.

The survey therefore shows that there is need to Intensify community conservation programs in Nakaseke to sensitize communities on conservation and sport hunting programs. At the same time, there is need to intensify law enforcement patrols to reduce the rampant poaching taking place in the area. Expansion of the sport hunting activity to other areas with wild animals for equal benefits is also necessary instead of the concessionaire targeting only one particular area.

There is need to excise areas that have been completed turned into agricultural land from the concession area as they no longer hold wild animals.

v CHAPTER 1: Survey of Wild Animals in Nakaseke District

Introduction

Nakaseke District is found in Central Uganda, bordered by to the north and northeast, Luwero District to the southeast, to the south, to the southwest. and lie to the west and lies to the northwest (Figure 1.1). The district covers an area of approximately 3,472 square kilometers.

Nakaseke District is divided into fifteen (15) administrative units Town Council, , Kasangombe, Kikamulo, Kinoni, Kinyogoga, Kito, Town Council, Nakaseke, Nakaseke Town Council, Ngoma, Ngoma Town Council, , Semuto Town Council, and Wakyato (Figure 1.1). Of the 15 administrative units, only six (06) Kapeeka, Ngoma, Kinoni, Kito Kinyogoga and Wakyaato sub counties (Figure 1.2) were viable for wildlife conservation due to the then suitable vegetation, predominate economic activity of cattle grazing, and cultural norm of detesting wildlife products.

Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) has the statutory obligation to manage and conserve wildlife outside Protected Areas for the benefit of all the stakeholders and the local communities. UWA therefore revived management of wildlife outside protected areas and one such area was Nakaseke District. The concessionaire who took management of this area has one of his activities as sport hunting, which is one of the ways that local communities and stake holders can benefit from wildlife management.

In the above regard, a tripartite agreement was signed between the Management Partners Uganda Wildlife Safaris Limited (UWSL), Supervisory Partners UWA and District Local Governments where each party had a role to play. UWA has a role to carry out surveys outside protected areas to know the species of animals that inhabit these areas, there distribution and population estimates.

Nakaseke district is part of the Kafu River Basin area. is primarily a papyrus wetland, which forms a drainage sink for a large part of central Uganda. Water drains eastwards from this swamp into , and westwards via the Nkusi River into . Much of this area, which includes parts of Luwero, Kyankwanzi, Nakaseke, Nakasongola and Masindi Districts, was allocated as private ranch holdings in the 1970s and 80s, in the Buruli, Singo, Bunyoro and Kiryandongo ranching schemes. Some areas are still managed as ranches, but many ranch holdings have been taken over by squatters (Lamprey 2003). In the mid-1990s it was suggested by the former Game Department that there was some potential for community-based conservation in the Kafu River basin area.

1 Figure 1.1: Location of Nakaseke district

Prior Surveys

In 1996 an SRF aerial survey of this area indicated that the human population density in the area was still low, and that the area supported a significant population of Uganda kob, waterbuck, reedbuck, hartebeest (Lamprey and Michelmore 1996). The area also supported a small herd of elephants (totaling 18), that lived in the dense thickets in the southern part of the area – as a small isolated population, these elephants were translocated by UWA to Murchison Falls NP in 1999. In year 2000 another aerial survey was conducted of the core area to determine trends in wildlife populations, livestock populations and human settlement, in order to make a more definitive statement about the possibilities for community conservation (Lamprey 2000). Results showed that Hartebeest and waterbuck populations were virtually eliminated from the area, whilst hippos were in a precarious state. The kob population also reduced by 50%.

2 In 2009, the first comprehensive documentation of the wildlife resources using a ground survey in Nakaseke District was carried out (Rwetsiba et al 2009). The report provided valuable information for development of interventions for sustainable utilization of wildlife resources therein. The findings suggested that Nakaseke still had diverse wildlife species comparable to that of adjacent Kafu River Basin contiguous with MFCA. Key animal species recorded included oribi, bushbuck, duiker, Uganda kob, Dik-dik, baboon, warthog and leopard. The study also revealed high levels of human activity in the area. The most common human activities were poaching by use of wire snares, snap traps, tree cutting for fire wood, poles and charcoal burning.

Current survey

The ground survey in Nakaseke district commenced on 16th August 2017 and ended on 4th September 2017. This was the second ground survey to be undertaken in the entire concession area of Nakaseke district.

The survey started with ground preparation where a team of five UWA staff travelled to the district to network with the different leaders. The team comprised of the law enforcement unit, community benefit and wildlife enterprises unit as well as the Ecological monitoring and research unit. The team explained to the various district leaders the importance of the exercise. The offices visited included; The Resident District Commissioner, District Police Commander, District Internal Security Officer, Local Council V, Sub county chairpersons, the District Wildlife Association chairman, and the Commandants of the barracks of Singo and Kaweweta. This was done from 16th to 18th August 2017.

The actual ground data collection on transects commenced on 21st August 2017 to 4th September 2017.

3 Figure 1.2: Map showing sub counties of Nakaseke district under concession agreement

Objective of the survey

The overall purpose of the survey was to establish current information on mammal species occurrence, abundance and distribution patterns, focusing on medium to large sized wild mammals. The concessioner was being given quotas for sport hunting without relying on survey data since 2010. The specific objectives are;

i. To generate the population estimate of medium to large wild mammal species in Nakaseke district ii. To show wild mammal species distribution patterns in Nakaseke. iii. Provide data for monitoring and assessments of the current conservation strategies in the district. In this case quota setting for Sport hunting). iv. Establish the illegal activities taking place in the district in relation to wildlife management.

4 CHAPTER 2: Census Method

Survey design

Due to the bushland and woodland nature of vegetation in Nakaseke district, a ground survey was deemed to be the best option. DISTANCE 6.0 (Laake et al. 2009) was used to design where transects would be located within the Nakaseke survey zone. The area was treated as one block and transects within the block, analyzed as a single entity.

DISTANCE 6.0 allows an assessment of coverage probability by various transect design layouts and can be used to try and maximize the chances that every portion of the survey area has an equal chance of being sampled. Using the DISTANCE software, and the concession area shapefile, a survey design was developed for line transects, positioning them evenly using the Systematic Segmented Trackline Sampling (Figure 2.1). A total of 166 transects each four (4) kilometre long were established. The spacing between individual transects was 2.5 km, giving an effort trackline length of 664 kilometers.

Figure 2.1: Location of transects in Nakaseke concession survey zone

The coordinates of the start and end points of the transects were calculated by DISTANCE and are given in Appendix 1 for the survey block. This should allow subsequent surveys to find the same points in the concession area and repeat surveys along the same lines, thereby allowing more robust comparisons of differences between population estimates. 5 Method used to count animals

Standard line transect methods were used to count wild game in the concession area (Buckland et al. 2003). These involve walking each transect in the early morning at a speed of about 1 km per hour recording all sightings of wild animals (estimating group size that can be seen at the time) and other animal spoors. The perpendicular distance from the transect to the individual animal/group of animals sighted is measured with a range finder to the center of animal group as estimated by the observer. The perpendicular measurements were made in meters. The length of each transect was also recorded at the end of each transect survey using the GPS.

The following assumptions were put into consideration during data collection as required for Distance analysis;

1. Line transects are located randomly with respect to the distribution of the animals. 2. All animals on or very close to the center line of the transect are detected with certainty and that the crew identifies all wild animals with ease. This has an influence on the estimation of the f(0). 3. Animal observations are independent of each other i.e., detection of one observation does not affect detection of another observation. 4. All animals are detected from their initial positions when first sighted. 5. Measurements are exact  Distances are recorded correctly and without measurement error.  Distances near the transect are recorded precisely and accurately

Data collection

Fifteen survey teams each headed by an individual knowledgeable in using Distance sampling were used to collect data on transects. The counts were all done on foot and they always started in the mornings between 0730 and 1200 hours with the latest count starting at 1030 hours due to the long distance walked by the crew to reach the transect. Each group made an effort to walk and collect data on one transect per day so as not to be fatigued and become biased, which is common in such ground surveys.

After reaching the starting point for each transect using the GPS, the census crew would walk quietly in a straight line using the GPS navigation until the end of transect. Each wild mammal or group of mammals spotted on either side of the transect line would be quickly counted and the perpendicular distance from the observation to the centerline of transect accurately estimated. All the information was recorded on specially designed data sheets (Appendix II). Other observations believed to be useful to management such as illegal activities were also recorded.

6 CHAPTER 3: Data Analysis and Results

Data Analysis

DISTANCE software was used to carry out the analysis. The software allows to design and analyze distance sampling surveys, where the aim is to estimate the density and abundance of a biological population. As with any statistical procedure, line transect methods rely on adequate sample sizes for estimation. Buckland et al. (1993, p. 302) suggest that the minimum number of observations required for adequate estimation of the detection function g is 60 to 80. It is standard practice to pool distance data across all transects when estimating g. Even when detectability varies by transect, the property of `pooling robustness' ensures that abundance estimation is still reliable (Buckland et al., 1993, p. 42).

Estimating the detection function

After data have been appropriately collected, equations or numerical methods are used to model the detection function, from which density is estimated. A number of competing models of how detection decreases with distance have been proposed. Version 6 of DISTANCE has three different analysis engines for estimating the detection function. In this study, only the Conventional Distance Sampling (CDS) engine was used. The CDS engine is a FORTRAN program based on the code in earlier versions of Distance. CDS assumes that detection of an animal on the line or point is certain. The same detection function is assumed to apply for all animals; this seems unrealistic, but the ‘pooling robustness’ property of CDS estimators ensures that moderate amounts of unmodelled heterogeneity cause little bias (Buckland et al. 2004:389–392). The CDS engine implements the flexible semi-parametric detection function modelling framework proposed by Buckland (1992), where a parametric key function is paired with zero or more series adjustment terms. Four key functions are available: uniform, half-normal, hazard-rate and negative exponential. Adjustments can be cosine terms, or hermite or simple polynomials. All the four functions were tried out with the different three adjustments.

The perpendicular distance data collected are used to fit a curve that models the decline in visibility with distance from the transect for each species. This enables us to calculate the density of a species by allowing us to calculate the proportion of animals missed (Buckland et al 1993). A typical curve often has a shoulder and sharp drop off (Figure 3.1).

The densities were calculated along with a confidence interval. Confidence limits for the mean (Snedecor and Cochran, 1989) are an interval estimate for the mean. Interval estimates are often desirable because the estimate of the mean varies from sample to sample. Instead of a single estimate for the mean, a confidence interval generates a lower and upper limit for the mean. The interval estimate gives an indication of how much uncertainty there is in our estimate of the true mean. The narrower the interval, the more precise is our estimate.

Confidence limits are expressed in terms of a confidence coefficient. Although the choice of confidence coefficient is somewhat arbitrary, in practice 90%, 95%, and 99% intervals are often used, with 95% being the most commonly used. Therefore, 95% confidence interval is a range of values that you can be 95% certain contains the true mean of the population. This is not the same as a range that contains 95% of the values. Thus, it is correct to say that there is a 95% chance 7 that the confidence interval you calculated contains the true population mean, but it is not quite correct to say that there is a 95% chance that the population mean lies within the interval.

Figure 3.1: The perpendicular distance data for bushbuck in Nakaseke survey zone with the fitted Hazard Rate Curve generated by DISTANCE.

Results

Density Estimates

The survey measured the population size of mammals in the survey zone. Consequently, the population estimates of the animals as counted in the survey were calculated with their associated errors and 95% confidence limits (Table 3.1). It should be noted that this has been the second ground survey, to be carried out in the Nakaseke concession area.

Density estimates were made for the wild game species where reasonably sufficient data were obtained from the transects (at least more than 30 sightings).

Table 3.1: Densities and population estimate of wild animals in Nakaseke district, August 2017

Population 95% Confidence Interval Species Density SE Estimate LCL UCL Bushbuck 7.63 11,090 1,078 9,158 13,429 Duiker 2.67 3,745 790 2,480 5,655 Uganda Kob1 0.81 1,141 362 619 2,102 Reedbuck 0.68 950 242 579 1,559 Vervet monkey 2.46 1,674 404 1,045 2,681

1 Analysis carried out but the encounter of observation this was 18. The rest of the species data analyzed had encounters of more than 30.

8 Besides the animals assessed in Table 3.1, there were other mammal species found in the study area which were seen but whose observations were few to warrant calculation of their populations using the DISTANCE software (Table 3.2). Most of these species occurred in low numbers. This could be attributed to the fact that line transect method is not suitable for their population estimations. Other methods such as camera traps might be better ways to estimate populations of these species.

Table 3.2: Species encountered in low numbers

Name Encounter Sum of Size Jackal 2 2 Dik-dik 3 3 Waterbuck 3 10 Hare 5 5 Warthog 5 15 Bush pig 6 7 Ground Hornbill 7 12 Oribi 7 8

Wild animal distribution maps

Encounters of the recorded animals, were spatially mapped using the GIS computer package ArcGIS 10.3. The relative abundance of animals in the different areas of the survey zone was represented using circles of different sizes Figure 3.2 and Figure 3.3 This enables the spatial distribution of animals to be analyzed visually showing concentrations of different species.

In general, there is decline in wild mammal populations in the district due to reducing habitat especially in Kito, parts of Wakyato and Kapeeka Sub counties which are now turned into both large scale and small scale agricultural/cultivation. These areas actually hold almost no animals any more due to reduced direct animal observations

Most of the wild animals are distributed in the areas of Kinoni, Ngoma and Kinyogoga. It is therefore evident that where sport hunting is effective especially in parts of Ngoma and Kinoni, wildlife populations are high and the community seem to appreciate wildlife on their land.

9 Figure 3.2: Species distribution map of bushbuck, reedbuck, duiker and vervet monkey

10 Figure 3.3: Species distribution map of Uganda kob, oribi and waterbuck

11 Human impacts

Signs of human activities in the area were recorded along the transects. These included; settlements, cultivation, land clearing for agriculture, charcoal burning, wire snaring, pole cutting, brick laying, timber logging and tree plantations.

Charcoal burning

With the growth of human populations and resulting expansion of agriculture, settlements, and roads, the wildlife habitats are continuously being fragmented as well as being lost. Land conversion is being done where trees are enormously being cut done for charcoal burning to change the area into farmland. Figure 3.4 indicate locations of charcoal burning in the district while Figure 3.5 displays the actual activity of charcoal burning as encountered on ground. Thus wild animals are losing their habitats and being pushed into closer quarters with humans. During the exercise, 673 incidences of charcoal burning were encountered.

Figure 3.4: Locations of charcoal burning kilns in the district

12 Figure 3.5: Charcoal burning activities

Poaching

Another vice decimating the wild animals in the district is the rampant poaching. The animals are hunted mainly for meat and this is for commercial purposes. Other derivatives such as skins and horns are popular in some areas as charms against evil spirits. Some wild animals like Bush duikers are hunted in reprisal for raiding crops. In June 2017, an anti-poaching patrol team arrested a lady with 483 kg of smoked meat in Megaera Figure 3.6. The source of meat was Nakaseke district in the Sub county of Ngoma and Kinoni as revealed by the culprit. In November this year, the chairman of the Wildlife Association Ngoma Sub County arrested poachers with five (5) carcasses of bushbucks Figure 3.7. The survey encountered seven (7) dead bushbucks, one dead duiker, one dead oribi, one dead reedbuck and 2 dead vervet monkeys.

Bush meat offtake is high in the unprotected areas of Kafu Basin compared to Protected Area Oluport (2008) and the off take is influenced by the level of law enforcement and abundance of

13 animal populations. The study also showed that meat hunted in the Kafu Basin was sold both in the neighboring villages and distant areas that included , Gulu, Lira, and Kitgum. The study also showed dealing in bushmeat was a major source of livelihood, contributing as high as 95% of the total annual household income to some hunters and fetching dealer’s profits of over 30% of the cost price.

Figure 3.6: Bush meat seizure

Figure 3.7: Bushbuck carcasses

During the survey period, three groups of poachers were encountered and the seven (7) offenders were arrested and taken to police. Figure 3.8 shows the offenders together with the hunting tools 14 they use who were taken to the Ngoma police station, while Figure 3.9 displays the hunting gears (hunting nets, spears and snap trap) that were confiscated from the poachers.

Figure 3.8: Poachers arrested and bushbuck caught by a snare

15 Figure 3.9: Hunting gears

16 CHAPTER 4: Discussion

Conservation status in the Area

Mammal abundance and distribution are affected by the alteration of their habitat. Nakaseke district is not a protected area and as such, the people living there are free to utilize their land as they so wish. But in so doing, they are altering the habitat suitable for wild animals. The human activities taking place in the survey zone included, bush clearing, charcoal burning, cattle grazing, settlement, cultivation, large scale farming, timber logging and softwood tree plantations. Much of the woodland is being cut down, wood being used for charcoal burning in preparedness for ranches and cultivation. Most of these human impacts, impact negatively on management of wildlife outside protected areas. The current challenge now is how to ensure sustainable utilization of the natural resource and biodiversity to enhance livelihood and the development of the local community. Figure 4.1 shows the land cover maps of the census zone for years 2005 and 2015

Figure 4.1: Land cover map of Nakaseke district survey area for 2005 and 2015

Table 4.1: below, is a comparison of land cover classes for the year 2005 and 2015. There were 8 land cover classes in 2015 but in 2015 they were 12 class, class 3 which is the Tropical High Forest, fully stocked is missing. Column AREA(HA)2005 show the area of the land cover class in 17 hectares in 2005 and column AREA(HA)2015 shows area of the same class in 2015. Then the difference column shows the difference between the figures. The classes are according to the National Biomass Study (NBS) Classification.

Table 4.1: Comparison of 2005 and 2015 Class areas

CLASS CLASS DESCRIPTION AREA(HA)2005 AREA(HA)2015 DIFFERENCE CODE1 Deciduous plantation or woodlot 60 60 2 Coniferous plantation or woodlot 3,195 3,195 4 Tropical High Forest, depleted 116 116 5 Woodland 119,601 68,092 -51,509 6 Bushland 70,367 77,164 6,797 7 Grassland 48,655 71,965 23,310 8 Wetland 17,372 18,279 906 9 Subsistence farmland 15,588 31,724 16,136 10 Uniform farmland 159 731 572 11 Urban or Rural Built-up Area 105 452 347 12 Open Water 161 226 65 13 Impediments 6 6

From the vegetation land cover maps, it’s evident that there is significant changes taking place in Nakaseke district. The woodland decreased significantly from 119,601 hectares in 2005 to 68,092 hectares in 2015. This shows a decrease for the wildlife habitat. Such areas are being converted to large scale farms of crops like maize Figure 4.2.

Figure 4.2: Area in Nakaseke district cleared for agriculture

18 Population trends

From this survey of August 2017, we note that there is a steep decline of the oribi, duiker and bushbuck populations in comparison to the ground survey of 2009. The oribi’s in this area are almost decimated, bushbuck population gone down half way it used to be while the duiker population is also greatly reduced as indicated by the percentage augmentation (Table 4.2). The decline of the wildlife population can mainly be attributed to poaching of bush meat for commercial purposes. This was further heightened by lack of illegal hunting interventions in the Nakaseke concession area since 2009. A wildlife centre has just been setup in Nakaseke district to combat the illegal wildlife activities. Though a great damage had already been done on the wildlife, presently arrest are being made to curb the vice.

Table 4.2: Population trends and augmentation.

Animal Population Est. Population Density 2009 Density 2017 % Augmentation species 2009 Est. 2017 Oribi 16 0.00 29,101 8 -100% Bushbuck 13 7.63 21,180 11,090 -48% Duiker 11 2.67 13,429 3,745 -72%

Proposed new concession boundary

During the survey, it was noted, in Kapeeka and Kito Sub counties, the woodland land and grassland areas that had remained were being converted to small and large scale agriculture. For interest to properly manage the concession zone, we recommend excision of this area. The land cover map 2015 Figure 4.3 of the concession zone shows agricultural activities in Kapeeka and Kito thus we propose a new boundary for the Nakaseke concession area as shown in Figure 4.3.

The parishes we recommend excision in the Kapeeka and Kito Sub Counties are detailed in Table 4.3. In Wakyato Sub County, the parishes of Mijjumwa and Nakonge should also be removed from the concession area for the same reason that they are being turned into subsistence farmland as shown in Figure 4.2 .leaving no area suitable for wild game.

Table 4.3: Areas proposed for excision from the concession area

District Sub county Parish Kalagala Kapeeka Kapeeka Kisimula Namusale Naluvule Nakaseke Kasiso Kito Kito Kivumu Mijjumwa Wakyato Nakonge

19 Figure 4.3: Proposed extent of the concession area in Nakaseke District

20 Threats to Wildlife Conservation and Wildlife Enterprise programs

 Commercialised poaching in the area, which seems to have a backing of the locals and landowners or farm managers. This situation seems to be stimulated by lack of benefits from wildlife on the ranches.  Rapid conversion of the wilderness land into farmlands for cultivation as well as, vegetation/ecosystem changes probably due to climate change effects.  Influx of the migrants in the area from places like Kabale which has increased demand for wild meat and charcoal burning.  Inadequate and uneven implementation of Wildlife Enterprise (sport hunting) program in the respective sub Counties contrary to the management agreement  Limited awareness on wildlife conservation and popularization of the wildlife Enterprise programme to give hope to landowners.  The Professional Hunter is over stretched to give any meaningful and effective service as he concentrates in one Block which reduce effectiveness of the program.

Sustainability and prospects of wildlife conservation and wildlife enterprise program

This squarely hinge on the wildlife compatible economic activities in the area, benefit/incentives to landowners in mitigating the costs associated with co-existing with wildlife, and positive engagements with the "senior" citizen in the area who own huge chunks of land in hundreds of square miles.

Unlike Kapeeka, Kito and part of Wakyato Sub Counties where 90% of the area has been turned into farmlands, the other sub counties, Ngoma, Kinoni and Kinyogoga are still secure and suitable for wildlife conservation. The ongoing programs of opening up of some of these areas through clearing by the landowners which is aiming at securing forage for their cattle is still compatible with wildlife species, since the species on these land are predominately grazers and need fairly open savannah areas.

21 CHAPTER 5: Conclusion

Over the last eight years wild animals in Nakaseke district have been decimated by poaching and loss of habitat. Large quantities of bush meat have been marketed on the Kampala-Gulu road, particularly in the area of the Kafu river bridge. Settlement have also increased and more cattle have been brought into the area, by the pastoralists.

The area is clearly in a process of being hugely transformed in terms of uncontrolled human settlement, habitat disturbance, and the elimination of large wildlife species. This area serves as a production zone for both charcoal and bush meat for urban markets.

The findings of this survey in comparison to the one undertaken in 2009 is an eye-opener in that, despite a management partner being brought on board with the intention of reducing the wildlife vulnerability and conservation threats in Nakaseke district, a lot more need to be done. Unless critical actions are taken, wildlife conservation in Nakaseke district will no longer be an option.

Recommendations

Short term

 Robust wildlife conservation sensitization and awareness in the district  UWA should extensively engage the Management partner over issues of non-compliancy in relation to management agreement  UWA should intervene and support or collaborate with the management partner to reach out to the "senior" citizens in the area whose influence is uncountable, to popularize the wildlife Enterprise in the area  There is need for UWA and UWSL to design prudent sustainable wildlife utilization approaches in order to reverse or prevent further decline of the wildlife resources in Nakaseke and the surrounding areas.

Long term

 UWSL should be engaged on matters of evenly distribution and implementation of Wildlife Enterprise, and improved community benefits.  Excise the Sub County of Kapeeka, Kito and some parishes of Wakyato from the concession area in the agreement since they are no longer viable and productive for wildlife conservation and wildlife enterprise. This will reduce pressure on the management partner, and also stop giving false hope to the local community.

22 REFERENCES

Buckland, S.T. (1992) Fitting density functions using polynomials. Applied Statistics, 41, 63.

Buckland, S.T., Anderson, D.R., Burnham, K.P. & Laake, J.L. 1993. Distance Sampling: Estimating Abundance of Biological Populations. Chapman & Hall, London.

Buckland, S.T., Anderson, D.R., Burnham, K.P., Laake, J.L., Borchers, D.L. and Thomas, L. 2004. Advanced Distance Sampling: estimating abundance of biological populations. Oxford University Press, UK. 416pp.

Buckland, S.T., Anderson, D.R., BurnhamK.P., Laake, J.L., Borchers, D.L. & ThomasL (eds) (2004) Advanced Distance Sampling. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Lamprey, R.H. & Michelmore, F. (1996) Surveys of Protected Areas, Phase I and Phase II. Ministry of Tourism, Wildlife and Antiquities, Kampala, Uganda.

Lamprey, R.H. (2000) Aerial Counts of Wildlife in Queen Elizabeth National Park and Murchison Falls National Park, 1999-2000. Uganda Wildlife Authority, Kampala

Lamprey. R, Buhanga. E, Omoding. J. 2003 A Study of Wildlife Distributions, Wildlife Management Systems, and Options for Wildlife-based Livelihoods in Uganda For IFPRI/USAID Kampala, Uganda

Oluport, W, McNeilage, A. J, Plumptre, A. 2008 Constraints to sustainability of benefits from wildlife resources. An analysis of socioeconomics of bushmeat hunting in and around major hunting sites in Uganda,

Rwetsiba. A, Wanyama. F, Muhabwe. R, Mugote. E and Igulo. I. 2009 Ground Census of Medium to Large Mammals in Nakaseke District. Uganda Wildlife Authority

Snedecor, George W. and Cochran, William G. (1989), Statistical Methods, Eighth Edition, Iowa State University Press.

Thomas, L., Laake, J.L., Rexstad, E., Strindberg, S., Marques, F.F.C., Buckland, S.T., Borchers, D.L., Anderson, D.R., Burnham, K.P., Burt, M.L., Hedley, S.L., Pollard, J.H., Bishop, J.R.B. and Marques, T.A. 2009. Distance 6.0. Release 2. Research Unit for Wildlife Population Assessment, University of St. Andrews, UK.

23 Appendix I: GPS start and end points (survey coordinates) for transects

Name Easting Northing Name Easting Northing 1S 371600 150988 25S 384100 125308 1E 371600 146988 25E 384100 121308 2S 374100 142559 26S 386600 127568 2E 374100 146559 26E 386600 123568 3S 374100 149059 27S 386600 122073 3E 374100 153059 27E 386600 118073 4S 376600 136967 28S 386600 162032 4E 376600 140967 28E 386600 158032 5S 376600 143438 29S 386600 155532 5E 376600 147438 29E 386600 151532 6S 376600 149938 30S 386600 149032 6E 376600 153938 30E 386600 145032 7S 379100 160421 31S 386600 142532 7E 379100 156421 31E 386600 138532 8S 379100 155058 32S 386600 136032 8E 379100 151058 32E 386600 132032 9S 379100 148558 33S 389100 109268 9E 379100 144558 33E 389100 113268 10S 379100 142058 34S 389100 115768 10E 379100 138058 34E 389100 119768 11S 379100 135558 35S 389100 121367 11E 379100 131558 35E 389100 125367 12S 379100 129058 36S 389100 138672 12E 379100 125058 36E 389100 142672 13S 381600 119457 37S 389100 145172 13E 381600 123457 37E 389100 149172 14S 381600 125836 38S 389100 151672 14E 381600 129836 38E 389100 155672 15S 381600 132336 39S 389100 157384 15E 381600 136336 39E 389100 161384 16S 381600 138836 40S 391600 122636 16E 381600 142836 40E 391600 118636 17S 381600 145336 41S 391600 116136 17E 381600 149336 41E 391600 112136 18S 381600 151836 42S 391600 109636 18E 381600 155836 42E 391600 105636 19S 381600 157015 43S 391600 160175 19E 381600 161015 43E 391600 156175 20S 384100 157808 44S 391600 155042 20E 384100 153808 44E 391600 151042 21S 384100 151308 45S 391600 148542 21E 384100 147308 45E 391600 144542 22S 384100 144808 46S 391600 142042 22E 384100 140808 46E 391600 138042 23S 384100 138308 47S 391600 136661 23E 384100 134308 47E 391600 132661 24S 384100 131808 48S 394100 104389 24E 384100 127808 48E 394100 108389

24 Name Easting Northing Name Easting Northing 49S 394100 110889 73S 401600 152046 49E 394100 114889 73E 401600 148046 50S 394100 117389 74S 401600 145546 50E 394100 121389 74E 401600 141546 51S 394100 123889 75S 401600 139046 51E 394100 127889 75E 401600 135046 52S 394100 136245 76S 401600 132546 52E 394100 140245 76E 401600 128546 53S 394100 142745 77S 401600 126046 53E 394100 146745 77E 401600 122046 54S 394100 149245 78S 401600 119546 54E 394100 153245 78E 401600 115546 55S 394100 155261 79S 401600 113046 55E 394100 159261 79E 401600 109046 56S 396600 128374 80S 401600 106546 56E 396600 124374 80E 401600 102546 57S 396600 121874 81S 404100 153952 57E 396600 117874 81E 404100 149952 58S 396600 115374 82S 404100 147699 58E 396600 111374 82E 404100 143699 59S 396600 108874 83S 404100 141199 59E 396600 104874 83E 404100 137199 60S 396600 104168 84S 404100 134699 60E 396600 100168 84E 404100 130699 61S 396600 153535 85S 404100 128199 61E 396600 149535 85E 404100 124199 62S 396600 147035 86S 404100 121699 62E 396600 143035 86E 404100 117699 63S 396600 140535 87S 404100 115199 63E 396600 136535 87E 404100 111199 64S 399100 100217 88S 404100 108699 64E 399100 104217 88E 404100 104699 65S 399100 106616 89S 404100 102993 65E 399100 110616 89E 404100 98993 66S 399100 113116 90S 406600 147581 66E 399100 117116 90E 406600 143581 67S 399100 119616 91S 406600 141081 67E 399100 123616 91E 406600 137081 68S 399100 126116 92S 406600 134581 68E 399100 130116 92E 406600 130581 69S 399100 134646 93S 406600 128081 69E 399100 138646 93E 406600 124081 70S 399100 141146 94S 406600 121581 70E 399100 145146 94E 406600 117581 71S 399100 147646 95S 406600 115081 71E 399100 151646 95E 406600 111081 72S 399100 152857 96S 406600 108581 72E 399100 156857 96E 406600 104581 25 Name Easting Northing Name Easting Northing 97S 406600 102081 121S 414100 107613 97E 406600 98081 121E 414100 111613 98S 409100 72428 122S 414100 114113 98E 409100 76428 122E 414100 118113 99S 409100 97529 123S 414100 120613 99E 409100 101529 123E 414100 124613 100S 409100 104029 124S 414100 127113 100E 409100 108029 124E 414100 131113 101S 409100 110529 125S 414100 133613 101E 409100 114529 125E 414100 137613 102S 409100 117029 126S 414100 139825 102E 409100 121029 126E 414100 143825 103S 409100 123529 127S 416600 76673 103E 409100 127529 127E 416600 80673 104S 409100 130029 128S 416600 83173 104E 409100 134029 128E 416600 87173 105S 409100 136529 129S 416600 99450 105E 409100 140529 129E 416600 103450 106S 409100 143029 130S 416600 105259 106E 409100 147029 130E 416600 109259 107S 411600 69855 131S 416600 111759 107E 411600 73855 131E 416600 115759 108S 411600 76943 132S 416600 118259 108E 411600 80943 132E 416600 122259 109S 411600 82301 133S 416600 124759 109E 411600 86301 133E 416600 128759 110S 411600 95515 134S 416600 131259 110E 411600 99515 134E 416600 135259 111S 411600 102015 135S 416600 137759 111E 411600 106015 135E 416600 141759 112S 411600 108515 136S 419100 74451 112E 411600 112515 136E 419100 78451 113S 411600 115015 137S 419100 80951 113E 411600 119015 137E 419100 84951 114S 411600 121515 138S 419100 85768 114E 411600 125515 138E 419100 89768 115S 411600 128015 139S 419100 103901 115E 411600 132015 139E 419100 107901 116S 411600 134515 140S 419100 110401 116E 411600 138515 140E 419100 114401 117S 411600 141015 141S 419100 116901 117E 411600 145015 141E 419100 120901 118S 414100 81234 142S 419100 123401 118E 414100 85234 142E 419100 127401 119S 414100 93852 143S 419100 129901 119E 414100 97852 143E 419100 133901 120S 414100 101113 144S 419100 136401 120E 414100 105113 144E 419100 140401

26 Name Easting Northing 145S 421600 73211 145E 421600 77211 146S 421600 83639 146E 421600 87639 147S 421600 100026 147E 421600 104026 148S 421600 105404 148E 421600 109404 149S 421600 111904 149E 421600 115904 150S 421600 118404 150E 421600 122404 151S 421600 124904 151E 421600 128904 152S 421600 131404 152E 421600 135404 153S 424100 138492 153E 424100 134492 154S 424100 132544 154E 424100 128544 155S 424100 126044 155E 424100 122044 156S 424100 119544 156E 424100 115544 157S 424100 113044 157E 424100 109044 158S 424100 106544 158E 424100 102544 159S 426600 99626 159E 426600 103626 160S 426600 105584 160E 426600 109584 161S 426600 112084 161E 426600 116084 162S 426600 118584 162E 426600 122584 163S 426600 125084 163E 426600 129084 164S 426600 131584 164E 426600 135584 165S 429100 101303 165E 429100 105303 166S 429100 125272 166E 429100 129272

27 Appendix II: Ground Survey Data Sheet Survey Area: …………………………………………

Observer (Team Leader): …………………….….….. Date: ………………………... Census Number: ………………. Other observers Transect No.: ………………… Transect length: ………..…... 1.…………………………………

Start time: ………………..…… End Time: ……………..……. 2.……………………..….………

Way Easting Northing Perp. Dist Group Time Animal species REMARKS/Habitat point 36M UTM (m) size

28 Appendix III: Ground Survey Crew

Part of the ground survey crew during briefing

29