DOCSLIB.ORG

AZA Antelope and Giraffe Advisory Group

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
AZA Antelope and Giraffe Advisory Group AZA Antelope and Giraffe TAG Regional Collection Plan Sixth Edition FINAL 1 November 2014 Compiled by AZA Antelope and Giraffe Taxon Advisory Group Steering Committee, Advisors and Program Leaders Table of Contents Acknowledgements 3 Introduction 4 Mission Statement and TAG Goals 6 TAG Structure 6 TAG Definition 8 Table 1. Genera Under Purview of AZA Antelope and Giraffe TAG 8 TAG Conservation Status 9 TAG Species Selection 9 Table 2. General Guidelines for Assigning Program Management Level Using Ranking 10 Table 3. Exceptions to General Program Management Level Guidelines 10 AZA Animal Program Management 11 Table 4. AZA Animal Program Management Categories 11 TAG Regional Collection Plan Development 12 Table 5. Comparison of Projected Maximum Space From All Editions of RCP 13 TAG Program Goals and Objectives 14 TAG Action Plan 2014-2019 15 TAG Program Resources 16 Collection Planning Resources for Institutions 17 Table 6. Antelope and Giraffe TAG Species Suggestions 19 2014 Antelope and Giraffe TAG Program Recommendations 20 Table 7. Program Recommendations Summary of All Six Editions of RCP 21 Table 8. AZA Antelope and Giraffe TAG Program Recommendations, 2014 22 Individual Species Sheets & in situ Focus Species for each TAG subgroup Forest/Woodland Antelope Subgroup 28 Small Antelope Subgroup 56 Hartebeest Subgroup 78 Waterbuck Subgroup 87 Aridland Antelope, Gazelle and Pronghorn Subgroup 95 Giraffe and Okapi Subgroup 127 Appendix 1 Antelope & Giraffe TAG Leadership, Advisors & Program Leaders, 2014 135 Appendix 2 Antelope and Giraffe TAG Conservation Status 139 Appendix 3 Antelope & Giraffe TAG Species Selection Criteria 142 Appendix 4 Antelope & Giraffe TAG Species Evaluation Summary, 2014 144 Appendix 5 Antelope & Giraffe TAG Space Survey Results, 2013 146 Appendix 6 AZA Facilities with IRs – No Response to Space Survey 149 Appendix 7 Antelope & Giraffe TAG Action Plan 2014-2019 150 Appendix 8 AZA Wildlife Contraception Center 156 Appendix 9 Antelope & Giraffe TAG Program Recommendations Updates from 2009 RCP 157 Appendix 10 Antelope & Giraffe TAG Program Status Table 163 AZA Antelope and Giraffe TAG Regional Collection Plan, 6th Edition, 2014 2 Acknowledgments This Regional Collection Plan has been developed through the collaborative effort of many, including the TAG's Vice Chairs, Steering Committee, Advisors, Program Leaders and Institutional Representatives. Everyone's help is greatly appreciated. Special thanks to Lily Civili and Amy Niedbalski for their help in developing and analyzing the space survey. This document would not have been possible without the support of the Saint Louis Zoo. To all, thank you! Photo courtesy of Robin Winkelmann, Saint Louis Zoo Regional Collection Plan edited by Martha Fischer, Saint Louis Zoo Dan Beetem, The Wilds Adam Eyres, Fossil Rim Wildlife Center Jeff Holland, Los Angeles Zoo Sharon Joseph, Houston Zoo Randy Rieches, San Diego Zoo’s Safari Park AZA Antelope and Giraffe TAG Regional Collection Plan, 6th Edition, 2014 3 Introduction This document represents the Sixth Edition of the Regional Collection Plan (RCP) for the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) Antelope and Giraffe Taxon Advisory Group (TAG). The intent of this work is to serve as a guide and a tool for AZA institutions and animal managers concerned with antelope, pronghorn, giraffe and okapi conservation. According to the IUCN SSC Antelope Specialist Group, an alarming 62% of the world’s 91 antelope species are experiencing decreasing population trends. Giraffe and okapi populations are also facing serious declines. AZA zoos have an obligation as stewards of a part of the world’s natural heritage to ensure the survival of these species for future generations by providing both ex situ and in situ conservation support. By providing safety net assurance populations and in situ conservation support zoos can do their part to make sure these unique and beautiful species do not vanish from our zoos and from our planet. Of the species managed under the AZA Antelope and Giraffe TAG’s umbrella, only one AZA population can be sustained long-term according to AZA’s current guidelines – the Reticulated/Rothschild’s giraffe. Sustainability of ungulate populations in AZA is of real concern. If current trends continue, AZA institutions will have significantly fewer ungulate species to fill their habitats in the future. According to the RCPs of the six AZA Ungulate TAGs, 68% of the ungulate species currently managed in AZA are either recommended to be phased out of collections or are not eligible for formal management at this time. Even if all of today’s ungulate SSP® and Studbook programs are successfully maintained, the number of ungulate species in our collections in the future is destined to be cut nearly in half. The AZA Ungulate TAGs are collaborating on many fronts to conserve ungulates for the long- term and they need your help. • Marketing and awareness campaigns to promote ungulates have always been a priority for the Ungulate TAGs. Zoo professionals can be of assistance in marketing ungulates by serving as passionate, vocal advocates for ungulates with visitors and colleagues. • Zoo leaders are encouraged to increase exhibit and behind-the-scenes space for ungulates. Managers and keepers are encouraged to seek creative solutions to space issues they face. • Alternative and flexible population management strategies need to be explored. • As appropriate, in accordance with AZA’s non-member participation guidelines, program leaders and institutional representatives are encouraged to collaborate with Sustainability Partners and other conservation organizations committed to the conservation of ungulates in a combined effort to build and maintain sustainable populations in North America and conserve these species in the wild. • TAG leaders are actively working with USDA to address the challenges of ruminant animal and semen importation. • As an additional hedge against extinction, zoos are urged to increase support for in situ conservation and habitat restoration initiatives that benefit ungulates. • And finally, collection managers are encouraged to select species according to conservation need and as prioritized by the TAGs, not solely on how appealing they may be or how easy they are to manage. Institutions are strongly encouraged to commit to TAG-recommended programs, stick with them long-term and follow the breeding and transfer recommendations provided by program leaders. AZA Antelope and Giraffe TAG Regional Collection Plan, 6th Edition, 2014 4 Included in this edition of the RCP are recommendations regarding the antelope, pronghorn, giraffe and okapi programs currently managed in AZA, including conservation, education, research, veterinary/health and marketing priorities. These recommendations are based on a series of evaluations, space surveys, current population genetic and demographic analyses, studbook and/or ZIMS data, and information provided by the IUCN SSC Specialist Groups regarding wild antelope, pronghorn, giraffe and okapi population trends. In some cases, threatened species not currently found in AZA collections were also included as priorities for conservation actions. This version of the RCP is intended to serve as a conduit linking AZA programs with efforts to conserve wild antelope, pronghorn, giraffe and okapi populations. The goal of managing our populations in AZA - to ensure sustainable programs for zoo animals which will contribute strongly to the conservation and awareness efforts for their wild counterparts - is of the highest priority. Thank you for all you do for antelope, pronghorn, giraffe and okapi in human care and in the wild. The Steering Committee and Program Leaders look forward to partnering with all of you and your institutions to achieve the goals of this RCP. Photo courtesy of Robin Winkelmann, Saint Louis Zoo AZA Antelope and Giraffe TAG Regional Collection Plan, 6th Edition, 2014 5 AZA Antelope and Giraffe Taxon Advisory Group Mission Statement To provide leadership and guidance to AZA institutions regarding the management and care of antelope, pronghorn, giraffe and okapi and to facilitate activities and programs that support their conservation in the wild Goals of the AZA Antelope and Giraffe TAG The following goals are priorities for the AZA Antelope and Giraffe TAG: • To continue to support AZA antelope, pronghorn, giraffe and okapi populations in cooperation with our partners nationally and internationally in the effort to develop and/or maintain sustainable ex situ populations. • To continue to develop and expand education programs which promote in situ and ex situ antelope, pronghorn, giraffe and okapi awareness and conservation. • To continue to support in situ research and conservation efforts that enhance and protect wild antelope, pronghorn, giraffe and okapi populations and their habitats, and to link these efforts to our ex situ programs as possible. • To continue to advance the management and husbandry of AZA antelope, pronghorn, giraffe and okapi populations through scientific investigation. • To provide support and, when needed, animals for global reintroduction efforts. AZA Antelope and Giraffe TAG Structure The AZA Antelope and Giraffe TAG was initiated in 1992. This TAG serves as an advisory group to AZA facilities on matters related to zoo and field conservation of antelope, pronghorn, giraffe and okapi. Officers The 15-member Antelope and Giraffe TAG leadership group consists of a Chair (selected by AZA Wildlife Conservation and Management Committee),
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arabian Ungulate CAMP & Leopard, Tahr, and Oryx PHVA Final Report 2001.Pdf
    Conservation Assessment and Management Plan (CAMP) For The Arabian Ungulates and Leopard & Population and Habitat Viability Assessment (PHVA) For the Arabian Leopard, Tahr, and Arabian Oryx 1 © Copyright 2001 by CBSG. A contribution of the IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group. Conservation Breeding Specialist Group (SSC/IUCN). 2001. Conservation Assessment and Management Plan for the Arabian Leopard and Arabian Ungulates with Population and Habitat Viability Assessments for the Arabian Leopard, Arabian Oryx, and Tahr Reports. CBSG, Apple Valley, MN. USA. Additional copies of Conservation Assessment and Management Plan for the Arabian Leopard and Arabian Ungulates with Population and Habitat Viability Assessments for the Arabian Leopard, Arabian Oryx, and Tahr Reports can be ordered through the IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, 12101 Johnny Cake Ridge Road, Apple Valley, MN 55124. USA. 2 Donor 3 4 Conservation Assessment and Management Plan (CAMP) For The Arabian Ungulates and Leopard & Population and Habitat Viability Assessment (PHVA) For the Arabian Leopard, Tahr, and Arabian Oryx TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1: Executive Summary 5. SECTION 2: Arabian Gazelles Reports 18. SECTION 3: Tahr and Ibex Reports 28. SECTION 4: Arabian Oryx Reports 41. SECTION 5: Arabian Leopard Reports 56. SECTION 6: New IUCN Red List Categories & Criteria; Taxon Data Sheet; and CBSG Workshop Process. 66. SECTION 7: List of Participants 116. 5 6 Conservation Assessment and Management Plan (CAMP) For The Arabian Ungulates and Leopard & Population and Habitat Viability Assessment (PHVA) For the Arabian Leopard, Tahr, and Arabian Oryx SECTION 1 Executive Summary 7 8 Executive Summary The ungulates of the Arabian peninsula region - Arabian Oryx, Arabian tahr, ibex, and the gazelles - generally are poorly known among local communities and the general public.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 5 of the 2020 Antelope, Deer and Elk Regulations
    WYOMING GAME AND FISH COMMISSION Antelope, 2020 Deer and Elk Hunting Regulations Don't forget your conservation stamp Hunters and anglers must purchase a conservation stamp to hunt and fish in Wyoming. (See page 6) See page 18 for more information. wgfd.wyo.gov Wyoming Hunting Regulations | 1 CONTENTS Access on Lands Enrolled in the Department’s Walk-in Areas Elk or Hunter Management Areas .................................................... 4 Hunt area map ............................................................................. 46 Access Yes Program .......................................................................... 4 Hunting seasons .......................................................................... 47 Age Restrictions ................................................................................. 4 Characteristics ............................................................................. 47 Antelope Special archery seasons.............................................................. 57 Hunt area map ..............................................................................12 Disabled hunter season extension.............................................. 57 Hunting seasons ...........................................................................13 Elk Special Management Permit ................................................. 57 Characteristics ..............................................................................13 Youth elk hunters........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Land Use and Land Cover Changes in Awash National Park, Ethiopia: Impact of Decentralization on the Use and Management of Resources
    Open Journal of Ecology, 2014, 4, 950-960 Published Online November 2014 in SciRes. http://www.scirp.org/journal/oje http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/oje.2014.415079 Land Use and Land Cover Changes in Awash National Park, Ethiopia: Impact of Decentralization on the Use and Management of Resources Solomon Belay1, Aklilu Amsalu2, Eyualem Abebe3* 1Department of Geography, Jigjiga University, Jijiga, Ethiopia 2Department of Geography, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 3Department of Natural Science, Elizabeth City State University, Elizabeth City, USA Email: *[email protected] Received 26 September 2014; revised 25 October 2014; accepted 30 October 2014 Copyright © 2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Abstract We analyzed the magnitude of land use land cover changes and identified drivers of those changes at Awash National Park, Ethiopia, using aerial photographs, satellite images and field observation. Scattered bushland—the most important habitat for the wild animals, declined drastically. Areas under grassland, farmland or open land increased over the study period. Policy and park border demarcation issues were identified as drivers of change before 1995 (before decentralization), whereas livestock grazing was indicated to be the leading driver of change after 1995. Major events and causes that largely explained these changes include immigration of the Ittu community, land tenure system, drought, poaching, use policy issues and regional economic and infrastructur- al development. Our study reveals that the sustainability of the park calls for an immediate action to reduce the ever increasing human and livestock pressure on park resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Boselaphus Tragocamelus</I>
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln USGS Staff -- Published Research US Geological Survey 2008 Boselaphus tragocamelus (Artiodactyla: Bovidae) David M. Leslie Jr. U.S. Geological Survey, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub Leslie, David M. Jr., "Boselaphus tragocamelus (Artiodactyla: Bovidae)" (2008). USGS Staff -- Published Research. 723. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usgsstaffpub/723 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the US Geological Survey at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in USGS Staff -- Published Research by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. MAMMALIAN SPECIES 813:1–16 Boselaphus tragocamelus (Artiodactyla: Bovidae) DAVID M. LESLIE,JR. United States Geological Survey, Oklahoma Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit and Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078-3051, USA; [email protected] Abstract: Boselaphus tragocamelus (Pallas, 1766) is a bovid commonly called the nilgai or blue bull and is Asia’s largest antelope. A sexually dimorphic ungulate of large stature and unique coloration, it is the only species in the genus Boselaphus. It is endemic to peninsular India and small parts of Pakistan and Nepal, has been extirpated from Bangladesh, and has been introduced in the United States (Texas), Mexico, South Africa, and Italy. It prefers open grassland and savannas and locally is a significant agricultural pest in India. It is not of special conservation concern and is well represented in zoos and private collections throughout the world. DOI: 10.1644/813.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Survey Captures First-Ever Photos of Endangered Jentink's Duiker In
    GNUSLETTER VOL. 30 NO. 1 ANTELOPELOPE SPECIALIST GRGROUP Volume 30 Number 2 September 2012 FROM THE EDITOR... The Antelope Specialist Group is pleased to present GNUSLETTER Volume 30 #2. This edition includes some incredibly positive news In this Issue... for antelopes and conservation in Africa includ- ing John Newby’s letter announcing the Termit From the ASG Chairs . and Tin Toumma National Nature and Cultural Reserve in Niger, and the inauguration of the From the Gnusletter editor . Boma National Park headquarters in South Su- dan from the Wildlife Conservation Society press This issue: Mai Mai Rebels Overun Okapi Wildlife Reserve Headquarters, S. Shurter release. Conversely the report of the sacking of Epulu and the destruction of the headquarters of Recent Reports the Okapi Wildlife Reserve by elephant poach- ers in the DR Congo poignantly illustrates the • Tin Toumma National Nature and Cultural Reserve, J. Newby, Sahara Conservation dangerous war for control of wildlife and natural Fund resources in Africa. • Boma National Park Headquarters inauguration, WCS press release Also included in this volume are some reports • Antelopes in S. Somalia, 1975-1975, ASG report Summary (N.A.O. Abel from Sierre Leone on Jentink’s duiker and & M.E. Kille) gazelles in Iraq. Two very nice historic reviews (Paul Evangelista in Ethiopia and Abel and Kille • The Natural and Unnatural History of the Mountain Nyala, P. Evangelista in Somalia) were submitted concerning antelopes • Jentink’s Duiker Camera Trap Photos in Sierra Leone, R. Garriga, A.McKenna in the Horn of Africa. • Notes on the antelopes of Iraq, Omar Fadhil Al-Sheikhly Finally, GNUSLETTER is now registered with • Antelopes in Stamps, D.
    [Show full text]
  • Mammals of Jordan
    © Biologiezentrum Linz/Austria; download unter www.biologiezentrum.at Mammals of Jordan Z. AMR, M. ABU BAKER & L. RIFAI Abstract: A total of 78 species of mammals belonging to seven orders (Insectivora, Chiroptera, Carni- vora, Hyracoidea, Artiodactyla, Lagomorpha and Rodentia) have been recorded from Jordan. Bats and rodents represent the highest diversity of recorded species. Notes on systematics and ecology for the re- corded species were given. Key words: Mammals, Jordan, ecology, systematics, zoogeography, arid environment. Introduction In this account we list the surviving mammals of Jordan, including some reintro- The mammalian diversity of Jordan is duced species. remarkable considering its location at the meeting point of three different faunal ele- Table 1: Summary to the mammalian taxa occurring ments; the African, Oriental and Palaearc- in Jordan tic. This diversity is a combination of these Order No. of Families No. of Species elements in addition to the occurrence of Insectivora 2 5 few endemic forms. Jordan's location result- Chiroptera 8 24 ed in a huge faunal diversity compared to Carnivora 5 16 the surrounding countries. It shelters a huge Hyracoidea >1 1 assembly of mammals of different zoogeo- Artiodactyla 2 5 graphical affinities. Most remarkably, Jordan Lagomorpha 1 1 represents biogeographic boundaries for the Rodentia 7 26 extreme distribution limit of several African Total 26 78 (e.g. Procavia capensis and Rousettus aegypti- acus) and Palaearctic mammals (e. g. Eri- Order Insectivora naceus concolor, Sciurus anomalus, Apodemus Order Insectivora contains the most mystacinus, Lutra lutra and Meles meles). primitive placental mammals. A pointed snout and a small brain case characterises Our knowledge on the diversity and members of this order.
    [Show full text]
  • Reproductive Seasonality in Captive Wild Ruminants: Implications for Biogeographical Adaptation, Photoperiodic Control, and Life History
    Zurich Open Repository and Archive University of Zurich Main Library Strickhofstrasse 39 CH-8057 Zurich www.zora.uzh.ch Year: 2012 Reproductive seasonality in captive wild ruminants: implications for biogeographical adaptation, photoperiodic control, and life history Zerbe, Philipp Abstract: Zur quantitativen Beschreibung der Reproduktionsmuster wurden Daten von 110 Wildwiederkäuer- arten aus Zoos der gemässigten Zone verwendet (dabei wurde die Anzahl Tage, an denen 80% aller Geburten stattfanden, als Geburtenpeak-Breite [BPB] definiert). Diese Muster wurden mit verschiede- nen biologischen Charakteristika verknüpft und mit denen von freilebenden Tieren verglichen. Der Bre- itengrad des natürlichen Verbreitungsgebietes korreliert stark mit dem in Menschenobhut beobachteten BPB. Nur 11% der Spezies wechselten ihr reproduktives Muster zwischen Wildnis und Gefangenschaft, wobei für saisonale Spezies die errechnete Tageslichtlänge zum Zeitpunkt der Konzeption für freilebende und in Menschenobhut gehaltene Populationen gleich war. Reproduktive Saisonalität erklärt zusätzliche Varianzen im Verhältnis von Körpergewicht und Tragzeit, wobei saisonalere Spezies für ihr Körpergewicht eine kürzere Tragzeit aufweisen. Rückschliessend ist festzuhalten, dass Photoperiodik, speziell die abso- lute Tageslichtlänge, genetisch fixierter Auslöser für die Fortpflanzung ist, und dass die Plastizität der Tragzeit unterstützend auf die erfolgreiche Verbreitung der Wiederkäuer in höheren Breitengraden wirkte. A dataset on 110 wild ruminant species kept in captivity in temperate-zone zoos was used to describe their reproductive patterns quantitatively (determining the birth peak breadth BPB as the number of days in which 80% of all births occur); then this pattern was linked to various biological characteristics, and compared with free-ranging animals. Globally, latitude of natural origin highly correlates with BPB observed in captivity, with species being more seasonal originating from higher latitudes.
    [Show full text]
  • Connochaetes Gnou – Black Wildebeest
    Connochaetes gnou – Black Wildebeest Blue Wildebeest (C. taurinus) (Grobler et al. 2005 and ongoing work at the University of the Free State and the National Zoological Gardens), which is most likely due to the historic bottlenecks experienced by C. gnou in the late 1800s. The evolution of a distinct southern endemic Black Wildebeest in the Pleistocene was associated with, and possibly driven by, a shift towards a more specialised kind of territorial breeding behaviour, which can only function in open habitat. Thus, the evolution of the Black Wildebeest was directly associated with the emergence of Highveld-type open grasslands in the central interior of South Africa (Ackermann et al. 2010). Andre Botha Assessment Rationale Regional Red List status (2016) Least Concern*† This is an endemic species occurring in open grasslands in the central interior of the assessment region. There are National Red List status (2004) Least Concern at least an estimated 16,260 individuals (counts Reasons for change No change conducted between 2012 and 2015) on protected areas across the Free State, Gauteng, North West, Northern Global Red List status (2008) Least Concern Cape, Eastern Cape, Mpumalanga and KwaZulu-Natal TOPS listing (NEMBA) (2007) Protected (KZN) provinces (mostly within the natural distribution range). This yields a total mature population size of 9,765– CITES listing None 11,382 (using a 60–70% mature population structure). This Endemic Yes is an underestimate as there are many more subpopulations on wildlife ranches for which comprehensive data are *Watch-list Threat †Conservation Dependent unavailable. Most subpopulations in protected areas are stable or increasing.
    [Show full text]
  • Crop Damage by Overabundant Populations of Nilgai and Blackbuck in Haryana (India) and Its Management
    CROP DAMAGE BY OVERABUNDANT POPULATIONS OF NILGAI AND BLACKBUCK IN HARYANA (INDIA) AND ITS MANAGEMENT N. P. S. CHAUHAN, and RAMVEER SINGH, Wildlife Institute of India, P.O. New Forest, Dehradun-2A8006, India. ABSTRACT: In India, as in other countries, problems associated with locally overabundant wildlife species have emerged as important management ~ues for reason of some species losing their natural habitat but adapting themselves to the man­ altered habitats. Consequently, there is a clash with the interests of local people. Crop-raiding by locally overabundant wild populations of nilgai and blackbuck in Haryana is one such problem analyzed in this paper. Nilgai causes extensive damage to agricultural cro~; among these, gram, wheat seedlings and moong are the most preferred ones. Btackbuck nibble mainly on young shoots of various cereal and pulse cro~ and the damage is much less than caused by nilgai. Possible management strategies such as culling, fencing in nilgai and black buck (enclosures or corrals), and fencing agricultural areas to minimize the problem are suggested. Chain-link fencing of a sizable Reserved Forest (RF) patch, where the animals seek daytime shelter, combined with other local protective methods in the cultivated areas of Nahar hold promise of reducing the pest animal populations. The experiment is likely to establish one approach for dealing with the specific problem in Haryana. This paper discusses agricultural crop-raiding by locally overabundant populations of nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus) and blackbuck (Antilope cervicapra) in several districts of Haryana and the possible management strategies that can limit or reduce the conflict. Based on these strategies, a management experiment is being conducted in one of the districts, namely, Nahar, and its results are presented in this paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Wildlife Trade in Somalia
    Volume 1 Issue 4 March 2007 ISSN 1990-8237 WILDLIFE TRADE IN SOMALIA Osman G. Amir An increasing demand of tortoise bones in China Grundstrasse 27, D-64289 Darmstadt, Germany. Email: [email protected] and Southeast Asia may apparently encourage the collection of leopard tortoises in Somalia. Somalia’s fauna is rated among the most interesting in Africa, owing to its high species richness and level of endemism. The species richness reflects the high diversity of ecosystems and wildlife of During the rule of the dictator Siad Barre, the country habitats. About 142 vertebrates are endemic into the country, comprising 8 species of birds, 22 had only three international airports, namely Mogadishu, species of fresh water fish, 82 species of amphibians and reptiles and 30 mammals. The Somali Hargeisa, and Kismayo, and these exit posts for fauna contains very highly adapted arid and semi-arid ecosystems of Northeastern Africa and is goods were controlled effectively by customs considered a high conservation priority. The initial objectives of the survey was to reassess the authorities. However, during the civil war a range of presence of Bulo-burte bush shrike (Laniarius liberatus) along the riverbank of Shabelle in Hiran new small airstrips were established. These airports region, and further the survey aimed to assess general impact of wildlife trade to the fauna in southern are operated by private people and entrepreneurs Somalia. However, the recent fighting between Mogadishu warlords and unions of Islamic courts and lack any effective control of the import and made it impossible to achieve the first objective and therefore we had to execute the second objective.
    [Show full text]
  • Animals of Africa
    Silver 49 Bronze 26 Gold 59 Copper 17 Animals of Africa _______________________________________________Diamond 80 PYGMY ANTELOPES Klipspringer Common oribi Haggard oribi Gold 59 Bronze 26 Silver 49 Copper 17 Bronze 26 Silver 49 Gold 61 Copper 17 Diamond 80 Diamond 80 Steenbok 1 234 5 _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________ Cape grysbok BIG CATS LECHWE, KOB, PUKU Sharpe grysbok African lion 1 2 2 2 Common lechwe Livingstone suni African leopard***** Kafue Flats lechwe East African suni African cheetah***** _______________________________________________ Red lechwe Royal antelope SMALL CATS & AFRICAN CIVET Black lechwe Bates pygmy antelope Serval Nile lechwe 1 1 2 2 4 _______________________________________________ Caracal 2 White-eared kob DIK-DIKS African wild cat Uganda kob Salt dik-dik African golden cat CentralAfrican kob Harar dik-dik 1 2 2 African civet _______________________________________________ Western kob (Buffon) Guenther dik-dik HYENAS Puku Kirk dik-dik Spotted hyena 1 1 1 _______________________________________________ Damara dik-dik REEDBUCKS & RHEBOK Brown hyena Phillips dik-dik Common reedbuck _______________________________________________ _______________________________________________African striped hyena Eastern bohor reedbuck BUSH DUIKERS THICK-SKINNED GAME Abyssinian bohor reedbuck Southern bush duiker _______________________________________________African elephant 1 1 1 Sudan bohor reedbuck Angolan bush duiker (closed) 1 122 2 Black rhinoceros** *** Nigerian
    [Show full text]
  • Are Protected Areas Save Havens for Threatened Species in Cameroon? Case of Banyang-Mbo Wildlife Sanctuary, South Western Cameroon
    Vol. 6(2), pp. 42-55, February 2014 DOI: 10.5897/JENE2013.0430 ISSN 2006-9847 ©2014 Academic Journals Journal of Ecology and the Natural Environment http://www.academicjournals.org/JENE Full Length Research Paper Endangering the endangered: Are protected areas save havens for threatened species in Cameroon? Case of Banyang-Mbo Wildlife Sanctuary, South Western Cameroon Ajonina S. A.1*, Gerhard Wiegleb2, Nkwatoh Athanasius Fuashi1 and Hofer Heribert3 1Department of Environmental Science, Faculty of Science, University of Buea, Cameroon. 2Chair of General Ecology, BTU Cottbus, Germany, 3Department of Evolutionary Ecology, Berlin Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research, Germany. Accepted 20 December, 2013 A hunting survey was conducted in the Banyang-Mbo Wildlife Sanctuary and support zones to estimate bushmeat off-take as a means to understand the current conservation status of protected species in that important area of biodiversity in Cameroon. A total of 756 protected animal carcasses with a total biomass of 6,815 kg, in six taxonomic groups constituted 24% of the total off-take of animals killed or captured by two adjacent ethnic groups of Banyang-Mbo Wildlife Sanctuary. Hunters caught more than 30 individuals of each of the red eared monkey (Cercopithecus erythrotis camerunensis), squirrel sp. (Protexerus stangeri, Funisciurus pyrropus), brush-tailed porcupine (Atherurus africanus), Water chevrotain (Hyemoschus aquaticus) African dwarf crocodile (Osteolaemus tetraspis), red river hog (Potamoschus porcus) and bay duiker (Cephalophus dorsalis) which together accounted for 75% of all protected species captures and 89% of the biomass. There was significant variation in the number of protected species exploited with the most captured taxonomic group, the rodents, comprising 37% of the kills or captures and 13% of the total biomass.
    [Show full text]