Ecologicalan deconomi c impactso fgorilla-base dtouris mi n Dzanga-Sangha, Promotor: Prof.Dr. H.H.T. Prins Hoogleraar in het Natuurbeheer in de Tropen en Ecologie van Vertebraten

Co-promotor: Dr. A.M.H. Brunsting Hoofddocent leerstoelgroep Natuurbeheer in de Tropen en Ecologie van Vertebraten

Promotie commissie: Prof.Dr.Ir. G.M.J. Mohren Wageningen Universiteit

Dr. L.E.M. Vet Nederlands Instituut voor Oecologisch Onderzoek

Dr. C.E.G. Tutin University of Stirling, UK

Dr. E.H.M. Sterck Universiteit Utrecht pm'^o},7^^-

AllardBlo m

Ecological andeconomi cimpact so fgorilla-base dtouris mi n Dzanga-Sangha,Centra lAfrica n Republic

Proefschrift terverkrijgin g vand egraa dva ndocto r opgeza gva nd erecto r magnificus vanWageninge n Universiteit, Prof.Dr .Ir .L .Speelman , inhe topenbaa r teverdedige n opmaanda g 11jun i200 1 desnamiddag st evie ruu r ind eAul a Doctoral thesis (2001),Departmen t ofEnvironmenta l Sciences,Tropica lNatur e Conservation andVertebrat eEcolog y Group,Wageninge n University, Bornsesteeg 69,670 8P DWageningen , TheNetherlands .

ISBN 90-5808-410-8 ^jol?^ ,t>"H ^

THESIS PROPOSITIONS (Stellingen)

Accompanying the doctoral thesis:

"ECOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS OFGORILL A BASED TOURISM IN DZANGA- SANGHA, CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC"

1.Wester n lowland gorillas can not be classified as strictly vegetarian because they digest considerable amounts of insects, most notably termites. this thesis

2.Th e main reason that law enforcement in central Africa ispresentl y insufficient to stop the bushmeat trade, is lack ofsustainabl e funding. this thesis

3. Regular daily contact and forewarning the gorillas ofone' s imminent arrival are thetw o most important factors inpromotin g habituation inwester n lowland gorillas. this thesis

4.Notwithstandin g the potential oftouris m togenerat e substantial revenues for protected areas, itwil l never generate enough to sustainably and sufficiently manage those inth e Guinean-Congolian Forest Region. this thesis

5. Given thepoo r economic development of most ofth e countries ofth e Guinean-Congolian Forest Region,th e international community isgoin g to havet o pay the costs ofbiodiversit y protection in this region. this thesis

6. On average African nations spend almost three times as much ofthei r national budget on protected area management as do wealthy European and North American nations. Wilkie, D.S. &Carpenter, J.F., inprep. Theunder-financing of protected areasin the Congo Basin:so manyparks andso little willingness-to-pay

7.Th e evolution ofsocialit y and cognition are apparently intertwined with inequality and information sharing. PrinsHHT (1996) Ecologyand behaviour ofthe African buffalo. London:Chapman & Hall.

8.Th e refractive index (R),a s ameasur e ofth e consistency ofbutter , isnegativel y related both to the daily fat production ofth e cow( K in g) and the fat content ofth e milk (V in %). Blom, G.F.(1962) Het verbandtussen delipiden in het gras ende consistentie vande boter. Proefschrift.Mededelingen der Landbouwhogeschool te Wageningen/Nederland62 (9), 1-134. p:124-127.

AllardBlom Lope, April 23,2001 In memory of:

Urbain Ngatoua

National Director Dzanga-Sangha Project

and

Dr.Gunthe r Merz

World Wildlife Fund -German y Abstract

Thisthesi sinvestigate sth epotentia lrol eo ftouris m inth efundin g ofprotecte dare a management inth eCong oBasin .A nassessmen to fth eprotecte darea san dgazette dforest s ofth e CentralAfrica n Republic (CAR)showe dtha tonl yabou ton ethir d ofth eprotecte darea si smor eo r lesseffectivel y managed.Almos t allth egazette dfores t andth eremainde ro fth eprotecte darea sar e insufficiently protectedfro m humandisturbance ,whic hi smostl yi nth efor m ofpoaching .Thi s exampleunderline sth efac t thatlon gter munder-financin g ofth emanagemen tha sseriousl y affected theintegrit yo fprotecte darea si nth eCong oBasin .Eve ni nrelativel ywel lmanage dareas , sucha sth eDzanga-Sangh aprotecte d areacomplex ,i nsouthwester n CAR,huma nimpac to n wildlife canstil lb emeasure dan di srelate dt oth edistanc efro mroads . Thecost so fmanagemen tt oeffectivel y protectth eforest s ofth eCong oBasi nar ehigh .Th e potentialrol etha ttouris m couldpla yi nraisin grevenu e formanagemen t andfo rth eloca l communitieswa sinvestigate dbase do nth ecas estud yo fap eviewin gi nDzanga-Sangha .Ape - viewingi sa hig hretur ntyp eo ftouris m andcondition st odevelo psuc htouris m inDzanga-Sangh a weregood .Th eare aharbor shig hdensitie so fwester n lowlandgorilla s(Gorilla gorilla gorilla) and severalpreviou sstudie so nthes eape sha dbee ncarrie dout .I norde rfo rvisitor st ob eabl et ovie w theape sthe yneede dt ob ehabituate dt ohuma npresence .Thi sthesi sshow stha thabituatio no f gorillasfo rtouris mi sfeasible .Althoug hfeasible ,th ehabituatio nproces srequire sa substantia l investment intim ean dmone yan di sno twithou trisks .I ti sunlikel ytha ttourism ,includin gape - viewing,wil lb eeconomicall yviabl efrom a commercia lpoin to fview . Iti sunlikel ytha trevenu e form tourismwil lcove rth emanagemen t costo fth eDzanga-Sangh aprotecte d areano wo ri nth e foreseeable future. Eventhoug htouris m canbrin gimportan tgain st oth eregion , sucha srevenu e andemployment ,manager shav et ocarefull y weighthes eadvantage sagains tth eapes ' wellbein g andth erisk yeconomic so ftouris m inCentra l Africa. Giventh e fact thatDzanga-Sangh a provides oneo fth ebes t opportunities forthi styp eo f tourism inth eCong oBasi n andtha t evenher eth eeconomi c success ishighl y questionable, iti s unlikelyt ob ea realisti c option inbu t afe w exceptional places inthi spar t ofth eworld .Thi scas e studyclearl y demonstrates that although someuse rfee s haveth epotentia l togenerat e substantial revenue forprotecte d areasi nth eCong oBasin ,thes e fees willb efa r from sufficient tomanag e theprotecte d area system. Acknowledgements

Thisresearc h wassupporte d byth eDzanga-Sangh a Project, specifically through funding from theWorl d Wildlife Fund, Inc.an dgrant s from theWorl d WideFun dfo rNatur e- Germany. Several studentsworkin go nthi sprogra m received student grants from theFON A Foundation, LucieBurger sFoundatio n forComparativ e Behaviour Research andth e Wageningen Agricultural University Foundation. Iwoul d liket othan k the lateUrbai nNgatoua ,Directo r ofth eDzanga-Sangh a Project and hisentir estaff . Theseve nyear sI spen t inBayang awer e special. Thecircumstance s were not always easy,bu tw eachieve d somuch .Th ededicatio n ofpeopl e likeValenti nBombo ,Jona s Bobero,Honor eNgaim aan dJean-Bosc oKpano umad ei tal lhappen .Josep hPamb akep tm e safe andwa sgoo dcompan ywhil ew ewer e drivingthos e awful longmile st oan dfro m . Gabriel Yikilian dVicto rBabo ndi dno tonl yprovid e goodmedica lhel pwhe nI neede d it, but did sot oal lou rstaff . Theywer eals over yactiv e inth ecommunit yo fBayanga .Pierr ean dDeni s looked after mean dalway sassure d thatth ehousehol d wasru nlik ea professiona l hotel.Indee di t sometime seemedt ofunctio n thatway ,bu tthe yalway skep tthing sunde rcontro l andtoo km y bestinteres ta thart .Merc imingi ,Pierr ean dDenis . Tryingt ojuggl etw ojobs an d doingm ythesi s atth e sametim ewa sa challeng e and without the support from UrbainNgatou a itwoul dno thav ebee npossible .Hi scal man d diplomacykep tthing smovin g along eveni fI wa sawa yfo rlon gperiods .Withou thi s leadership andsteadfas t dedicationth eDzanga-Sangh a Project mighthav e crumbled duringth eperio do f theprolonge d armymutiny ,whe n Iwa sunabl et oge tbac kt oBayanga . Hispresenc ewil l be missedb ymany . InBayang aI mad eman y friends. Thanksfo rbein gthere .M y"Dzanga-Sangha " colleagues:Gunthe rKlemm ,Jean-Mar c Garreau, "Dobre"Strgule c Slavko,Christop h Oertle, Daniela Renner, GuyRondeau , Lisa Steel,Nige l Orbell,Jean-Claud e Thibaud and Anna Kretsinger,al lth ePeac e Corps volunteers,an dfello w researchers especially AndreaTurkalo . AnnaKretsinge r andLoui s Sarnower e friends whohelpe d mebette runderstan d the BaAka and hopefully helpedm ei nbette rtakin gthei r interest atheart . Michele Goldsmith helped me discover BaiHoko uan d itsgorillas . Theresearc h campo fBa iHoko u isa n amazingplac et oliv ean dwork .Richar dCarrol l wasth efirst t owor kher ean dhi sresearc h andhi ssubsequen t dedicationt oDzanga-Sangh a were aninspiratio n forme .Richar dno t onlyhire dm eoriginall yt oru nth eDzanga-Sangh a project,bu t heals osupporte dm y"crazy "ide ao fhabituatin go fwester nlowlan dgorilla sfo rtourism , althoughh emus thav ethough t (asmos tpeopl e did)tha ti twa sa wast e oftim ean dmoney . GuntherMer zwa sconvince d from the starttha tw ewoul db eabl et od oi tan dwen tt owor kt o find thefundin g needed.H esucceede dbeyon dhi sow nexpectations .I a mver ygratefu l tohi m andgla dtha th ewa sabl et ose eth egorilla sbefor e histragi c deathi nGermany . Dzanga-Sangha losta dea r friend. AndreaAlmasi ,Jean-Bosc o Kpanou, KennethOtto ,Pladel eGodob oan dEugen eMbe a were instrumental ingettin gth egorill ahabituatio n program started. CloeCipollett a madei t happen.He renerg y waseve nto omuc hfo rth e gorillas.The ydecide dtha trunnin g away from thispersisten t "ganguwali "wa sjus t toomuc hwor kan db y default became habituated tou s as well. Iespeciall y would liket othan kth efield team , consisting ofth epermanen tfield staff , students andvolunteers : CloeCipolletta , Jean-Bosco Kpanou, Kenneth Otto,Pladel eGodobo , Eugene Mbea,Jea n Tetoungbou, Michel Pounguinza, Flavien Pani,Jaso n Fink, DavidRitchie , David Greer, Franca Donati,Andre a Almasi,Claudi a Sieler, Linda Haartsen, Robert vanZalinge , Sandra deJong ,Igo rDijkers , Birgit Janssen,Nasj a Arends,Esthe rva nde rWal ,Pi mVugteveen , GuusKruitwagen , Liesbeth Noor, Christine de Siant-Rat, ChristineAmalfaltino , Veronica Vecellioan dBrigitt e Mbassangoa, Gorilla research andhabituatio n wouldno t havebee n feasible withoutth eknowledg eo f theBaAk atrackers .The y showedm eho wt otrac kgorilla s andI probabl y achievedth e level ofa threeyea rol di nthei r opinion. Onth eothe rhan d Iamaze dthe mb yneve rgettin g lost (acompas s isa nea t littletrick) .A specia l thankst oNyele ,wh obecam e aher owhe nh ewa sbitten ,an dal l theothe rBaAk atrackers : Bakombo,Balambe ,Bokombi ,Benzaba ,Bessekele ,Boangu ,Elemo , Epecekele, Gaito,Gbalake ,Gbelema , Kambi,Koto ,Likpoyo , Makizou,Mapoko ,Mamondele , Matofi, Mayenda,Mbanda ,Mbembele ,Mbokola ,Mbokombo ,Messan ,Mobambu ,Modebe , Mokedi,Mokoko ,Mokonja , Molimba, Molongo,Mondebe ,Mondoubou , Mongamba,Mongo , Mosimba,Mossombo ,Mosakou , Mouama,Moukandi , Moyekele,Ndiki ,Ndondo ,Ngombo , Ngoumbie,Ngulake ,Poupe ,Samedi ,Singale ,Taleke ,Tototombo ,Toutou ,Wassi ,Wonga , Yangassou andZou . Iwil lneve r forget Wonga's stories aroundth e camp fire. TheWW Fstaf f inBangu i worked hardt okee pu s supplied andwer e anessentia l link withth eoutsid eworld .The ydefende d thepremise sdurin gth emutin yan dhelpe dm esafel y get awaydurin gth ewors t ofth e fighting. Theirdedicatio n set astandard . GustaveDoungounb e and hisstaf f werea bi ghel pi nth eearl y years.Rarel y doeson ecom eacros s someone ashar d working anddedicate d asFrancois .Specia l thankst oth elat eAstri dMomb ean dClaud eKokot . TonyMokombo ,Bernar d Difara andJea nYamindo u allworke d hard inthei rjob s asprogra m officers. Theyprovid etechnica l backstopping aswel l asessentia l liaison with Government and otheragencies .Jea n Yamindou hasver ycapabl y taken overm yjo b inBangu i andremaine d helpful throughout theresearc h andwrit eu pphase . InBangu i Iha dman y friends and colleagues.Th eEmbassie s ofth e United Statesan d Germanytoo k aspecia l interest inou rprojec t andwer e amajo r support aswa sth eU SPeac e Corps.Durin gth eperio d Iwa s inCA Rw ewen t through soman ychange s inGovernmen t thatI canno tnam eal lth eMinister s that were involved, some for better some for worse,wit hth e Dzanga-Sangha project. President Patasse andhi s Government havemad ea dedicatio nt o conservation that shouldb ea nexampl e for othercountries .Althoug h weexperience d major disappointments andsetbacks ,thank st oth eCA RGovernmen t theDzanga-Sangh a Projectan d protected areacomple x isa realit ytoday , eventhoug hthe ymus thav eothe rpriorities . Special thankst oReinhar d and Sabine Wolf andth efamil y Weinstable for theirtechnica l assistance,bu t foremost theirfriendship . Iwoul dlik et othan km yfrien dNassif ,fo rno tonl ykeepin g ourcar s running,bu tals ofo r support indifficul t times Ithan kth eentir e WWFstaf f inWashingto n andFrankfur t for their support, witha specialthank st oTon yMokombo ,Richar dCarrol lan dGunthe rMerz . Iwoul d liket othan k the StateUniversit y ofNe wYor k at StonyBroo k for providingth e opportunity tous ethei r facilities. Iwoul d liket othan k AndreaAlmasi ,Conra d Aveling,Andre w Balmford, RichardBarnes ,Aren dBrunsting ,To mButynski ,Richar dCarroll ,Clo eCipolletta , DianeDoran ,Bernar d Difara, Gustave Doungoube,Michel e Fernandez,Jean-Mar c Garreau, Michele Goldsmith,Davi d Greer,Jefferso n Hall,Rebecc a Hardin,Davi d Harris,Igna s Heitkonig, PieterKetner ,Ann aKretsinger , Annette Lanjouw, TonyMokombo ,Joh nOates , Herbert Prins,Meliss aRemis ,Gu yRondeau ,Natash a Shah,Thoma s Struhsaker, Lisa Steel, Andrea Turkalo,Carolin eTutin ,Le eWhite ,Davi d Wilkie,Jea nYamindo u andRober tva n Zalinge forthei r assistance, comments andsuggestion s inwritin gthi sthesis . WithoutHerber t Prins,m ysupervisor , thisthesi swoul dno t evenhav e startedan d certainlywoul dno thav efinished . Hewa s supportive from thebeginning .Althoug hI onl yha da vagueide awhe nI firs t approached him,Herber t reallypushe dm et og oahead .Aren d Brunsting, theco-promotor , helpedwit hal lth e logistical problems ofgettin gth erigh t students for sucha remoteplace .I thin kh esucceede d verywel l in suggesting therigh tpeopl et ocom et oDzanga - Sangha. Atota lo f 12student smad e itfro m Wageningen toBayang a andbac k inon epiece . Arendmad emos t ofth earrangement s and supervised manyo fthe mdurin gthei rpreparatio n and write-up.Igna sHeitkoni g also supervised some students andwa shelpfu l with statistics.H e provided useful comments onmos t manuscripts.Piete rKetne r supervised students andhelpe d withvegetatio n classification. Thelis tha sbee n long,bu t last Iwoul d liket othan km yparents ,becaus e simplywithou t themI woul d nothav ebee nhere .The yalway sencourage d met ofin d myow nway .I gues sI inherited my"green "interes t from mygrandfathe r whowa sa ninspiratio n from anearl y age.I t wasm yparent swh oencourage d andmad ei tpossibl efo r met opursu ea caree ri nconservatio n andecology .The yprovide d financial support form et og ot oAfric a forth efirst time ,althoug h theymus thav ebee nver yworrie dwhe nthe ywoul dno thea r from mefo r months.The nsuddenl y theywoul d geta cal l againtha t Iwa si nsom eothe rcountry ,onc eagai nevacuate d duet osom e waro rother .Thank sfo r thepatienc e andencouragement . Natasha Shahha sbee nm ycompanio n these last few yearsbot h inth e field andlate rwhil ewritin g up.Alway s agoo dlistener , sheha s coachedm ethroug h adaptingt oth eAmerica nwa yo flife . Eventhoug h shewa sdoin ghe row n PhD.researc h shealway stoo kth etim et ohel pme .Thank s forbein gther ewhe nth egoin gwa s tough.Havin g survivedthi stogethe r hascreate d alastin gbond .

SoundBeach ,Februar y200 1 Table ofcontent s

Abstract

Acknowledgments

Chapter1 General introduction andoutlin eo fthesi s AllardBlo m

Chapter2 Statuso fth eprotecte d areasan dgazett eforest s ofth eCentra l African Republic Allard Blom,Jea nYamindo u andHerber t H.T.Prin s

Chapter3 27 Dzanga-Sangha context AllardBlo m

Chapter4 50 Asurve y ofth eape si nth eDzanga-Ndok i National Park,Centra l African Republic. AllardBlom ,Andre aAlmasi ,Igna sM.A .Heitkonig ,Jean-Bosc oKpano u and Herbert H.T.Prins .

Chapters 61 Humanimpac to nwildlif e populationswithi na protecte dcentra lAfrica n forest AllardBlom ,Rober tva nZalinge ,Eugen eMbea ,Igna sM.A .Heitkoni gan d HerbertH.T .Prin s

Chapter6 91 Behavioralresponse so fgorilla st ohabituatio n inth eDzanga-Ndok iNationa l Park,Centra lAfrica n Republic. AllardBlom ,Chlo eCipolletta ,Aren dM.H .Brunstin gan dHerber tH.T .Prin s

Chapter 7 125 Themonetar y impacto ftouris m onprotecte dare amanagemen t andth eloca l economyi nDzanga-Sangh a (CentralAfrica n Republic). AllardBlom .

Chapter8 142 Synthesis:Potential san dpitfall s oftouris m inth e Guinean-Congolian Forest Region.Allar dBlo m

Summary 157

Samenvatting 159

Resume 162

Curriculum vitae 165 Chapter 1 Generalintroductio n andoutlin eo fthesi s

Managemento fprotecte dareas :a simpl ematte ro fmoney ?

Ina recen tarticle ,Leake y(2000 )calle dupo nth eworld' sriches tnation st oprovid emone y forth epreservatio no fth eworld' sbiodiversity ,o fwhic ha larg epar treside si nth epoores tnations . Hecalle dfo rsettin gu pa permanen tgloba lendowmen tt oprovid efo r sustainablefundin g for wildlife protection.Thi scal lpose sa serie so finterestin gquestions : 1. Issustainabl e funding essential forprotecte dare amanagemen tan dthu sbiodiversit y conservation? Inothe rword sd oarea swit hfundin g dobette rtha nthos ewithout ? 2. Whati sth epresen t situationo fprotecte dare amanagemen ti nth epoores tnations ?I sadditiona l funding neededo rca nthos ecountrie scop ethemselves ? 3. Isi tindee dnecessar y forth eriches tcountrie st oprovid eth efundin g orar ealternative s available?

TheCong oBasi nprovide sa nopportunit yt oanswe rpart so fthes equestions .I ti son eo fth e poorestregion si nth eworld ,bu ti tals oharbor son eo fth eworld' smos tdivers eforests .Protecte d areasi nth eCong oBasi ncove rapproximatel y 6% o fth eregio nan dsubstantia laddition sar ebein g proposed(Blom ,e tal. ,i nprep.) .Howeve raccordin gt oWilki e& Carpenter (inprep. )long-ter m under-funding ofth emanagemen tha sseriousl yaffecte d theintegrit yo fthes eareas .Accordin gt o thedat apresente db yWilki e& Carpente r (inprep. )th eCong oBasi ncountrie sspen dabou tth e samepercentag eo fthei rnationa lbudget so nprotecte dare amanagemen ta sd owealth yEuropea n andNort hAmerica nnations .Th eCentra lAfrica n Republic (CAR)i sranke damon gth epoores t nationsi nth eworl d(PNUD , 1995),ye tspend sroughl yth esam epercentag eo fit sbudge to n protectedarea sa sth eUnite d Stateso fAmeric a (0.17versu s0.1 5 %:dat afrom Wilki e& Carpenter , inprep.) . Ecotourismi ssee nb yman ya sa possibilit yt ofinanc e thelong-ter mcost so fbiodiversit y conservationan di nparticula rprotecte dare amanagement ,bu tquestion sabou tsustainabilit yan d contributingvalu ehav ebee nraise d (e.g.Boo , 1990;Tobia s& Mendelsohn, 1991;Lindberg , 1991; Inskeep, 1992; Cater& Lowman, 1994;Navru d& Mungatana, 1994; TheNatur e Conservancy, 1995;Brandon , 1996; Langholz, 1996;Durbin , 1996; Wells, 1997). TheCA Rha sha da histor yo f limitedtouris m andit spotentia li sstil lconsidere dviabl e(Plumier , 1992;UNDP/WTO ,1998) . TheDzanga-Sangh a protectedare acomplex ,i nth esouthwes to fth eCAR ,offer s an exceptionalpotentia l forth edevelopmen t ofecotourism .I tha suniqu ewildlif e viewingpossibilitie s combinedwit hth eexperienc eo fBaAk a(pygmy )culture .I twa sthough ttha tthi spotentia lwoul d provide sustainabledevelopmen t options(Telesis , 1991,1993).Ecotouris mbase do nape sha sbee n successful inraisin gpar krevenue ,loca lemploymen ta swel la spubli c awareness ofnatur e conservation issuesa tth enationa l leveli nothe rpart s ofAfric a (Harcourt, 1986;Avelin g& Aveling, 1989;Shackley , 1995;McNeilage , 1996;Butynsk i &Kalina , 1998a& 1998b; Lanjouw, 1991,1999) .Base d onthi s experience ape-viewing ecotourism inDzanga-Sangha , was seena sa nadditiona l possibility ofsubstantiall y raisingrevenue ,fo r thepar k andth eloca l community. Thecondition s for suchtouris mwer ethough tt ob e good.Dzanga-Sangh a hasa hig h density ofgorilla s (Carroll, 1986, 1988, 1997)an dgorill a research hadbeen ,althoug h intermittently, on-going since 1984(Remis , 1994, 1997;Carroll , 1997;Fay , 1997;Goldsmith , 1997,1999;Dora ne tal. , 1996;Dora n& McNeilage, 1998).Furthermor e thepar kha sth e 1 necessary infrastructure aswel l asa ninnovativ e legislation forrevenu e sharing: forty percento f tourist fees got oa loca lNon-Governmenta l Organization for rural development activities and5 0 %remain swit hth epar kadministratio n for management (Blom, 1999). Forecotouris mbase d ongorill aviewing ,i ti sessentia l for theape st ob ehabituated , exceptmayb e inth ecas ewher e gorillas visit forest clearings (e.g.Magliocca , 1999;Magliocc a &Querouil , 1997;Magliocc a et al., 1999;Olejnczak , 1996, 1997).Habituatio n isth eslo w processb ywhic hgorilla sbecom eaccustome dt oth epresenc eo fhuman si nthei rvicinity . As gorillasbecom emor ean dmor euse dt opeople ,th edistanc ebetwee nth egorill aan dth eobserve r canb ereduced .Ideall yhabituatio n leadst oth eacceptanc eo fhuma nobserver sb ywil danimal sa s neutral elementsi nthei renvironmen t (Tutin& Fernandez , 1991).Eve nthoug hmountai ngorilla s havebee nsuccessfull y habituatedfo rbot htouris ma swel la sscientifi c pursuits(e.g .McNeilage , 1996;Fossey , 1983),th eproces so fhabituatio nha scom eunde rsom erecen twell-founde d criticism (Butynski& Kalina , 1998a; 1998b).Gorill ahabituatio ncarrie scertai nrisk sfo rth egroup sbein g habituated (McNeilage, 1996;Butynsk i& Kalina, 1998a; 1998b:Goldsmith ,2000 ;Kalema ,1998 ; Sholley, 1989;Walli s& Lee ,i nprep. ;Mudikikwa , 1998, Macfie, 1996).Butynsk i& Kalin a (1998a)an dMcNeilag e (1996)stres sth enee dt oestablis hstudie so fth ereaction so fgorilla st o touristsan dt omonito rth epotentiall ydisastrou simpac to fhabituatio no ngorilla s(se e for chimpanzeesJohns , 1999 andfo rbonobo sKrunkelsve n etal. , 1999). Inth estud ypresente d inthi sthesi sI investigate dth esituatio ni nth eCentra l African Republic(CAR) .I evaluate dth epresen tstatu so fth eprotecte darea si nligh to fmanagemen t investments. Thisallowe dm et oaddres sth equestio no fwhethe rth eunder-fundin g ofprotecte d areamanagemen ti sindee dresultin gi na progressiv eecologica limpoverishmen tan dlos so f biodiversitya spostulate db yWilki e& Carpente r (inprep.) .I tals ogive sa novervie wo fth e situation inon eparticula rcountr ywithi nth eCong obasin . Ithe nfocusse d myresearc h onon eparticula rprotecte dare ai nth esouthwes to fth eCAR , theDzanga-Sangh aprotecte dare acomplex ,whic hconsist so fth eDzanga-Sangh a SpecialDens e ForestReserv ean dth eDzanga-Ndok iNationa lPark .Th ecas estud yo fDzanga-Sangh aprovide s importantinformatio n onho wt oaddres sissue sconcernin gtouris mi nprotecte darea san dho w tourismcoul dcontribut et osustainabl edevelopmen to fprotecte dareas ,whil eminimizin gpotentia l negativeimpacts .I toffer s standardmethod sfo rmonitorin ghuma nimpac ti nprotecte darea san d baselinedat at ob euse di nevaluatin gth eeffectivenes s ofth emanagemen to fth eDzanga-Sangh a complex.Th eresult so fth ehabituatio nmonitorin gan dit ssubsequen trecommendation sar e importantfo rthos ecase swer ehabituatio ni scarrie dou ti na simila rcontex to fecotouris m development (e.g.Lope :Tuti ne tal. , 1996;Tuti n& Abernethy , 1997;Lossi :Aveling ,1996 ; Bermejo, 1997,1999). Inth eCong oBasin ,touris mi sprobabl yth eonl ysubstantia lrevenu etha tcoul db egenerate d locallyt osupplemen tGovernmen tspendin go nprotecte dareas .I norde rt ojustif y Leakey's(2000 ) callfo r funding from theriches t countries,i ti snecessar yt osho wth erol etouris m couldpla ya s a sourceo fsustainabl einterna lrevenu e forprotecte dare amanagement . Furthermore,Leakey' s (2000)suggestio n ofa nendowmen ti sjus ton eo fth eoption s for sustainable financing ofprotecte d areas inth e CongoFores t Regionwhic h arebein g investigated (Spergel,e tal. ,i nprep.) . Substantial additional funding willb eneede d toprotec tth ebiodiversit y inth eCong oBasi n as thepresen t protected area system isinsufficien t both inquantit y aswel l asqualit y (Blom,e tal. , inprep.) . Outlineo fthesi s

Thestud ystart swit ha nanalysi so fth estatu so fth eprotecte darea san dgazette dforest so f theCentra lAfrica n Republic(chapte r2 )t oillustrat eth enationa lcontex ti nwhic hth ecas estud y tookplace .I nth efollowin g chapter,I provid ebackgroun dinformatio n onth eDzanga-Sangh aare a (chapter 3).I norde rt ob eabl et ostar thabituatin g gorillasi twa sessentia lt ohav ea bette r understanding ofthei rdistributio n anddensitie si nth eDzanga-Ndok iNationa lPar k(chapte r4) . Likewiseth ehuma nimpac to nwildlif e (chapter 5)i sessentia la sa baselin eagains twhic ht o monitorth eeffectivenes s ofoveral lmanagemen t aswel la sth eimpac to fhabituatio no nth e wildlife andgorilla si nparticular .Th eresult soutline di nthes etw ochapter sals ohelpe didentif y themos t appropriateare afo rth eactua lhabituation ,th eBa iHoko ustud yarea .Th eproces so fhabituatio nan d theresult so fit smonitorin gar edescribe di nchapte r6 .Thi si sfollowe db ya nanalysi so fth eimpac t oftouris mprio rt oth egorill ahabituatio no nprotecte dare amanagemen t andth eloca leconom yi n Dzanga-Sangha (Chapter 7).Th esynthesi si nchapte r8 put sth efinding s ofth eentir estud ywithi n theperspectiv eo fpotentia lo ftouris ma sa viabl elon gter mfundin g mechanismfo rprotecte dare a management inorde rt oprotec tth ebiodiversit yo fth eCong oBasin .

References

Aveling, C.(1996 )Updat e on gorillanew s from the ECOFACprogramme . Gorilla Conservation News 10: 7-9.

Aveling,C .& Aveling ,R .(1989 )Gorill aconservatio n inZaire .Ory x23 :64-70 .

Bermejo, M. (1997) Study of western lowland gorillas in the Lossi forest ofNort h Congo anda pilotgorill atouris mplan .Gorill aconservatio nnew s 11:6-7 .

Bermejo, M. (1999) Update on the Lossi gorillas study and future sancuary of gorillas, 1998, PopularRepubli c ofCongo .Gorill a conservation news13.

Blom,A .(1999) .Te nyear sDzanga-Sangh a Project: 1988- 1999.Worl dWildlif e Fund- CAR.

Blom,A. ,Kamde mToham ,A. ,D'Amico ,J. ,O'Hara ,D. ,Abel lR .& Olsen ,D .(i nprep. ) Assessment ofbiologica lprioritie s for conservation inth eGuinean-Congolia n Forest Region. World Wildlife Fund,Inc .Washington .

Boo,E .(1990 )Ecotourism :th epotential san dpitfalls . Washington:Worl dWildlif e Fund.

Brandon, K. (1996) Ecotourism and Conservation: A Review of Key Issues. Environment Department Papers,Biodiversit y Series,Worl dBan k 33:69 .

Butynski,T.M .& Kalina,J . (1998a)Gorill aTourism : Acritica l lookMilner-Gulland , E.J. Mace,R . Conservation ofbiologica l resources. Oxford Blackwell Science,p :294-370 .

Butynski,T .& Kalina , J.(1998b )I sGorill a Tourism Sustainable? Gorilla Journal, 16:15-19 . 3 Carroll,R.W . (1986) Statuso fth elowlan dgorill aan dothe rwildlif e inth eDzanga-Sangh a region of southwestern Central African Republic.Primate Conservation 7,38-41 .

Carroll,R.W .(1988 )Relativ edensity ,rang eextension ,an dconservatio npotentia l ofth elowlan d gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) inth eDzang a -Sangh a region of southwestern Central African Republic.Mammalia, 52, 309-323.

Carroll, R.W. (1997)Feedin g ecology oflowlan d gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) inDzanga - Sangha Reserve ofth eCentra lAfrica n Republic. PhDthesis ,Universit y ofYale .

Cater, E., &Lowman , G.E. (Eds.) (1994) Ecotourism: a sustainable option? Wiley: Chichester: Wiley. P.:l-101.

Doran, D.M.& McNeilage ,A .(1998) .Gorill aecolog y andbehavior . Evolutionary Anthroplogy, 6(4): 120-129.

Doran,D. ,McNeilage ,A .& Demmers ,P .(1996 )Mondik a Research center, Central African Republic. Gorilla Conservation News 10: 9.

Durbin, J.C.(1996 )Ca n tourism make amajo r contribution to conservation ofprotecte d areasi n Madagascar?Biodiversit y andconservation , 5: 345-353.

Fay,J.M. , 1997.Th eecology , socialorganization , populations,habita t andhistir y ofth ewester n lowland gorilla (gorilla gorilla gorilla Savanga andWyman , 1874).Dissertation , Washingon University.

Fossey,D .(1983 )Gorilla s inth emist .BostonHoughto n Mifflin Co.

Goldsmith, M.L. (1996)Ecologica l Influences onth erangin g andgroupin g behaviouro f werstern lowland gorillas atBa iHokou ,Centra lAfrica n Republic. Phdthesis . State University ofNe wYor k at StonyBrook ,Ne wYor k

Goldsmith,M.L . (1999)Ecologica l constraints onth e foraging effort ofwester n lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) atBa iHokou ,Centra lAfrica n Republic. International Journalo f Primatology,2 0 (1): 1-23.

Goldsmith, M.L. (2000)Effect s ofecotouris m onth ebehaviora l ecology ofBwind igorillas , Uganda:preliminair yresults .America n Journal ofPhysica lAnthropolog yAAPA AbstractsSupplement 30: 161 .

Harcourt, A.H.(1986 )Gorill a conservation: anatomy ofa campaign . In:Ernischke ,K .(ed.) : Primates:th eroa dt oself-sustainin g populations.Ne wYork : Springer-Verlag

Inskeep,E . (1992)Achievin g sustainable tourism development. WTO-News,6 :4-6 . Johns,B .(1999 )Response s ofchimpanzee s tohabituatio n andtouris m inth eKibal e forest, Uganda. Biological conservation 78:257-262 .

Kalema,G .(1998 )A noutbrea k of sarcoptic mange in free-ranging mountian gorillas (Gorilla gorillaberengei ) inBwind i Impenetrable National Park, Southwerster nUganda .AAZ V andAAW Vjoin t conference, pp. 438.

Krunkelsven, E.van ,Dupai n J., Elsacker L.va n & Verheyen,R . (1999)Habituatio n ofbonobo s (Panpaniscus) :first reactio n toth epresenc e ofobserver s andth e evolution ofrespons e over time.Foli a Primatol 70:365-368 .

Langholz,J . (1996)Ecotouris m impact onindependantl y ownednatur e reserves inLati n America and Sub-Saharan Africa. TheEcotouris m Equation: Meausuring theImpacts . YaleF&E S Bulletin

Lanjouw, A.(1991 )Tong oChimpanze e Conservation Project: anexperimen t in long-term conservation. Understanding Chimpanzees Symposium.Chicago .

Lanjouw, A.(1999 )Tourism e aux gorilles enAfriqu e centrale.Canope e 13:25-26 .

Leakey, R. (2000).Extinction spas t andpresent . Time 155(17) : 35.

Lindberg,K . (1991)Policie s for maximizing naturetourism' s ecological andeconomi c benefits. International Conservation Financing Project Working Paper. World ResourceInstitute : 37pp

Nature Conservancy (1995)Compatibl e Economic Development: Ecotourism: First edition.Th e Nature Conservancy.

Navrud, S.& Mungatana , E.D.(1994 )Environmenta l valuation indevelopin g countries : the recreational valueo fwildlif e viewing.Ecologica l Economics 11: 135-151

Macfie, L.(1996 )Cas erepor t on scabies infection inBwind i gorillas.Gorill ajourna l 13:19-20 .

Magliocca, F.(1999 ) 1998Updat e onth e gorillas ofth e OdzalaNationa l Park, Popular Republic ofCongo .Gorill a Conservation News,13 .

Magliocca, F.& Querouil , S.(1997 )Preliminair y report onth eus eo fth e Maya-Mayanort h saline (OdzalaNationa l Park,Congo )b ylowlan d gorillas.Gorill a ConservationNews , 11:5.

Magliocca, F.,Querouil , S.,an dGautie rHion ,A .(1999 )Populatio n Structure andGrou p Composition ofWester nLowlan d Gorillas inNorth-Wester nRepubli c ofCongo . American Journal ofPrimatolog y48:1-14 . 5 McNeilage,A .(1996 )Ecotouris m andmountai n gorillas inth eVirung aVolcanoes .V .Taylo r and N.Dunstone .Th eexploitatio n ofmamma lpopulation s London Chapman andHill , p: 334-344.

Mudakikwa, A.B.(1998 )A nindicato r ofhuma n impact: gastrointestinal parasites ofmountai n gorillas (Gorilla gorillaberengei ) from theVirung a volcanoesregion ,centra l Africa. AAZVan dAAW Vjoin t conference, p.:436-437 .

Olejniczak, C.(1996 )Updat eo nth eMbel iBa i gorilla study,Nouabale-Ndok iNationa l Park, Congo.Gorill a conservation news 10: 6-7.

Olejniczak, C.(1997 ) 1996 update onth eMbel iBa igorill a study,Nouabale-Ndok i national park,Congo .Gorill a conservation news 11:7-10 .

Plumier,J.F .(1992 )L'ecotourism edan sl aRegio nNor d del aRepubliqu e Centrafricaine. Tropicultura 10:163-165 .

PNUD(1995 )Rappor tmondia l surl edeveloppemen t humain 1995. Paris:Economic .

Remis,J.M . (1994)Feedin g Ecology andPositiona l Behavior ofwester n lowland gorillas (Gorillagorill a gorilla) inth e CentralAfrica n Republic.Ph.D .thesi s YaleUniversity , NewHaven ,C T

Remis,M.J . (1997)Rangin g andgroupin gpattern s ofa wester n lowland gorilla groupa tBa i Hokou, CentralAfrica n Republic.America nJourna l ofPrimatology ,43 : 111-133.

Shackley,M .(1995 )Th efutur e ofgorill atouris m inRwanda .Journa l of Sustainable Tourism.3 : 61-72.

Sholley,C.R . (1989)Mountai n gorillaupdate .Ory x 23:57-58 .

Spergel,B ,Wilkie ,D .S .& Blom ,A .(i nprep. )Prospect s for sustainable financing ofprotecte d areas inth e CongoFores t Regionthroug huse r fees.

Telesis (1991)Sustainbl e economic development options for theDzanga-Sangh a Reserve Central African Republic,Telesi sUSA ,Inc .

Telesis (1993)Supplementar y study ofth e sustainable economic development options for the Dzanga-Sangha Reserve Central African Republic,Telesi sUSA ,Inc .

Tutin, C.E.G.& Abernethy , K.A. (1997) Station d'Etudede sGorille s etChimpanzes , Reserved e laLope ,Gabon . Gorilla Conservation News 11. Tutin,C.E.G., Abemethy, K.A. & Fontaine, F. (1996) Station d'Etude des Gorilles et Chimpanzes, Reserve del aLope ,Gabo n - 1995.Gorill a Conservation News 11: 4-5.

Tutin, C.E.G. &Fernandez , M. (1991)Response s ofwil d chimpanzees and gorillas toth e arrival of primatologists: behaviour observed during habituation. In: Box, H.O. (ed.) Primate responsest oenvironmenta l change.Chapma n &Hall ,Ne wYork : 187-196.

Tobias, D. & Mendelsohn, R. (1991) Valuing ecotourism in a tropical rain-forest reserve. Ambio. 20:91-93.

UNDP/WTO (1998) Plan directeur pour le developpement du tourisme, Republique Centrafricaine, volune 1: diagnostics et orientations. Madrid: United Nations Development Program &Worl dTouris m Organization

Wallis,J .& Lee,D.R .(i nprep. )Primat econservation :th epreventio no fdiseas etransmission . 27 p.

Wells, M.P. (1996) Economic Perspectives on Nature Tourism, Conservation and Development. Environment DepartmentPapers ,Environmenta l Economics Series,5 WorldBank ,5 4p .

Wilkie,D.S .& Carpenter ,J.F .(i nprep. )Th eunder-financin g ofprotecte darea si nth eCong oBasin : soman ypark san ds olittl ewillingness-to-pay . BiologicalConservatio n (inreview ) Chapter2 Statuso fth eprotecte d areasan dgazette dforest s ofth eCentra lAfrica n Republic

Allard Blom1,2'4,Jea nYamindou 3 &Herber t H.T.Prins 1

1 Department of Terrestrial Ecology and Nature Conservation, Wageningen University, Bornsesteeg 69, 6708 PD Wageningen, The Netherlands 2 Department of Anthropology, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook NY 11794, USA 3 World Widlife Fund, B.P. 1053 Bangui, Central African Republic 4 Corresponding address: Zuivelweg 5B, 7255 XA, Hengelo (Gld), The Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected] Summary

Although the Central African Republic (CAR)i sranke d amongth e least developed countries inth eworld , itha smad e animpressiv e commitment tobiodiversit y conservation.A total of 15 protected areas covering about 10.9% o fth e country havebee n gazetted.A n additional 1.0 %ha sbee n setapar t asgazette d forests, mainly for sustainable production of forest resources. Howeveri nman ypart so fCentra lAfric a protected areas onlyexis t onpaper . Thisstud y critically examined the statuso fth eprotecte d areas andgazette d forest inth e Central African Republic inth e lighto fthei rpotentia l for long-termprotectio n ofbiodiversity . First ofal lth e protected areasyste m doesno t atpresen tprotec ta representativ e sample ofth eecoregion s ofth e CAR. Evenmor eimportan t isth e fact that only 32% o fth eprotecte d areasan donl y2 o fth e4 7 gazetted forests are adequately managed. In allprotecte d areas law-enforcement to stopth e rampantpoachin g isinadequate , andpoachin g posesth e largestthrea tt obiodiversit y conservation. Facedwit hthi sthrea tt oth e survival ofit sprotecte d area system,th e Government mustmak e astron g commitment to law-enforcement tobrin gpoachin g under control. Giventh emeage rfinancial resource s ofth ecountr y andth e dimeconomi cprospect s iti s cleartha t theCA Rwil lnee dbot h financial aswel l astechnica l assistance to dealwit hprotecte d areamanagement .Experience shav e showntha t such intervention canmak ea difference , but only ifth e Government makesth enecessar y commitment.

Introduction

TheCentra l African Republic,a sth enam e indicates,i slocate d inth ehear t of Africa. Landlocked andwithou tmountain s it still ison eo fth emos t diverse countries onth e continent, because of itsclimati c range from thedr ydeser tnort ht oth ewe trainfores t inth e south. Witha landare a ofabou t 623,000km2an da populatio no fles stha n4 millio nth ecountr yha sa lo w population density.Furthermor ethi spopulatio ni slargel yconcentrate d inth ecapita l Banguian dth e west(Nan aMamber e- MambereKadei) ,center-nort h ()an dcenter-eas t() ,leavin g theremainde ro fth ecountr yalmos tempt yo fhuma nhabitation .Thes efactor s combinedcreat e a situationwhic hcoul dpotentiall yb ever ybeneficia l forth elong-ter mconservatio n ofth eenormou s biodiversityo fth eCentra lAfrica n Republicthroug h asyste mo fwell-manage dprotecte darea san d gazetted forests. Indeedth eCentra lAfrica n Republic(CAR )ha sa nimpressiv enumbe ro fsuc hprotecte dan d gazettedarea scoverin ga larg epar to fth ecountry .O npape rth esituatio nlook srathe rpromising , howeverthi simpressio ni sdeceiving .Man yo fth eprotecte darea sonl yexis to npaper , often referred toa ss ocalle d"pape rparks" .Howeve rn ocomplet epictur eexist so fth epresen tsituatio no f manyo fth earea si nCAR .T omitigat ethi ssituatio n WorldWildlif e Fund(WWF )initiate dthi s studya spar to fa large rregiona l studycarrie dou ti nth eframewor k ofth eCentra lAfrica n Regional program forth eEnvironmen t (CARPE)an dth eWorl dBan k- WWFAlliance . Byusin g cleardefinition s anda standar dmetho d for evaluating itwil lb epossibl et o assessth edevelopmen t ofth eprotecte d area system overtim ean dals ocompar e efforts madei n different countries.Th eproble m sofa r hasbee ntha tonl yth etota lare agazette dha sbee ntake n intoconsideration , butn oattempt shav ebee nmad et oqualif y these areas.Thi sca npresen ta distorted impression ofconservatio n inth eregion . Wehop e thatthi s studywil lprovid efirst o fal la nupdat edatabas e ofexistin g protected areas andgazette d forest ofth e CAR,a sunfortunatel y thepresen t databases ofsuc h organizations asWorl d Conservation Monitoring Center (WCMC),UNE Pan dIUC Nar e incomplete oreve nnon-existin g (e.g.WCMC , 1994). Secondly, itwil l provide abaselin e againstwhic h future conservation initiatives canb e measured. Itals owil l provide anoutlin e ofa methodolog y which couldb eexpande d tocove rth e entire Guinean-Congolian Forest Region. Thirdly,a nupdate d overview ofth e status ofbiodiversit y protection the CARwil l provide ane w stimulus inth eongoin g discussion onprioritizatio n andeffectiv e conservation of biodiversity inth e Guinean-Congolian Forest Region (Blom,e t al.i nprep.) .

TheCentra l African Republic:backgroun d

TheCA Ri samon gth e least developed countries inth eworld . Itrank s 149amon g 174 countrieso nth eUND PIndicato r ofHuma nDevelopmen t (IHD),wit ha lif e expectancy ofonl y 49.4years ,a nadul t literacyrat eo f 53.9%an da GN Ppe r inhabitant ofonl y41 0US $i n 1992 (UNDP, 1995).Th esam erepor testimate d thepopulatio n ofCA Ra t3. 1 millioni n 1992,wit ha n expected annual increase of2. 4 %,expectin g toreac h 3.7 million peopleb yth eyea r2000 . Estimates ofth e sizeo fth e Central African Republic vary slightly from sourcet o source (Boulvert, 1983,Carroll , 1992,Fay , 1997,UNDP , 1995,Gree n &Paine , 1997,IUC N 1992),bu t average atabou t 623,000km 2.Includin g orexcludin g rivers andlake sma yaccoun t for someo f thesedifferences . Inan y event itdoe s illustratetha t anyfigure s for CARhav et ob etake nwit h somecaution , asfe w accurate dataexist .Nevertheles s theeconomi c situationha sonl y deteriorated further inrecen t years,du et o severepolitica l disturbances combined with violence andlooting . Sooveral l oneca n conclude that theCentra l African Republic ison eo fth e least developed andpopulate d countries inth eworld . Theecosystem s of theCA R

Thealtitud evarie sfrom 32 5m i nth evalle yo fth eOubangu it o 1410m a tMoun tNgaoui , onth eborde rwit hCameroo n (Boulvert, 1983).Th ecountr yoveral l showslittl erelie fan di salmos t entirely situatedbelo w 1000meters .Tw othird so fth ecountr yform spar to fth eCong oBasi n drainage system,th eremainin glargel ygoin gt oth eTchadia n system(Boulvert , 1983).Mos to fth e reliefi srelate dt oth eriver so fthes edrainag esystems . TheCentra lAfrica n Republicha s4 mai nclimat ezone s(Boulvert , 1983;Carroll , 1997). The vegetationzone so fth eCA Rar estrongl ycorrelate dwit hthes eclimat ezone s(Boulvert , 1986). Fromnort ht osout hth efollowin g canb edistinguis h (adaptedfro m Boulvert, 1986 andCarroll , 1997)(Figur e1) : 1. Saheliansavanna: consistso fope nsavanna s 2. Sudaniansavanna: vastgrassland swit hsmal lgroup so ftree s 3. Congolianforest-savanna mosaic: includeswoode dsavann aan ddr ydecidiou s forest 4. Congoliandense forest: from deciduous forest throughtransitio n forest toevergree n forest.

Thesevegetatio nzone scorrespon d fairly wellwit hth eecoregion sdescribe db yUnderwood , etal .(1998) .Thes eauthor sdistinguis h from northt osout hth eSahelia nAcaci a Savanna,th eEas t Sudanian Savannaan dth eNorther nCongolia nForest-Savann aMosaic . Thedens efores t zonethe y spliti ntwo :th eNorthwester n CongolianLowlan dForest san dth eNortheaster n CongolianLowlan d Forests.

10 Figure 1 Protected areas ofth e CentralAfrica n Republicwit hvegetatio n zones

Protected areas of the Central African Republlic with vegetation zones

Sahelian savanna

/^/Vegetation zones of the CAR Protected areas of the CAR gg>}01: VassakoBolo Bffli 02: Andre felix ^B 03: - Evv| 04: Dzanga-Ndoki - Ndoki sector pppl 05: Dzanga-Ndoki • Dzanga sector Ejgg 06: Manovo--St.Ftoris PBB 07: Avakaba [gg] 08; Aouk-Aoukale [HH 09: Grinbuigui-Bamingui p§ 10: -Bamingui SB 11:Nana-Bary a E5S3 12: Ouandja- WPi 13: Yata-Ngaya ^^ 14: Zemongo gggj15: Dzanga-Sangha ^H 16: Basse | |Internationa l borders

W

400 800 Kilometers

Methods

This studywa scarrie d outb yusin gth e existing datafrom differen t sources sucha sCA R Government records andlaws ,Worl d Conservation Monitoring Center,IUCN ,UNESCO ,UND P andWWF . These datawere ,wheneve rpossible , corroborated andcombine dwit h ourow n experiences,Governmen t sources andinterview swit hpeopl e familiar withth edifferen t regions ofth ecountry . Considerably moredat awer e available onth eprotecte d areastha n onth e gazetted forests. Forth eprotecte d areasw emad e extensiveus eo fth eexistin gprotecte d areadatabas ea t WCMC such asth e UnitedNation s list ofprotecte d areas(IUCN , 1998) Weuse dth e following definition ofa protecte dare aa sadopte db yIUC N(1994) :

11 An area of land and/or sea especially dedicated to theprotection and maintenance of biological diversity, and of natural and associated cultural resources, and managed through legal or other effective means.

In the case ofth e CAR this describes an ideal rather than an actual situation, because many ofth e protected areas are certainly not managed. The following definition for gazetted forest was adopted:

An area of land especially dedicated to thesustainable production offorestry products and/orprotection ofsuch resources on which thisproduction isbased.

Inpractic e these are areas which have been temporarily or permanently withheld from commercial logging, for variousreason s such asprotectio n ofresources , local use of forest products and research or reforestation. It is important to note the clear distinction between protected areas whose main focus are biodiversity protection and maintenance, and gazetted forests, which are reserves of forest products. Even though their stated purpose of sustainable use brings them close to the definition of category VI of IUCN (1994),the y differ in some essential aspects. These gazetted areas are often no longer predominantly unmodified natural systems and rarely are they indeed managed for sustainable use. In this study they have not been considered asprotecte d areas aspe r above definition and thus fall into the category unassigned (UA) of IUCN (1994). Although they do not aim to protect biodiversity, in some cases these gazetted forests have played an important role in biodiversity protection, both directly by maintaining forest cover as well as often being the precursor for protected areas. For that reason they are included inthi s study. We used the following categories, as outlined in Table 1,o f the IUCN categories of protected areas for defining the types ofprotecte d areas present in the CAR.

Table 1:IUC N categories ofprotecte d areas (IUCN, 1994)

Category Description Ia Strict Nature Reserve: protected area managed mainly for science lb Wilderness Area:protecte d areamanage d mainly for wilderness protection II National Park: protected area managed mainly for ecosystem protection and recreation III Natural Monument: protected area managed mainly for conservation of specific natural features IV Habitat/Species Management Area: protected area managed mainly for conservation through management intervention V Protected Landscape/Seascape: protected area managed mainly for landscape/seascape conservation and recreation VI Managed Resource Protected Area: protected area managed mainly for the sustainable use ofnatura l resources

In table 2 we give the corresponding CAR categories that are inus e to define protected areas.

12 Table2 : CentralAfrica n Republic categorieso fprotecte darea san dthei requivalen tIUC N categories

CAR category Description IUCN equivalent RI Reserve Integrale la PN Pare National II PP Pare Presidentiel IV RF Reserve deFaun e IV RS Reserve Speciale VI RB Reserve deBiospher e VI

TheCentra l African Republic hasmad e animportan t effort inth e field ofconservatio n andha sove rth eyear sgazette d 15protecte d areas (Table 3& Anne x 1).Al lo fthes e still existo n paper, although somehav egon ethroug hnam e changes,upgrade s orextensions . Fora nhistorica l overview werefe r to IUCN (1992).Th etota l areaprotecte d is6,818,50 0ha ,whic h represents 10.9% o fth enationa l territory.

Table 3: Protected areas ofth eCentra lAfrica n Republic

Name IUCNa CAR" Year Ecoregion0 Location Size Gazetted (in ha)

Vassako-Bolo Ia RI 1960 41 08°06'N; 19°47'E 86000 Andre Felix II PN 1960 41 09°29'N; 23°18'E 170000 Bamingui-Bangoran II PN 1933 41 08°35'N; 19°43'E 1070000 Dzanga-Ndoki (Ndoki II PN 1990 14 02°27'N; 16°15'E 72500 sector) Dzanga-Ndoki (Dzanga II PN 1990 14 02°57'N; 16°22'E 49500 sector) Manova Gounda-St Floris II PN 1933 41 (WSnSf^l^l'E 1740000 Avakaba IV PP 1980 41 08°40'N; 20°40'E 250000 Aouk-Aoukale IV RF 1939 39/41 09°52'N; 21°25'E 330000 Gribingui-Bamingui IV RF 1940 41 07°41'N; 19°17'E 450000 Koukourou-Bamingui IV RF 1940 41 07°24'N; 19°57'E 110000 Nana-Barya IV RF 1960 41 07°40'N; 17°29'E 230000 Ouandjia-Vakag a IV RF 1925 41 09o02'N;22o18'E 480000 Yata-Ngaya IV RF 1960 41 O^lSTvf; 23°25'E 420000 Zemongo IV RF 1925 44 06°54'N; 26°04'E 1010000 Dzanga-Sangha VI RS 1990 14 02°53'N; 16°13'E 335900 Basse Lobaye VI RB 1977 14 03°40'N; 17°50'E 14600

Total 6818500

13 Updatedan dcorrecte d from IUCN, 1998with : a IUCN: IUCNcategorie so fprotecte d areas asi nTabl e 2(IUCN , 1994) b CAR: CARcategorie so fprotecte d areasa si nTabl e3 c Ecoregions,wit h 14=Northwestern Congolian Lowland Forest; 39=Sahelian Acacia Savanna41=Eas t Sudanian Savanna;44=Norther n Congolian Forest-Savanna Mosaic (Underwood, et.al. , 1998)

TheUNESC OMa nan dBiospher e Reserve Directory (UNESCO,2000 ) liststh eBasse - Lobaye Forest andth eBamingui-Bangora nConservatio n Area asdesignate d areas,th e former since 1977an dth e latter since 1979.Bot hdesignation s include areasoutsid e theactua l protected area, following the MABmodel .I npractic ethes e designations have contributed little tothei r actual functioning, except for abrie f studyo fagricultura l practices around Basse-Lobayeunde r theMA BYoun g Scientist Awardprogra m (Mborohoul, 1993) TheManavo-Gounda-St.Flori s National Parkwa s inscribed onth e listo fWorl d Heritage Sitesi n 1988(Worl d Heritage Committee, 1988;UNESCO , 1999).Th esit ewa sadde d toth e list ofWorl d Heritage indange r in 1997(Worl d Heritage Committee, 1998)followin g reportso f illegal grazing andpoaching .Th eWorl d Heritage Committee (1999)confirme d this listingi n 1998wit ha stron g request for thepreparatio n ofa detaile d stateo fconservatio n report anda rehabilitation action plan. Submission ofth eDzanga-Ndok i National Park asa Worl d Heritage Sitei sbein g considered. Inorde rt oobtai na nindicatio no fth econservatio npotentia lo fthes eprotecte darea sw e usedsevera lfactor s ina noveral lassessmen to fth epresen tstatu so fth eprotecte dareas .Al lth e assessmentswer ebase do nth eauthor sow nimpressions ,whic hwer everifie d byMinistr y staff (Doungoube,pers .comm.) .Th edat awer ecomparabl ewit h information obtaineddurin g informal interviewswit hpeopl efamilia r withth eareas .W eshoul dad dtha tmos tarea sha dbee nvisite db y theauthor si nth elas t5 years,bu tsom ewer eno t(Nana-Barya ,Zemongo ,Andre-Feli x andYata - Ngaya).Th efollowin g factors wereassesse d andthe nuse dt oarriv ea ta noveral lconservatio n potential:

1. Significance:

Biodiversity significance atth enationa llevel ,takin gint oconsideratio noveral l representation. Significance wasranked : l=high(onl yprotecte dare ao rcomple x invegetatio nzon e oressentia l corearea) ,2=moderat e(a tleas ton eothe rprotecte dare ai nvegetatio nzone) ,3=lo w(a t leasttw oothe rprotecte d areai nvegetatio nzone) ,4=ver ylo wt onon e(a tleas ttw oothe rprotecte d areai nvegetatio nzone) .

2. Threat:

Threatswer eassesse db ylookin ga tth etype so fpotentiall ythreatenin g activitiestha tar e takingplac ei nthes eareas .The yca nb esummarize da sfollows : 1. Logging: presenceo rabsenc eo floggin gactivities ,whic hwa sranke d (1=none , 2=low, 3=moderate,4=high) .W edefine d thetyp eo floggin ga straditiona l (woodsaw ni nfield), o r commercial(log stransporte dt omill so rexported) .W eals olooke da tth ewa yth eloggin gwa s regulated(certified , supervised orunregulated )t oasses sth eoveral lranking . 14 2. Mining: presenceo rabsenc eo fminin gactivities ,whic hwa sranke d(l=none ,2=low , 3=moderate, 4=high). 3. Hunting: presenceo rabsenc eo fhuntin gactivities ,whic hwa sranke d(l=none ,2=low , 3=moderate, 4=high). 4. Grazing: presenceo rabsenc eo fcattl egrazin gactivities ,whic hwa sranke d(l=none ,2=low , 3=moderate, 4=high). 5. Farming: presenceo rabsenc eo ffarmin g activities,whic hwa sranke d (l=none,2=low , 3=moderate, 4=high). 6. Villages: presenceo rabsenc eo fvillages ,whic hwa sranke d (l=none,2=low ,3=moderate , 4=high). 7. Roads: presenceo rabsenc eo froad sand/o rpaths ,whic hwa sranke d (l=none,2=fe w (onlyfoo t paths),3=moderat e(loggin groad so rcommercial) , 4=many).

Thenfo reac hprotecte dare ath eto pactivitie s seena sth emai nsourc eo fthrea to r disturbancewer enote dan da noveral lthrea tassessmen twa smad eb ymultiplyin gthes emai n sourcesnumber sb ytw obefor e addingal lth eactivitie stogethe ran daveragin gth eresult .Thi sgive s afigur e between 1 and4 .A scor eo f 1 representsa nare awit hn othreatenin g ordisturbin gactivitie s presentan d4 indicate s anare abein goverru nb yactivitie sincompatibl ewit hprotecte dare a management. Wedi dtak eint oconsideratio nth estate dobjectiv e ofth eprotecte darea .I ffo rexampl e sustainableloggin gi sallowe di na reserv ean dsuc hloggin gwa sindee dcarrie dou ti na sustainabl e waythe nthi swoul dno tb enote da sa threatenin g ordisturbin gactivity .Als oth esiz efacto rwa s takenint oconsideration , asa loca ldisturbance ,eve na seriou sone ,ca nb enegligibl ei nrelatio nt o theoveral l sizeo fth eprotecte darea .I nth eCA Rthi si softe n thecas ewit hagriculture .

3. Integrity:

Integrityi sa snapsho t assessmento fth epresen t statuso fth eprotecte dare atakin gint o consideration destruction,degradatio nan dfragmentation . Integritywa sranke da sfollows : l=high (lesstha n5 %o fth eare ai sdestroye do rseverel ydegrade dand/o rles stha n 10 %i smoderatel y degradedo rfragmented) , 2=medium (lesstha n 10 %o fth eare ai sdestroye do rseverel ydegrade d and/orles stha n2 5% i smoderatel y degradedo rfragmented) , 3=low(les stha n2 5% o fth eare ai s destroyedo rseverel ydegrade dand/o rles stha n5 0% i smoderatel ydegrade do r fragmented), 4=verylo w(mor etha n2 5% ofth eare ai sdestroye do rseverel ydegrade dand/o rmor etha n5 0% is moderately degradedo r fragmented).

4. Management:

Thepresen tstatu so fth emanagemen to fth eprotecte dare awa sassesse di nth e following way: 1. Type: typeo fmanagemen twa sdescribe da s l=Government plusexterna lpartner ,2 = Governmentalone ,3=none . 2. Guards: presenceo rabsenc eo fla wenforcemen t staff, whichwa sranke d(l=hig h (well staffed), 2=moderate ,3=lo w(inadequatel ystaffed) , 4=none) .

15 3. Support: levelo ffinancial suppor t(l=hig h (wellfinanced), 2=moderate ,3=lo w(inadequatel y funded),4=none) . 4. Participation: levelo floca l(village )participatio n (l=high (localpeopl einvolve di nal laspects) , 2=moderate(involve di nsom eactivitie san dconsulte do nothers) ,3=lo w(n oactiv e participation, someconsultation) , 4=none).

Thelas tthre efactor s wereal lconsidere dequall y importantan dwer eaverage dt ogiv ea n overall assessmento fth epresen tmanagement ,wit h4 indicatin gn omanagemen ta tpresen tan d1 indicatingtha tmanagemen t isexcellent .Typ eo fmanagemen twa sdirectl y linkedt oleve lo f financial supportan dwa sno tfurthe r takenint oconsideration . Weuse dPearso ncorrelatio n coefficient ofsignificanc e toexamin ei fcertai nassessmen tvariable sco-varie do rwer e interdependent (SPPS,1997) . Toreac ha noveral lassessmen to fth epresen t statuso fth eprotecte darea san dthei r conservationpotential ,w eadde dbiodiversit y significance, integrity,managemen tan dthrea t togetheran dfinall y averagedthi snumber .W econsidere dtha tth eare aha dth efollowin g potential basedo nthei rfina l score,whic hwa sth emaximu mrankin go f4 minu sth eaverag enumber ,i nth e following matter: l=none,2=low ,3=moderate ,4=high .Th ehighe rth enumbe rth emor e conservationpotential .Thi sresul twa suse dt oran kth eprotecte darea si nprioritie san d opportunitiesfo rconservatio n inth eCAR .

Unfortunately, duet oa lac ko feve nth emos tbasi cdata ,i twa sno tpossibl et orepea tth e sameexercis efo rth egazette dforest s inth eCAR .I nmos tcase sw ewer eabl et oestablis hsiz ean d yearo fgazettin gan di nsom ecase si fan yactiv emanagemen twa simplemented .

Statuso fprotecte d areasi nCA R

Thepresen tthreat s andproblem s concerning disturbances facing theprotecte dare a network aresummarize d inTabl e4 .Thi stabl eprovide s furthermore information onthei r management, significance andintegrity . Thefina l column assessth eoveral lpotentia l for conservation ofbiodiversit y inth emi d (10years )t o long-term (50years) .A ful l breakdowno f thedetail s isprovide d inAnne x 1.

16 Table 4:Assessmen t ofth epresen t status andconservatio n potential ofth eprotecte d areas ofth eCentra lAfrica n Republic,ranke db ypotentia l (with4 = highest , 1 =lowest )

Name Significance Threat Integrity Management Potential

Dzanga-Ndoki (Ndoki sector) 1 1.5 1 2 2.6 Dzanga-Ndoki (Dzanga sector) 1 1.8 1 1.7 2.6 Manova Gounda-St Floris 1 2.6 3 2 1.9 Dzanga-Sangha 1 2.4 2 2 1.9 Aouk-Aoukale 3 2.3 3 2.7 1.8 Vassako-Bolo 2 2.1 3 2.7 1.6 Bamingui-Bangoran 2 2.3 3 2.7 1.5 Ouandjia -Vakag a 3 2.3 3 2.7 1.3 Gribingui-Bamingui 3 2.3 3 2.7 1 Koukourou-Bamingui 3 2.4 3 2.7 1 Nana-Barya 3 1.9 3 4 1 Basse Lobaye 4 2.6 3 3.7 0.9 Andre Felix 3 2.3 4 3.7 0.8 Avakaba 3 2.3 3 3.7 0.8 Zemongo 3 2.3 4 4 0.7 Yata-Ngaya 4 2.3 4 4 0.5

Average 2.5 2.2 2.9 2.9 1.4

With:Threat=averag ethrea tassessment ;Management=averag e management assessment; Significance=relative significance forbiodiversit yconservation ;Integrity=assessmen to fth epresen t statuso fth eprotecte dare atakin gint oconsideratio ndestruction ,degradatio nan d fragmentation; Potential=conservationpotential .(Se emethod ssectio nfo r scoringtechnique suse di nthi s assessment)

Theaverag emanagemen t assessment ispositivel y correlated withbot hth erelativ e significance andth e integrity assessment (Pearson correlation two-tailed, resp.0.83 8an d0.768 , N= 16,p<0.01) ,bu t notwit hth e averagethrea t assessment (Pearson correlation two-tailed, 0.240,N=16,NS).

Statuso fgazette dforest s inth eCA R

Asmentioned ,virtuall yn orecen tdat awer eavailabl eo nth estatu so fth egazette d forests priort othi spaper .Onl yDami o(1997 )an dNamsene i(1999 )giv esom edat ao nth epresen tsituatio n concerningthes eforests .A sfa ra scoul db eassesse dfro m Governmentan dothe rsource sa tota lo f 47area shav ebee ngazette dan dar estil lrecognize do npaper .Al lwer eestablishe d before independence.Th etota lare adeclare da sgazette dfores t is634,94 7h ao r 1.0 % ofth enationa l territory.I nrecen tyear sth enationa lForestr y andTouris mDevelopmen t Fund(FDFT) ,whic hwa s 17 createdunde rWorl dBan ksponsorshi p in 1993 hasbee nactiv ei nsom eo fth eexistin ggazette d forests andha sestablishe d severalne wreforestatio n areas.Howeve rth eGovernmen tha ss ofa r officially gazettednon eo fthes ene wareas . Only 13o fth e gazetted forests ora tota l of70,57 8ha , seemt ohav e anyactiv e management (Namsenie, 1999;Governmen t sources andpers .obs.) ,representin g only 11% of thegazette d forests. Virtually noinformatio n isavailabl e onth epresen t status ofth eothe r forests orthei rmanagement . Giventh eoveral l situation inth e country iti s safe toassum etha t themajorit y isno tmanage d atall .Mos to fth egazette d forests havebee nmanage dthroug hth e FDFTa sreforestatio n plantations (Damio, 1997,Namsenei , 1999).Notabl e exceptions areth e hillsbehin d thecapita lcalle d "Collines deBangui "o r"Gbazoubangui" , which duet oimpressiv e erosion havebecom e amajo r discussionpoin t inth e capital.Thi sha sle dt oth egazettin g ofthi s areaa sa specia l forest reserve in 1998an da nupgrad e inth e management, with sometechnica l assistance from GTZ.Furthermor e theNgott o forest hasha d special attention duet obein gpar t ofth e European Union sponsored project on sustainable forestry andconservatio n(ECOFAC ) baseda tth evillag e ofNgott o itself.Thi sprojec t hasforge d asuccessfu l collaboration witha logging company injointl y developing amanagemen t plan forth eregion ,whic h isno wbein g implemented. This includes acor e area for biodiversity conservation purposes.

Discussion

The 1997Unite dNation s listo fprotecte d areas inth e CARmention s 14 protectedareas , with atota l areao f5,445,60 0h a(IUCN , 1998).Thi slis t isfairl y accurate.I nfac t onlyon e protected areaha sbee n omitted:th e Basse-Lobaye Reserveo f 14,600ha .However , thislis tdoe s notprovid e any further information othertha n category,location , sizean dyea ro f establishment. Withwel l over 10% o fth ecountr y designated asprotecte d areas,th e Central African Republic hasmad e anexceptiona l commitment tobiodiversit y conservation. Giventh e fact that not allth e areaspredat e independence,clearl y demonstrates acontinuin g commitment. This commitment isreal ,als oi neconomi c terms.Eve nthoug h manyo fthes e areasar eo nmargina l lands,some ,lik eth eDzanga-Ndok i National Park, couldhav e generated important revenue from loggingand/o r safari hunting. Giventh e fact thatmos t oftha tpopulatio n isconcentrate d inth ecitie s inth e southan d west ofth e country, leavingth enort h andeas t almost completelybarre n ofhuma npopulation , onewoul d haveexpecte dtha t thiswoul dhav eresulte d inlarg e untouched wilderness areas.Thi s fact combined withth eextensiv e system ofprotecte d areas seemt oprovid e analmos t perfect situation for effective biodiversity conservation. Althoughthi s isth e situation onpaper ,th erealit y isdifferent . Firsto fal lth e systemdoe s notprotec t arepresentativ e sampleo fth evegetatio n zoneso recoregion s ofth eCAR . Bothth e SahelianAcaci a Savanna (except for apar t ofth eAouk-Aoukal eReserve ) aswel la s Northeastern Congolian Lowland Forest areno t atal lrepresente d inth eprotecte d area systemo f theCAR . Moreimportan t isth epresen t statuso fth eprotecte d areas.Fro mTabl e4 w eca n seetha t on averageth emanagemen t ofth eprotecte d area system isinadequate .I nfac t 3protecte d areas (Zemongo,Yata-Ngay a andNana-Barya ) haven omanagemen t atall ,representin g 24% o fth e areaunde rprotectio n bylaw .A nadditiona l 3protecte d areas(Andre-Felix , Avakaba andBasse - Lobaye) or6 %hav e onlysuperficia l management and6 othe rarea s (37%o fare aunde r 18 protection) aremanage d inadequately. Thisleave s onlyth eDzanga-Sangh a protectedare a complex andth eManovo-Gounda-St.Floris . Even inthes e moderately wellmanage darea s problems remain. Duet oth e lack ofmanagemen t andmos t specifically law-enforcement, poachershav e overrun mosto fth eprotecte d areas(e.g .Moussa , 1992).Th emai nreaso n topu tth eManovo - Gounda-St.Floris onth e list ofWorl dHeritag e inDange r listwa stha tpoachin g haddecimate d moretha n 80%o fth e Park's wildlife populations (UNESCO, 1999).Thes epoacher s arewel l organized andequipped . Theyoperat e ona professiona l basis andconcentrat e onbushmea ta s well asivory .I nth epas t they alsocollecte d rhinoceroshorn ,bu t theyhav e long since eliminated therhinocero s inCAR .I nth enort h andeas tth eproble m isespeciall y serious,resultin g inth e death of4 par kranger s in 1997i nMonovo-Gounda-St.Flori s anddisruptio n oftouris m tothi s park (WCMC, 1997).Her eth epar k rangers confront localpoacher s aswel l asregula r infiltration from Sudanan dChad . Asmos to fth e European Union financed "Projet deDeveloppmen t duRegio nNor d (PDRN)"effor t toprotec tth ediversit y ofth enorther n savannaswen t intothi spar k the situation inothe r areas iscertainl yworse .Recen t observations inth enort h andeas tb yth eauthors , conservation staff aswel l as safari hunters confirm thisoveral lpicture . Theauthor swer eunabl e tovisi tth e3 easter n mostarea s (Zemongo,Andre-Feli x andYata-Ngaya ) inrecen t yearsan d few othershave ,a sthi s areaha sbecom e dangerous fortravel .Howeve ra recen t river rafting expedition onth eChink oriver ,clos et oZemongo ,indicate d that littlewildlif e waslef t intha t area. GuntherKlem m(pers .com. )o fth eGT ZDzanga-Sangh a Project, whovisite d theare ai n 1997a swel l asth e safari hunters (Haut-Chinko Safaris, pers.com.) ,wh oha dt oabando nth e region duet ointens epoachin g confirmed this situation. AWW Ftea m surveyedth e forests ofBangassou ,sout hwes t ofZemongo ,i n 1995-96. Eventha t far from thenorth/easter n borderthe yfoun d evidence ofintens epoaching .A n estimated 1600elephant sremai n inthi sfores t (Kpanou etal , inprep.) .Th eBangasso u forest is atpresen t thesubjec t ofa ne wconservatio n initiative,whic h may leadt oth e establishment of CAR'sfirst protecte d areai nth eNortheaster n Congolian LowlandFores t ecoregion. Overallpoachin g isb yfa r themos timportan t threat inth e short andmediu mter mt oth e survival ofth e entireprotecte d area system inth eCAR . Inth e southth e situation issomewha t better, buteve nher epoacher s armedwit hautomati crifles , asu pnorth ,hav ebee n reported (Blom, 1999).Illega l grazing isals oa majo r problem in someo fth earea s inth enort h(e.g . WCMC,1997) . Manywoul d arguetha t thebiologica l significance isth emos t important determent for assigning priorities for protection andassessin g overallpotential .Howeve r evendoublin gth e scorefo r thisvalu e would notmak ea majo r difference inth e endresul t oftabl e4 .I nan yeven t the mainpoin t tob emad eher e isth epresen t statuso fprotecte d areas andho wtha t affects future potential for effective biodiversity protection.A sillustrate d intabl e 4onl y 3areas ,whic h together makeu pth e Dzanga-Sangha protected areacomplex , seemt ohav eescape d major degradation andfragmentation . Weconside r thatan yare awit ha noveral l scoreo f 1 orles so n thepotentia l scale wouldprobabl yb edifficul t orimpossibl e torestor e inth epresen t situation.I n effect weconside r such areas"pape rparks" ,especiall ybecaus e none ofthes e areashav ean y serious effort inmanagement . Onenationa l park (Andre-Felix) and7 reserve s fall inthi s category,representin g 39% o fth e areaofficiall y underprotection . Thusmor etha n onethir do f theprotecte d area ofth eCA Rar es ocalle d "paper parks",wit h little orn omanagement . 19 Ifn oactio n istake n inth enea r future it islikel ytha tw eca nad da nadditiona l national park (Bamingui-Bangoran)an d 1 reserve (Ouandjia-Vakaga) tothi slist ,whic h bothhav ea scor e ofles stha n 1.5. Thatwoul d leaveonl yth e strictnatur e reserve ofVassako-Bolo ,2 nationa l parks (Manovo-Gounda-St.Floris andDzanga-Ndoki) ,th efauna l reserve ofAouk-Aoukal ean d theDzanga-Sangh a specialreserve ,representin g nomor ethe n 38% o fth epresen tprotecte d area system,relativel y intact.Thes earea s areals obein gdegrade d atpresent ,bu t at areduce drate . Ouranalysi s showstha tther e isa positiv ecorrelatio n between theaverag e management assessment andth erelativ e significance ofth eprotecte d area, indicating that the Government has madeth emos to fit slimite dresource sb yconcentratin g management efforts inth emos t significant areas.Thes e areasals o showth ehighes t integrity inou r snapshot assessment. This could indicatetha t themanagemen t hasbee n effective anddoe smak e adifference . Nowwit h thisassessmen t available asa baseline ,futur e assessments canmak e anevaluatio n ofth e effectiveness ofmanagement . Little isknow n aboutth e status ofth e gazetted forests,bu t many ofthes eforest s arever y small,2 0ar e lessthe n 1,000 ha,an dman yar eplantation s (Namsenei, 1999)s oprobabl y contribute littlet ooveral l biodiversity conservation. Furthermore eventhoug h someo fthes e forests havebee n thesubjec t ofsom eoccasiona l interventions though thecountry' s forestry and tourism development fund (Damio, 1997,Namsenei , 1999), these interventions cameafte r many years ofneglec t andeve n nowthei r interventions remain irregular andth eoveral l impacti s questionable. Duet oth epolitica l andsecurit y situation inth eCAR , asurve y ofthes e forests to establish theirpresen t statusan dcontribution s tobiodiversit y conservation isno tpossibl ea t present. Thusoveral lw eca nconclud etha tonl y4. 2 %o fth eCentra lAfrica n Republic isi nrealit y under somefor m ofprotectio n for biodiversity conservation onth emi dt olon gterm .Th emai n threat for the survival ofth eremainin g protected area network islarge-scal e poaching, followed byuncontrolle d cattle grazing andlogging . What follows from thisanalysi s isa rathe r somberpictur e ofa situatio n that looksmor e promising onpaper . Rathertha nbein g exceptional this situation seemst opresen t therealitie so f conservation inth e CentralAfrica n region.Th e situation info r exampleth e Democratic Republic ofth e Congoi seve nwors ethe n theon edescribe d here for theCA R(Blom ,pers .obs.) . First andforemos t theresponsibilit y for finding solutions lieswit hth e Government. Although theCA RGovernmen t hasmad e someremarkabl e commitments to conservation, these have clearly been insufficient. Facedwit hth e survival ofth eprotecte d area systemth e Government hast omak e somehar d choices.S ofa r theGovernmen t hasbee nunwillin g topa y thepolitica l price for taking action againstpoaching . Twomai n reasons for this lacko factio n canb e identified. Thefirst reaso n iscorruptio n andhig h level involvement inth ehighl y profitable poaching schemes.A secon dreason , isth epopula r support atloca l village level for poaching activities.A sloca l villagers rarely derive anybenefit s from thewildlif e under protection, whichthe yconside r eitherfoo d orpests ,the yofte n seem eagert oparticipat ei n eradicating theirow n future life support. Somefairl y recent initiativesb yPDR N andth eDzanga-Sangh aprojec t (e.g.Blom , 1999) have showntha t when villagers areinvolve d inrevenu e sharingther e areopportunitie st o develop collaboration andreduc epoaching . However itremain seviden t from the analysistha t law enforcement atal llevel s isa prerequisit e for the survival ofth eprotecte d area system inth e CAR. 20 Giventh emeage r financial resources ofth ecountr y andth e dimeconomi c prospects iti s cleartha tth e CARwil l needbot h financial aswel l astechnica l assistance todea lwit hprotecte d areamanagement , eventhoug hth e country could probably contribute moreresource s (Wilkie& Carpenter, inprep.) -Experiences ,bot hpositiv e aswel l asnegative ,wit hPDRN ,ECOFAC - Ngotto andDzanga-Sangh a (e.g.Blom , 1999)hav e showntha t suchinterventio n canmak ea difference, but onlyi fth e Government makesth enecessar y commitment.

Acknowledgements

Wewoul d liket othan k theWorl dWildlif e Fund,Inc .an dth e different Government agencies for supporting thisresearch . Wear eparticularl y grateful toDavi d Wilkie,Joh nOates , Gustave Doungoube andNatash a Shah for theconstructiv e commentso nth emanuscript .

References Boulvert, Y., 1983.Cart epedologiqu e del aRepubliqu e Centrafricaine, a 1:1,000,000.Notic e explicative #100.ORSTOM ,Paris , 126 p.

Boulvert, Y., 1986.Republiqu e Centrafricaine. Cartephytogeographiqu e a 1:1,000,000. Notice explicative # 104.ORSTOM ,Paris , 131 p.

Blom,A. , 1999.Te nyear sDzanga-Sangh a Project: 1988- 1999.Worl d Wildlife Fund- CAR.

Blom,A. ,Kamde mToham ,A. , D'Amico, J.,O'Hara , D.,Abell ,R . &Olsen ,D. ,i nprep . Assessment ofbiologica l priorities for conservation inth eGuinean-Congolia n Forest Region.Worl d Wildlife Fund. Washington,DC .

Carroll,R.W . 1992.Centra lAfrica n Republic. In: Sayer,J.A. ,Harcourt , C.S.& Collins , N.M. (Eds.) Conservation Atlaso ftropica l forests: Africa. MacMillan Publishers,Ltd. ,Hants , UK.

Carroll,R.W . 1997.Feedin g ecology ofth ewester n lowland gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla)i n the Central African Republic.Dissertation , YaleUniversity .

Damio,T. , 1997.L eFond sd eDeveloppemen t Forestier etTouristique , Ministered e l'Environnement,de sEaux ,Forest , Chasses etPeches ,Bangui ,CAR ,27pp .

Fay,J.M. , 1997.Th eecology , social organization, populations,habita t andhistir y ofth ewester n lowland gorilla (gorilla gorilla gorilla Savanga andWyman , 1874).Dissertation , Washingon University.

Green, M.J.B.& Paine ,J. , 1997.Stat eo fth eworld' sprotecte d areasa tth een do fth etwentiet h century. Paperpresente d atIUC NWorl d Commission onProtecte d Areas Symposium on "Protected areas inth e20t hCentury :from island s tonetworks" .Albany ,Australia ,24 - 29thNovembe r 1997. 21 IUCN, 1992. Protected areas of world: a review of national systems. Volume 3: Afrotropical. Prepared by the World Conservation Monitoring Center (WCMC). IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. xxii+360pp.

IUCN, 1994. Guidelines for protected areas management categories. IUCN, Cambridge, UK and Gland, Switzerland

IUCN, 1998. 1997 United Nations list of protected areas. IUCN, Cambridge, UK and Gland, Switzerland

Kpanou, J-B., Otto, K., Mbea, E., Godobo, P. & Blom, A., in prep. Wildlife survey of the Forest, Central African Republic.

Mborohoul, J-B., 1993.L a Reserve de Biosphere de la Basse-Lobaye. UNESCO MAB, 96pp., figs., tabs.

MEFCPTE/Banque Mondial/Projet Dzanga-Sangha, 1995.Developpemen t touristique et conservation de ecosystemes. Table ronde 21-22 Mars 1995

Moussa, M., 1992. Le grand bracconage en Centrafrique. In K. Cleaver, M. Munasinghe, M. Dysan, N. Egli, A. Peuker, and F. Wencelius (eds.), Conservation of West and Central African rainforests. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, pp.: 182-188.

Namsenei, R., 1999. Les perimetres de reboisement et forets classees du Fonds de Developpement Forestier et Touristiques (FDFT). Ministere de l'Environnement, des Eaux, Forets, Chasses et Peches, Bangui, RCA. 17pp.

SPSS, 1997. SPSS Base 8.0, SPSS, Inc. Chicago.

Underwood, E., Itoua, I., Olson, D., Dinerstein, E., Loucks, C. & Wettengel, W., 1998. Terrestrial ecoregions of Africa. WWF-US Conservation Science Program, WWF-US, Washington.

UNDP, 1995. Rapport Mondial sur le Developpement Humain. Economica, Paris. X+251 pp.

UNESCO, 1999. World Heritage list in danger, www.unesco.org/whc/danglist.htm. site last updated: 30 November 1999

UNESCO, 2000. UNESCO MAB Biosphere Reserve Directory, www.unesco.org/mab/br/brdir, site last updated: 14/02/2000

WCMC, 1994 Biodiversity data sourcebook. World Conservation Press, Cambridge, UK

22 WCMC, 1997.Descriptio n ofNatura l World HeritageProperties . www.wcmc.org.uk/protected_areas/data/wh. Lastupdated : August 1997,Acces sdate :9 March2000 .

WorldHeritag e Committee,UNESCO , 1988.Repor to fth eWorl dHeritag e Committee. Convention concerning theprotectio n ofth eworl d cultural andnatura l heritage. Twelfth Session,Brasilia , 5-9 December 1988

WorldHeritag e Committee,UNESCO , 1998.Repor t ofth eWorl d Heritage Committee. Convention concerning theprotectio n ofth eworl dcultura l andnatura l heritage.Twenty - firstSession ,Naples ,Italy , 1-6 December 1997

World Heritage Committee, UNESCO, 1999.Repor t ofth e WorldHeritag e Committee. Convention concerning theprotectio n ofth eworl dcultura l andnatura l heritage Twenty- second Session,Koyoto ,Japan , 30November - 5Decembe r 1998

Wilkie,D.S .& Carpenter , J.F.,i nprep .Th eunder-financin g ofprotecte d areas inth eCong o Basin: soman ypark san d solittl ewillingness-to-pay .Biological Conservation (inreview )

23 o CO CO IT) CO CD a> 0 co T-1-T-« in s a o) •<* a. ^ o T^ c\i CM ^ 0 T^ ^ 0 0 ^ 0 ** c CO Tf CO T- T- 00 COCOCOCOCOCO'

CO -tf CO CM CM CO Tj-COCOCO'cococo DC c T3 CO CO CO CM CO "* COCOCOCOCM-5j-CO-«t-<3-CM to 03 o O co *i_ ac < T- T- CM i- T- CM T-T-T-CMT-CMT-T-CMCO cq 15 5 c T- i- i- CM 1- T- a> E O 03 - LL N tCO^T- T- Tj •^•^••^••^•COCOCOCM'-T- co 03 CD CO CD c CO -* CO CM CM CO COCOCOCOCOCOTl-Tj-CMTf CO X

0) CD T- T~ T- T~ CM T- CM o a> c o 2 T- T- T- T- CM 1- CM a. O _J a) CD .c "3 CO co CO •5 °> 03 *— 1 O ^-.03 CO C £ O) 03 Q o = J* -^^ 2 c o SS o o o o 3 O E « i? TO 9> X S X CO T3 •« T3 o o V CD c c CD 5 " §>co •» cb &§ CO < E feC03S3CC0™Ec0CO CD 03 S £-| =1 c£ | O>O'=OC03cDa}NC0 > z u.<<(D^zO>-NQai >< co QtoB5 < Field attributes Field Description Possible Values Source Name Name oftyp e Official names inuse . Log Presence/absence of logging 1=None activities 2=Low 3=moderate 4=High Mine Presence/absence of mining activities 1=None 2=Low 3=moderate 4=High Hunt Presence/absence of hunting in area 1=None 2=Low 3=Moderate 4=High Graz Presence/absence of grazing in area 1=None 2=Low 3=Moderate 4=High Farm Presence/absence offarmin g 1=None activities 2-Low 3=moderate 4=High Vil Presence/absence of villages 1=None 2-Low 3=moderate 4=High Road Presence/absence of roads in area 1-no(n o motorable roads) 2=few (Onlyfoo t paths) 3=moderate (Logging roads) 4=many (Logging,an dcommercia l roads) Main Main source of threat H=Hunting G=Grazing Threat Overall threat assessment 1=None 2-Low 3=moderate 4=High Type Type of management 1=Government plus external partner(s) 2=Government 3=None Guard Presence/absence of guards 1=Well Staffed 2=Moderately Staffed 3=lnadequately staffed 4=No staff Supp Level of external support 1=High 2=Moderate 3=Low 4=None Part Level of local (village) participation 1=high (local people involved inall aspects) 2=moderate (involved insom e activities and consulted on others) 3=low (no active participation, some

25 consultation) 4=none Manage Assessment of the present 1=None management 2-Low 3=moderate 4=High Sign Biodiversity significance 1=High 2=Moderate 3=Low 4=None Int Assessment ofth e present status 1=High 2=Moderate/Medium 3=Low 4=Very low Pot Conservation potential 1=None 2=Low 3=Moderate 4=High

26 Chapter3 Dzanga-Sangha context

Historyo fDzanga-Sangh a

Inth e 19thcentur ytriba lwar sle dt oseriou sdisruptio no flif e formos tinhabitant so f theDzanga-Sangh a region(Figur e 1).Man ypeopl ewer edisplaced ,enslave do rkilled . The presentdistributio no fethni cgroup swa sth eresul to fthes econtinuou swars .Nola ,th e regionalcapital ,wa sestablishe db yth eNgoundi ,onl yabou ta decad ebefor eth earriva lo f Brazza(Anacle tAmion ,pers .comm .i nKretsinge r & Zana, 1997). Howeveri tseem stha ti t wasFournea uwh owa sth efirs t Europeant oreac hDzanga-Sangh a (Extrait duJourna ld e Fourneau,9 Avri l 1891,COAM ,AE F4(Y)1 5i nKretsinge r& Zana, 1997). Apparentlyi n thatperio dth eBakong ofro m Congoha dalread ystarte da livel ytrad ei nivory ,anima lskin s andothe rproduct salon gth eriver wit hthei rdugou tcanoes .Europea ncompanie swer e grantedtradin gconcession s inth enewl y"discovered "territorie s (Coquery-Vidrovitch, 1972;Giles-Vernick ,1996) . Thecommercia ldevelopmen t ofth eSangh ariver b yth eFrenc hwa srapi dan db y 1892a tradin gpos twa salread yestablishe di nBayanga .Th efamou sFrenc hautho rAndr e Gidei nhi sboo k "Voyagea uCongo "(Travel si nth eCongo )o f 1927give sa goo d impressionabou tth eofte n brutalexploitatio no fth eloca ltribe sb ythi sconcessio nsystem . Butivor ywa sno tth eonl ycommercia linteres to fthes ecompanie s(Coquery - Vidrovitch, 1972).B yth esecon ddecad eo fth e20t hcentury ,ivor ywa sreplace db yrubbe r asth eprincipa lcommercia lproduc to fth eregion .Rubbe rwa scollecte di nth efores tb y localvillager seithe rt ob esol do rusuall yt opa ythei rtaxes . InJul y 1928 arevol t startedi nth eOubangui-Char i region,bu twa spu tdow n swiftly. Accordingt oth ehistoria nKalc k(1992 )th erevol twa scause db yth eabuse so f someo fth estaf f ofth econcessio ncompanie san dth erecruitmen t forth erailwa ybetwee n Brazzavillean dPoin tNoire .Th econstructio n ofth erailwa yfacilitate d tradeal lalon gth e Congo,includin gth eSangha .However ,it stol lo nhuma nlive san dmiser ywa sfel t asfa r awaya sChad .I ti sunknow nho wman ypeopl edie ddurin gth econstructio no fthi srailway , butthi scombine dwit hth eoutbrea ko fa nepidemi co fsleepin gsicknes sle dt oa dramati c decreasei nth ehuma npopulatio ndensit yi nth eregio n(Kretsinge r &Zana ,1997) . In 1950th ecolonia ladministratio npropose dt oimprov eth eroa dfro m Nolat o Bayanga,a ttha ttim eonl ya smal lvillage ,t oallo wth edevelopmen to ftrade .However ,th e roadt oBayang awa sabandone dbefor e 1960.O nth eothe rhan dLidjombo , established aroundth eplantation so fLope san dSantini , hadbecom emuc hmor eimportant .Mos to f thesepeopl eha dcom et oLidjomb o towor ko nth enewl yestablishe dcoffe e plantations (Giles-Vernick, 1996).Coffe e bytha ttim eha dbecom eth emajo r exportproduct ,replacin g rubberan divory . Theconferenc e ofBrazzavill ei n 1958clearl ypu tth eentir eCentra lAfrica n region onth eroa dt oindependence .Tha tsam eyea rth econstitutio no fOubangui-Char iwa s acceptedb yit speople .Boganda ,wh owa sth efounde r ofth eCentra lAfrica n Republic,die d ina plan ecras ho nth e29t ho fMarc h 1959,whil eo nelectio ntour .Th eagreemen t for independencefrom Franc ewa ssigne do nth e 13 ofAugus t 1960(Kalck , 1992).

27 A N

• Villages /\J Roads Streams H Rivers r*~l Savanna | 1 Dzanga-Ndoki NationalPar k

| |Dzanga-Sangh aReserv e 3D KloiTirtcrt

Figure 1 TheDzanga-Ndok i National park andth e Dzanga-Sangha Dense Forest Special Reserve inth eCentra l African Republic

Around 1965 thefirst diamon dmine swer eopene djus tnort ho fDzanga-Sangha . Diamondminin gsoo nbecam ea majo r economicactivit yfollowe d soonafterward s by forestry exploitation (Kretsinger& Zana, 1997).Th eare ao fDzanga-Sangh awa sonl yo n

28 thesouther nlimi to fth ediamon dfields . Saloan dYob esa wmajo r diamondactivities ,bu t theare aaroun dBayang aan dfurthe r southwer eonl ymarginall yinvolved .Her eth e economicimpac to fth eestablishmen t ofth eloggin gcompan y SloveniaBoi si n 1972 was muchmor eimportant .Furthermor eth earriva lo fth eloggin gcompanie s inth eare ao f Dzanga-Sanghapulle dth eare aou to fit sisolation .Th eroa dt oBayang awa sreopene dan d in 1976Sloveni aBoi sopene dth eroa dt oLidjomb o (Strgulec Slavko,pers . comm.). SloveniaBoi s(SB )i sa tth eorigi no fth e "new"Bayanga . SB wasresponsibl eno t onlyfo rth econstructio no fth esawmil lan dit sow nhouses ,bu tals oo fmos to fth eres to f thetown .Furthermor ethe ybuil tth eschool ,dispensar yan dairstri p(Strgule c Slavko, pers. comm.).Th elat eseventie san dearl yeightie swer eth egoo dyear sfo rth eloggin gindustr yi n CAR.Sloveni aBoi sclose ddu et ofinancial difficultie s in 1986.Sangha-Boi s in198 8 attemptedt owor kthi sconcession .The yals ofaile d andwer eclose db yth egovernmen ti n 1990(Yamindou ,pers .comm.) .Th eSlovenia-Boi sconcessio nwa sbough tb ya Frenc h investmentgrou pi nlat e 1992.Operation srestarte di nearl y 1993.The ychange dth enam e intoSylvicol ed eBayanga .Fro mth estar tthi scompan yha dseriou soperationa lproblems , apparentlycause db yunder-capitalization .Onc eagai noperation swer esuspende db yth e Governmenti n 1997.Th ecurren t statusan dfutur e ofthi sconcessio nremain sa sye tunclea r andconsiderabl elega lmatter sremai nunresolved . Asecon dloggin gcompan ywa sgrante da permi twithi nth ereserv ei nth eregio no f Saloo n2 Sept . 1991.Thi scompany ,Th eSociet ed'Exploitatio nForestier ed el aSangha - Mbaere,SESAM ,ha sconcessionair e rightst o 106,700hectare si n4 Forestr yProductio n Unitsi nth enorthwester nportio no fth eReserve . Theyestablishe da mil lan dproductio n facility atSalo .The yreceive da loa nfro m theCF D(Caiss eFrancaiss ed eDeveloppement ) whichallowe d forth einstallatio n ofthei rsawmil li nSalo .Recentl ythi scompan ywa s recapitalized withMalaysia nfundin g andwa sabl et oexten dit soperation snorth ,b ybuyin g updysfunctiona l loggingoperation saroun dNola . Ina reactio nt othes econtinue dboo man dbus tcycle so fth eloggin gcompanie sa s wella sdisastrou senvironmenta l impactthei roperation scaused ,th eCentra l African Governmentrequeste dtechnica lassistanc efro m WWFt oinvestigat e alternatives.I n199 1 WWFcommissione dth econsultin gfirm TELESI St oexamin eth esustainabl eeconomi c optionsfo rth ePark/Reserv eare aan dexamin ei ndetai lth eeconomic so flogging . The conclusionso fthi srepor twer etha tth eeconomi c advantageso floggin gar eminima la tbes t andth eecologica lcost sar ever yhigh .The yrecommende dth edevelopmen to fecotouris m combinedwit hassociate dsmal lenterpris edevelopment ,an dnon-timbe rfores tproduc t exploitationa sth ebes tan dmos tcompatibl ealternative st ologgin gi nth eare a (Telesis, 1991& 1993) .

Historyo fth epar kan dth ereserv e

Inth elat e 1970'ssurvey sb yGuigoni s(Guigonis , 1977),Loevinsoh n (Loevensohn, 1978),Spinag e(Spinage , 1979,1981a& 1981b) ,Carrol lan dHulber g(Carrol l& Hulberg , 1982)al lindicate dth enee dfo r additionalsystemati csurvey saime dtowar dth e establishment ofa par ko rreserv et oprotec tth edens efores t ecosystem.A bong osanctuar y waspropose db ySpinag e(Spinage , 1981a). Atth ereques to fth eGovernment ,Carrol lan d Faycarrie dou ta mor ein-dept h surveyi n 1985/86(Carroll , 1982,1986a, 1986b,1986c ;

29 Fay, 1989, 1991).Followin gthes esurvey sa managemen tpla nfo rth ecreatio no fth e park/reservesyste mwa spresente di n 1986 (Carroll,1986c) . Thesurvey sconfirme d theregion' sreputatio no fcontainin gth elarges t concentration offores t elephants{Loxodonta africana cyclotis) inth ecountry .The yals o establishedth epresenc eo fothe ranima lspecie sincludin gth ewester nlowlan dgorill a {Gorillagorilla gorilla) andchimpanze e (Pan troglodytes). In 1988a nagreemen twa ssigne dbetwee nth eCentra lAfrica n Republican dWW F (WorldWid eFun dfo rNatur eknow na sWorl dWildlif e Fundi nth eUS Aan dCanada )fo r thecreatio nan dmanagemen to fa protecte dare asyste mi nth eDzanga-Sangh aregion .Thi s wasth eorigi no fth eso-calle d "Dzanga-Sangha Project". TheDzanga-Ndok iNationa lPar kan dTh eDzanga-Sangh a DenseFores tSpecia l Reservewer eofficiall y gazettedo nDecembe r29,199 0(Republiqu eCentrafricaine , 1990a &b) .Th e'specia lreserve 'classificatio n allowingfo rmultipl eus eo fresource swithi na conservationare ai sa ne wcategor yo fprotecte dare acreate dfo rDzanga-Sangh a (Chapter 2).I tindicate sals oa majo r shift inpolic yb yth eCA RGovernment , from classicprotecte d areamanagemen ttoward smor eparticipator yan dintegrate dmanagemen tpolicies .Thes e policieswer ese tou teve nmor eclearl yi nth eInterio rRegulation so fth ePar kan dReserv e whichwer epasse di nMarc h 1992(Republiqu eCentrafricaine , 1992a& b).Thes e regulationsfo rth efirs t timei nth eCAR ,permi tth eloca ldistributio no fth e financial benefits ofconservatio na sa nincentiv e forth eloca lpopulatio nt osuppor tconservatio n(se e chapter6) .

Dzanga-Sangha protectedare acomple x

Theare acomprisin gbot hsector so fth enationa lpar ka swel la sth especia lreserv ei s often simplyreferre d toa sDzanga-Sangha . Thetota lDzanga-Sangh a complexcover sa n areao f438 1 km2o fmostl ydens erainforest . Thesouther nNdok isecto ro fth enationa lpar k covers72 7km 2an dth ewester nDzang asecto r49 5km 2,th eremainin g315 9km 2bein g madeu pb yth esurroundin greserv e(Figur e1) . Thenam eDzanga-Sangh a comesfro m thetw omos timportan t features ofth earea : theba i(clearing )an dstrea m "Dzanga"an dth erive r "Sangha"a tributar yo fth eCongo . Thenam e"Ndoki "feature d inth enam eo fth eNationa lPar ki sagai na river .Thi s timei ti sa rive rwel lknow nfo rit slarg eextent so fswam pforest .Th enam e"Ndoki "mean s witchcraft.

Dzanga-Sangha Project

TheGovernmen to fth eCentra lAfrica n Republican dWW Fa smentione dabov e initiatedth eDzanga-Sangh a Project in 1988.Fiel dactivitie s startedi n 1989wit ha n emphasiso nanti-poachin gt ocomba telephan tpoacher swh ower eoverrunnin gth eare a (Carroll,pers .comm.) .Fro mth estar to fth eproject , itwa sfel ttha tcollaboratio nwit hth e localpopulatio nwa sessential ,a sthe yar esom eo fth eprimar yresourc euser s(Carroll , 1986c,se eals oHunsicke r& Ngambesso , 1993,Kretsinger , 1993an dDoungoube ,1990) . Theireconomi clivelihoo di sdirectl yo rindirectl ylinke dt oth enatura lresource so fth e region.Th eloca lpopulatio nals oclaime d- rightl y so- direc tbenefit s from theproject .Wit h increasingfundin g becomingavailabl ei nth eearl y90's ,th eprojec t startedexpandin gint o

30 ruraldevelopmen tan drealizin git sorigina lstrateg yno wofte n referredt oa s "Integrated Conservationan dDevelopmen t Project (ICDP)"(Blom , 1998,1999a) .

Theorigina lpurpos eo fth eDzanga-Sangh aProjec twa s "thedevelopment, protection, andmanagement of the forest of Southwestern CentralAfrican Republic for theconservation ofits' importantfloristic, fauna! and human components". Basedo nth ewildlif e surveysa swel la ssocio-economi c surveys,an d after consultationwit hstakeholders ,th efollowin g long-term objective forth eDzanga-Sangh a Projectwa s defined:

Toprotect the biodiversity of the forest of the southwestern CentralAfrican Republic by themanagement and the development of a protected area system witha multiple use conservation bufferzone (Special Reserve), with inits core a strictly protected area (NationalPark).

Themultipl eus ezon ewa senvisione dt ofunctio n asa buffe r zonearoun dth e nationalpar kan dwoul dallo wfo r sustainableus epractices .Thes epractice scoul dinclud e sustainableforestry , tourism developmentan dsafar ihunting .I tshoul db enote di nthi s contexttha ta tth etim eo festablishmen tn ologgin gwa sbein gcarrie dou ti nth eare aa sth e previous loggingoperation swer esuspended .Howeve rth ere-openin go floggin goperation s inth ebuffe r zonewa sa naccepte dprincipl efro m thebeginning . Thegazettin gi n 1990o fth eDzanga-Ndok iNationa l Parkan dth eDzanga-Sangh a DenseFores t SpecialReserv ewa sa majo r stepforwar d inreachin gth elong-ter m objectives ofth eProject . Althoughth eorigina lpurpos eo fth eProjec t hasno tchanged ,th eProjec t assuc hha s evolvedan dit sobjective shav ebee nadapte daccordingly .Th eobjectiv e forth ephas e duringwhic hmos to fthi sstud ytoo kplac ewa sdefine d asfollows :

Reducethe rate of ecosystem degradation inDzanga-Sangha and at the same time, ensurethe acceptance and partial implementation oflong-term sustainable land use specificallyadapted to the region.

Toachiev ethi sobjectiv eth eProjec twas ,durin gtha tphase ,puttin ga nemphasi son : • Improvingan dextendin gth ela wenforcemen t system • Reducingth enegativ eimpac to floggin go nth eecosyste m • Increasingrevenue sfrom sustainabl eactivitie sint oth eloca leconom y • Increasingtouris mrevenu e • Improvingth einterna lorganizatio no fth eloca lpopulatio na st opermi tbette r participation • Improvingth emanagemen t ofresearc h • Improvingoveral lprojec t administration

TheProjec t possesses amanagemen t structureworkin g in4 differen t domains: conservation,rura l development, tourism andadministration . Intota lth eprojec t employs about 120people .Mos to fthes epeopl ehav ebee n recruited locally amongth eroughl y 4,500Reserv e andPar k inhabitants. Somepeopl e werebrough t infro m outsideth e

31 Dzanga-Sangha area,a sthei r specific qualifications neededwer eno t availablewithi nth e region. Fora mor e detailed description andhistor y ofth eDzanga-Sangh a Project see Blom(1999a) .

Theregiona l context:th etri-nationa lpar k

Currently,discussion s sponsoredb yth eWorl dWildlif e Fund,Wildlif e Conservation International,th eGerma nTechnica lCooperatio n (GTZ)an dth eMacArthu rFoundatio nar e underwayt ocreat ea tri-nationa lconservatio n systemcentere daroun dth eDzanga-Sangh a area.Thi seffor t hopest oestablis hconservatio nan dmanagemen t ofth efores t inth e contiguousarea so fnorther nCongo ,th eNouabale-Ndok iNationa lPark ,an dsoutheaster n ,i nth eLak eLobek eforests .I ti santicipate dtha tthes earea swoul db emanage d individuallybu twit ha nincreasin gcoordinatio nbetwee nth edifferen t countries,especiall y infields suc ha santi-poaching ,touris man dresearch . Forexampl eth erecentl yestablishe d Sangharive rnetwor kwil lcontribut et oth eexchang eo finformatio n onresearc h andothe r topics(Eves ,et .al. ,1998) .

Research at Dzanga-Sangha

Sixresearc hcenter shav ebee nestablishe d (figure 2). BaiHoko ui nth enorther n NationalPar kare ai sth emai nstud yare afo rth egorill ahabituatio nprogra mdiscusse dhere . Mongambeha sbee nuse da swel lfo rpreliminar ystudie san dserve sa sa bas ecam pfo rth e linetransec tmonitoring . Ndakani nth esouther nNationa lPar kzon eha sha dactiv egorill a ecologystudie san di sa tpresen tth esit eo fresearc ho nth eregeneratio no fterrestria l herbaceousvegetatio n(THV) .Mondik a isa thir dsit eo fgorill aresearch ,whic hi sstil l ongoing.Mondik awa sals oth esit eo fresearc ho nmangabeys .Dzang aBai ,i nth eDzang a parksecto ran dit sassociate dcam par eth esit eo flong-ter melephan tresearch .Kongan a Bridgeha sbee nuse dfo ra researc hprogra mo nth eecolog yo fnocturna lcarnivore san di sa t presenta trainin gcam pfo rguard san dguides .

32 Figure2 Researc han dothe rcamp si nDzanga-Sangh a

* Q

BaiHoko u I

9 0 9 18 Kilometers

* Camps ^Ftaads n Rvets [>:oi Savanna •1 DzangaJvktoki National Park ^M CfcargaSangha Reserve

33 Overth epas t2 0year sDzanga-Sangh a hasbee na nimportan tare afo rimprovin gth e knowledgeo fth eCong oBasi nrainfores t andit sinhabitants .A tleas t 10these shav ebee n finalized basedo nwor kcarrie dou ti nDzanga-Sangh a (Table 1)

Table 1: Thesisresearc hcarrie dou ta tDzanga-Sangh a

Subject Author Gorillas Remis, 1994; Carroll, 1997;Fay , 1997;Goldsmith , 1997 Oralhistor y Giles-Vernick,199 6 Smallcarnivore s Ray, 1997 Geophagy Klaus,199 8 Culturalecolog yo fhuntin g Noss, 1996 Bongo Klaus-Hugi, 1998 Irvingiaceae Harris, 1993

Severalother sar ei npreparation .Furthermor eth eDzanga-Sangh a areaha sbee nth e siteo fman yothe rtype so fresearch ,rangin gfrom archeolog yt osocio-economic s(se e Blom, 1999afo r anoverview) .

Topography and Hydrology

Dzanga-Sangha iso nth e northern fringe ofth eCong o Basinplateau . Theterrai n ingenera l isflat t o slightly undulating,wit haltitud e varyingbetwee n about 200an d80 0 meters (Boulvert, 1983).Th evalley s become morepronounce d towardsth e eastan dar e steepan dpronounce d inth enorthwest , forming clearridge srunnin g northeast-southwest. Large areasar eseasonall y inundated plains,especiall y alongth e Sangha andth eNdok i rivers inth e south. Thesetw oriver s areals oth e mainhydrologica l features ofDzanga - Sangha,roughl yrunnin gfrom th enort h toth e south.Th e Sangha isa larg e navigable river atthi spoin tan dtraverse sth e entire area.Th eNdok i ischaracterize d byit slarg e extents ofswamp san dseasonall y inundated forests. TheDzang a areai scharacterize d bya slightl yundulatin g arearisin g slightly from thebasi n ofth e Sangharive rtoward s BaiHokou . BaiHoko u (atroughl y 500meter s altitude) islocate d onth eborde rwit h Congoan di ssevera lhundre d metershighe r than Bayanga(se eals oBoulvert , 1983&1986) .Th eterrai nher ei sals omor epronounce dwit h somestee pvalley s with small streams runningthroug hthem .Thes e streamsal lru n towardsth e Sangha inth ewest .

Geology

According toBoulver t (1986)th eare ao fDzanga-Sangh a canb e geomorphologicallyclassifie d asrecen talluvial . Herefer s toth e areaa sth e Sanghaplai n (Boulvert, 1983& 1986).Th eprincipa l soiltyp e inth eregio ni siro nsoil scomprise do f kaolinitean dgibbsit e andi scharacterize d bylaterit e shields (Carroll, 1992).

34 Dzanga-Sangha hasman ynatura l clearings,locall y called "bais".Thes ebai sar e visitedb yman yfores t animalsan dmak ea nexcellen ttouris tattraction . Especiallyth e otherwiserarel y seenfores t elephant isdail y encountered inthes ebai sdiggin g for soil (geophagy).Th e soil layer eatenb yth eelephant s isclayis h weathered volcanic rock. Geologicalinvestigation s showedtha tth evolcani cmateria l canonl yb efoun d onth ebai s (Klaus, 1998).I fvolcanoe seve r existed toa grea texten tthe yar elon g since erodedb y thetropica l rain.Th eonl yvolcani cmateria l thatremaine d isth emateria l that filled the rifts whereth e lava streamed outfro m agrea t depth.Th erift s belongt oth erif t systemo f the MtCameroo ntha t stretches from theretoward sth enortheast . Asth ewhol eDzanga - Sangharegio n iscovere dwit h sedimentary sands,th evolcani cmateria l appears onlya t the surface when arive rcut sth erift . Asa consequenc e ofth e digging activity ofth e elephants,th etree s fall anddi ean di nth ecours e ofmilleni alarg enatura l clearings,th e bais,evolv e(Klaus ,pers.comm.) .

Climate

Continuedclimati cdat aha sbee ncollecte da tBayang ab y Slovenia-Bois, the Yugoslavianloggin gfir mwhic hoperate di nBayanga .Bayang afall s inth etransitio nzon e betweenth eCongoles eEquatoria lan dSubequatoria lclimati czone s(Carroll , 1992). The averageminimum ,averag emaximu man dmonthl y averagetemperature srecorde db y Slovenia-Boisa tBayang aan daverage dove rth eyear s 1974throug h 1984ar ea sfollow s (figure 3 basedo ndat afro m Carroll, 1992). Temperature varies little overth eyea rwit ha n averageo f26. 4°C .Mea nmonthl yminimu mtemperature s varyfro m 20.6° Ct o22. 9°C , andmea nmonthl ymaximu mtemperature s from 28.4° Ct o35. 7° C(Carroll , 1996).

35 Figure3 :Th eaverag eminimum ,averag emaximu m andmonthl yaverag etemperature s recordedb ySlovenia-Boi sa tBayang a andaverage dove rth eyear s 1974throug h 1984

Average temperatures for Bayanga 1974-1984

— .._.... .—

— - i M aximutn M nimum — M ean

jan feb mar apr may jun aug sep oct nov dec

Theyea ri scharacterize db ya dr yseaso no fthre emonth s(fro m earlyDecembe r untilth een do fFebruary ) anda lon grain yseaso nwit ha relativ eminimu mo frainfal l in Junean dJul y(Figur e4) .Th elengt ho fth edr yseaso ndecrease sfrom Nort ht oSouth . The rainyseason ,therefore , isapproximatel y 9month swit hfrequent heav yrainstorms . The averageyearl yrainfal l isapproximatel y 1400mm. peryea r(Carroll , 1992).

36 Figure4 :Averag emonthl yrainfal l forBayang a for 1973-1984

Averagemonthl y rainfallfo r Bayanga 1973-1984

E 150 E c I

n jan feb mar apr may jun Jul aug sep oct dec Rainfall datafo r Bayanga,collecte db y Slovenia-Boisan daverage dove rth eyear s 1973 through 1984(base do ndat afro m Carroll, 1992)

37 Vegetation

Introduction toth e forests ofCA R

Inth eCentra lAfrica n Republic forest coversi ntota l92,50 0km 2,o rclos et o 15% of theterritory .Mos to fthi sfores t consisto fsemi-humi dan ddr yfores t andgaller y forest. Onlyapproximatel y 37,500km 2i scovere db ydens efores t (Carroll, 1992).Wit hreduction s for cultivatedarea san dswamps ,th etota lexploitabl efores t isestimate da t27,00 0km 2 (Carroll, 1992).A larg epar to fthi si sunde rexploitation .Th eonl yare afull y protectedi sth e Dzanga-NdokiNationa lPar k(Chapte r2 )presentin g only 1222km 2o rles stha n5 % ofth e totalexploitabl e forest. Thefores t ofDzanga-Sangh a canbes tb edescribe da sa semi-deciduou s forestwit h atransitio nfro m semi-deciduous inth enort ht oevergree nfurthe r southacros sth eborde ri n theCong o(se eals oBoulvert , 1986).Withi nth enort ho fthi sfores t zonesevera lsmal l patcheso fsavann a exist.Ever ystag eo fdegradatio nan dsuccessio ndu et ohuma nactivitie s sucha svillag eclearing ,nativ eslas han dbur nagriculture ,extensiv ecoffe e plantations, traditional gatheringactivitie san dlarg earea so fexploitatio nb yloggin goperations ,a swel l asdisturbanc e causedb yelephants ,windfall s andlightening ,for m avariet yo fhabitats . The forest ofDzanga-Sangh a andit sfloristi c compositionar eextensivel ydescribe di nCarrol l (1992, 1997),bu tals ose eBoulver t(1986 )an dFa y(1997) .Additionall yHarri s(1994 ) providesa specie slist .

Thefores t ofDzang a

Ourmai nstud yarea ,th efores t ofth eDzang asecto ro fth enationa lpark ,includin g BaiHokou ,ca nbes tb ecategorize da sa semi-deciduou stransitio nforest , lightlyt olocall y moderatelydisturbe db yselectiv eloggin gactivitie scarrie dou ti nth e 1970's.Fo ra descriptiono fthes eloggin gactivitie sI refe rt oCarrol l(1992) .Her eI jus twan tt ounderlin e thati nth eCA Rth emos timportan t speciesfo rexploitatio n inrecen tyear sare : Triplochiton scleroxylon (Ayous),Entrandrophragma utile (Sipo) ,E. cylindricum (Sapelli),E. candollei (Kosipo),E. angolense (Tiama) ,Khaya grandifolia (Acajou) andAningeria altissima. (Aningre)(PARN , 1995).O fthes etrees ,thos eselecte dfo rharves tar egreate rtha n6 0 cm. dbhan deac htre ecu trepresent sapproximatel y 12-14m 3.I nDzanga-Sangh a Ayouscome s mostlyfrom th enort hi nth eYob eregion ,wher ei ti sfoun d ina densit yo f80-9 0stem s 60cm.db ho rlarge ro na 2 5 ha.parce l(Carroll , 1992).Sipo ,Sapell ian dTiam acom e from thesouther narea .Sip oi sver yrare ,o naverage ,on este mpe r25ha .an di sth emos t expensivewoo d(Carroll , 1992). TheDzang aare awa sselectivel ylogge di nth e 1970's, mostlyfo r Sipoan dSapelli .Sinc eth ecreatio no fth eNationa lPar kn ologgin g isallowe d andi sstrictl yenforced , whichha sle dt oconflict s withth eloca lloggin gcompany . Wedistinguishe dth efollowin g forest typesi nth eDzang aarea : MixedOpen (MO): mixedfores t withope nunde r story(visibilit y> 20m) ; MixedClosed (MC): mixedfores t withclose dunde rstor y(visibilit y< 20m) ; LightGap (LG): major lightgap sresultin gfrom natura ltre efalls ; Dense Understorey(DU): mixedope ncanop yforest , locallycalle dEbuka ,wit ha ver y denseunderstorey . Thecanop y isdiscontinuou s allowing lightt openetrat et oth e forest floor. Theunderstore y iscovere dwit hdens e herbaceous growth,whic hi sdominate db y

38 Haumaniasp. an dothe rMarantaceae andZingerberaceae. Thicklian atangle sca nb e locallycommon . Secondary(SC): humaninduce d secondary forest andshrub ,ofte n closet oroad so rrivers ; Monodominant(MD): monodominant forest of Gilbertiondendron dewevrei, locally called Malapa orBemba ,whic h aredistribute d in lowdensities . Sparseunderstorey ,o f mostlyPalisota sp.; Swamps (SW): inundated throughout theyear . Treesbelo w 15 meters andliana sar e observedregularly ; SeasonallyInundated (SI): seasonall y inundated often alongth ebank s ofth e streams andrivers . Undergrowth hasa lo wdensity ; LowClosed Shrub (LC): lowcanop ywit hver ydens e under storey,ofte n with Ancistrophyllum palms; Clearing(CL): openclearing si nth efores t withn otre ecanop yan dgrass yo rmarsh y vegetation(elephan tbai s& swam pbais) .

InTabl e 2th epercentag e ofth e forest habitattype s ispresented . Thisestimat ei s based on5 transect so f2 0k meac hthroug hth e Dzangaare a from northt o south crossing themai ndrainag e (Almasi,e t al., inprep.) .Th emixe d openforest , the monodominant forest andinundate d forest, habitattype swit h arelativel y littleundergrowth , form34 % ofth e forest habitattype .Th ehabita ttype swit hdens eunderstore y (mixedclose d forest andlo wclose d shrub forest) form 44%o fth e forest habitattype .Withi n all forest habitats the light gaps,secondar y forest anddens eunderstore y forest form patcheso f verydens e herbaceous vegetation, mainly ofMarantaceae sp. an dthes e habitats form 18%o fth e forest habitattype .

Table2 :Fores thabita ttype spresen t inth eDzang asecto ro fth eDzanga-Ndok iNationa l Park

Foresthabita ttyp e Percentage 1.Mixe d Closed 43 2.Mixe d Open 28 3. Light Gap 9 4.Dens e Understory 5 5.Secondar y 4 6.Monodominan t 4 7.Swam p 2 8.Seasonall y Inundated 2 9.Lo wClose d Shrub 1 10.Clearin g 1 Unknown 1 100

Foresthabita ttype salon g 100k mo ftransec t aspercentag eo ftota lhabita tobserve d (modified from Almasi,e tal. ,i nprep. )

39 Fauna

Many species of wildlife exist in Dzanga-Sangha, representing a wide variety of dense forest fauna, but also including some savanna species. Tropical forests are complex and diverse ecosystems and Dzanga-Sangha is no exception. However the most striking aspect ofDzanga-Sangh a isth e visibility of its wildlife, especially its amazing mega-fauna. The diversity in insects ishigh ,bu t very little is known about the species composition. Only some collecting by the American Museum ofNatura l History (AMNH) and private collectors (J-C.Thibaud , pers. comm.)ha s taken place. Likewise the amphibians are largely unknown as isth e entire aquatic fauna, except for some work carried out by Peace Corps and the AMNH, which asye t remains unpublished. The reptiles of CAR have been studied by Chirios. He has indicated that a new species of lizard might be amongst his collections from Dzanga-Sangha (Chirios,pers . comm.). The AMNH also collected several specimens in recent years. Approximately 700 species ofbird s have been recorded for the CAR, with over 400 from the forested regions (Carroll, 1987). The first breeding record ofth e rare brown ( binotatus) was made inth e Bayanga region (Carroll and Fry, 1986). Several checklists of the of the region have been produced (Green & Carroll, 1991; Blom, 1993b; Rondeau & Blom, inprep.) . These are still constantly being updated. The most recent checklist by Patrice Christy includes 42 new species for the region (L.Steel, pers. corr. Feb 4, 2000),bringin g the total for the region to at least 350 species, including the recently discovered endemic Sangha Forest Robin (Stiphronis sanghensis) (Bereford & Cracraft, 1999). At present 105 species ofnon-volan t mammals have been identified at Dzanga- Sangha (Blom, 1993a). Most noteworthy isth e forest elephant {Loxodonta africanus cyclotis) and not only because of its size.Dzanga-Sangh a harbors one ofth e highest densities of forest elephants in Africa (Carroll, 1986b, 1988a, 1988b;Fay , 1991; Almasi, et al., inprep.) . Their impact on the forest isprofound . They are amajo r disperser of seeds and have an important effect on forest regeneration and architecture (Carroll, 1992).The y may play arol e in the creation of the clearings or bais and certainly help to maintain them (Klaus, 1999). Twenty species of primates are listed for the CAR, with 15occurrin g in Dzanga- Sangha alone (Carroll, 1992). The reserve ishom e to two species of apes, to nine diurnal species ofmonkey s (four guenons, two mangabeys, two species of colobus monkeys and one baboon) and to four nocturnal prosimians (Blom, 1993a). The subspecies of gorilla in Dzanga-Sangha is the western lowland gorilla {Gorilla gorilla gorilla). It isreportedl y the smallest ofth e three generally recognized subspecies (Kingdon, 1997),reachin g 168 cm invertica l position (Napier, in Meester & Setzer, 1971). According to Kingdon (1997) it isbrownis h with a broad face but relatively smalljaws . However the easiest distinction inth e field istha t in general western lowland gorillas have less heavy fur than mountain gorillas and that females often have a distinct russet crown of hair, covering the whole head above the ears.Male s from 10year s of age begin to develop a grayish saddle-back, or 'silver-back1,whic h sometimes spreads to the thighs. Adult male gorillas may reach 140k g and females 75k g (Carroll, 1992). Some discussion isongoin g on the taxonomy ofth e gorillas (e.g.Butynski , in prep.).Th e western lowland might be considered a separate species (Kingdon, 1997).

40 Lowlandgorilla sar eprimaril yterrestrial ,thoug hthe yclim bi ntree squit e frequently tofee d onfruit s andleave s(Remis , 1994). Gorillasar esocia lanimal sthat ,wit hth e exception ofsolitar ymales ,liv ei ngroup sfrom 2 t o3 0animal s(Carroll , 1992).Th eaverag e groupsiz ei nDzanga-Sangh aha sbee nestimate da t5. 4b yCarrol l(1992) .Solitar ymale s canmak eu p 17%o fth epopulatio n (Carroll, 1992). AtBa iHoko ugorilla sfee d heavilyo nth epit han dbar ko fherbaceou san dwood y materialthroughou tth eyear .Additionall ythe yfee d onove r 100specie so ffrui t andsevera l specieso fant san dtermite s(Carroll , 1992).The yar ediurna lan dconstruc t sleepingnest s mainlyb ybendin gth eherbaceou so rwood ymaterial s intoa roughl ycircula rstructure .Eac h adultusuall ybuild shi so rhe row nnest ,eithe ro nth egroun do rlo wi ntrees .Thi shabi to f buildingnest sever ynigh tca nb euse dfo rdensit yestimate s(Chapte r3) . Lowlandgorilla sreac hhig hpopulatio ndensitie si nDzanga-Sangh a (seechapte r3) . Carroll(1992 )estimate dbetwee n 0.2an d 11 perkm 2i nth evariou shabitats ,bein gmos t frequent insecondar y forest andligh tgaps ,bu tusin gprimar yfores t andmarsh yarea s regularly. Thesecon dap epresen ti nDzanga-Sangh a isth echimpanzee ,whic hi smor e arboreal.Chimpanzee sals obuil dsleepin gnests ,bu tthes ear ealmos talway sabov e3 meters highi ntrees .Chimpanzee sar efoun d inmuc hlowe rdensitie si nDzanga-Sangh atha n gorillas(chapte r3) . Localpeopl ehun tbot hgorilla san dchimpanzee sfo rmeat ,eve nthoug hthe yar e fully protectedb yla w(Republiqu eCentrafricaine , 1984). Howeverthi sseem srathe rlimite d anda syet ,ther eseem st ob elittl etrad ei nthei rmeat .Als on otroph ytrad ei ngorill abod y partsi seviden ti nth eregion .Onl ydurin ga brie fperio do fabou t3 month swa sther ean y evidenceo ftrad eo fliv egorillas .Thre eincidence so fgorill apoachin goccurre d ina perio d wheni twa srumore dtha ta Europea ntrade rwa sbuyin gliv egorilla sfo rtrad ejus t acrossth e borderi nCameroon .Afte r weinforme d theCameroo n authoritiesan dcolleague si n Cameroonthi strad estopped .I ntw oo fth ethre eincidence sPar kauthoritie sarreste dth e perpetrators.Th ethir dpoachin gpart ywa sabl et oescap eint oneighborin g Cameroon.

Thepeopl eo fDzanga-Sangh a

Thisdens efores t regionha straditionall yha da ver ylo whuma npopulatio ndensit y ofapproximatel y 0.5perso npe rkm. 2 (Carroll, 1992).Eve na tpresen tth edensit yi nth e Dzanga-Sanghaprotecte dare acomple xremain sextremel y low.Th ehuma npopulatio n density inthi s areaha sbee n estimated tob e 1 personpe rk m ,base do na censu scarrie d outi n 1995b yWorl dWildlif e Fund (GondaNgbalet , 1995;Blom ,unpublishe d data). Almost 60% o fth epeopl e livei nth etow no fBayang a (2,365 inhabitants in 1995). The rest ofth epopulatio n islargel y distributed alongth eroa d leadingfro m the northern limit ofth e Reservet oLindjomb o (720inhabitants) ,th e second largest settlement inth e Reserve (Figure 1). Howeverth e samecensu s hasindicate d that atleas t 10,000peopl e livejus t north ofth eReserv ewithi n a25-k mradius .Althoug hpopulatio ndensit yi nth e forest islo wan dpermanen tsettlement sar efe w andlocalized ,th eentir efores t isinhabite d oruse dt oa certai ndegre eb ypeopl efo rthei rlivelihood .

41 EthnicGroup s

Southwest CAR,norther nCong oan dsoutheas tCameroo n form onecontinuou s expanseo frai nfores t inhabitedb ynumerou s Bantuan dOubangian-speakin gfarmer san d threeprincipa l groupso fpygmies .Th epygmie so fsouther nCA Ran dnorther n Congoar e geneticallyreferre d toa sBaAka .Othe rpygmie slivin gi nnorther n Congo,nea rth eborde r withCameroon ,refe r tothemselve sa sBangoumbe ,bu tthe yar econtinuou swit han d linguisticallyindistinc tfro m thepygmie so fsoutheas tCameroo nwh ocal lthemselve sBaK a (nott ob econfuse d withBaAka) . TheBaAk apygmie scompris eth e largest ethnic group inDzanga-Sangh a (GondaNgbalet , 1995;Blom ,unpublishe d data).Apparentl yman yo f theBaAka ,a sth epygmie si nthi sregio nar ecalled ,cam efro m Impfondo inCong o - Brazzaville(Kretsinge r& Zana , 1997). Thefarmer s andfisherme n livingi nth eCA Rforest s areOubangia nspeakin ggroup s whichinclud eth eNgbaka ,Yangere ,Bofi , andBiyand aan dBantu-speakin g groupswhic h includeth eNgando ,Mbati ,Pande ,Porno ,Mbim uan dKak o(Carroll ,1992) . Theindigenou spopulation sar econsiderabl yaugmente db ytransien tworker s cominglon gdistance st owor ki nth eloggin goperation si nBayang aan dSalo .Fo rexampl e aton epoin tth etow no fBayang aharbore dpeopl efro mprobabl yever yregio no fCA Ra s well 15 different foreign countries.Peopl ear eals oattracte db yth eactivitie so fth eDzanga - SanghaProject ,no twithstandin g itspolicie st odiminis himmigration .Additionall yman y peoplear eattracte dt oth ediamon dmine sjus tnort ho fDzanga-Sangha . Someo fthes e mineshav ecomplet etown swit hthousand so finhabitant sassociate dwit hthem .Howeve r thesetown susuall yprovid eonl yth emos tbasi csocia l services,wit hsuc hessential sa s schoolingan dhealt hfacilitie s entirely lacking.Thi scombine dwit hth ehars hworkin g conditionsi nth emine softe n leadst omiserabl elivin gconditions .Man ycomplai nbu thav e noothe ralternative si nth eCAR .

Economy

TheCA Ri sranke d amongth e leastdevelope d countries inth eworld . Itrank s 149 among 174countrie s onth eUND PIndicato r ofHuma nDevelopmen t (IHD),wit h alif e expectancy ofonl y49. 4years ,a nadul t literacyrat e of 53.9%an da GN Ppe r inhabitant ofonl y41 0US $i n 1992(UNDP , 1995).Th e samerepor t estimated thepopulatio n of CARa t 3.1millio n in 1992,wit ha nexpecte d annual increase of2. 4 %,expectin g to reach 3.7millio npeopl eb yth eyea r2000 .Thes e figures for CARhav et ob etake nwit h somecaution , asfe w accuratedat a exist.Nevertheles s the economic situationha sonl y deteriorated further inrecen t year,du et o severepolitica l disturbances combinedwit h violence andlooting .Therefor , weca nconclud etha tth eCentra lAfrica n Republic ison e ofth e least developed andpopulate d countries inth eworld . Asi nmos tothe rrura larea si ncentra lAfric a themajorit y ofpeopl ear efarmers , practicingsubsistenc eslas han dbur nagriculture ,an drel yo nth efores t forhunting , gatheringinsects ,fruit s andnuts ,an dcollectin gbuildin gmaterial san dtraditiona l medicines.Man ysupplemen tthei rincome sb ygrowin gcoffe e orcassav acommercially . Alongth erivers ,man yar ecommercia lfishermen . Evenpeopl ewit hpermanen t employmentalmos tal lparticipat ei nthes eactivitie st osupplemen tthei rhousehol dincome .

42 A survey carried outi n 1994showe d that 52% o fth eme ni nBayang awer e formally employed byvariou s employers andreceive d aregula r salary (Garreau, 1996a). Formalemploymen t istherefor e aver yimportan t economic factor inth eregion .Thi si s veryatypica li nth eCAR ,wher eemploymen topportunitie sar ever yscarce .Th esam e survey showedtha to fthos e employed inth eforma l sector,3 4% wer eemploye d byth e Dzanga-Sangha Project. Increasingpopulatio ndensitie sa swel la sa nincrease dacces st omarket san dhuntin g areasthroug hloggin groad sha sle dt oa rapi ddevelopmen t from sustainablesubsistenc e huntingt oa commercia lbushmea tenterprise .Huntin gwit hcabl esnare san dmor ean dmor e frequently, withshotguns ,ha smad ea considerabl e impacto nwildlif e populations(Blom , 1999a).Thi styp eo fhuntin gan dpoachin gi sunlikel yt ob esustainabl efo rman yspecie so f duikers(Noss , 1996& 1998).Thi ssubjec twil lb efurthe r discussed inchapte r4 . Tourismha sha da nincreasin gimpac to nth eeconom yi nmor erecen tyear s(Chapte r 7).Som eo fth epar krevenu ei sshare dwit hth eloca lpopulatio nthroug ha Non - Governmental Organizationcalle d"Committee ed eDeveloppemen td eBayanga "(CDB) . TheCD Bi splayin ga nimportan trol ei nDzanga-Sangh a inimprovin g collaboration (Garreau, 1996b& 1996c) . Asrecentl ya sabou t 10year sago ,n oBaAk aha dfield s orplantation s for themselves.The ypreferre d towor kth efields o fBantou/Oubangu ivillager sfo rmeage r wagesan dspendin gstil llarg eamount so ftim ei nth efores t tohun twildlif e andcollec t variousplants ,mushrooms ,insect san dhone y(Kretsinger ,pers .coram.) .Thi ssituatio nha s changeddramatically .Mos tBaAk ano wow nthei rfield s andg oles san dles sint oth e forest. Theyhav echange dwithi non egeneratio nfro m nomadichunter/gatherer s intosemi - sedentaryagriculturists .Furthermor eman yar eno wemploye db yloggin gcompanie sa swel l asth eDzanga-Sangh a Project (seeals oKretsinger , 1993) andassociate dresearchers .

Conclusions

TheCentra lAfrica n Republici sa poo ran dunderdevelope dcountry ,dependin g heavilyo nextractio no fresource st ofue l itseconomy .I nth eDzanga-Sangh aregion ,thi si s mostlyminin gan dlogging .However ,a si nmos to fth ecountr yth emajorit y ofpeopl estil l dependo nslas han dbur nagriculture ,combine dwit hgathering ,huntin gand/o rfishing .Th e regionharbor sa highl ydivers ean dmobil ecommunity ,du et obot hhistorica la swel la s recentmigrations . Inth eDzanga-Sangh aregion ,th eexploitatio no fnatura lresource sha sha da lon g history,startin gwit hth eexploitatio no felephant sfo rivor yan dduiker sfo rthei rskins ,late r followed byrubbe ran dtimber .Th ebannin go felephan thuntin gb yth eGovernmen tan dth e subsequentenforcemen t byth eDzanga-Sangh aProjec t hasprovide drespit efo rth e elephants.Stil lth emai nthrea tfo rbiodiversit yconservatio ni nDzanga-Sangh aremain s poaching,especiall yo fduiker san dprimates .Bot hloggin gan dminin ghav econtribute d significantly byprovidin gbot ha marke ta swel la sacces st oth eforest . Thehuma nimpac t onth efaun a isfurthe r investigated inthi sthesis . However the establishment of the Dzanga-Sangha Project with its innovative approach to management and revenue sharing provide some hope for the long-term protection ofthi soutstandin g regionfo r biodiversity. Asw ewil l seefurthe r oni nthi sthesi s

43 the main challenge will be to find ways of perpetuating the Project itself and assuring its future functioning.

Acknowledgements

I would liket othan kth e World Wildlife Fund, Inc.,Worl d Wildlife Fund,th e different Government agencies andprivat edonor s forthei r supportt oth e Dzanga-Sangha Project andbiodiversit y conservation. Specialthank st oUrbai nNgatou a andal lth e staff ofth eDzanga-Sangh a Project for theircollaboration . I'mparticularl y grateful toRichar d Carroll andNatash a Shah forthei r constructive comments onth emanuscrip t ofthi s chapter.

References

Almasi,A , Blom,A. ,Kpanou , J.-B.,Otto ,K. , Mbea,E. ,Godobo ,P .(i nprep. ) Elephant surveyso fth eDzang a sectoro fth eDzanga-Ndok i National Park, Central African Republic

Beresford, P.& Cracraft , J., (1999).Speciatio n inAfrica n Forest Robins(Stiphrornis) : species limits,phylogenti c relationships,an dmolecula r biogeography., American MuseumNovitate sNumbe r 3270,22pp. ,America n Museum ofNatura l History.

Blom,A .(199 3a )Lis to fth elarg emammal so fth eDzanga-Sangh a DenseFores t Reserve andth e Dzanga-Ndoki National Park. World Wildlife Fund -CAR .

Blom,A .(199 3b )Lis t ofth ebird s ofth eDzanga-Sangh a Dense ForestReserv e andth e Dzanga-Ndoki National Park. World Wildlife Fund -CAR .

Blom,A .(1999a )Te nyear sDzanga-Sangh a Project: 1988 - 1999.Worl d Wildlife Fund -CAR.

Blom,A .(1999b )Ecologica lmonitoring .Dzanga-Sangh aprojec t technicalreport.Worl d Wildlife Fund- CAR.

Boulvert, Y.(1983) .Cart epedologiqu e del aRepubliqu e Centrafricaine, a 1:1,000,000. Noticeexplicativ e #100.ORSTOM ,Paris , 126 p.

Boulvert, Y.(1986) .Republiqu e Centrafricaine. Cartephytogeographiqu e a 1:1,000,000. Notice explicative # 104.ORSTOM ,Paris , 131 p.

Butynski,T.M .(i nprep. )Africa' s greatapes :a novervie w ofcurren t taxonomy, distribution, numbers,conservatio n status,an dthreats .

44 Carroll, R.W. (1982). Preliminary survey of the forests of southwest CAR. Report to the Central African Government.

Carroll, R.W. (1986 a) Status of the lowland gorilla and other wildlife in the Dzanga- Sangha region of southwestern Central African Republic. Primate Conservation 7, 38-41.

Carroll, R.W. (1986 b) The creation, development, protection, and management of the Dzanga-Sangha dense forest sanctuary and the Dzanga-Ndoki National Park in southwestern Central Africa Republic. Unpublished report. New Haven: Yale University.

Carroll, R.W. (1986 c) The status, distribution, and density of the lowland gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla (Savage and Wyman)), forest elephant (Loxodonta africana cyclotis), and associated dense forest fauna in southwestern Central African Republic: research towards the establishment of a reserve for their protection. Unpublished report. New Haven: Yale University.

Carroll, R.W. (1987). Birds of the CAR. Malimbus 10.

Carroll, R.W. (1988a). Elephants of the Dzanga-Sangha Dense Forest of southwestern CAR. Pachyderm 10:12-15. January 1988.

Carroll, R.W. (1988b) Relative density, range extension, and conservation potential of the lowland gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) in the Dzanga - Sangha region of southwestern Central African Republic. Mammalia 52,309-323 .

Carroll, R.W. (1992) The development, protection, and management of the Dzanga- Sangha Dense Forest Special Reserve and the Dzanga-Ndoki National Park in southwestern Central African Republic. Dzanga-Sangha Reserve Project and World Wildlife Fund, Washington.

Carroll, R.W. (1996) Feeding ecology of lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) in Dzanga-Sangha Reserve of the Central African Republic. PhD thesis, University of Yale.

Carroll, R.W. & Hulberg, B. (1982). Wildlife investigations in the Manovo-Gounda-Saint Floris National Park, CAR. Report to the CAR Government.

Carroll, R.W. & Fry, H. (1986). A range extension and possible breeding record of the Brown Nightjar (Caprimulgus binotatus Bonaparta) in southwestern CAR. Malimbus 9.

Coquery-Vidrovitch, C. (1972). Le Congo au temps des grands compagnies concessionaires. 1898-1930. Paris: Mouton.

45 Doungoube, G.(1990) .Centra l African Republic:th eDzanga-Sangh a DenseFores t Reserve. InA .Kis s (ed.),Living with wildlife: wildlife resourcemanagement with localparticipation inAfrica. Washington, D.C.:Worl d Bank,pp. :75-79 .

Eves,H.E. , Hardin, R.& Rupp , S.(1998 )Resourc eus ei nth etrinationa l Sangharive r region ofequatoria l Africa: Histories,knowledg e forms, andinstitutions . Bulletin Series#112 . Yale School ofForestr y andEnvironmenta l Studies.

Fay,J.M . (1989)Partia l completion ofa censu so fth elowlan d gorilla (Gorilla g. gorilla (Savagean dWyman) )i nsouthwester n CentralAfrica n Republic.Mammalia 53, 203-215.

Fay,J.M . (1991)A nelephan t (Loxodonta africana) surveyusin gdun g counts inth e forests ofth e Central African Republic.Journal of Tropical Ecology 7 :25-36 .

Fay,J.M . (1996)Th edistribution , habitat, ecology,evolution , andorigi n ofth eWester n LowlandGorill a (Gorilla gorilla gorilla Savage andWyman) .PhD .thesis , Washington University

Garreau,J-M . (1996a)Enquet e socio-economique surquelque sproduction s de lavill ed e Bayanga.Non-publishe d report.Proje t Dzanga-Sangha. pp.17 .

Garreau,J-M . (1996b)Demarch e dedeveloppemen trura l ausei n duPCD IDzanga - Sangha.Non-publishe d report.Proje t Dzanga-Sangha.

Garreau,J-M . (1996c) Evaluation duCD Baupre sd el apopulatio n deBayanag a apresu n and'existenc e legale.Proje t Dzanga-Sangha.

Gide,A .(1927) .Voyag e auCongo .

Giguet,R . (1975).L afore t dense Centrafricaine. Ministere desEau xe tForets ,Bangui , 16 p.multigr .

Giles-Vernick,T .L .(1996 ) Adea dpeople :migrants ,lan d andhistor y inth erai nfores t ofcentra lAfrica . PhD. Dissertation. Baltimore:Joh nHopkin sUniversity .

Guigonis,(1977) .Unpublishe drepor tt oCA RGovernmen t

Goldsmith,M.L .(1997) .Ecologica l influences onth erangin g andgroupin gbehaviou ro f werstern lowland gorillas atBa iHokou , Central African Republic. Phdthesis . StateUniversit y ofNe wYor k at StonyBrook ,Ne wYork .

GondaNgbalet , M.(1995 )Donnee s demographiqued eDzanga-Sangha . Rapport intermediare.Proje t Dzanga-Sangha, Universite deBangui .

46 Green,A .A .& Carroll ,R.W . (1991).Th eavifaun a ofDzanga-Ndok i National Parkan d Dzanga-Sangha Rainforest Reserve,Centra lAfrica n Republic.Malimbus , 13:49 - 66.

Harcourt, A.H.(1986 )Gorill a conservation: anatomy ofa campaign . InBernischke ,K . (ed.)Primates: theroad to self-sustainingpopulations. NewYork : Springer- Verlag,

Harris,D .J .(1993) .A taxonomi c revision anda nethnobotanica l survey ofth e Irvingiaceae inAfrica . Ph.D.Thesis ,Universit y ofOxford , UK

Harris,D .J . (1994)Interi m check-list toth evascula r plants ofth e Dzanga-Sangha Project Area CentralAfrica n Republic.Unpublishe d report.Universit y of Oxford 31pp.

Hunsicker, P.M.an dF .Ngambess o (1993) Banking ona natur ereserve .I nE .Kem f(ed.) , The lawof the mother:protecting indigenouspeople inprotected areas. SanFrancisco : Sierra ClubBooks ,pp. : 233- 237.

Kalck, P.,(1992) . Histoire Centrafricaine- Des origines a1966. L'Harmattan

Kingdon,J. , (1997) TheKingdon field guide to African mammals. Academic Press Limited,London .

Klaus,G . (1998).Natura l licksan dgeophag y (soil ingestion)b y largemammal si nth e rainforest ofth eCentra lAfrica n Republic. Inaugural-Dissertation, Universitat Zurich

Klaus-Hugi,C . S.(1998 )Hom erange ,feedin g behaviour andsocia l organization ofth e bongo (Tragelaphus eurycerus) inth erainfores t ofth e CentralAfrica n Republic. Dissertation, Mathematische-Naturwissenschaftlichen Falkutat derUniversita t Zurich

Kretsinger, A.(1989 ) Guide desmammifere s aBayanga . Bangui:Worl d Wildlife Fund.

Kretsinger, A.(1993 ) Domedevelopmen t options for theBaAk awithi nth e dzanga-Sangha DenseFores t Reserve.Unpublishe d report. Bangui:Worl d Wildlife Fund.

Kretsinger, A.(1995) .Produit s cruexporte spa rCFS O- DouanesBrazzaville .Source : Lesarchive sAix-en-Provence .

Kretsinger, A.& Zana ,H. , (1997). Souvenirs deBayang a 1890- 1960.Proje t Dzanga- Sangha.

47 Loevinsohn, M.E., (1978).Etude spreliminarie s del afore t dense.Documen t detravai l #9,FAO ,Rome .

Meester,J . &Setzer ,H.W . (1971).Th emammal so fAfrica : Anidentificatio n manual. Smithsonian Institution Press,Washington ,D.C .

Noss,A.J . (1995)Duikers ,cables ,an dnets :a cultura l ecology ofhuntin gi na centra l African forest. PhD.dissertation . University ofFlorida .P . 415.

Noss,A.J . (1998)Th eimpac to fcabl e snarehuntin g onwildlif e populations inth e forests ofth e CentralAfrica n Republic.Conservatio n Biology, 12(2) , 390-398.

PARN, Projet d'Amenagementde sRessource sNaturelle s (1995).Annuair e statistiqued u secteur forestier Centrafricain 1989- 1993.Minister e desEaux ,Forest ,Chasses , Peches,d uTourism ee td el'Environnement ,Bangui ,CAR .

PNUD(1995 )Rappor tmondia l surl edeveloppemen t humain 1995.Programm ede s NationsUnie spou r leDeveloppemen t (PNUD),Paris :Economic a

Ray,J.C .(1997) .Resourc eus epattern s amongmongoose s andothe rcarnivore s ina Central African Rainforest. PhD.dissertation , 1996,25 5p .Universit y ofFlorida .

Remis,M.J . (1994).Feedin g ecology andpositiona l behavior ofwester n lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) inth eCentra l African Republic.PhD .Thesis . University ofYale .

Republique Centrafricaine. (1984) Coded eprotectio n del afaun e sauvage,Ordonnanc e NO.84.045 . Bangui: Ministere desEaux ,Forets ,Chasse ,Peche ,Tourism e etd el'Environnement .

Republique Centrafricaine. (1990a) Loi90.01 7portan t creation duPar eNationa l Dzanga-Ndoki., Republique Centrafricaine. Bangui.

Republique Centrafricaine. (1990b) Loi90.01 8portan t creation del aReserv e Speciale deFore tDens e deDzanga - Sangha.Republiqu e Centrafricaine. Bangui.

Republique Centrafricaine. (1992a) Portant reglement interieur dupar enationa l Dzanga-Ndoki.,Arret eNo . 008. Bangui:Minister e desEaux ,Forets ,Chasse ,Peche ,Tourism e etd e l'Environnement.

Republique Centrafricaine. (1992b)

48 Portant reglement interieur dul aReserv e Speciale deFore t Dense deDzanga - Sangha., ArreteNo . 007.Bangui :Minister e desEaux ,Forets ,Chasse ,Peche , Tourisme etd el'Environnement .

Rondeau, G& Blom ,A .(i nprep. )Th eavifaun a ofDzanga-Sangha , Central African Republic.

Spinage,C.A. , (1979).Unpubl .Repor tt oCA Rgovt .FAO , Bangui

Spinage,C.A. , (1981a).Resum e desaire sprotegee se tpropose epou retr eprotegees . Document deterrai n #2,FAO , Rome.

Spinage,C.A. , (1981b). Some faunal isolates ofth eCentra lAfrica n Republic.Blackwel l Sci.Publ .

Telesis(1991 ) Sustainble economic development options forth e Dzanga-Sangha Reserve Central African Republic,Telesi sUSA ,Inc .

Telesis (1993) Supplementary study ofth e sustainable economic development options for theDzanga-Sangh a Reserve CentralAfrica n Republic,Telesi sUSA ,Inc .

49 Chapter4

Asurve y ofth eape si nth eDzanga-Ndok i National Park, CentralAfrica n Republic.

Acompariso nbetwee n thecensu s and surveymetho d for estimating the gorilla (Gorilla gorillagorilla) andchimpanze e (Pan troglodytes) nest groupdensity .

Blom,A. 1,2, Almasi,A. 2, Heitkonig, I.M.A.2,Kpano u J-B.1 andPrins ,H.H. T2 '3

1 Dzanga-Sangha project, WWF,B P 1053Bangui , Central African Republic 2 Department of Environmental Sciences, Tropical Nature Conservation and Vertebrate Ecology Group,Bornsestee g69 ,670 8 PDWageningen , The Netherlands 3 Corresponding author

(Journalo fAfrica n Ecology, inpress )

Abstract

Asurve y ofth ediurna lprimate s wascarrie d outbetwee n October 1996an d May 1997i nth eDzang a sectoro fth eDzanga-Ndok iNationa l Park, Central African Republic (CAR),t oestimat e gorilla (Gorillagorilla gorilla) andchimpanze e (Pan troglodytes) densities.Th edensit yestimate swer ebase do nnes t counts.Thi sarticl e describesho wth e striptransec t census andth e linetransec t surveymetho d wereuse d toestimat e thegorill anes t groupdensity .Th e striptransec t hasbee nmos t commonly usedt odate .I tassume s that allnes t groupswithi nth ewidt h ofth estri p aredetected , but asthi sassumptio n iseasil y violated inth edens etropica l rainforest thelin e transect survey wasals oused . Forth e lattermethod ,onl yal lnes t groups onth e transect lineitsel f shouldb edetected . Thatmetho dprove dt ob ea nadequat ean deas y technique for estimating densities indens evegetation . Thegorill a density of 1.6 individuals/km2 (linetransec t surveymethod ) found for theDzang a sectori son eo fth ehighes t gorilla densitieseve rreporte d inliterature . Thedensit y estimate for chimpanzees was0.1 6individual spe rkm 2(censu smethod) . Theresult s ofthi sstud yconfir m the importance ofth e Dzanga-Ndoki National Park for primate conservation.

Introduction

TheDzanga-Ndok i National Park (1222km 2)an dth eDzanga-Sangh a Special Dense ForestReserv e (3159km 2) inth e extreme south-west ofth e Central African Republic (CAR)(Figur e 1)wer edesignate d in 1990.Thei rabundanc e ofwildlif e and range ofpristin edens e forest habitatshav ebee n described byCarrol l (1986)an dFa y (1989).Th efores t contains 15o fth e 19 primate speciesrecorde d inth e CAR,o f which gorilla (Gorillagorilla gorilla) andchimpanze e (Pan troglodytes) areo fprim e interest.

50 \ CENTRALAFRICA NREPUBLI C J + N

-3° " J 3°- Dzanga- S\rsecto r Ndoki \ \ / Bayang~a >' - National Park

C Lidjoinbo A^y A M / C E i \ 1 ( Ndoki sector 0 R v s\ / N 0 e a I / G 0 r n\ / 0 N g\ / a] / 1:12500 , 16°^-« Bomassa

Figure 1: Study area in the Central African Republic

Iti sessentia l tohav e accurate datao nth edensit y ofthes eanimal s inorde rt o conserve andmanag eth e CARprotecte d areas,an d specifically, tomonito r trendsi n ordert oestablis hwhethe r theirpopulation s arestable ,declinin g orincreasing .T o design anappropriat e system for monitoring gorilla andchimpanze e populationsw e neededt oestablis h anadequat e surveytechniqu e based onindirec t observations of animalpresence , sucha snes tgroups . Theusua lmethod so festimatin gmamma ldensit yi ndens efores t habitatar eth e striptransec tcensu san dth elin etransec tsurvey .Th estri ptransec t(Burnham ,et al., 1980),i sth emos tcommonl yuse dmetho dfo r estimatingnes tgrou pdensities .I t assumestha tal lnes tgroup swithi nth ewidt ho fth estri par ecounted .Thi sassumptio n howeveri seasil yviolate d inth edens etropica lrainforest . Thelin etransec tsurve y (Buckland,et al., 1993)assume stha tal lnes tgroup so nth etransec tlin ear edetected . A proportiono fth enes tgroup so neithe rsid eo fthi slin ema yg oundetected ,bu ta detectionfunctio n correctsfo rth edecreasin gprobabilit yo fdetectin ga nes tgrou p further awayfrom th etransec tline . Thedat aw ecollecte dwil lb euse dfo r anongoin gstud yo fprimate san dothe r largemammal si nth eDzang asector ,an dt omonito rth eoveral limpac to fprojec t activities sucha seco-touris mdevelopmen tan dla w enforcement.

51 Studyare a

This studywa sundertake nfrom th eMongamb eresearc h campi nth eDzang a sector (2°55'N, 16°20'E) ofth e Dzanga-Ndoki National Park.Thi ssecto r coversa n area of49 5km 2 (Figure 1),whic h from 1972unti l the 1980swa s selectively logged mainly fortw o species ofhardwood . Thetopograph y ofth eDzang a sector isrelativel y flat. Afe w streams flow from eastt owes tthroug hth epark ,toward sth e Sanghariver . Inth enorthwester n part ofth epar kther e isa larg e marshy area. Thefores t structure inth eDzang a sectori sa patchwork ofprimar y forest habitats and secondary forest withmuc hherbaceou s undergrowth. Light gapscreate db ynatura l tree fall orelephan t activity (Carroll, 1986),accoun t for almost 9.5%o fth e forest habitat (Almasie tal. , inprep.) .Th e selective logging alsocreate d disturbed forest habitats:th eherbaceou s plants areals o abundant inth e abandoned loggingroads . Theclimat e ischaracterise d bya dr y season ofthre emonth s (December - February) anda lon grain y season witha drie rperio d inJune-July . Themea nannua l rainfall inBayang a is 1365m m(Carroll , 1986).Temperatur e varies little overth e year,wit h anaverag e of26. 4°C .Mea nmonthl y minimum temperature ranges from 20.6° Ci nDecembert o 22.9° CApril ,an dmea n monthlymaximu m temperature ranges from 28.4° Ci nJun et o 35.7° Ci nMarc h (Carroll, 1986). Thedesignate d conservation area ismanage db yth e Dzanga-Sangha project ina n integrated manner. Thismean stha t limited traditional andsafar i hunting, agroforestry development andcommercia l logging areallowe d inth ereserve ,whil e there isful l protection ofth e natural forest ecosystem inth e designated core areao f thepar k (Carroll, 1986).

Materials andmethod s

Directcount s alongtransects ,th emos t commonlyuse dtechniqu e for surveys ofmammals ,ar eo flimite dvalu e for surveying gorillas andchimpanzee s inth e tropical rainforest becauseth e denseunderstor y ofth efores t andth eextrem e wariness ofth e apesmak edirec t observations rare (Tutin etal. , 1995).T oovercom e thisproble m ofobtainin g sufficient data,populatio n studiesmus ttherefor e relyo n interpreting the signso fap eactivity .W eopte dt oestimat e density from nestcounts , aseac h individual ofa grou po fgorillas/chimpanzees , except for suckling infants, usuallybuild s anes t toslee pi n eachnight ,thereb y leaving tangible signso fbot h theirpresenc e andthei rnumber s (Tutin etal . 1995).

52 Transects

Datawer ecollecte d during 5month s offieldwork betwee n October 1996an d March 1997.T oestimat e nest density, 520-k mtransect swer e laidacros s ama po f the arearandomly ,bu t atleas t 1 kmapar t andparalle l toeac hother ,a trigh t angelst o the country drainage.Eac htransec t thenwa swalke d once,followin g afixe d compass bearing;distance salon gth etransec t were measured byhip-chain . Eachhabita ttyp e andtopograph y change encountered alongth etransec twa snoted ,wit hit sdistanc e alongth etransect , aswel l asal l signso fsimia man dhuma n activities.A tleas ttw o BaAka assistantshelpe d the observer tosearc h for signsan d indications ofsimia n andhuma n activity.Th eBaAk aar ea trib e offores t dwelling peoplewit hexcellen t knowledge ofth e forest. Whena grou p ofnest swa sencountered , the distance from eachnes tt oth etransec t linewa smeasured . Toovercom eth eproble m ofclumpe ddistributio n for the statistical analyses, the countednest s wereanalyse d interm so fnes tgroups .Al lnest s ofth e sameag e recorded along a2 0m stretc h ofth etransec t linewer e arbitrarily designated ason e group.

Apenest s

The datacollecte d oneac hnes twer e species,location ,habita ttype ,ag eclas s ofth enest ,constructio n type andheigh t above theground . Fournes t age classeswer e distinguished: • fresh: moist dungpresent , sometimes gorilla/ chimpanzee odourtoo ; • recent: vegetation stillgreen , someflattene d dung mayb epresent ; • old:intact ,bu tal lvegetatio n dead; • veryold :decompositio n advanced.

Sixnes t construction typeswer e distinguished for gorillas: • "zero":flattene d patch andgorill a odour anddung ,indicatin g thatth egorill aha d slept onth eground ; • minimal:nes t madefro m afe w herbaceous stems; • herbaceous: morecomple x structure made exclusively from herbaceousmaterials ; • mixed:nes t constructed from mixture ofwood yan dherbaceou s material; • woody:nes t constructed exclusively ofwood ymaterial ; • treenest :nes t constructed intree ,mostl yconstructe d exclusively ofwood y material. Chimpanzees onlybuil dtre enests .

Gorillanest swer edistinguishe d from chimpanzeenest sb ythei rconstruction , theheigh tdistributio no fnest swithi na nes tgrou p(gorill anes tgroup susuall yhav ea t leaston enes to nth egroun dan dar erarel yconstructe d atheigh tabov e 15 m),an dth e presenceo fgorill ascent ,dun go rhair si nth enests .

53 Calculatingnes t groupdensit y

Bothth e striptransec t census andth e linetransec t surveymetho dwer e appliedt oestimat e thenes t groupdensity .Bot hmethod s requireth edistanc efrom eachnes tt oth etransec t linet ob emeasured . Thedistanc eo fth egeometrica l centre ofth enes tgrou pfro m thetransec t linei suse dt oestimat enes tgrou pdensit y(Figur e 2).

Figure 2: Calculation of the geometrical centre (G) of the nest group from the transect line

Transect 4 (km) distance ofth e along thetra t lsect nest (N)from thetransec t line

1.250 N 3.50 m

N 0.00 m N 2.35 m G 1.71m N 1.245 1.70 m

N 1.00 m

1.240

Striptransec tcensu s

Thismetho d calculatesth enes t groupdensit y bydividin g thenumbe ro fnes tgroup s withinth ewidt ho fth estri pb yth etota lare ao fth estrip s(Formul a 1).

numbero fnes t groups Nest group density= I(L,j*(2*w)) (1)

Ly =lengt htransec t line i- j w= widt h ofth e striptransec t

Amarke d dropi nth epercentag e ofnest s groupsrecorde dbeyon d aparticula r width ofth e strip indicatesth ecut-of f point for reliable counting (w).Fo r gorillasth e dropwa sdetecte d at4 m. ,whic hmean si twa scrucia lt orecor dal lnest swithi nthi s distance.Th etransec t width for chimpanzees found was 15 m.

54 It seemsprobabl e that thedifferenc e intransec t widthbetwee n gorillasan d chimpanzees isa consequenc e ofth edistributio n ofnes tgroup sove rth evariou shabita t types.Ove r 80% o fgorill a nest groupswer e detected ina habita ttyp ewit hdens e understorey andlo wvisibility , but 84%o fth e chimpanzee nest groupswer e situatedi n forest withlittl egroun d coveran dgoo dvisibility . Usingth emetho ddescribe dabove ,al lnes tgroup stha thav ethei rcentre swithi n theare ao fth estri pshoul db edetected .However ,i ndens etropica lrainfores t this assumptioni seasil yviolated .Th eapplicatio no fthi smetho di sexpecte dt oyiel d reduceddensity ,leadin gt ounderestimate s ofnest s(i.e .gorilla )density .

Linetransec t survey

Unlike samplingmethod stha t arebase d onfixed-widt h transects,th elin e transect method(Buckland , etal., 1993 )doe sno t assumetha t allnes tgroup swithi na specified width aredetected . Ratherth e assumption istha tther e is 100%probabilit y thatth eobject s onth etransec t linear e seen. Thenumbe r ofnes t groups sightedawa y from the linedecrease s insom efashion . Thedetectio n function corrects for thelowe r probability ofdetectin g anes t group asdistance s increases from thetransec tline . Thismethod ,therefor e considers onlyth enes t groupstha tar e seenfro m thetransec t line. Itsassumptio n ismor erealisti c giventh econdition sprevailin g inou rarea . Therefore weexpecte dtha ti twoul dyiel dhighe ran dmor ereliabl e figures for nest groupdensit y than thestri ptransec t method. TheDISTANC E samplingprogra m (Buckland, etal, 1993)use sth e perpendicular distances ofth e geometrical centreo fth enes t groupfrom th etransec t linet o estimate density.A rul eo fthum b ist otruncat ebetwee n 5%an d 10% ofth e datat ofacilitat e datamodelin g bydeletin g extreme data (Buckland, etal. 1993) . Truncation at7 m resulte d in7 %o fth edat abein gsuppresse d .W eteste dth e influence ofgrou p sizeo ndetectabilit y from thetransec t line("sizebias") , but found itt ob e insignificant. Threeke ymodel swer eapplie dt ofi t thedetectio nfunction : theUnifor mmode l withcosin eadjustment , theHazar drat emode lan dth eHalf-Norma l model.Th eHalf - Normalmode lwa sselecte db yAkaike' sInformatio n Criteriont ofi tnes tgrou pdata . We didno tus eth esurve ymetho dt oestimat echimpanze enes tgrou pdensit ybecaus ew e onlycounte d 12 nestgroups .

Calculatingth edensit yo fnest-buildin g individuals

Equation 2(Tuti n andFernandez , 1984)wa suse dt oestimat eth e densityo f nest-building individualspe rkm 2.W edi dno t adjust the density figures toinclud e non-nest-building individuals, sincew eha dn odat ao nth e group structure ofgorilla s inCAR .

55 lestgrou p 1 1 Mediannes t number ofnes t Density x no. ofnest s x meannes t x groupsiz e buildingindi ­ builtb ya life span vidualspe rkm 2 individual/day (2)

5

= X(liXPi)

1 L =averag e life span ofnes t 1; =lif e spano ftyp e ines t i =nes tconstructio n type Pi= proportio n ofobservation s ofnes ttype s (seeTabl e 1)

Table 1: Life spano fth enes ttype s distinguished byTuti n andFernande z (1984)an dth e number ofobservation s ofthes e nesttype spresen t inthi sstudy .

Nest construction meannes t numbero f types" lifespan (days)b observations (%) Zero 4.3 7 (9%) Minimum 19.1 5 (6%) Herbaceous 61.7 35 (43%) Mixed 52.7 27 (33%) Woodyan dtre e 50.9 8 (10%) Totalnumbe ro fnest s 82

For explanation, seetex t Data from Tutin andFernande z(1984) .

Themea nnes tlif e span,th eaverag enumbe ro fday sth enes tremain s identifiable asa nest ,wa sobtaine db ymultiplyin gth elif e spano feac hnes ttyp ea sdetermine db yTuti n andFernande z (1984)b yth efrequenc y ofoccurrenc e(Equatio n 3).Thi sapproac hassume s thatth enes tdecompositio n factors aresufficientl y similari nth eGabo nstud ysit ean d Dzangat ojustif y thisextrapolation . Wefel tjustifie d inmakin gthi sassumptio nbecaus eth e climatean dth etyp eo ffores t aresimila ri nbot hstud ysites .Th egorill anes tlif e spanwa s estimatedt ob e5 0day s(Formul a 3,Tabl e 1).Chimpanzee sonl ybuil dtre enest ss ones t life spanha sa sa naverag eo f50. 9day s(Tabl e1) .

56 Results

Gorilla density

Intotal ,8 2gorill anest swer ecounte di n2 9nes tgroups ,rangin gfrom 1 to8 nests.Squar eroo ttransforme d datafitte d anorma ldistribution .Th emea ngrou psiz e was2. 6(95 %confidenc e limits:2.0-3.2) . The gorilla density calculated with the strip transect method was 1.5 gorilla/km2 (Table 2). The gorilla density calculated by line transect survey method was 1.6 gorilla/km2 (95% confidence interval 1.1 -2.3 ) (Table3) .

Table 2: Density of nestbuilding gorillas and chimpanzees estimated by the strip transect censusmetho d

Species Width Area censused no. no. ofweane d ind. (m) (km2) nest groups km2 Gorilla 4 0.8 20 1.5 Chimpanzee 15 3.0 12 0.16

Table 3:Densit y ofnestbuildin g gorillas estimatedb yth e linetransec t survey method

Species Width no.nes t no.nes tgroup sk m no.o fweane dind .k m (m) groups (95% confidence (95%confidenc e limits) limits) Gorilla 7 29 26.7 (18.6-38.3) 1.6 (1.2-2.1)

Despite sampling 100 kmo ftransect , inthi s studyth edat a for gorillasdi d notreac hth eminimu mnumbe r of4 0nes t groups required forth e linetransec t survey method. Duet oth e small data setth e coefficient ofvariatio ndi dno treac h thedesire d accuracy ofestimatio n of<10 %(Buckland , et. ah,1993) .

Chimpanzeedensit y

Wecounte d atota l of3 8nests ,i n 12 nest groups.Th emea ngrou p sizevalu e was2. 8 (95% confidence interval: 1.7 -4.3 ,median=2) . Squareroo t transformation wasapplie dt ofit th edat at oa norma ldistributio n (Kolmogorov-Smirnovp>0.05) . Thedensit yestimat ea scalculate db yth estri ptransec tmetho dwa s0.1 6 chimpanzee/km2(Tabl e 2).Th elin etransec t surveymetho dwa sno tapplie d since therewer eto ofe w datat ofi t the detection function.

Discussion

Incensus/surve y relyingupo n theestimatio n oftrace s left byanimal s (nests) rathertha n sightingso fanimal sthemselves , sources oferro rar eintroduced . Onth eothe r hand, sample sizewil l increase,thu simprovin g statistical resolution (White, 1994).Fo ra

57 moredetaile d discussion onth e accuracy ofdat acollectio n andth ecorrectnes so f Equations 1 and2 ,se eTuti n andFernande z(1984) . Inthi s study, wefoun d agorill adensit y of 1.6 individuals/km2 for the Dzanga sectoro fth eDzanga-Ndok iNationa l Park.Th edensit y calculationswer e based onnes t groupestimates ,whic hwer e analysedb yth e surveymethod . Thestri p transect methodyielde d an estimateo f 1.5 gorilla/km2. Invie wo fth e assumptions underlying inth e lattermethod ,w econside r thatthi svalu erepresent s alowe rlimit . Apossibl ereaso n for thegoo dagreemen t between estimates istha t thedat awer e collected asth etransect s werebein gwalke d for thefirs t time. Thespee d ofprogres swa s lesstha n 500m a nhour ,wit hmor etha n four BaAkaassistant shelpin g tocu tth etrai la t the sametime .Thi sminimize d thepossibilit y ofmissin ga nes t groupwithi nth ewidt ho f the striptransect . Thegorill a density inth e Dzanga area ison eo fth ehighes t densities recorded based onnes tobservation s (Table4) ,surpasse d onlyb yMitani' s (1993) estimate of4 -5 individual spe rkm 2.Hi sestimat e wasbase d ondirec tobservatio n of gorilla groups inth eNdok i forest inNorther n Congo.Th ehig h density ofgorilla sa t his studysit ei sexpecte d tob ea resul to fth epresenc e ofaquati cplant s inswamps . Gorillasuse dthes eplant sextensivel ywithou t ecological competition from sympatric chimpanzees. Thehig hgorill a density inth eDzang a sector canb eunderstoo d invie wo f thetypica l habitat ofth eDzang a area. Moderately disturbed forest, sucha stha t found inDzanga ,ca nb erelativel y rich inhig hqualit y folivore foods andca n support higher densitieso ffolivorou s primates (Oates, 1996).Oate s(1996 )ha sdemonstrate d that gorilla density iscorrelate d withth e abundanceo fterrestria l herbaceous vegetation. Fay(1995 )state stha t allmonocotyledonou splants ,bu t especially thosebelongin gt o the families Marantaceae andZingiberaceae, arefavourabl e for ahig h gorilla density.No t onlyar ethes eherb suse d for constructing most ofth enests ,bu tthei r pith isals oa nimportan t gorilla food (Carroll, 1986). Ourdensit y estimate of0.1 6chimpanzee/km 2 isslightl yhighe rtha nth e figure of0.01-0.1 3chimpanzee/km 2tha t Carroll (1986)calculate d in 1984fo rth e various sectorso fth e Dzanga-NdokiNationa l Park, andremain s lowcompare d to othersite si nAfrica . Apossibl e explanation for the lowchimpanze e density inth e Dzangasecto ri sth eproximit y ofth evillag eo fBayanga .Tuti nan dFernande z(1984 ) claimtha t chimpanzees areaffecte d more seriously byhuntin gpressur etha ngorillas . Poaching occurs inth eDzang a sector,bu t doesno tappea rt ofor m aseriou sthrea tt o thepopulatio n ofapes .Thi smigh tb ebecaus epoacher susuall y huntwit hcabl e snares sincethei rchie fpre y ismainl y duikers.Anothe r explanation for thelo w density ofchimpanzee s couldb eth eunavailabilit y of suitablehabitat :the y prefer undisturbed forest. Thetypica l rainforest habitat inDzanga ,characterise d byth e frequent occurrence ofnatura l secondary forest habitats containing abundant herbaceous regrowth, favours highgorill a densities.Th ehig h gorilla densityw efoun d confirms thisan dshow stha tth e National Park isimportan t role inth econservatio n ofth ewester n lowland gorilla. Overall,th epar k appears tooffe r sufficient protection toth egorill a andchimpanzee .W e suggesttha tth emonitorin gprogramm e becontinued , usinglin etransec t surveys asth e maintool .

58 Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Dzanga-Sangha Project, specifically through a grant from the World Wildlife Fund for nature in Washington, and grants from the FONA Foundation, Lucie Burgers Foundation for Comparative Behaviour Research and the Wageningen Agricultural University Foundation. We would also like to thank the field team, K. Otto, E. Mbea and P. Godobo, and all the BaAka trackers for their assistance with the field work. Furthermore, we would like to thank G. van der Kroon, Dr. W. van Schaik and Ir. C. Sieler for their assistance. Finally, we would like to thank the entire Dzanga-Sangha Project staff and the World Wildlife Fund staff in Bangui, Frankfurt and Washington for their support.

References

ALMASI, A., BLOM, A., OTTO, K., KNAPOU, J-B. AND PRINS, H.T.T. Survey of elephants (Loxodonta Africana) in the Dzanga-Sangha National Park, Central African Republic, (in prep.) BUCKLAND, S.T., ANDERSON, D.R., BURNHAM, K.P. AND LAAKE, J.L. (1993) Distance sampling: Estimating abundance of biological populations. Chapman & Hall, London & New York, pp 446. BURNHAM, K.P., ANDERSON, D.R., LAAKE, J.L. (1980) Estimating density from line-transect, sampling of biological populations. Wildlife monographs 72, 1-102. CARROLL, R.W. (1986) The status, distribution, and density of the lowland gorilla (Gorilla g gorilla Savage + Wymari)),forest elephant (Loxodonta africana cyclotis) and associated dense forest fauna in south-western Central African Republic: Research towards the establishment of a reserve for their protection. Thesis submitted for the degree of Ph.D. Yale University, Connecticut, USA. FAY, J.M. (1989) Partial completion of a census of the lowland gorilla (Gorilla g gorilla) in the Central African Republic. Mammalia 53,203-215 . FAY, J.M., AGNAGNA, M. (1992) Census of gorillas in the northern Republic of Congo.American Journal of Primatology 27, 275-284 JONES, C. AND SAVAGE-PI, J. (1971), Comparative ecology of Gorilla gorilla (Savage and Wyman) and Pan troglodytes (Blumenbach) in Rio Muni, West Africa. Bib primatology 13, 1-96 MITANI, M., YAMAGIWA, J., OKO, R.A., MOUTSAMBOTE, J-M, YUMOTO, T., MARUHASHI, T. (1993) Approaches in density estimates and reconstruction of social groups in western lowland gorilla population in the Ndoki forest northern Congo. Tropics, 2(4), 219-229 OATES, J.F. (1996) Habitat alterations, hunting and the conservation of folivorous primates in the African forests. Australian Journal of Ecology 21(1), 1-19. TUTIN, C.E.G. AND FERNANDEZ, M. (1984) Nation-wide census of Gorilla (Gorilla g gorilla) and chimpanzee (Pan t. Troglodytes) in Gabon. American Journal of Primatology 6, 313-336.

59 TUTIN, C.E.G., PARNELL, R.J., WHITE, L.T.J., FERNANDEZ, M. (1995) Nest building by lowland gorillas in the Lope reserve, Gabon: Environmental influences and implications for censusing. International Journal of Primatology Vol. 16, No.l, 53-75. WHITE, L.J.T. (1994) Biomass of rainforest mammals in the Lope reserve, Gabon. Journalof Animal Ecology 63,499-512 .

60 Chapter5 Humanimpac t onwildlif e populations within aprotecte d central African forest AllardBlom 1'2'3,Rober tva nZalinge 2,Eugen eMbea 1,Igna sHeitkonig 2an dHerber tH.T . Prins2.

1Dzanga-Sangh a Project,Worl dWildlif e Fund,B.P . 1053,Bangui ,Centra lAfrica n Republic 2Tropica l Nature Conservation andVertebrat e Ecology Group,Wageninge n Agricultural University, Bornsesteeg 69,670 8 PD,Wagenigen , TheNetherlands . 3Departmen t ofAnthropology , StateUniversit y ofNe wYor ka tSton yBroo k Stony,Broo kN Y 11794,US A Corresponding authoraddress :4 3Cov eDrive ,Soun dBeach ,N Y 11789,USA ,E-mail :[email protected] m

Abstract Thispape rpresent sth eresult s ofth emonitorin g oflarg emammal s and evidence ofhuma npresenc ecarrie d outo na monthl ybasi s from January 1997t oAugus t 1999i n the Dzanga-Ndoki National Park andadjacen t Dzanga-Sangha Reserve inth eCentra l African Republic. Between 6t o 8twent ykilometer-lon g permanent transect were walked ona monthlybasi s toasses slarg emamma lpopulation s aswel l ashuma n intrusion.Ther e weren oobviou s seasonal ormonthl ytrend s inelephant , gorilla ormonke ydensities . Although somesignifican t differences were found between years inbot h gorillaan d elephantpopulation s (butno tmonkeys) ,th eresult swer eno t conclusive andi ti s premature toreac h adefinit e conclusion aboutpopulatio n changes. Elephants inparticula r were significantly lesscommo n inarea srelate dt ohuma n use,bu t alsoothe r species such asmonkey s showed lowerdensitie s closert oth emai n road andth etow no fBayanga .Ou rstud yals o showstha tpoacher sus e secondary (logging)road st openetrat e intoth enationa l park.Thus ,increasin g anti-poaching efforts alongthes eroad s couldb e aneffectiv e protection measure.

Introduction

Asth ehuma n population continues togrow ,huma n activities escalatean d become increasingly widespread. Incentra lAfrica , asi nman yothe rarea s inth eworld , several animal specieshav e comeunde rthrea t duet ohabita t lossan dhunting .A recen t study carried out inth ecentra l African forests highlighted that gameresource s areth e limiting factor for human densities inthes e areas (Barnes &Lahm , 1997),an dca nb e easily exploited beyond sustainable levels (Noss, 1995& 1998).Eve nthos e areaswit ha legallyprotecte d status areno t free from human disturbance.A recen t assessment ofth e protected areas inth eCentra lAfrica n Republic (Blom& Yamindou , inprep. ) illustrates that human disturbance isa nimportan t threatt oth ebasi c survival ofman yo fthes e protected areas.Th eeffec t ofhuma ndisturbanc e varygreatl y depending onit snatur ean d intensity; thus studieswhic h looka tth eresult s ofhuma n interaction withwildlif e may prove essential for managingprotecte dareas . As Tutin et al. (1995) pointed out, survey data are essential for conservation and management ofprotecte d areas.I t is important toestimat e numbers,bu t it isprobabl y even

61 more important to monitor trends in order to establish whether populations are stable, declining orincreasin g over time. Theobjectiv e of thestud ypresente dher e ist o determine theeffec t ofloca lhuma npopulation so nth edistributio no fwildlif e withinth eDzang asecto r of the Dzanga-Ndoki National Park and the adjacent area of the Dzanga-Sangha Dense Forest SpecialReserv ei nsouthwester n CentralAfrica n Republic (Figure1) . This study is part of ongoing ecological research set up by the Dzanga-Sangha Project tosurve yan dmonito rloca lwildlif e populations (Blom, 1999;Blom ,e tal. ,i npress ; Almasi, et al, in prep.). The results of the initial surveys (i.e. density estimates) will be published separately (Blom,e t al.,i npress ;Almasi ,e t al.,i nprep.) .Thi spape rpresent sth e resultso fth efirs t 20month so fth emonitorin g datacollection , spanningfrom Januar y 1997 toAugus t 1999. Past studieshav e analyzed species distribution bycomparin g regions withvaryin g levelso fhuma n disturbance (Fitzgibbon etal, 1995;Hal l etal, 1998;Oates , 1996;Prin s &Reitsma , 1989;White , 1994), but few have actuallytrie dt oquantif y therelationshi pi n amor edetaile d manner (but seeBarnes ,e tal. , 1997an dLahm ,e tal. , 1998fo r notable exceptions). Bylookin ga tth edistributio n ofhuma nactivitie sa swel la sa rang eo f different speciesw ehop et oobtai n abette runderstandin g ofhuma n impact inth e Dzanga-Sangha protected areacomplex . The surveys (Blom, et al., in press; Almasi, et al., in prep.) and the ecological monitoringprogra mpresente dher econcentrat eo nlarg emammal san dhuma ntraces ,a si ti s assumedtha t largemammal sar egoo d indicators ofoveral lecosyste m health.Althoug h iti s realizedthi sma yno tb esufficient , largemammals ,suc ha smonkeys ,ape san delephants ,d o provide indicators for trends associated with hunting and otherhuma n activities (Barnes, et al, 1991, 1993, 1995 a,b). As such they provide an appropriate indicator for the effectiveness of the protection program carried out by the Dzanga-Sangha project (Blom, 1999). Additional surveys and studies by the Dzanga-Sangha project, museums and other researchers on large and small mammals, birds, fishes and some insect families have and will continue to complement the large mammal surveys and the monitoring program (e.g. Blom, 1993a,b ;Rondea u & Blom,i nprep ;Lund e& Beresford , 1997;Beresford , 1999; Ray &Hutterer , 1996).

Studyare a

TheDzang a Sangha Special Dense Forest Reserve (3159km 2)an dth e adjacent Dzanga-NdokiNationa l Park (sectorDzang a 495km 2; sectorNdok i 727km 2)togethe r form theDzanga-Sangh a protected areacomplex ,whic h liesi nth e south-western Central African Republic (CAR)(Figur e 1).S ofa r 105specie so fnon-volan tmammal shav ebee n observedwithi nth eDzanga-Sangh a area(Blom , 1993a),includin gth especie so flarg e mammalstha twer eth efocu s ofou rstudy .Thes especie sinclud eelephant s (Loxodonta africana), chimpanzees {Pan troglodytes) andgorilla s(Gorilla gorilla), 9specie so f monkeys(Papio anubis, Cercocebus agilis, L. albigena, Cercopithecusnictitans, C. cephus, C.pogonias, C. neglectus, Colobusguereza and Piliocolobus oustaleti) an dfiv e specieso fduiker s(Cephalophus monticola, C. nigrifrons; C. silvicultor, C. callipygus, C. dorsalisand C. leucogaster). Besides adivers erainfores t flora andfaun a (Fay, etal. , 1990;Blom , 1993a,b ;Harris , 1994;Rondea u &Blom , inprep. ) theare acontain son eo f thehighes tdocumente d densities ofwester n lowland gorillas (Gorillag. gorilla) and

62 forest elephants (Loxodontaafricana cyclotis) inAfric a (Carroll, 1986a,b,c , 1988a,b , 1997;Fay , 1989, 1991a,b;Blom , etah, i nprep. ;Almasi ,et ah, inprep.) .Th etota l forest areao fsouthwes t CARcover s approximately 6000k m andlie salon gth enorther n limits ofth e CongoBasi nrainfores t (Carroll, 1997).

63 Figure 1Th e Dzanga-Ndoki National park and the Dzanga-Sangha Dense Forest Special Reservei nth eCentra lAfrica n Republic

A N

• Villages /\/ Roads Streams ^B Rivers [~~1Savann a I |Dzanga-Ndok iNationa lPar k I |Dzanga-Sangh aReserv e

64 The Dzanga-Sangha protected area complex is also part of a continuous protected forest block stretching into neighboring Congo (Nouabale-Ndoki) and Cameroon (Lac Lobeke), forming the so-called Sangha tri-national area. The Dzanga-Ndoki National Park is a strictly protected area, allowing only limited access for research and tourism. The creation of the Dzanga-Sangha Dense Forest Special Reserve in 1990 introduced a new category of protected area into the Central African legislation, that of a multiple-use reserve. The reserve functions as a buffer zone for the national park by allowing the use of natural resources in a sustainable manner (Carroll, 1992). Forestry, safari hunting and traditional hunting and gathering are authorized, but mining is banned. The limits as well as the interior regulations of the protected areas were negotiated with the local population before their gazetting (Carroll, pers. comm.). The human population density in this area is low at an estimated 1perso n per km2, based on a census carried out in 1995 by World Wildlife Fund (Gonda Ngbalet, 1995; Blom, unpublished data). Almost 60 % of the people live in the town of Bayanga (2,365 inhabitants in 1995). The rest of the population, roughly 2400 people, is largely distributed along the road leading from the northern limit of the Reserve to Lindjombo (720 inhabitants), the second largest settlement in the Reserve (Figure 1). The BaAka pygmies comprise the largest ethnic group in the area. Most people living in the area are dependent on wildlife as a source of daily protein. Duikers and most other wildlife may be legally hunted within the reserve by the owners of licensed firearms or by traditional means such as nets and spears. Meat is then consumed directly, bartered, sold at the marketplace of Bayanga or transported to other villages. Transportation of meat and hides to markets outside of the reserve is illegal, but difficult to control. Protected species such as the apes and species for which hunting is closed, such as elephants can not be legally hunted. The use of cable snares, which kill indiscriminately, is prohibited though widely used by local hunters, whose range encompasses the entire Dzanga-sector. A recent study carried out in Dzanga Sangha confirmed that snare hunting alone is currently being practiced at unsustainable high levels for three species of duiker: Cephalophus callipygus, C. dorsalis and C. monticola (Noss, 1998). From 1971unti l the early eighties the logging company "Slovenia Bois" selectively logged a 1,000 km2 area, largely within the area now encompassing the Dzanga-Sangha complex (Carroll, 1997), before going bankrupt. It briefly reinitiated activities to fail again within a year. In 1993 new owners revived and renamed the company "Sylvicole de Bayanga". Logging operations were restarted on a smaller scale, employing about 250 people. It closed once again in 1997 due to mismanagement. At present it is in the process of re-opening once again. The town of Bayanga grew rapidly during the heyday of Slovenia Bois, but the following cycles of boom and bust resulted in similar cycles of immigration and emigration. The result has been a highly mobile population with significant fluctuations in inhabitant numbers in Bayanga. Most of the survey and monitoring presented in this study was undertaken in and adjacent to the Dzanga sector (2°55'N, 16°20'E) of the Dzanga-Ndoki National Park (Figure 1). From 1971 until the 1985 this area was selectively logged for mainly two species of hardwood, sipo and sapeli {Entandrophragma utile and E. cylindricum)(C&rro\\, 1997).

65 Thefores t structure inth e studyare a isa patchwor k ofprimar y forest habitats, including stands ofmonodominan t forest of Gilbertiodendron dewevreii, and secondary forest with large quantities ofherbaceou s undergrowth. Light gapswhic h arecreate db y natural tree fall orelephan t activity (Carroll, 1986c),represen t almost 9.5%o fth e forest habitat (Almasi etal. ,i nprep.) . Also,selectiv e logging createddisturbe d forest habitats andherbaceou s plants areabundan t alongabandone d loggingroads . Theclimat e istropica l andth eyea r ischaracterise d bya dr y seasono fthre e months (December -February ) anda lon grain y season witha relativ e drierperio di n June-July.Mea nannua lrainfal l is 1365m mi nBayang a (Carroll, 1997).Temperatur e varies littleove rth eyea rwit h anaverag eo f26. 4°C .Mea nmonthl y minimum temperatures vary from 20.6° Ct o22. 9°C ,an dmea nmonthl ymaximu m temperatures from 28.4° Ct o35. 7° C(Carroll , 1997).

Methods Initially 5line-transect s wereplace d inth eDzang a sector ofth e Dzanga-Ndoki National Park (Almasi etal. ,i nprep. ;Blom ,e tal. ,i npress) :transect s 3,4,5,6an d7 (Figure 2).T othi swa sadde dth elimi t ofth eDzang a sectoro fth enationa l park,whic hi s inth e form ofa transect . Thetransect swer e 20k mi nlengt h andwer eplace d perpendicular toaverag e drainage flow. Inthi swa yth evariatio n inhabita t wasaccounte d for asmuc ha spossible .Thus ,al ltransect s alsora nperpendicula r toth e Nola-Lindjombo Road andt oal lhuma n settlements inth estud y area (Figure2) .Th etransect s werespace d randomly,wit hth eexceptio n ofth epar k limit.Durin gMarc h andApri l 1998 two additional transects: 1 and2 ,wer eplace d inth ereserve .

66 Figure 2Th eDzang a sector ofth e Dzanga-NdokiNationa l Parkwit htransec t locations

Dzangasecto r Dzanga-Ndoki NationalPar k

Villages 4 0 4 8 Kilometers

J Rivers 1Savann a IN ' Transects 1 Dzanga-NdokiNationa lPar k | Dzanga-Sangha Reserve A

67 From January 1997 to August 1999 monthly surveys focused on estimating distribution and relative abundance of wildlife and human disturbance. Each transect was walked by at least one researcher and two BaAka pygmy trackers, sometimes accompanied by one or two guards and additional trackers. The transects were walked every month (with the exception of 2 transects during March 1999) at an even pace and most of the time by the same experienced observers, as to minimise fluctuation in detection rates. An effort was made to remove all snares that were encountered, including those off the transect. Each of the pre-established transects of 20 km was divided into forty 500 meter blocks. Distances from the center point of each transect to the main road Nola- Lindjombo, as well as of each block to the nearest secondary (logging) road were measured using a satellite photo of the study area. To determine the effect of the main road on animal distribution our sample level was that of a transect, as the transects run perpendicular to the main road. For all other environmental variables the sample level was that of a block, allowing more detailed analysis. The percentages of the different habitat types found in each block were determined during the initial placement of the transects (Almasi, et al., in prep.). During the monthly surveys the observers noted the following signs for each 500 meter block:

• Number of elephant dung piles seen from the transect line • Presence or absence of ape nest • Presence of non-human primates: each species of monkeys (seen or heard) and/or apes (feeding remains, traces/tracks, seen or heard). Human presence and type of presence: • Hunting: snare, cartridge • Traditional hunting: net • Honey gathering:tre e cut, open hive • Other: footprints, camps,trails ,etc .

In April, May and June 1998duike r distribution data was collected on monthly surveys through dung counts on specific strip transects. As the dung is of small size yet frequently encountered we did not count all dung piles, but placed a strip transect only 1 km long and 3m wide on each of the 20 km transects, within a mixed forest type of similar structural appearance. Due to the subjectivity possible in this procedure all strip transects were placed by one individual. Average travel speed along these strips was approximately 0.5 km per hour in order to get accurate counts. Two individuals would search for duiker dung while the other(s) would continue standard observations. Differentiation of the dung belonging to the various medium sized (red) duikers often proved difficult and so for analysis these were lumped together as a group. Thus we distinguished dung as belonging to either red duikers or the smaller Blue duiker, Cephalophus monticola. The red duiker group consists of Peter's duiker, Cephalophus callipygus; Bay duiker, C. dorsalis; White-bellied duiker, C. leucogaster and the Black- fronted duiker, C. nigrifrons. Dung of the larger yellow-backed duiker (C. sylviclutor) was only rarely encountered on any of the transects and was not taken into consideration here. Besides leaving feeding remains of plants, lowland gorillas have been observed to frequently use the termites of the genus Cubitermes as a food resource in various study

68 sites (Tutin & Fernandez, 1992; Carroll, 1997). Furthermore, though chimpanzees have been reported to feed on termites and other insects they seem to select other species than those eaten by gorillas (Tutin & Fernandez, 1992). Gorillas break termite mounds into fist sized pieces in order to shake out the termites (Carroll, 1997), thus leaving characteristic trace of their passage. Traces of chimpanzees other then nest sites were rarely encountered on transects and therefore not used for distribution analysis. The following species of monkeys were encountered: Cercopithecus nictitans, C. cephus, C.pogonias, Lophocebus albigena and Cercocebus agilis. To analyse species distribution five habitat types were distinguished:

1. Mixed Forest: dense semi-deciduous forest with a wide variety of species. Structure of undergrowth varies from dense to relatively sparse, though always more dense than found in Gilbertiodendron type forest.

2. Gilbertiodendron Forest: Gilbertiodendron dewevreii tends to be found in monodominant stands, most often close to rivers and streams, but also in drier areas. Transition zones in which Gilbertiodendron is still dominant are also noted as such. Undergrowth is very sparse.

3. Disturbed Forest: found throughout the forest where the vegetation has not recovered from past logging operations or other forms of disturbance. Characterized by a dominance of saplings and young trees. In the lighter areas, where more sunlight penetrates the canopy, herbs such as Marantaceae spp. and Affromomum spp. occur in high densities.

4. Light Gaps: formed by treefalls. The increased light intensity encourages the development of a dense herb layer as can be found in disturbed forests, though light gaps are smaller in size.

5. Waterlogged and Exposed Habitats: forest along streams and rivers, bais (clearings) and swampy areas are included here.

Data analysis

The following statistical analysis methods were used: • Linear regression and the F-test of significance (Sokal & Rohlf, 1995; SPSS, 1997) to analyse the impact oftransec t distance from the town of Bayanga and the main road • Pearson correlation coefficient of significance (SPSS, 1997)t o examine the way certain variables covary orwer e interdependent • T-test for comparisons between means for trimestrial as well asth e dry season versus wet season values (Sokal & Rohlf, 1995; SPSS, 1997) • Paired samples t-test for comparisons between monthly means for years (SPSS, 1997).

We used SPSS 8.0 statistics software (SPSS, 1997)t o analyse the data. Tests were either one-tailed ortwo-taile d depending on the hypothesis, with a 5% level of significance. Forth e more detailed analyses of distribution from the encounter rate data collected per

69 blocko napes ,duiker san dvariou smonkey sw euse dmultivariat etechniques .Multivariat e techniquesar ea usefu l toolfo r exploringecologica lrelationships .T oge ta novervie wo fth e distributiono fspecie si nrelatio nt oeac hothe ran dtoward senvironmenta l variablesw euse d aprincipa lcomponen tanalysi s (PCA). Usingth especie sabundanc edat aset ,PC A constructscomponent so raxes ,whic hwil leac hreflec t themaximu m linearcorrelatio n betweenth especies ,whic hca nstil lb efoun d after theconstructio no fa previou saxis . All axesconstructe d arecompletel yuncorrelate d andthu sca nexplai ndifferen t relationships (Kentan dCoker , 1994).Environmenta l gradientsar esubsequentl yregresse do nt oth e principalcomponent sconstructe dt ohel pinterpre tth eecologica lmeanin go fth eaxis . Multiplelinea rregressio n wasthe n applied inorde rt o selectthos e environmental variableswhic h explainth e greatestvariatio n in species abundance.Necessar y assumptions inapplyin g linearregressio n toou r dataar etha tth e dependant variablei s normally distributed around any givenvalu e ofth e independent variablesan dtha tth e variance aroundth eregressio n linei sconstan t (Sokalan dRohlf , 1995).T otes t fora normal distribution weuse dth e Kolmogorov-Smirnov test onth eresidual sfrom th e regression. Where regression couldno tb eapplied , Spearman's rankcorrelatio n testwa s used.

Predictions

Weexpecte d tofind tha t human influence onwildlif e distribution wouldb e reducedwithi n theboundarie s ofth eDzang aNationa l Parkan dtha tther ewoul db e significant differences between species abundance inth epar k andi nth ereserve . Furthermore,base d onpreviou s studies (e.g.Barnes ,e tal. , 1991)w epredicte d that elephant densitieswoul d increasewit hth edistanc efrom th emai npopulatio n center,th e towno fBayang a andth emai nroad . Likewise weexpecte d higherdensitie s ofprimate s further away from themai nroad ,bu t theopposit e forhuma n presence.W eexpecte d the samei nrelatio n to secondary roads,possibl y toa lesse rdegree .A sthes e roadsar e often notdisplaye d onmaps ,the yar eno ttake n intoconsideratio n whendat a areuse di n extrapolations basedo nmodel susin g Global Information Systems (e.g.Michelmore ,et . al., 1994).Fo rth eprotectio n programcarrie d outb yth eDzanga-Sangh a Project tob e considered successful, populations ofelephant san dprimate s shouldno thav e declined duringth estud yperio d duet oincrease dpoaching .

Results

Asmentione d earlier,th e ecological monitoring wascarrie dou to na monthl y basisfrom Januar y 1997unti lAugus t 1999fo r 6o fth e 8 transects.Th etw otransect s closestt oBayang awer eadde d inApri l 1998, butwer eno t investigated inMarc h 1999. Thust o showth emonthl y fluctuations indun gpile s (Figure2 )an dth enumbe r ofblock s withelephan t dung,ap enest so rhuma n sign(Figur e 3)w ecoul d onlyuse dth e first 6 transectstha twer emonitore d consistentlyfrom th ebeginnin g ofth estudy .

70 Figure 2:Tota l number ofelephan tdun gpile sfo r thefirs t 6transect spe rmonth s

Total numbero felephan tdungpile s permont h 1997-1999

2500

2000

1500

• 1000 4n E

500 4

v v v **" # ^ *> £ J- & & J> s^ & J- # .# **jj"P ^ *> ^ January 1997 -Augus t 1999 iTOTAL

71 Figure 3: Total number of blocks with indicators (elephant dung piles, ape nests, non- human primates and human signs) for the first 6 transects per months

Total number of blocks per month 1997-1999

200

-elephant -ap enes t # # ^ ^ of ^ -f # ^ - primates January 1997 -August 1999 -huma n

The data show that the total number of elephant dung piles per month on the first 6 transects was significantly higher in 1998 than in 1997 (paired samples t-test, two- tailed, df=l 1,t=-2.641 , p<0.05). However no differences were apparent between the first 8 months of 1998 and 1999 (paired samples t-test, two-tailed, df=7, t= 0.039, NS). The same result was shown when we compared the number of blocks with elephant dung between 1997 and 1998 (paired samples t-test, two-tailed, df=l 1,t = -3.657, p<0.005), but likewise no differences were apparent between the first 8 months of 1998 and 1999 (paired samples t-test, two-tailed, df=7, t= -0.171, NS). The number of blocks with ape nests per month shows the opposite, with 1997 being significantly higher than 1998 (paired samples t-test, two-tailed, df=l 1,t = 5.568, p<0.001) and again significantly higher in 1998 than in 1999 (paired samples t-test, two- tailed, df=7, t= 3.507, p=0.010). The number of blocks with human sign and the number of blocks with non-human primates did not show any significant differences between 1997 and 1998 (paired samples t-test, two-tailed, df=l 1,resp . t= -0.750, NS and t=-1.884, NS). The latter showed an almost significant trend (p=0.086), with 1998 being higher than 1997, but then the first of 8month s of 1999 were significantly lower then in 1998 (paired samples t-test, two-tailed, df=7, t=3.512 ,p=0.010) . Human sign significantly increased between 1998 and 1999 (paired samples t-test, two-tailed, df=7, t=-5.451 , p=0.001). As illustrated in figure 3 there were no obvious seasonal or monthly trends in the number of blocks with elephant dung, ape nests, non-human primates or human presence.

72 No significant differences were found betweenan ycombinatio n ofquarter steste d for all theyear scombine d (t-test,two-tailed , df=16 for yearscombine dfirst an dsecon d quarter todf=1 4 for yearcombine d third andfourt h quarter,NS) . Oneexceptio n could benoted , which wasa significan t difference between first andthir d quarter witha nincreas ei n human sign (t-test,two-tailed , df=15,t=-2.799 ,p<0.05) .N o significant differences were found between seasons (dry-wet)fo r allth eyear s combined (1997-1999)o rfo r theothe r yearstreate d separately for anyo fth eteste dmeasure so nth efirst 6 transect sa s illustrated inTabl e 1.Th eonl yexceptio nwa stha tth eelephan t dungpile s seemt ohav e beenmor enumerou s andpresen t inmor eblock s inth edr y season of 1999 than inth ewe t season ofth e sameyear . However it shouldb epointe d outtha tth edat afo r 1999 were incomplete.

Table 1: Seasonaldifference s betweenwe tan ddr yseaso ndurin gth eperio d 1997- 1999

t-value 1997- t-value 1997 t-value 1998 t-value 1999 1999 combined Elephant dung piles -0.870 0.365 0.399 -2.499 * Blocks with -0.488 0.570 0.215 -3.998 ** elephant dung piles Blocks with ape -0.718 -1.490 -1.200 0.327 nests Blocks with human -1.316 -0.619 -.0455 -2.043 sign Blocks with non- -0.525 1.109 -1.075 -1.075 human primates sign

(T-test,two-tailed , df^30 for yearscombine d anddf=1 0 for 1997, 1998an ddf= 6 for 1999an d * p<0.05,* *p<0.0 1 ***p<0.005 .Equa lvarianc e isassume d inal lcases , except for blockswit h apes in 1998wher eth e Levene's test for equality ofvariance swa s significant (F= 5.481,p<0.05)) .

Table 2indicate stha tth enumbe ro fblock swit hnon-huma nprimate spresen twa s clearly dependent onth e distance from themai nroad ,bu t onlyi n 1998.Th enumbe ro f blocks (Figure4 )wit hdun gpile s andth etota lnumbe ro fdun gpile s (Figure 5),showe da tendencyt o increasewit h distancefrom th emai nroad ,whe n alltransect swer etake nint o consideration.

73 Table 2:Regressio n between distance anddependan t variables

F-value 1997 F-value F-value April- F-valueJan. - (df=5) 1998 (df=5) Dec. 1998 (df=7) Aug. 1999 (df=7) Elephant dungpile s - 2.044 1.144 6.578* 8.890 * Distance from MainRoa d Blocks withdun gpile s - 5.863 4.776 12.009* 17.067* * Distancefrom Mai nRoa d Blockswit hap enest s - 0.267 0.268 4.155 0.558 Distancefrom Mai nRoa d Blockswit hhuma nsig n 4.108 2.772 1.330 4.602 - Distance from Main Road Blockswit htraditiona l 3.588 0.560 0.666 0.955 hunting- Distance from MainRoa d Blockswit hhuntin g sign 3.585 0.710 0.163 0.012 - Distancefrom Mai n Road Blockswit h non-human 2.777 33.942 *** 72.559 *** 1.873 primates- Distance from MainRoa d

(ANOVA; * p<0.05,* *p<0.0 1 ***p<0.005 )

74 Figure4 :Th erelatio nbetwee n distancefrom th emai nroa d anddependan t variables

MONTHLYAVERAG E NUMBERO F BLOCKSI N RELATIONT ODISTANC E FROM MAINROA D 1997-1999

ug 50 2 O 40 -# BLOCKS 30 ELEPHANT DUNG 52 -# BLOCKS HUMAN ^20 SIGN £ m 10 -# BLOCKS PRIMATES ii 0 S=£» -# BLOCKS APE 5 10 15 20 25 NESTS DISTANCE FROM MAIN ROAD INK M

(withn=3 2 for alltransects ,excep tth etw ocloses tt oth emai nroa d n=16;block s primates refers to signso fnon-huma nprimate spresence : seemethods )

Asillustrate d inFigur e4 and5 th e increase inelephant s isno t linearlyrelate d to the distance,bu t showsa sudde n increase after about 10 kmawa y from themai nroad . Thisincreas e isconstan tove rth elengt h ofth e study.

75 Figure 5:Th erelatio nbetwee n distance from themai nroa d andaverag enumbe ro f dungpilespe rtransec t for 1997, 1998an d 1999.

MONTHLYAVERAG E OFDUNGPILE S INRELATIO N TO DISTANCE FROM MAINROA D IN 1997, 1998 AND 1999

LLI 300 o 260 -# ELEPHANT DUNG <2 fe W UJ O 111 200 1997 £ * - < U 0. 150 -# ELEPHANT DUNG >- m (9 -> S z 100 1998 t£ Z= Q=> -# ELEPHANT DUNG z ""• SO 1999 o s 0 J^ 0 10 20 30 DISTANCE FROM MAIN ROAD IN KM

(withn=1 2 for alltransect s in 1997an d 1998,excep tth etw ocloses tt oth emai nroa d n=9;n= 8fo r alltransec t in 1999, exceptth etw ocloses tt oth emai nroa dn=7 )

Therelatio n between thedistanc e from themai nroa dan dth emonthl y average number ofdun gpile spe rtransec t canbes t bedescribe d asa regressio n witha polynomia l trend ofth ethir d order (Figure6 )

76 Figure 6: Regression between distance from the main road and the dependent variable: the monthly average number of dung piles per transect.

ELEPHANT DUNG RELATEDT O DISTANCE FROMMAI NROA D

• # ELEPHANT DUNGj

Poly. (# ELEPHANT DUNG)

•47.992x+ 118.05 R2= 0.9411

0 5 10 15 20 25 DISTANCE FROM MAIN ROAD INK M

(polynomial trendline of the third order; only those months with all transect taken into consideration n=16 months)

The only other regression which showed some significant trend (table 2) was the relation between distance from the main road and blocks with non-human primates present. This relation, as illustrated in Figure 7, is best presented as a linear regression.

77 Figure 7: Regression between distance from the main road and the dependent variable: the monthly average number of blocks with non-human primates present per transect.

NON-HUMAN PRIMATES RELATEDT O DISTANCE FROMMAI NROA D

UJ co 10 ^ • # BLOCKS WITH (3§ J PRIMATES -*• w m"' « 8 , Linear (# BLOCKS 23ii! r > 10 < 6 . ^0^-^^ • WITH PRIMATES) < s . O"- % K i Q. A - I ^ I £ m t 2 y = 0.1471X + 5.4886 2§S „ R2= 0.7181 2 0 10 20 30 DISTANCE FROM MAIN ROAD

(only those months with all transect taken into consideration n=16 month; blocks primates refers to signs of non-human primates presence: see methods)

Contrary to our expectations, no relation was found between distance from the main road and human presence. Even when examining clear hunting signs (e.g. snares and cartridges) or traditional hunting (nets) and eliminating other traces from for example patrols and researchers, no relation was detected (Table 2). The number of blocks with human sign showed a negative regression with the number of elephant dung piles in 1998 and 1999 and with the number of blocks with dung in 1997 and 1998 (Table 3). In 1998,thes e relations were no longer evident when the two additional transects were added. The number of blocks with ape nests and non- human primates present did not show any significant relation to the number of blocks with human evidence.

78 Table 3: Regression betweenhuma n signan ddependan t variables

F-value F-value F-value F-value 1997 1998 April-Dec. Jan.-Aug. (df=5) (df=5) 1998 (df=7) 1999 (df=7) # of dung piles - Human 3.837 14.539* 2.959 7.184* sign Blocks with dung piles - 7.874 * 26.926 ** 1.358 4.438 Human sign Blocks with ape nests - 0.179 0.004 0.099 0.185 Human sign Blocks with non-human 3.644 1.240 0.555 0.137 primates - Human sign

(ANOVA; * p<0.05,* *p<0.0 1 ***p<0.005 )

Althoughther ewa sa significan t negativeregressio n ofoveral lhuma npresenc e andelephan t dungpiles ,whe n looking specifically athuntin g signsan delephan tdun g pilesther e isn orelationship . In fact none ofth eexpecte d dependant variables showan y significant relation (Table4) .

Table4 :regressio n betweenhuntin g signan ddependan t variables

F-value F-value F-value F-value 1997 1998 April-Dec. Jan.-Aug. (df=5) (df=5) 1998 (df=7) 1999 (df=7) # of dung piles - Hunting 1.344 3.799 0.044 0.552 sign Blocks with dung piles - 3.540 4.609 0.476 0.266 Hunting sign Blocks with ape nests - 0.009 0.107 0.864 1.067 Hunting sign Blocks with non-human 2.586 0.032 0.564 0.407 primates - Hunting sign

(ANOVA; * p<0.05,* *pO.O l ***p<0.005 )

Detailed analyses ofecologica l relationships Comparison ofsectors

Table 5give sth emea n encounter ratespe rk mfo rth e species studied for different sectors.Th erate s werecalculate d from surveys inApril-Jun e 1998b ywhic htim e transects 1 and2 ha dbee nplace d inth ereserve .Th emea nencounte r rates for the Dzanga sectorar ebase do ntransect s4 , 5,6 an d7 ,whil etransec t 3represent sth epar k boundary. Testsfo r significant differences between sectors inth emea nencounte rrate s

79 pertransec t survey reliedo nth eMann-Whitne yU-test . Unfortunately onlyon eduike r survey could becarrie dou t alongth epar kboundar y andi nth ereserv e solittl ecoul db e said onth e significance ofth edifference s found for thetw ogroup s ofduiker s (redan d blue). Statistical strength wasincrease d whenth e samples from bothgroup swer euse d together {Cephalophus spp.).Difference s between thepar k andothe r sectors thenprove d significant. Table 5.Mea ngrou p encounter ratesan dth e statistical significance ofthei r differences for thethre e sectors, (t)= trace ,(n )= nests ,(d )= dun gpiles .

Species Mean encouter rates 2 statistic of differences between sectors Dzanga-sector Pari boundary Reserve Ds&Pb Ds&R Pb&R Cercopithecus nictitans 0.3 0.18 0.18 -2.23* -2.46* -0.10 Cercopithecus cephus 0.08 0.06 0.05 -0.65 -1.37 -0.29 Cercopithecus pogonias 0.16 0.05 0.06 -2.19* -2.18* -0.30 Lophocebus albigena 0.25 0.05 0.03 -2.61** -2.99*** -0.32 Cercocebus agilis 0.05 0.03 0.02 -0.59 -1.58 -1.07 Gorillag. gorilla (t) 0.88 0.31 0.18 -1.95 -2.87** -0.56 Gorillag. gorilla (n) 0.04 0.02 0.01 -0.42 -1.18 -0.83 Pan t. troglodytes (n) 0.04 0.05 0.02 -0.50 -0.84 -0.27 Loxodanta a.cyclotis (d) 16.32 5.67 2.43 -3.16*** -3 37*** -2.20* Cephalophus spp. (d) 0.17 0.03 0.03 -2.12* -2.12* 0.00 C. monticola (d) 0.15 0.05 0.05 -1.33 -1.33 0.00 Red duikers (d) 0.19 0 0 -1.61 -1.61 0.00

(with: * p<0.05,* *p<0.0 1 *** p<0.005)

MultivariateAnalysis

Figure 8show sth ebi-plo tproduce d from the PCA.Th efirst an d secondaxe s havebee ntake n asthe y showth ehighes t correlation for most species.Th elengt h ofth e linesrelativ et oth eaxi si sa measur e ofth e strength ofth erelationshi p betweentha t variable andth eaxis . Allspecie s ofmonkey s showa stron g correlation withth efirst axis .Th efirst axi s ispositivel y correlated withincreasin g distance from thevillag e ofBayang a (onth emai n road)an dmixe d forest, whilebein gnegativel y correlated with especially Gilbertiodendron forest. Forest elephants andagil emangabey s {Cercocebus agilis) are highly correlated withth e secondaxi swhic h ispositivel yrelate dt odistanc e from secondaryroad s andinundate d forest, butnegativel y relatedt ohuma n disturbance. Gorillaabundanc eha dth ebes t correlation withth ethir d axis,whic hwa spositivel y relatedt omixe d forest anddistanc e from Bayangawhil enegativel y relatedt odistanc e from secondaryroads .

80 Figure 8.Biplo t ofprincipa l component analysis

L.alb Cpog

C.nic

Gor nests

L.afr =Loxodonta a. cyclotis, Gortr a= trace s of Gorillag. gorilla, Gornest s =gorill a nests,Pa n= chimpanze e nests,L.al b= Lophocebus albigena, C.agi= Cercocebus agilis, C.nic= Cercopithecus nictitans, C.cep= Cercopithecus cepus, C.pog= Cercopithecus pogonias. D-Rd= Distanc e from roads,D-Ba y =Distanc e from village,HT A= Huntin g trace,CT A = Collection trace,PT A= Passag e Trace,TH A= Tota lhuma ntrace ,M F= Mixe d forest, MO= Gilbertiodendron forest, LG= Ligh tgaps , SF= Disturbe d forest, IF= Waterlogged andExpose dHabitats . Multiple linearregression

Applying theKolmogorov-Smirnof f test showed that theresidua l variation from regression of species meanencounte r rateso nt omos t ofth eenvironmenta l variablesdi d not havea norma l distribution. Bytakin gth enatura l logarithm ofth emea n encounter ratesregressio n waspossibl e for putt-nosed monkeys (Cercopithecus nictitants), gorillas, elephants andgrey-cheeke d mangabeys (Lophocebus albigena). Usingth enatura l logarithm gavea bette rfit o fth eregressio n linefo rth efirst thre e species. Transformation ofth emea nencounte r rate for grey-cheeked mangabeysdi dno thel pexplai n distribution andn ovariable sprove d significant (P<0.05).Putty-nose d monkeyswer e significantly moreabundan tfurthe r awayfro m Bayangavillag ean doutsid e ofblock swher e waterlogged andexpose dhabitat swer e stronglyrepresente d (Sig.modelO.Ol ,R 2=0.18). Gorillatrac ewa smor e frequently found inblock s further removed from Bayangaan d withrelativel y moremixe d forest (Sig.model<0.01 ,R 2=0.15).Finall yelephan tdun g abundancewa s stronglyrelate dt oincreasin g distance from Bayangaan dblock swhic h hada lowe roccurrenc e ofhuma ntrac edurin g surveys (Sig.model<0.01 , R2=0.39).

Correlation ofvariables

Spearman's rank testwa suse d tofind correlation s between environmental variables andbetwee n speciesmea nencounte r rates andenvironmenta l variables (table 6). Significant correlations existbetwee n the environmental variables:huntin gtrac e decreased asdistanc e from roads (bothmai nan d secondaryroad s combined) increased. Onth e otherhan d collection trace andtrail swer e found moreofte n closert oth evillage . Monodominant standso f Gilbertiodendron were mostfrequentl y encountered nearert o Bayanga village,whil e thedisturbe d forest occurring inth enationa l parkwa s found furtherfrom Bayanga .

Table 6.Environmenta l variables,whic h are significantly, correlated (p< 0.05 )wit h mean encounter rateso fspecie si norde r ofmagnitud e ofcorrelatio n coefficient. (+)o r (-) signssho wth enatur e ofth erelationship .

Cercopithecus cephus Secondary Roads (-) Cercopithecus pogonias Village (-) Lophocebus albigena Village (-); Secondary Roads (-); Hunting Trace (-); Human Trace (-) Cercocebus agilis Secondary Roads (-) Gorilla g. gorilla (trace) Waterlogged and Exposed Habitats (-); Mixed Forest (+); Village (-); Monodominant Forest (-) Gorilla g. gorilla (nest) Light Gap (+); Collection Trace (+) Pan t. troglodytes (nest) None Loxodonta a. cyclotis (dung) Secondary Roads (-); Village (-); Human Trace (-); Passage Trace (-); Hunting Trace (-); Collection Trace (-) Cephalophus monticola None (dung) Red Duikers (dung) Mixed Forest (+); Secondary Roads (-)

82 Table 7.Result so f Spearman's RankCorrelation s between environmental variables, showing the correlation coefficients (rs)an dthei r significance.

Village -0.039 Hunting Trace 0.262" 0.086 Passage Trace 0.149 0.282" 0.095 Collection Trace -0.068 0.042 -0.194 0.062 Human Trace (Total) -0.247* 0.286"* 0.565"* 0.745*** 0.289*** Mixed Forest 0.047 -0.099 -0.044 0.0298 -0.042 -0.01 Monodominant Forest -0.194 0.398"* -0.04 0.122 0.078 0.068 -0.409*** Light Gaps 0.197* -0.129 -0.024 0.092 -0.089 0.04 -0.096 -0.12 Disturbed Forest -0.027 -0.324*" 0.073 -0.029 -0.099 0.013 -0.354*** -0.09 0.137 Waterlogged and -0.005 0.006 0.034 -0.189 0.019 -0.08 -0.385*** 0.167 -0.05 0.14 Exposed Habitats

CD O CD o CO CD tz co O to CO o CO H CO c CD 03 Ll_ K c 'E Q. "D CD g H O (C en O) o (D CO CD c CD CO CO u_ O co •o _c co T3 01 CO E CD C » o *z CO o X a. 5 I Q. O o o _l b S 5 U_

(with: * p<0.05,* *p<0.0 1 ***p<0.005 )

Discussion

Theecologica l monitoring resultsrevea ltha tther e weren oobviou s seasonalo r monthly trends inelephant , gorilla ormonke y densities.Elephan t populations mayhav e increased between 1997an d 1998,bu tn osuc hincreas e wasapparen t between 1998an d 1999.I ti sto oearl y todra wan yconclusion s relating thisincreas e inelephan t densities. Elephant densities increasewit h distance from themai nNola-Lindjomb o roada sbot hth e total numbero fdungpile spe rtransec t aswel l asth enumbe r ofblock s withdungpile spe r transect increaseswit h distance from themai nroa d(se eals oBarne s& Jensen,1987 ; Barnes,etal, 1991). Gorillapopulation s appeart ohav edecrease d between 1997an d 1999,a sth e numbero fblock swit hap enes tpe rtransec t decreased significantly between 1997 and 1998an dagai nbetwee n 1998an d 1999.Thi si ssurprisin g asther e aren oothe r indications- carcassesfro m eithernatura l death orpoaching ,researche r observationsa t theBa iHoko uan dMongamb e sites insideth eDzang a sector- supporting thisdecline . Howeverfurthe r monitoring andresearc h isessentia l before reaching any definite conclusions.Gorill adensitie sd ono tincreas ewit hdistanc e from themai nroad ,a sth e numbero fblock swit hap enest spe rtransec t didno tchang e significantly with growing distance from themai nroad . Monkeypopulation s fluctuated between 1997an d 1999,a sth enumbe ro fblock s withprimate spe rtransec t fluctuated betweenthes eyears ,showin g analmos t significant increasefollowe d bya significan t decrease.Th edecreas e in 1999migh tb erelate dt oa simultaneous significant increase inhuma n sign.Monke y densitiesmigh t increasewit h

83 distance from themai nroad ,a sth enumbe r ofblock swit hnon-huma nprimate spresen t pertransec t increased verysignificantl y with distance from themai nroa d in 1998,bu t didno td os oi neithe r 1997o r 1999.However , analternativ e explanation istha t asnon - humanprimate spresenc ewa sdetecte d byeithe r sound orsigh t itma yb etha t in fact non- humanprimate sar emor ecrypti c nearth emai nroa da soppose dt obein g at lower densities. Humanpresenc edoe sno tdecreas ewit hdistanc efrom th emai nroad ,a sth enumbe r ofblock swit hhuma ntrace spresen tpe rtransec tdi dno tdecreas esignificantl y withdistance . Thepossibilit ytha tthi smigh tb ecause db yth epresenc eo fpatrol san dresearcher sinsid e thePar kan dwel lawa yfro m theroa ddi dno tsee mt oprovid eth eanswer .Whe nw e analyzedonl yclea rsign so fnon-traditiona l hunting(snare san dcartridges )o rtraditiona l hunting(nets )w estil lcoul dno tdetec ta declin ewit hdistanc efro m theroad .A nalternativ e explanation istha tth ehunter scompensat efo rth elowe rdensitie so fpre ynea rth eroad san d movefurthe r intoth eforest . Iti sals opossibl etha tanti-poachin gpatrol shav ele dt o a diffusion ofhuma nactivities ,a sconcentratio n ofhuman sa swel la slong-ter mresidenc yar e likelyt ob edetecte db yth epatrols .Thi sstrateg yb yloca lhunter swoul dindee dmak ei t moredifficul t todetec tthem ,whic hlead st oth equestio ni faeria lsurveillanc emigh tno tb e anappropriat eanswe rt oincreas eth echanc eo fearl ydetectio no fpoachers .Elephan t densities seemt odecreas ewit hincreasin ghuma npresence ,bu tno tspecificall y withhuntin g pressure.Gorill adensitie s seemunaffecte d byhuma npresenc ean dhuntin gpressure . Monkeypresenc edoe sno tsee mt odecreas ewit hincrease dhuma npresenc eo rhuntin g pressure. Themor edetaile danalyse so fecologica lrelationship sw ecarrie dou tshowe d significant differences betweenth epar kan dth ereserv ei nth eencounte rrate sfo rgorill a traces,duiker san d3 o fth e5 specie so fmonkeys . Howeverb yfa rth emos tinterestin g resultfro m thisanalysi si sth erol eo fsecondar yroads .Severa lspecie sar enegativel y correlatedwit hthes eroads .I nou rorigina ldesig no fth emonitorin gprogra mw eha dpai d specialattentio nt oth emai nroad ,bu tno ts omuc ht oth esecondar yroads .W eha dinitiall y underestimatedth einfluenc e ofthes eroads ,bu tals opractica lconsideration splaye da role . Nogoo dmap sexiste d ofth esecondar yroads ,a si softe n thecas ei nothe rpart so fcentra l Africa. Forfutur e modellingusin gGloba lInformatio n Systemsth eregressio nfoun dher e forbot helephant san dnon-huma nprimate si nrelatio nt oth emai nroad si sstil la nimportan t result. Itappear stha thuma n activitiesnegativel y influence thedistributio n oflarg e forest inDzanga-Sangh a considerably. There ismuc hevidenc e ofhuma n intrusion intoth epark .Th ehighes t intensities ofhuma ntrac e werefoun djus t insideo f thepar kboundar y facing thevillag e ofBayanga ,bu ttrace s were found throughoutth e park. Huntingtrac ewa smos t intensivewithi n aban d of3 k mfro m mostly secondary roads,bu tdi dno tchang emuc hwit hvaryin g distance from Bayanga.A sthes e secondary roads (incontras t toth emai nroad )ar eclose d for vehiclesthi sunderline sth e importance ofhuntin g on foot inthi sarea .Distance s from thevillag e andth emai nroa d aswel l asth e distancefro m secondary roadsappeare d tob eth emos t important variables measured, both influencing half ofth enumbe ro fspecie s studied. Elephantsi nparticula rwer e significantly lesscommo n inarea srelate dt ohuma n use.Togethe r withth elocatio n ofroads ,huma ntrac e explained 39%o fthei r distribution within thenationa lpark ,a s shownb yth eregressio n results.Thi savoidanc e behaviorha s

84 alsobee nreporte d inGabo n(Barne set al, 1991). Several authorshav ereporte dtha t elephants favor habitatswher ether e isabundan t groundvegetatio n (Barneset al., 1991 ; White, 1994).I nthi s studyw efoun d nosignifican t correlation witheithe r light gapso r disturbed forest. Light gapswer e found frequently nearroads ,whic h elephants generally avoid,bu t disturbed forest wasmor ecommo n deepwithi nth epar kwher ether e wereals o moreelephants .Thi s leadsu st obeliev etha t elephants find enough herbaceous vegetation andothe r food resources such asfrui t throughout the forest. Western lowland gorillasus ea wid e variety offoo d resources,includin g insects (Carroll, 1986;Tuti nan dFernandez , 1992).Frui ti sa majo r component ofthei rdie twhe n it isreadil y available (Remis, 1994;Fa y , 1997;Carroll , 1998;Goldsmith , 1996). Terrestrial herbaceous vegetation remains important especially intime s offrui t scarcity and selection ofhabitat s withlarg e amounts ofherbaceou s vegetation hasbee n reported frequently (Carroll, 1986;Tuti n andFernandez , 1984, 1993;Dora n& McNeilage , 1998). Wefoun d nocorrelatio n between gorilla densities andhabitat . Thiscoul db ea resul to f thetim eperio d inwhic hth edetaile d datawa scollecte d ongorill a feeding trace,bein gth e first threemonth s ofth erain y season. Thisi sprobabl yth eperio dwit hth ehighes t fruit availability andfrui t consumption bygorillas ,whe nthe y leaverelativel y few terrestrial herbaceous vegetation feeding remains (Remis, 1994;Goldsmith , 1996).Feedin gtrac e consisted mostly ofbroke ntermit emound s andlittl e herbaceous vegetation. However, theirpreferenc e for mixedfores t couldals oreflec t theampl eavailabilit yo fterrestria l vegetation withinthi shabitat . Although themonitorin g dataa sexpecte d showedtha tther e isa stron grelatio n betweenth e distance from the mainroa d andwildlif e abundance, sucha snon-huma n primates andelephants ,i twa ssurprisin g tofin d no similarrelatio n for apenests .On e possible explanation istha t gorillas areno t hunted often andthu sco-exis t inclos e proximity withhumans ,a sthe yd oaroun dth ehote l atpar kheadquarters ,th efield cam p at Salcapa andth eNouabale-Ndok iNationa l Parkheadquarters ,jus t acrossth eborde ri n Congo (Ruggiero,2000 ;Quammen ,2000) .However , increasing elephantnumber si n Dzangama ylea dt oa decreas e ingorill anumbers .Competitio n between thetw ospecie s hasbee nreporte d previously byPlumptr e (1996)an ddisplacemen t hasbee n observed (Blom,pers .obs.) .Thi spotentia lchang ewarrant sclos emonitorin gan dfurthe r studyi n following years,especiall y because gorillatrace s dono tconfir m thisrelation . Wefoun d a large difference betweenth e correlations found for nest sites andfeedin g activity,whic h alsoma yhav e implications for studies inwhic h nest sites areuse dt o determine distribution andhabita t selectionb ygorilla s andchimpanzees . The grey-cheeked mangabey was significantly morecommo n wherehuma n disturbance (particularly hunting)wa slow .Bot hputty-nose d andcrowne d monkeyswer e moreabundan t further awayfro m thevillag e andth emai nroad .Th edistanc e from secondary roads influenced themoustache d monkey andagil e mangabey,bu t thedistanc e toth emai nroa d didno t influence them, sopossibl ythe y are onlynegativel y influenced byhuma n activity ifi ti si nth e form ofhunting . Theresult so fthi sstud ysho wtha teve nthoug h iti sofficiall y aprotecte darea , human incursions arefrequen t andtrace s ofpoachin g arefoun d deepwithi n thepar k boundaries,affectin g the distribution ofanimal ssignificantly . Not onlywa sther e evidence ofencroachmen t alongth epar kboundary ,i tals obecam eclea rtha t secondary roadswer ebein guse dt openetrat e deepint oth epark ,especiall y forhuntin g activities.

85 Theobserve d avoidance ofth evillag e androad sb ywildlif e wasno tcause db y variations inhabita tbu tb yhuma n activities.Increasin g anti-poachingpatrol swithi n a4k mban d off roadsides couldb ea neffectiv e protection measure. Theresult sunderlin eth evita l importance ofa monitorin gprogra mt odetec t changesi nwildlif e populations andthei rinterrelationshi p withhuma n activitiesan d presence. Thisbecome s especiallyrelevan t in lighto fth ere-openin g ofth eloggin g company inBayanga .A sthi sstud y demonstrates theexistenc e ofbas e linedat a aswel l asa well-establishe d monitoringprogra m mayprovid eth eopportunit y tobette r understand therelatio nbetwee n logging,huntin g andwildlife . Abette runderstandin go f thisrelatio n isvita l for conservation incentra l Africa, wheremor ean dmor eo fth e forest isbein g invadedb yloggin gcompanies ,ofte n closely followed byhunters .

Acknowledgement

Thiswor k wassupporte d byth eDzanga-Sangh a Project, specifically through funding from theWorl d Wildlife Fund, Inc.an dgrant s from the World WideFun d for Nature- Germany andth e United StatesFis han dWildlif e Service. Several students workingo nthi sprogra mreceive d student grants from the FONAFoundation ,Luci e Burgers Foundation for Comparative Behaviour Research andth e Wageningen Agricultural University Foundation. Wewoul dals o liket othan kth e field team, consisting ofth epermanen t field staff, students,volunteer s andal lth e BaAkatrackers . Thanks areals odu et oChlo eCipollett a (BaiHokou )an dhe r staff for generous support anddat a sharing. Wewoul d liket othan k Jeff Hallfo r lettingu sus ehi srainfal l data from Bayanga.Furthermor e wewoul d liket othan k ChloeCipolletta , Arend Brunsting, Jefferson Hall,Le eWhite ,Pete rWalsh , Richard Carroll, Richard Barnes,Gu y Rondeau, Lisa Steel,Gerri t Gort,Alfre d Stein,Ha nOlf f andNatash a Shah forthei rassistanc e and useful comments and suggestions. Finally,w ewoul dlik et othan kth eentir eDzanga - Sangha Project staff andth eWW Fstaf f inBangui ,Washingto n andFrankfur t for their support.

References

Almasi, A., Blom, A., Otto, K., Knapou, J-B. and Prins, H.T.T. (in prep.) Survey of elephants (Loxodonta Africana) in the Dzanga-Sangha reserve, Central African Republic

Barnes,R.F.W. ,Agnagna ,M. ,Alers ,M.P.T. ,Blom ,A. ,Doungoube ,G. ,Fay ,M. ,Masunda , T., Ndo Nkoumou, J.C., Sikubwabo Kiyengo, C. and Tchamba, T., (1993) Elephantsan divor ypoachin gi nth eforest s ofequatoria lAfrica . Oryx, 27,27-34.

Barnes, R.F.W. &Barnes , K.L., (1992) Estimating decay rates of elephant dung-piles in forest.African Journal of Ecology, 30,316-32 1

Barnes, R.F.W., Barnes, K.L., Alers, M.P.T. and Blom, A., (1991) Man determines the distribution of elephants in the rain forests ofnortheaster n Gabon.African Journal ofEcology, 29,54-63.

86 Barnes, R.F.W., Beardsley, K., Michelmore, F., Barnes, K.L., Alers, M.P.T. & Blom, A. (1997) Estimating forest elephant numbers with dung counts and a geographic information system. Journal of Wildlife Management 61, 1384-1393.

Barnes, R.F.W., Blom, A. and Alers, M.P.T., (1995a) A review of the status of forest elephants in central Africa. Biological Conservation, 71,125-132.

Barnes, R.F.W., Blom, A., Alers, M.P.T. and Barnes, K.L., (1995b) An estimate of the numbers of forest elephants in Gabon.Journal of TropicalEcology, 11,27-37.

Barnes, R.F.W. and Jensen, K.L., (1987) How to count elephants in forests. IUCN African Elephant &Rhino Specialist Group Tech.Bull. 1, 1-6.

Barnes, R.F.W. & Lahm, S.A. (1997) An ecological perspective on human densities in the central African forests. Journal ofApplied Ecology, 34,245-260.

Beresford, P. (1999). Speciation in African forest robins (Stiphronis) : species limits, phylogentic relationships, and molecular biology. American Museum Novitates, 22 p.: ill.(som e col.),map . American Museum ofNatura l History, New York.

Blom, A. (1993 a) List of the large mammals of the Dzanga-Sangha Dense Forest Reserve and the Dzanga-Ndoki National Park. World Wildlife Fund - CAR.

Blom, A. (1993 b) List of the birds of the Dzanga-Sangha Dense Forest Reserve and the Dzanga-Ndoki National Park. World Wildlife Fund - CAR.

Blom, A., (1999) Ten years Dzanga-Sangha project 1988 - 1999. Unpublished manuscript, WWF-CAR

Blom, A., Almasi, A, Heitkonig, I.M.A., Kpanou, J.-B. & Prins. H.H.T. (in press) A survey of the apes in the Dzanga-Ndoki National Park, Central African Republic. African Journal of Ecology

Blom, A. & Yamindou, J., in prep. Status of the protected areas and gazetted forests of the Central African Republic.

Carroll, R.W. (1986 a) Status of the lowland gorilla and other wildlife in the Dzanga- Sangha region of southwestern Central African Republic. Primate Conservation 7, 38-41.

Carroll, R.W. (1986 b) The creation, development, protection, and management of the Dzanga-Sangha dense forest sanctuary and the Dzanga-Ndoki National Park in southwestern Central Africa Republic. Unpublished report. New Haven: Yale University.

87 Carroll,R.W .(198 6c )Th e status,distribution , anddensit y ofth e lowland gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla (Savage andWyman)) ,fores t elephant (Loxodonta africana cyclotis),an dassociate d dense forest fauna insouthwester n Central African Republic:researc h towardsth eestablishmen t ofa reserv e forthei rprotection . Unpublished report.Ne wHaven :Yal eUniversity .

Carroll, R.W.(1988a ) Relative density,rang e extension, andconservatio n potential of thelowlan d gorilla (Gorilla gorillagorilla ) inth eDzang a -Sangh a regiono f southwestern Central African Republic.Mammalia, 52, 309-323.

Carroll,R.W . (1988b)Elephant s ofth eDzanga-Sangh a dense forest of southwestern C.A.R.Pachyderm, 10,12-15 .

Carroll,R.W . (1992)Th edevelopment , protection, andmanagemen t ofth eDzanga - SanghaDens e Forest Special Reserve andth e Dzanga-NdokiNationa l Parki n southwestern Central African Republic.Dzanga-Sangh a ReserveProjec t and World Wildlife Fund, Washington.

Carroll,R.W . (1997)Feedin gecolog y oflowlan d gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla)i n Dzanga-Sangha Reserve ofth eCentra lAfrica n Republic.Ph Dthesis ,Universit yo f Yale.

Doran, D.M.& McNeilage ,A .(1998 )Gorill a ecologyan dbehavior . Evolutionary Anthropology, 6(4) : 120-131

Fay,J.M . (1989)Partia l completion ofa censu s ofth e lowland gorilla (Gorilla ggorilla ) inth eCentra l African Republic.Mammalia, 53, 203-215.

Fay,J.M .(1991a )A nelephan t {Loxodontaafricana) surveyusin gdun gcount si nth e forests ofth eCentra lAfrica n Republic.Journal of Tropical Ecology, 7, 25-36.

Fay, J.M. (1991b)Fores t elephant populations inth e Central African Republic andCongo : theCentra lAfrica n Republic.Pachyderm, 14,4-12.

Fay, J.M. (1997) The ecology, social organization, populations, habitats and history of the western lowland gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla Savage and Wyman, 1874). PhD thesis,Washingto n University.

Fay,J.M. , C.A. Spinage,B .Chardonne t andA.A . Green (1990)Centra l African Republic.I nEast ,R . (ed.)Antelopes global survey and action plans (pp.99-109 ) Gland:IUCN .

Fitzgibbon, CD., Mogoka, H.,Fanshawe ,J.H . (1995) Subsistence hunting inArabuko - Sokoke Forest, Kenya andit seffect s onmamma lpopulations . Conservation Biology,?,, 1116-1126. Goldsmith, M.L. (1996). Ecological influences on the ranging and grouping behavior of western lowland gorillas at Bai Hokou, Central African Republic.

Gonda Ngbalet, M. (1995) Donnees demographique de Dzanga-Sangha. Rapport intermediare. Projet Dzanga-Sangha, Universite de Bangui.

Hall, J.S., White, L.J.T., Inogwabini, B.I., Omari, I., Morland, H.S., Williamson, E.A., Walsh, P., Saltonstall, K., Sikubwabo, C, Bonny, D., Kiswele, K.P., Vedder, A., Freeman, K. (1998). A survey of Grauer's gorillas (Gorilla gorilla graueri) and chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes schweinfurthi) in the Kahuzi-Biega lowland sector and adjacent forest in eastern Zaire. InternationalJournal ofPrimatology, 19 (2): 207-235

Harris, D. (1994) Interim check-list to the vascular plants of the Dzanga-Sangha Project Area Central African Republic. Unpublished report. University of Oxford 31pp.

Kent, M, & Coker, P., (1994) Vegetation description and analysis: A practical approach. John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.

Lahm, S.A., Barnes, R.F.W., Beardsley, K. & Cervinka (1998). A method for censusing the greater white-nosed monkey in northeastern Gabon using the population density gradient in relation to roads.Journal of Tropical Ecology, 14: 629-643.

Lunde, D. & P. Beresford (1997). Noteworthy records of bats from the Central African Republic. Bat Research News, 38 (2): 19-20.

Michelmore, F., K. Beardsley, R.F.W. Barnes and I. Douglas-Hamilton, (1994) A model illustrating the changes in forest elephant numbers caused by poaching. African Journal ofEcology, 32,89-99 .

Noss, A.J. (1995) Duikers, cables, and nets: a cultural ecology ofhuntin g in a central African forest. PhD. dissertation. University of Florida. P. 415.

Noss, A.J. (1998) The impacts of cable snare hunting on wildlife populations in the forests of the Central African Republic. Conservation Biology, 12, 390-398.

Oates, J.F. (1996) Habitat alterations, hunting and the conservation of folivorous primates in the African forests. Australian Journal of ecology, 21(1),1-19.

Plumptre, A.J. (1996) Modelling the impact of large herbivores on the food supply of mountain gorillas and implications for management. Biological Conservation, 75, 147-155.

Prins, H.H.T. & Reitsma, J. (1989). Mammalian biomass in an African Equatorial rain forest. Journal ofAnimal Ecology, 58: 851-861

89 Ray,J.C.& Hutterer,R . (1996). Structureo fa shre wcommunit y inth e Central African Republicbase do nth e analysis ofcarnivor escats,wit h thedescriptio n ofa ne w sylvisorex (Mammmalia;Soricidae) .Ecotropica, 1:85-9 7

Remis,J.M . (1994)Feedin gEcolog y andPositiona l Behavior ofwester n lowland gorillas (Gorillagorill agorilla )i nth eCentra lAfrica n Republic.Ph.D .thesi sYal e University,Ne wHaven ,C T

Rondeau, G. & Blom, A. (in prep.) The avifauna of Dzanga-Sangha, Central African Republic

Ruggiero,R . (2000).Phanto m ofth e forest. Wildlife Conservation, 103(5) :50-55 .

Sokal,R.R . &Rohlf ,F.J . (1995)Biometry. Third edition. W.H.Freema n and company, NewYork .

SPSS(1997 )SPSS Base 8.0, SPSS,Inc. ,Chicag o

Turin, C.E.G. and Fernandez, M. (1984)Nation-wid e census of Gorilla (Gorilla ggorilla) andchimpanze e (Pant. troglodytes) inGabon .American Journal of Primatology, 6, 313-336.

Turin, C.E.G.& Fernandez , M. (1992)Insec t eatingb y sympatriclowlan d gorillas (Gorilla g. gorilla) and chimpanzees (Pan t. troglodytes) in the Lope Reserve, Gabon. AmericanJournal of Primatology, 28: 41-48.

Tutin, C.E.G. & Fernandez, M. (1993). Composition of the diet of chimpanzees and comparisons withtha t ofsympatri clowlan d gorillas inth eLop eReserve ,Gabo n- Composition duregim ealimentair e deschimpanze se tcomparaiso nave ccelu ide s gorilles de plaine de la Reserve de la Lope, Gabon. American Journal of Primatology, 30, 195-211

Tutin, C.E.G., Parnell, R.J., White,L.T.J. , Fernandez, M. (1995) Nest building by lowland gorillas in the Lope reserve, Gabon: Environmental influences and implications for censusing.International Journal of Primatology, 16(1), 53-75.

White,L.J.T .(1994 )Biomas so frainfores t mammalsi nth eLop ereserve ,Gabon .Journal of AnimalEcology, 63,499-512.

Quammen,D .(2000) .Megatransect .Nationa lGeographic , 198(4) :2-2 9

90 Chapter6

Behavioral responses of gorillasto habituatio n inth eDzanga-Ndok i NationalPark , Central African Republic

AllardBlom 1,2,3,Chlo eCipolletta 1,Aren dM.H .Brunsting 2an dHerber tH.T . Prins2'4

'Dzanga-Sangh aProject , WorldWildlif e Fund,B.P . 1053,Bangui ,Centra l African Republic 2Tropica l Nature Conservation and Ecology ofVertebrates , Dept. ofEnvironmenta l Sciences, Wageningen University, Bomsesteeg 69,N L 6708 PDWageningen , The Netherlands 3Departmen t ofAnthropology , StateUniversit y ofNe wYor ka tSton yBrook , Stony,Broo kN Y 11794,US A Corresponding author address:Zuivelwe g 5B,725 5XA ,Hengel o(Gld) ,Th eNetherlands ,E-mail : [email protected] 4Correspondin g author

Abstract Habituationo fwester nlowlan dgorilla si sth eslo wproces sb ywhic hgorilla s becomeaccustome dt oth epresenc eo fhuman si nthei rproximity .Habituatio no fgorilla sfo r tourismwa sundertake ni nth eDzanga-Ndok iNationa lPark ,Centra lAfrica n Republic,wit h theai mt oincreas epar krevenu ean dt orais eth eleve lo fbenefit s andemploymen tfo rth e localcommunity .Th eai mo fou rstud ywa st omonito rth eimpac to fhabituatio nthroug h changesi nth egorillas 'behavio rdurin gth ehabituatio nprocess .Th estud ywa sundertake n inth eDzang asecto ro fth enationa lpar kfro m August 1996unti lDecembe r 1999. From August 1998onward sw ewer eabl et ofocu sth ehabituatio nproces so non especifi cgroup , theMunye . Overtime ,a shabituatio n progressed, itbecam e increasingly easiert o locatean d toremai nwit hth e gorillas.Th egorillas ' initialreaction so faggression , fear and vocalization upon contactwit hth e observerswer ereplace d increasingly byignorin gth e observers.I t seemstha t curiousreactio nwa sa nintermediat e stage inth ehabituatio n process.Th ewa yi nwhic h contactswit hth eMuny e groupende d alsobecam emor e subduedove rtime .Th eaverag edail ypat hlengt hdiminishe d overtime ,indicatin gtha t theMuny e groupwa srangin g further (avoiding theobservers ) inth ebeginnin g ofth e study. Several factors have animpac t onth e gorillas' behavior duringth ehabituatio n process.Regula r daily contact seemsmor eimportan t thanth enumbe ro fcontact s ina single dayi npromotin g habituation. Likewise,contactin g gorillaswhil ethe ywer e ina tree ori ndens e forest seemst oprovid ebette rresults . Contacts within 10 metersan d contactswithou t forewarning the gorillas (achieved inou r studyb ytongu e clacking) shouldb eavoided , asthes elea dt omor epronounce dreactions . Wejudg etha thabituatio ni sprogressin gwel lan dtha thabituatio no fwester n lowlandgorilla si sfeasible .However ,th egorilla sexperienc enegativ eimpact sdurin gth e habituationprocess ,suc ha spossibl ya nincreas ei nrangin gan ddisturbanc e inthei r behavior. Impactsd odiminis hove rtime .Give nthes ean dpotentiall yothe rnegativ e impacts,th edecisio nt ostar thabituatin g shouldno tb etake nlightly .

91 Introduction

TheCentra lAfrica n Republic (CAR)ha smad etremendou seffort s topreserv eit s naturalheritag eb ysettin gasid elarg etract so fbot hsavanna san dforest s asprotecte darea s (Blom& Yamindou ,i nprep.) -However ,give ntha tth eCA Ri samon gth epoores tcountrie s inth eworl d(e.g .PNUD , 1995)th egovernmen t isunabl et omaintai nthes eprotecte dareas . Infac tth earea swithou toutsid eforeig n donorassistanc ehav ebecom e"paper "parks , with littleconservatio nvalu e(Blo m& Yamindou ,i nprep.) .Furthermor eth eshort-ter m objectivesan dfundin g cyclestypica lo fforeig n donorassistanc emak ethi styp eo f dependenceo noutsid efundin g anoptio ntha ti sno tviabl ei nth elong-term .Alternativ e sourceso frevenue sar eessentia lt omaintai nth eprotecte dare asyste mi nth eCAR .Touris m issee na son eo fth epotentia lrevenu e sources(TELESIS , 1991;TELESIS , 1993;Blom ,i n press;Blom ,e tal. ,i npre p c). TheDzanga-Sangh a Protected area complex,consistin g ofDzanga-Sangh a Dense Forest Reserve (3159km 2)an dth e Dzanga-Ndoki National Park(secto rDzang a 495km 2; sectorNdok i 727km 2)ar e located inth e southwestern cornero fth ecountr y (Figure 1). Dzanga-Sangha canoffe r thetouris ta hundre dpercen tguarante et ose efores t elephants,an d otherfascinatin g denserainfores t wildlife, aswel la sth epossibilit yo fexperiencin gth eric h BaAkapygm yculture .However ,eve nthes euniqu eexperience sar einsufficien t todra w enoughvisitor st oDzanga-Sangh at ocontribut esubstantia lresource stoward sth e management costso fth eprotecte dare a(Blom ,i npress) .B yaddin gth epossibilit yo f observingwester n lowlandgorilla s{Gorilla gorilla gorilla) atclos erange ,th eDzanga - SanghaProjec t hopedt oplac eDzanga-Sangh a amongth eworld' smos tprominen t ecotourismsite san dt oincreas eit sdirec trevenu ea swel la sit simpac to nth eloca leconom y (Blom,i npress ;Blo me tal ,i nprep . c).

92 Figure 1 TheDanga-Ndok iNationa lPar kan dth eDzanga-Sangh a DenseFores t Special Reserve,Centra lAfrica n Republic

TheDzanga-Ndok iNationa l Parkan dth e Dzanga-SanghaDens eFores tSpecia lReserv e inth eCentra lAfrica nRepubli c

+N

• Villages /V Roads ' Streams Rivers HSavanna Dfeanga-NdokiNationa lPar k 20 40 60 80 Kilometers Dzanga-SanghaReserv e

93 Habituation isth eslo wproces sb ywhic hgorilla sbecom eaccustome dt oth e presenceo fhuman si nthei rvicinity .A sgorilla sbecom emor ean dmor euse dt opeopl eth e distancebetwee nth egorill a andth eobserve rca nb ereduced .Ideall yhabituatio nlead st oth e acceptanceb ywil danimal so fhuma nobserver sa sneutra lelement si nthei renvironmen t (Tutin& Fernandez, 1991). Eventhoug hmountai ngorilla shav ebee nsuccessfull y habituated forbot htouris ma s wella sscientifi c pursuits(e.g .McNeilage , 1996; Fossey, 1983),th eproces sha scom eunde r somerecen twell-founde d criticism (Butynski& Kalina, 1998a; 1998b).Gorill ahabituatio n carriescertai nrisks fo rth egroup sbein ghabituate d (seeMcNeilage , 1996 forrevie wo f mountian gorillatourism) .Du et oth epresenc eo fpeopl ei nthei rhom erange ,gorilla smigh t changethei rdail ypat hlengths ,exten dthei rhom erang eo rchang ethei rhom erang e altogether(e.g .Butynsk i& Kalina, 1998a; 1998b:Goldsmith ,2000) .Habituatio nmigh t resulti nbehaviora lchange san dultimatel yeve ni nlowe rreproductio n (McNeilage, 1996). Otherimportan riskst ma yb eth etransmissio no fdisease s(e.g .Kalema , 1998; Sholley, 1989;Walli s& Lee,i nprep. ;McNeilage , 1996)an dparasite s(e.g .Mudikikwa , 1998, Macafie, 1996)fro m visitort ogorill aan daccident scause db yvisitors .Eve nthoug hthi si s a milliondolla rbusines san dmountai ngorilla sar eclassifie d asvulnerabl e(Lee ,e tal , 1988; Harcourt, 1996)Butynsk i& Kalin a(1998a )poin tou ttha tlittl eha sbee ndon et omonito rth e potentiallydisastrou simpac to fhabituatio no ngorillas .Som erecen tinitiative so ndiseas e transmissionissue s(Camero ne tal , 1997;Homsy , 1998;Cranfield , 1999)a swel la s behavioralecolog y(Goldsmith ,2000 ;thi sstudy )migh tb emitigatin gthi ssituation .Th e processo fhabituatio no fape si srarel ydescribe d (butse eTuti n& Fernandez , 1991; Krunkelsvene tal. , 1999;Johns , 1996),a si ti scommonl yregarde da sa mean st oa nen d (Tutin& Fernandez , 1991).McNeilag e(1996 )recentl yreviewe d someo fthes eissue si nth e caseo fmountai ngorill aecotouris mconcludin gtha teve ni nth ecas eo fth ewel lstudie d mountaingorillas ,ther ei sa sye tlittl einformatio n availablet oallo wa ful l assessmento fth e effects oftouris mo nth emountai ngorillas .H estresse sth enee dt oestablis h studieso fth e reactionso fgorilla st otourists . One aim of our study was to monitor human impact through changes in behavior duringhabituation .Monitorin g willcontinu e after theprogra mha sbee nopene d fortourism . Thiswil lallo wu st oevaluat e ifgorilla sar edisturbe d andi fs owhic hfactor s arecausin gth e disturbance. Weca nthe ntak emitigatin g actionsbase d onconcret edata . The second aimo f the studywa st oanalyz eth e factors influencing theproces so fhabituation .Wester nlowlan d gorillas are notoriously difficult to habituate (Tutin & Fernandez, 1991) and a better understanding of the process could help future initiatives in habituation. This could be essential in those cases were habituation is carried out in a similar context of ecotourism development (e.g.Lope :Tuti ne tal , 1996;Tuti n& Abernethy , 1997;Lossi :Aveling , 1996; Bermejo, 1997,1999) . Thispape rpresent sth efirst result so fth emonitorin g ofgorill abehavio rdurin gth e habituationproces si nDzanga-Sangha . Thisresearc hi spar to fa large rmonitorin gprogram , whichinclude smonitorin go fthei rhom erange san ddail ypat hlengt h(Cipolletta ,i nprep.) , diseasetransmission ,a swel la soveral lhuma nimpac to nth enationa lpar k(Almas ie tal ,i n prep.;Blom ,e tal. ,i nprep.c) .I nthi spape rw emeasur ean devaluat eth edifferen t factors influencing thesebehaviora lchange sa swel la sthei rdevelopmen t overtime .W efocusse d onth efirs t reactiono fth egorillas ,a sthi si sprobabl yth emos tstressfu l momento fth e encounteran dwoul dgiv eu sa nindicatio no fth eseriousnes san dth eduratio no f stressful

94 reactionst oth eobserver .B ymonitorin gth egorilla' sresponse sdurin ghabituatio nw ear e lookinga tthos efactor s mostlikel yt oprovok eaggressiv eo rfearfu l reactions,i na noveral l aimt opreven tsuc hreaction san dpreventin ggorill atouris mfro m beingdetrimenta lt oth e animalsthemselves . Weexpecte dthat , overtime ,th egorilla s would increasingly ignoreth e observersa s a neutral element inthei r environment, astha ti sa sign of asuccessfu l habituation (Tutin& Fernandez, 1991). We also expected that if the process of habituation causes stress to the gorillas they would move away from the observers, increasing their daily path length and even shifting their home ranges. Both these factors would have serious impacts on the gorillas by increasing their energy expenditure, possible risk of predation and foraging effort. Specifically weexpecte d that after repeated exposuret oth eobserver sth e gorillas wouldbecom e lessagitate d andstressed . Weexpecte d thatth etim et ofin d andcontac t thegorilla swoul ddecreas eove rth ehabituatio nperiod ,whil eth eduratio no fth econtact s would increase during the sameperiod . Additionally weexpecte dtha t apreviou s encounter oreve n apreviou s dayencounte r (Fossey, 1983)woul d affect thebehavior , makingth e gorillasmor eagitated . Weexpecte d thata n increasing number ofrecontact s anda decreasin g timebetwee n contactswoul dresul t in increasing excitement inth e response.A sgorilla s seemt oprefe r denserhabita ttype s(Fa y& Agnagna , 1992;Carroll , 1997)w eexpecte d thatthe ywoul d feel more secure andsho wles sagitate d behaviori n dense ascompare d toope nhabita ttypes . Schaller(1963 )describe d"toleranc edistance "a sa nimportan tfacto r inth egorilla' s reactiont oth eobserver .Th epossibilit yt oavoi do rescap ean dth edistanc ebetwee ngorill a andobserve ral lprobabl ypla ya rol ei nth ebehaviora lrespons et oa nobserver .W eexpecte d thatcontact si ntrees ,especiall ythos ehighe rup ,woul db eexperience d asmor ethreatenin g duet opoo rescap epossibilitie sa scompare dt ocontact so nth eground .Furthermore ,w e expecteda shorte rhorizonta ldistanc ebetwee nth egorilla san dth eobserver st ob eperceive d asmor ethreatening ,an dtherefor e expectedth efirst reaction st ob emor eagitate dwhe n observerswer eclose rt oth egorillas .Schalle r(1963 )als oindicate dtha tth erespons egive n dependso nth esuddennes so fth econtact .W eexpecte d suddennesso fcontac tan dagitatio n tob epositivel ycorrelated .Las tw eexpecte dtha ta nincreasin gnumbe ro fobserver swoul d resulti na nincreasin gagitate dresponse .

Studyare a

This study was undertaken at Bai Hokou in the Dzanga sector (2°55'N, 16°20'E) of the Dzanga-Ndoki National Park. From 1972 until the 1980sthi s area was selectively logged. Since the gazetting in 1990 of the Dzanga-Ndoki National Park no logging has taken place.Th eare a isa strictl yprotecte d area,allowin g only limited access for research and tourism. The Dzanga-Sangha Dense Forest Special Reserve functions as a buffer zone for the national park by allowing the use of natural resources in a sustainable manner. The human population density in this area is low at an estimated 1perso n per km2 (GondaNgbalet , 1995;Blom ,unpublishe d data)an dmos t people areconcentrate d in thetow no fBayang a oralon gth emai nroa doutsid e ofth enationa l park (figure 1). The Dzanga-Sangha complex contains high densities of western lowland gorillas (Gorilla g.gorilla) and forest elephants (Loxodonta africana cyclotis) (Carroll, 1986 a,b,c, 1988 a,b, 1997; Fay, 1989, 1991a,b, 1997; Blom, et ah, in press; Blom et al., in prep, a;

95 Almasi,et al, inprep.) .Th eflor a andfaun a ofth e areai sver yric han ddivers e (Fay,et al, 1990; Blom, 1993a,b ; Harris, 1994; Rondeau & Blom, in prep.), including some recently discovered endemic species (e.g. Lunde & Beresford, 1997; Beresford, 1999; Ray & Hutterer, 1996). Duikersan dsom eothe rwildlif e canb elegall yhunte dwithi n thereserve ,bu tno t inth enationa l park.Poachin g isa seriou sproble m bothi nth ereserv ean dth enationa l park (Blom, 1999;Blom ,e tal. ,i nprep) .Wir e snares (illegal) arecommo n (Blom, 1999) andth ecombine d offtake ofhuntin g andpoachin g isknow nt ob ecurrentl y unsustainable for atleas tthre e specieso fduike r (Noss, 1998).Poachin g ofgorilla s however, isa rar eevent ,bu t snares dopos e aris k for gorillas. Thefores t structure inth e Dzangaare a isa patchwor k ofdifferen t habitat types with large quantitieso fherbaceou s undergrowth. Thefores t isdominate d bymixe d forest andmonodominan t forest of Gilbertiodendron dewevrei, whichha sa ver yope n understorey. Light gapswhic h arecreate db ynatura l tree fall orelephan tactivit y (Carroll, 1986c),compos ealmos t 9.5%o fth efores t habitat (Almasie tal. ,i nprep.) .Pas t selective logging created disturbed forest habitats andherbaceou s plantsar eabundan t alongabandone d loggingroads . Theclimat e istropica l andth e year ischaracterise d bya dr yseaso n ofthre e months (December -February ) anda lon g rainy season with arelativ edrie rperio di n June-July.Mea nannua lrainfal l is 1365m mi nBayang a(Carroll , 1997).Temperatur e varies little overth eyea rwit h anaverag e of26. 4° C(Carroll , 1997). Methods Thedat apresente d inthi spape rwer ecollecte d from August 1996unti l December 1999i nth eDzang a sector ofth enationa l park.B yth e endo f 1999 progresswa s suchtha t wedecide dt o start habituating asecon d group ofgorillas .Analyse s ofth edat aunti ltha t pointwoul d helpu sguid ethi s secondproces so f habituation. Duringth e initialphas e (August 1996 - December 1997)th eBa iHoko u study site wasselected . Fromlat e 1997onward s allth e datawer e collected atthi s study site.I nth e study areaa numbe ro ftrail swer emarke dusin gpre-establishe d elephanttrails , abandoned loggingroad san dsurve y transects.(Figur e 2).A nextensiv e trail systemwa s thusestablishe d ina nare ao fabou t 25km 2tha t allowedbot h for easymovemen t ofth e observers throughth eare aa swel l asmean st oma pth emovement s ofth egorillas .Th e trailswer emappe dusin g acompas s andtopofi l orpacing .Th ewhol e systemwa s represented ona bas emap ,whic h waslate rdigitize d usingAr cVie w software (ESRI, 1998a).

96 Figure 2Th eBa iHoko u studysit e

Trails Camp >T^~£ Bais/Clearings

Eachda ya tea mo fobservers ,usuall y consisting of2 BaAk atracker s andon e researcher,wen t outalon gth etrail sunti l fresh tracks ofgorilla swer e encountered. When feasible these trackswer e followed untilth e gorillas wereencountered . Aneffor t was madet ofind th enes t siteso rt olocat eth e gorillasa tthei rnes t sitesan dfollo w themal l dayt othei rne wnes t sites,a sgorilla sbuil da ne wnes tever y evening. Onmos tday s teams switched aroundmid-da y andth e secondtea mwoul dcontinu ewher e thefirst tea m hadlef t off. Wetrie d asmuc ha spossibl et oestablis h contactb ymakin g atongu eclackin g sound.Thi s soundwa sconsidere d distinctive andlou denoug h for the gorillast o associate itwit hth eresearcher s withoutbein gthreatening . Tocreat eth e least threatening situation,th egorilla swer epreferabl y contacted when ata nacceptabl e distance(a tleas t 10 meters) andwhe n gorillasan dresearcher s wereabl et oobserv e eachother . Observations were madeo n several groups andlon eindividuals .However , from August 1998onward s itwa spossibl et odistinguis h oneparticula r group(calle d "Munye")an d

97 thehabituatio n from theno nfocusse d onthi sgroup .B ytha ttim ew ewer e ablet o distinguishthi sgrou pbase do nit scomposition , itshom erang ean dit sprogressivel y calmerreactio n toth e observers.W ewer e fortunate thatth etracker swer e inman ycase s ablet ofollo w atrai l from nest toth eactua l encounter andonward swithou t losingth e gorilla'strail .Additionally ,th eproces so fhabituatio n wasaide d byth efac t thatth e Munyegrou palmos texclusivel yuse dth ecor eare ao fou r study site,wit honl ya n occasional lonemal ewonderin g in.Encounter swit h othergroup s inthi s areawer e extremely rarean dthei rreactio nt ou smad e it immediately evidenttha tw ewer e dealing withanothe rgroup . Encounterswer e defined asstartin gwhe n atleas ton egorill ashowe d awareness ofth eobservers ' presence.Awarenes swa sclearl y demonstrated inth emajorit y ofcase s bya gorill a responding toth eobserver sb yon eo fth ebehavior s defined inTabl e 1. In caseswher e gorillas didno trespon dt oobservers ' presence ("ignore" inTabl e 1), awareness wasjudge d subjectively byth eobserver swhe ncondition s ofvisibilit yan d proximity meant thatth e gorillas couldno tb eunawar e ofth eobservers ' presence.Th e duration ofth econtact swa sdefine d asth etim ewhe nth e first gorillawa sawar eo fth e observersunti l eitherth e last gorilla left and/orth eobserver s moved away. Theduratio n ofeac hcontac twa srecorde d rounded off toth ecloses tminute .I nmos tcase sth een do f the contactwa sclearl y delimited, witheithe rth e observer leavingo rth e gorillasvisibl y moving away.Howeve r sometimesn ovisua lclue swer eeviden t andth eobserve r hadt o rely onauditor y evidence ofdeparture .I fth egorilla swer eno thear dfo r about 15 minutes,whil eth e observersremaine d stationary,an dther ewa sn oevidenc eo fthei r continued presence,the ywer econsidere d tohav ebroke n off contact atth e last signo f them. Duringa contac tth eobserver swoul d mostly remain seatedi non earea ,althoug h sometimesw ewoul d movet oge ta bette rvie wo fth egroup .N oattemp twa smad et o follow thegorilla s duringa contact . Ifth e gorillas brokeof f acontact ,w ewaite da tleas t 15 minutes andsometime s considerably moretim ebefor e tryingt ofollo w theirtrai lan d locatethe monc eagain .Th e interval depended onth etyp e ofcontac tan dth enumbe ro f contactsmad epreviousl ytha t day. Ifth econtac tha dbee n calm,les stim ewoul db espen t waiting (butminimu m about 15 minutes)befor e tryingt orecontac t them. Onth eothe r hand, especially later ondurin gth ehabituatio n process,i fw eha dalread y made several previouscontac t that dayo rth e contactha dbee n stressful, wewoul dwai t longer before startingtracking . Anadditiona l contacto nth e sameda ywa sdefine d asa same-da y recontact. Ifw ewer e ablet ofollo w the groupove rconsecutiv e days,withou t interruption, thenumbe ro fday so fth e follow werenote d aswer eth e subsequent number ofcontacts ,calle drecontacts . All fresh traces and nest sites were located on the base map and attributed to a specific group (Munye) or lone males whenever possible.W e only attributed trails ornest s toth eMuny egrou pwhe ntha tnes to rtrai lwa sdirectl y connectedt oa nencounte rwher ew e could make a positive identification. Likewise when in contact with the gorillas their position wasmappe d andeac h timea trai l was crossedthi swa smarke d onth emap .A sth e trailswer emarke dever y 100 metersan dfe wtrail swer emor ethe n50 0meter sapar tth etrai l network allowed for fairly accurate positioning (within 100x 100meters ) within the study area. This geographic information was later digitized onto the base map using ArcVie w

98 software (ESRI, 1998a) and analyzed using the same software with the Spatial Analyst (ESRI, 1998b)an dAnima lMovemen tAnalysi s(Hoog e& Eichenlaub, 1997) extensions. For eachencounte rwit hgorillas ,dat awer ecollecte d onth e immediatereactio nt o theobservers ,th ewa yth e encounter endedan dcircumstance s ofth econtac t asoutline d intable s 1 and2 .Onl yth e initialresponse s ofth efirs t gorilladetectin g theobserver s were considered. Inmos t casesth e gorillas wouldbrea k off thecontac t in synchronous fashion. Usually thewhol egrou pwoul deithe rru nawa yo rwal kaway .Otherwise ,th e reactiono fth e last individual leavingwa staken .Th ereaso ntha t observersbrok e off the contactwa smostl yrelate dt oth e fact that itwa sgettin gdar ka tth een do fth e dayo rtha t achang eove ro fteam swa smad earoun dmid-day .Furthermor eth etim eo fday ,numbe r ofth econtact sfo r thatday ,numbe ro fsubsequen t dayso fcontac t andgrou pI Dwer e noted.I twa sno t alwayspossibl e tocollec t allth e dataintende d ands oth enumbe ro f observationsvarie da sexpresse dwit hth eN-valu ementione dwit heac htest .

Table 1. Behavioral datatake n during contactswit h gorillas

First reaction First responsegive n after contact (inorde r ofincreasin g disturbance): • IG Ignore;n odiscernibl e response shown,whil e iti sobviou s thatth eobserve r hasbee n noticed,b yth e fact thatcondition so fvisibilit y andproximit y meanttha tth egorilla scoul dno tb eunawar e ofth eobservers ' presence. • CU Curious;th e gorillamove st oobtai n abette rvie wo fth eobserver , orkeep s looking atth e observer witho rwithou t continuing thepreviou sactivity .O n a few occasionsfollowe d by anon-threatenin g chestbea to rhan dclap . • VO Non-threatening vocalization ("bark"o r"whoo" ) • AV Avoid; changing direction,descendin g tree ormovin g away • FE Fear;runnin g awaywit ho rwithou t screaming orscreamin gfrom positio ni n treewit ho rwithou tdescendin g thetre e • AG Aggressive;varyin g from athreatenin g "wraagh"vocalizatio nwithou t movementt o acharg ewit hdirec tphysica lcontac t

Way Activity uponendin gth econtac t encounter ended • OL Observer leaves • WA Gorillaswal kawa y • RA Gorillas runawa y • RV Gorillasru nawa yvocalizin g

Ourdefinitio n ofcuriosit y includedbot hth edefinition s ofmonito r aswel la s curiosityuse db yTuti n &Fernande z (1991).Thes eauthor s alsodistinguishe d hidea sa n activity,b ywhic hth egorill amove sbehin dvegetation .Althoug hthi sbehavio rwa s observed itwa sno t afirs t reaction inDzanga-Sangha . Overall,bot hth efirst reactio nan d thewa yth e contact ended inTabl e 1 areordere d ina gradien t ofincreasin g stress. Althoughth egradien t isno t always directly stepwise,i ti sclea rtha ta gradien t ispresent .

99 Table 2Dat atake n onth ecircumstance s ofth e contact

Way Wayo fcontac t establishment • OC Observer contacted; observer approachesundetecte d andmake shis/he r presenceknow n • OD Observer detected; observers detected bygorilla sbefor e the observers could signalthei rpresenc e • RD Reciprocal detection; abrupt detection inwhic h gorilla andobserve r detect eachothe r simultaneously

Distance Horizontal distancebetwee n gorilla (ortre ewit hgorilla ) atth emomen t contact established (inmeters ) • A <10 • B 10-20 • C 21-30 • D >30

Height Height abovegroun do fgorill a atth emomen tcontac t established • GR Onth egroun d • TR Ina tre e atth e following heights (inmeters) : A <10 B 10-20 C >20

Tomonito r theeffor t needed tofin d thegorilla sw enote d timespen t searching (timew elef t campunti lth etim ew ereturne d tocamp )a swel l asth enumbe r ofpeopl ei n theteam .A sth etyp e ofhabita t couldhav ea n influence onth e detection distance aswel l asth e subsequent reaction ofth egorillas ,w enote d thehabita ttyp e inwhic h thecontac t tookplace ,ranke d byrelativ e visibility atgroun d level (Table3) .

100 Table 3Habita ttype s

Type Habitat typei nwhic h the gorillawa spresen t atmomen t ofcontac t (in ordero fincreasin g density of understory) • OH Openhabitats ;road san dclearing s (open areas inforest , locally called "bais") (visibility » 20meters ) aswel l asmonodominan tfores t of Gibertiodendron dewevrei (visibility» 20meters) ,locall y referred toa s Bemba orMalapa, with sparseunderstor y ofmostl yPalisota sp • MO Mixed forest witha nope nunderstor y (visibility> 2 0meters ) • MC Mixed forest witha close d understory (visibility <2 0meters ) • DU Denseunderstor yfores t witha mixe dope ncanopy ,locall ycalle dEbuka. The canopy isdiscontinuou s allowing lightt openetrat et oth e forest floor. The resulting very denseunderstor y iscovere dwit hdens eherbaceou s growth, whichi sdominate db yHaumania sp. an dothe rMarantaceae an d Zingerberaceae. Thicklian atangle sca nb elocall ycommon . Also included inthi shabita ttyp ewer eligh t gapsan d secondary forest along roadsan d rivers (visibility < 10meters )

Visibility isexpresse d asa nestimat eo fth e average distance atwhic h aperso n dressed indar k colorsca nb esee nstandin g still ina nare atha t istypica l for that habitat type.

Inorde rt odetec t any generaltrend s inth edata ,th eparameter s wereplotte d against eachothe r ina Spearman-correlation testusin g SPSS 8.0 software (SPSS,1998) . Parameters wereranke d aspresente d inth e abovetables .Normall yth e classicalmetho d ofChi-squar e test isuse d for analyzing frequencies (Sokal& Rohlf , 1995;SPSS ,1998) , while assuring thatn omor etha n 20%o fth ecategorie sha dexpecte d frequencies ofles s than 5(SPSS , 1998).I nth e case ofver y large sample sizesth eChi-squar e becomes inappropriate (Wonnacott &Wonnacott , 1977).Instea dw euse dth e recommended simultaneous 95% confidenc e intervals,constructin g asyste m ofconfidenc e intervals that areal l simultaneously true.Th eerro rrat e of 5% i sdivide db yth enumbe ro f factors wear ecomparin g (Wonnacott &Wonnacott , 1977).Th eresultin g confidence intervals were calculated byusin g SPSS(1998) .Th eresult s arepresente d asmean swit h standard deviation. Ourvariable swer e inman ycase sno tnumerical ,bu tmerel y ordered. Coding thevariable s andthe nproceedin g withthi sne wnumerica l variablewil lyiel d amor e powerful testtha n Chi-square (Wonnacott &Wonnacott , 1977).Th eLevene' s test for equality ofvariance swa suse dt otes t for equalvariance so f samplesbefor e usingth et - test for equality ofmean s (Sokal& Rohlf , 1995;SPSS , 1998).T odetermin e inwhic h orderth edifferen t factors relatedt oth ecircumstanc e ofth e encounter (Table2 an d3 ) influenced thegorilla s first reaction aswel l asth ewa yth e contact endedw euse dth e step-wise discriminant analysis (SPSS, 1998).I nth e step-wise discriminant analysisa t each stepth evariabl e thatminimize sth eoveral l Wilks' Lambda isentere d (SPSS,1998) .

101 Results

Duration

Between August 1996an dDecembe r 1999dat awer e collected on 1472contact s with gorilla groups for atota lo f24,85 9minute s ofcontac ttime . Contacts variedi n length from several seconds (rounded off tozero )t o 180 minutes,bu tlaste d almost 17 minuteso n average (16.9;SD=25.5 ;N=1470) .Averag e contact timeincrease d overth e years asillustrate d infigur e 3.

Figure 3Averag e contacttim e overth eyear s

Average contacttim e

Error Bars show 95 0% CIo fMea n

N=909 Bars showMean s

N=66 20.00- .3 N=15 N=48D

| 10.00-

B 0.00- II I • • • • I • • • • I • • • • I 1996 1997 1998 1999 Year

Theincreas e inaverag e contact duration from 1998t o 1999wa s significant (Levene's test for equality ofvariance sF = 51.718 ,p<0.00 1an dt-tes t withequa l variancesno t assumed t= -8.350 ,df= l 189,p<0.001) .Th eaverag e contactwit hth e Munye group,identifie d sinceAugus t 1998,laste d2 0minute s (20.0;N= l 148;SD=27.0 ) andincrease d overth e studyperio d (figure 4;Spearma ncorrelatio n 2-tailed= 0.376 , N=l 148,p<0.01) .Thi sgrou pwa scontacte d 1,150 times for atota lo f22,98 3minutes .

102 Figure4 Averag econtac ttim ewit hth eMuny egrou p(N= l150 )

Arerage monthly duration of contacttime wit hth eMnny e Group

50.00-

40.00-

0.00- -ST=1 2 33 52 10410 61 6 87 12210 57 47 0 79 57 67 36

I ' ' T^ " I "^ T JUL 98 NOV 98 MAE 99 JUN< OCT 99 Month Error Bars show 35.0 % CIo fMea n Bars showMean s

Effort Duringth e first full year (1997)a tota l of3,08 5hour swer e spent inth e field searching for gorillas,durin gwhic h time6 4encounter swit hgorilla stoo kplace ,givin g onaverag e onecontac t about every4 8hours .I n 1998a tota lo f 3,236hour swer espen ti n thefield, wit h46 7 gorilla contacts,givin g onaverag e about onecontac t every 7 hours. Thisdecreas e ofaverag e inth efield tim epe r contactcontinue d in 1999,wit h atota lo f 4,160hour s inth efield fo r 859contacts ,averagin g about onecontac t every 5 hours. There isa significan t decrease ofth eaverag etim e inth efield pe rcontac t from January 1997t oDecembe r 1999,excludin gth emont h ofNovembe r 1997,whe nn o gorillaswer e encountered (Spearman Correlation 2-tailed:-0.861 ,N=35 , p<0.01). Overall 1,472 contactswer emad ewit h gorillas inove r 10,481hour si nth efield. O fthes e 5,177 hourswer e spendtrackin gth eMuny egroup ,whic hwa sfirst recognize da ssuc hi n August of 1998resultin g in 1,150 contactswit hthi sgroup .Th eaverag e tracking timepe r contactwa sove rfou r hours.I nfac t alsowit hth e Munye groupinitiall y theaverag e contacttim edi ddecrease ,bu tw edecide dt o limitth enumber so fcontact safte r April 1999(se ediscussion) .

103 Firstreactio n

First reactions ofgorilla st oobserver swer enote d starting inApri l of 1998. As illustrated infigur e 5th ebehavio r ofth egorilla s atcontac t changed overtime .

Figure 5.Change si nfirs t reaction during habituation

Changes infirs treactio ndurin g habituation

minim on •Aggressive • Fear ""WHimm •Avoid •Vocalisation HCuriou s • Ignore

cocgcocooo05a>g?o>oo> o .a 3 "

Thepercentag e ofaggressiv efirst reaction s seemt opea k inOctobe r 1998, but overall showed adecreas e overtim e (Spearman correlation 2-tailed-0,735 , N=21, p<0.01).Fea r (Spearman correlation 2-tailed -0,717,N=21 ,p<0.01) ,an d vocalization reactions (Spearman correlation 2-tailed -0,614,N=21 ,p<0.01 )bot hdecrease d overtime . Onth e otherhand ,th epercentag e of"ignore "wa sabsen t during 1998an d showeda n increase overtim e (Spearman correlation 2-tailed, 0.933,N=21 ,p<0.01) .Th e"curious " reactionwa sonl y first noted inJanuar y of 1998.Th ecuriou s reaction remained prominent for several months andthe n slowly diminished (Figure 5;Spearma n correlation 2-tailed -0.951,N=12 ,p<0.01) .Avoi d didno t show any significant correlation (Spearman correlation 2-tailed -0,385,N=21 ,NS ) InAugus t of 1998w estarte d concentrating onth eMuny egroup .Lookin g atth e changes inth efirst reactio n ofthi sgroup ,th eproces s ofhabituatio n isclearl y demonstrated. Initially aggression seemst o increase,peakin g inOctobe r in 1999an dthe n diminishing tolo w levels (Spearman correlation 2-tailed, 0.850,N=17 ,P<0.01) .Th e percentages offirst reactio n fear andavoidanc ebot hten dt ofluctuat e more,bu tbot hd o diminish overtim e (Spearman correlation 2-tailed, N=17,resp .-0.55 1an d-0.569 , p<0.05).Bot hvocalizatio n andcuriou s asfirst reactio n didno t showan y significant correlation (Spearman correlation 2-tailed, N=17,resp .-0.47 1an d0.283 ,NS) .Howeve r curiousa sfirst reactio n didsignificantl y decrease from itsfirs t occurrence inJanuar y 1999,(Spearma n correlation -0.986,N=12 ,p<0.01) .Finall yth eMuny e group gradually ignoredth eobserve r (Spearman correlation 2-tailed, 0.968,N=17 , p<0.01).

104 Wayencounte rende d

Another important factor inth e evaluation ofth ehabituatio n process isth ewa y theencounte r ended.A sillustrate d inFigur e 6th efrequenc y of "run away", either vocalizing ornot ,diminishe d overtim e(Spearma n correlation 2-tailed,N=21 , -0.797an d -0.850respectively ,p<0.01) .Th egorilla srarel yra n off duringth e last 5month s ofth e study,whe nthe yusuall ywalke d awaycalml y orth eobserver sbrok e offth e contact. Boththes etype s ofcontac t ending increased duringth e studyperio d (Spearman correlation 2-tailed,N=21 , 0.586an d0.90 5respectively ,p<0.01) .

Figure6 Change si nth ewa yth econtac tende ddurin ghabituatio n (N=1365)

Way encounter ended

100% I

0) 80%\ • Runawa yvocalizin g en 60%i S |• Runawa y c 40% j iDWal kawa y Q. 20% • Observerleave s 0% J -J* ^ ^ ^ Month

Duringth ewhol eperio do fhabituatio n ofth e Munye group,th emos t common wayi nwhic hth e contact endedwa sth egrou p walking awayquietly .N o significant changes inth epercentag e ofthi sbehavio r wasfoun d overtim e (Spearman correlation2 - tailed, 0.065,N=17 ,NS) .Ove rtime ,i tbecam erar efo r the groupt oru n away during contact(Spearma n correlation 2-tailed,-0.482 ,N=17 ,NS ,bu tp=0.05 )an deve nrare rt o dos owhil e vocalizing,whil ethes ewer e commonreaction s inth ebeginnin g (Spearman correlation 2-tailed,.-0.492,N=17 ,p<0.05) .A tth een do fth ehabituatio n periodi t became quite common for thecontac tt o endb yth eobserve r leavingth egorilla s (Spearman correlation 2-tailed,0.700 ,N=17 , p<0.01).

Recontacts

Thesucces s oftrackin g andcontactin g theMuny e groupvarie dove rtime .Th e numbero fconsecutiv e contactswit hth e Munyegroup ,o rrecontacts , slowly shifted toa higherpercentag e permonth . Howeverthi stren dwa sno t significant (Spearman correlation, -0.015,N= l150 ,NS) . Themaximu m numbero f subsequent contacts,withou t aday' s interruption, was 109ove r 17 dayso fcontinue d follow. Themaximu mnumbe ro f

105 recontactso nth e sameda ywa s 10 andth emaximu m numbero fday so fcontinue d follow was 28. Thenumbe r ofrecontact s onth e sameda ybecam e sohig hi nFebruar y of 1999 that wedecide db yMa ytha tw ewoul dno ttr yt orecontac t the gorillasmor etha n 5-6 times ina da y (seeDiscussion) . Thenumbe ro ftime sth e Munye groupwa scontacte d inth e sameda ydi dno t seemt oinfluenc e theirfirst reactio nt oobservers . Wecompare d responses onth e1 st (Mean=3.31, SD=1.95,N=339) ,2 nd(Mean=3.28 ,SD=1.95 , N=274),3 rd (Mean=3.40, SD=1.93,N=202) ,4 th(Mean=3.28 ,SD=1.86 ,N=125 ) andmor etha n4 th(Mean=3.45 , SD=1.90,N=171 ) encounters for thatda ya sillustrate d inTabl e3 .

Table 3. Percentage offirs t reactionb y subsequent contactwit hth eMuny e groupo nth e sameda y(N= l110 )

Contacts on same day First reaction 1 2 3 4 >4 Ignore 27.5 25.9 22.3 21.6 20.5 Curious 14.5 17.5 18.3 20.8 19.3 Vocalization 16.3 17.2 18.8 20.0 16.4 Avoid 7.4 6.6 4.5 4.8 7.6 Fear 10.1 7.3 9.9 11.2 11.1 Aggressive 24.3 25.5 26.2 21.6 25.1 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 N 338 274 202 125 171

Likewise, thewa y the contact ended did not seem to be influenced significantly by the number of contacts during the day (1st: Mean=1.97, SD=0.48,N=349 ; 2nd: Mean=1.91, SD=0.47,N=280 ;3 rd:Mean=2.00 ,SD=0.58 ,N=208 ;4 th:Mean=1.99 ,SD=0.54 ,N=12 8an d >4 th:Mean=1.96 , SD=0.60,N=173) .O nth eothe rhand ,th enumbe ro fday stha tth eMuny e groupha dbee nfollowe d didsignificantl y alterthei rfirst reactio nt oth eobserve r (Spearman correlation -0.107, N=llll, p<0.001), but not the way the contact was ended (Pearson correlation -0.038, N=1138, NS). In fact, especially the percentage of aggressive first reactions seemst odiminis h with anincreasin gnumbe r ofday stha tth egrou pwa s followed (Spearman correlation-0.709 ,N= l1 , PO.05).

Habitat

Thetyp eo fhabita t hasa ninfluenc e onth efirst reactio n ofth eMuny e groupt o observers.Howeve r asillustrate d infigur e 7thi sdifferenc e inrespons e doesno t seemt o berelate dt oho wdens eth evegetatio n is.I n fact, thegroup' s first reaction inth edens e understory forest (Mean=2.96, SD=1.97,N=361 ) issignificantl y differentfrom th e reaction inmixe dclose d forest (Mean=3.59, SD=1.85, N=549),bu tth edifferenc e does notreac ha significan t level withmixe d openfores t (Mean=3.44, SD=1.92,N=155) .N o trend iseviden twit hth eope nhabitat ,whic h showsa mea n inbetwee n mixed forest and openhabitat s (Mean=3.20, SD=1.98, N=41).

106 Figure 7Percentag e offirst reactio n indifferen t habitattype s (N=l106 )

Percentage offirs t reactioni ndifferen t habitat types

100% ^H ^H ^M ^H HH ^H ^H ^1 • Aggressive a • DFear S 60% gg| dp • Avoid c m o 40% : • Vocalization 0 1 • Curious a. ; 20% • Ignore

1 OH MO MC DU Habitattyp e

Habitattypes :O H= Ope nHabitats ;M O = MixedOpen ;M C= Mixe dClosed ; DU=Dens eUnderstor y (seemethods) .

Thewa yth econtac t ended withth eMuny e group differed significantly inth e DenseUnderstore y (Mean=1.83,SD=0.53 ,N=379 ) from the otherhabita t types(Mixe d Closed: Mean=2.02,SD=0.51 ,N=556 ;Mixe d Open:Mean=2.06 ,SD=0.47 ,N=15 7an d OpenHabitats :Mean=2.17 , SD=0.59 ,N=41) .Th echance s ofth egrou prunnin g away, diminished progressively asth ehabita tbecam e denser(Figur e8) .

107 Figure 8 Percentage of the way the contact ended in different habitat types (n=l 133)

Percentageo flas treactio n indifferen t habitat types

100% 80% a • Runawa y vocalizing O) m 60% U Runawa y C 0) o 40% • Walk away a a. mObserve r leaves 20% 0% OH MO MC DU Habitat type

Position

Our results show that the Munye group's first reaction to observers was different when the gorillas were on the ground (Mean=3.61, SD=1.96, N=874) or in a tree (Mean=2.34, SD=1.39, N=233). The gorillas were a lot more tolerant in trees, showing a much higher percentage of curious and ignore behavior than when they were on the ground (Figure 9). They were also less likely to run away when in the trees versus on the ground (Figure 10;Ground : Mean=1.99, SD=0.53,N=89 3 and Tree: Mean=1.88, SD=0.49, N=240).

108 Figure 9Firs t reaction ofgorilla si nrelatio nt othei rpositio n

First reaction in relation to position

100% - - JJJJJJ 80% ^^H |• Aggressive « ^^^S n |D Fea r c 60% • Avoid a> o 40% B Vocalization a. • Curious 20% B Ignore 0% Dngroun c In tree Position

Figure 10 Waycontac t endedwit hth egorilla s inrelatio nt othei rpositio n

Way contact ended in relation to position

100%

80% o> • Run away vocalizing IS 60% • Run away c a 40% •Walk away a a. • Observer leaves 20%

0% C) n groun d In tree Position

Theheigh t atwhic hth e gorillaswer e found ina tre e atth emomen t ofcontac t did not seemt o significantly influence theirfirs t reaction (Height < 10mete r : Mean=2.49, SD=1.36,N=49 ;Heigh t 10-20:Mean=2.37 ,SD=1.37 ,N=79 ;Heigh t> 20 :Mean=2.05 , SD=1.19,N=83 )o rth ewa yth e contact ended (Height < 10mete r : Mean=1.94, SD=0.59,N=50 ;Heigh t 10-20:Mean=1.88 ,SD=0.40 ,N=82 ;Heigh t> 20 : Mean=1.81, SD=0.45, N=84).

109 Horizontal distance

Horizontal distancebetwee n the Munye group (closest individual onth egroun d ordistanc et otre ewit hcloses t individual) andth e observer influenced thefirst reactio no f the gorillas.Th edifferenc e issignifican t between adistanc eo fles stha n 10 meters (Mean=4.95, SD=1.56,N=109 ) andth enex t categoryu po fbetwee n 10 and2 0meter s (Mean=3.61, SD=1.94,N=505) .Furthermore ,th e differences attha t category is significantly different again from thenex tcategor y up, which isbetwee n 20an d3 0 meters (Mean=2.78,SD=1.79 ,N=333) .Finall y atth emaximu m distance ofmor etha n3 0 meters dow en olonge rdetec t asignifican t difference, butth etren d remains(Mean=2.36 , SD=1.40,N=149) .A sillustrate d infigure 1 1 there isa correlatio n betweenth e first reaction andth edistanc ebetwee n theobserve r andth egorilla s (Spearman correlation2 - tailed-0.347 ,N=1096 ,P<0.01) .Th egreate rth e distancet oth eobserve rth eles s pronounced isth efirst reactio n ofth e gorillast oth e observer'spresence .

Figure 11Firs treactio n ofMuny egrou pi nrelatio nt oth ehorizonta l distancet oth e observers(N=1096 )

First reaction in relation to horizontal distance

• Aggressive o> • Fear a • Avoid c 0) •Vocalization a • Curious a a. • Ignore

<10 11 to 20 21 to 30 >30 Horizontaldistanc e (inmeters )

Horizontal distancebetwee nth e Munye group andth e observer also influenced thewa yth econtac t ended.A sillustrate d in figure 12, againth e greaterth edistanc eth e lesspronounce d thereactio n ofth egorilla st oth e observers' presence (Spearman correlation 2-tailed -0.068,N= l 124, p<0.05).

110 Figure 12Wa ycontac t endedwit hth eMuny e groupi nrelatio n toth ehorizonta l distance betweenthe man dth eobserver s (N=l124 )

Way contact ended in relation to horizontal distance 100% • 80% | • Runawa yvocalizin g S 60% ! £ BRu nawa y 0) O 40% '• DWal k away a a. : • Observerleave s 20%

0% f— <10 11 to 20 21to 3 0 >30 Distance(i nmeters )

Waycontac twa s established

Themanne ri nwhic h acontac twa sestablishe d wascorrelate d withth e subsequent occurrence ofth e contacto rcontac tnumbe r (Spearman correlation 2-tailed - 0.341,N= l149 ,p<0.01) .Th enumbe ro fcontact si nwhic hth e observer madehi so rhe r presenceactivel y known (usuallyb yclacking ) increased overtime .Bot hth e first reaction andth elas treactio nwer ecorrelate d withth ewa yth econtac twa sestablishe d (Spearman correlation 2-tailed resp.0.579 ,N= l110 ,p<0.0 1an d0.186 ,N= l 137,p<0.01) .Reciproca l detectionswer e rarean dhappene d in 14case swit hth eMuny e groupo rabou t 1 %o fth e contacts.I nou ranalysi s wecombine d thereciproca l detectionwit hobserve r detected. Figure 13illustrate stha tth e first reaction differed significantly whenth e gorillaswer e contacted byth eobserve r (Mean=2.38,SD=1.59 ,N=640 ) compared toencounter swher e the gorillasdetecte d theobserver sfirst o rsimultaneousl y (Mean=4.65,SD=1.54 , N=470). TheMuny e groups' first reactionwa smor epositiv ewhe nth egorilla swer e contactedb y theobserve r asoppose dt owhe nth egorilla s detectedth e observers first.

Ill Figure 13Firs t reaction in relation to the way the gorillas were contacted

First reaction in relation towa y of contact

100% i 80% •Aggressive 0) a M ; O) DFear a 60% 4-* • ^H • Avoid oC !• o 40% • Vocalization 0) Q. -.-J" OCurious 20% Hj-Sn . i• Ignore 0% Observercontacte d Observerdetecte d Wayo fcontac t establishment

Similarly, the way the contact ended varied significantly with the way the contact was established. The gorillas were less likely to run away if they were contacted by the observers (mostly by the distinct clacking sound; Mean=1.89, SD=0.47, N=663) than if they noticed the observers before being forewarned (Figure 14;Mean=2.08 , SD=0.57, N=474).

Figure 14Wa y contact ended in relation to the way the gorillas were contacted

Way contact ended in relation to way of contact

100% • i 80% O) • Runawa yvocalizin g! (0 60% c • Runawa y a0) 40% DWal kawa y 0) Q. BObserve rleave s 20% 0% Observer Observer detected contacted Wa y ofc < >ntactestaf c >lishmen t

112 Observers

Ourresult sdi dno tsho wan ysignifican t correlationbetwee nth enumbe ro f observers (varyingbetwee n 1 and7 )an dth efirst reactio n ofth egorilla s(Pearso n correlation2-taile d-0.015 ,N= l111 ,NS) .Likewis ew ecoul dno tdetec tan y significant correlationbetwee nth enumbe ro fobserver san dth ewa yth econtac tende d(Pearso n correlation2-taile d-0.036 ,N= l138 ,NS) .Howeve ri tshoul db enote dtha ti n9 9% ofth e casesther ewer eeithe r3 o r4 observers.

Most important factors

Toevaluat ewhic ho fth eabov eanalyze dfactor s wereth emos timportan ti n determining bothth efirst reactio no fth eMuny egrou pupo nbein gcontacte da swel la sth e wayi nwhic hth econtac tended ,w euse dth efollowin g variablesi nth eanalysis : • Contact number, asa measur e oftim e spend habituating • Totalnumbe r ofrecontact s • Number ofcontact so nsam eda y • Number of subsequent dayso fcontac t • Habitattyp e • Position: onth egroun do ru pi ntre e • Horizontal distancebetwee n observer andMuny egrou p • Way contactwa s established • Numbero f observers Notetha tth enumbe ro fcontact so n sameda yan dth enumbe r ofobserver spreviousl y didno t show asignifican t relationwit hth efirst reactio n ofth egorillas . Thestepwis ediscriminan t analysis showedtha tth efollowin g factors, inorde ro f relativeimportance ,playe da significan t role(al lPO.00 1an dN = 1081)i ndeterminin gth e gorillasfirst' reaction :contac tnumbe r(Wilks ' Lambda0.646) ,wa ycontac twa sestablishe d (0.479),distanc e(0.436) ,positio n(0.416) ,habita ttyp e(0.404) ,tota lnumbe ro frecontact s (0.396)an dnumbe ro fsubsequen tday so fcontac t (0.377).I nfac tth eresultin gfunctio n with contactnumbe ran dwa ycontac twa sestablishe da sth elarges tabsolut ecorrelation s explained 83.3% o fth evariance . Inth ecas eo fth ewa yth econtac tende dthes ewer eth esignifican t factors (all P<0.001an dN = 1114):contac tnumbe r(Wilks 'Lambd a0.942) ,habita ttyp e(0.911) , way ofcontac t(0.889 )an ddistanc e (0.874).I nthi scas eth eresultin gfirs t function usescontac t number,wa ycontac twa sestablishe dan dhabita ta sth elarges tabsolut ecorrelatio n explaining79. 3% o fth evariance .

Discussion

According toTuti n &Fernande z (1991)th eeas eo fhabituatio n ofa particula r population ofprimate sappear st odepen d largely onth e following factors: 1. Thenatur e ofan ypreviou sexperienc e withhuman s 2. Thebehavio r ofth e specieswhe n faced witha nunfamilia r intruder intothei r environment 3. Thestructur e ofth ehabita t

113 Although iti simpossibl e to assessth enatur e ofpreviou s experiences ofth e gorillasi nth e BaiHoko u area,i ti simportan t tonot eth eare aha sbee na stud ysit e intermittently since 1984(Carroll , 1986a,c).Beside sgorill aresearc h (e.g.Carroll ,1997 ; Remis, 1994;Goldsmith , 1996), the sitewa sals ouse d tostud yothe recologica l aspects ofth eregio n (e.g.Klaus-Hugi , 1998;Klaus , 1998)an dresearcher s havebee npresen ti n the areafo rmos to fth etim e sinceth eresearc h campwa sinitiall yopened .Furthermore , poaching ofgorilla swa srar e inDzanga-Sangh a duringthi s study (January 1993- December 1999).Fou rcase so fgorill apoachin g wereconfirme d duringtha ttime ,bu t none inth estud y area. Nevertheless thestud y sitewa sneve rcompletel yfree o fth e presence ofpoachers ,wh ower emostl yafte r duikers andmonkeys . Theincreas e inth eduratio no faverag econtac ttim ewit hgorilla san dth e fact that ittoo k lessan dles stim e (effort) to locate gorillasbot hindicat etha t habituation progressed overth e studyperiod . Infac t alsowit hth eMuny egrou pth eeffor t initially decreased,bu tw edecide dt olimi tth enumbe r ofcontact st on omor etha n 5-6pe rda yi n ordert oavoi d strongnegativ ereactions .Thi sdecisio nwa sprovoke d bya physica l contact onApri l 15, 1999 betweenth e silverback andon eo fth etrackers ,i nwhic hth e trackerwa sbitte n inth earm .I nth eperio dprecedin gthi s incidenthabituatio n seemedt o progresswel l andth enumbe ro fcontact so na singl eda yha d increased upt o9 .Th eexac t cause ofth e attacko nth etracke rremain sunclear ,howeve r ourobservations ,rangin gan d nest dataindicat etha tth egrou pwa sgoin gthroug h socialupheava lwit hmember s leavingth e group (Cipolletta, inprep.) .Afte r thiseven tmor e cautionwa stake n approachingth egorilla san dreducin gth enumbe r ofrecontacts .N ofurthe r physical contact occurred. Weranke dth e gorillas' first reaction from ignore,curiou sthroug h vocalization, avoid,fea r andfinall y aggression, asa measuremen t ofth e stressinvolved .Althoug hthi s isa somewha t subjective classification itals o indicatesth e amount ofenerg y spentb yth e gorillaso nth e encounterwit hth e observers.I tals o islinke dt oth e statuso fth e habituation process. Gorillastha t ignoreth eobserve r arepe rdefinitio n habituated,whil e unhabituated gorillas commonly show signso ffear , including diarrhea (Butynski& Kalina, 1998a;Blo m& Cipolletta ,pers .obs. )a swel l ascharge san dothe r aggressive displays,includin g biting (Fossey, 1983;Butynsk i &Kalina , 1998a;Blo m& Cipolletta , pers. obs.).Initia lreaction s ofaggression ,fea r andvocalizatio n upon contactwit hth e observerswer ereplace d increasinglyb yignorin g theobservers .I tseem stha ta curiou s reaction wasa nintermediat e stage inth ehabituatio nprocess . Thewa y inwhic hth e contactsende dals obecam emuc hmor esubdue d overtime . Inth elas t 5month so fth e study,th e Munye grouprarel yra nawa yonc econtacte dan d running awaywhil e vocalizing virtually disappeared. Thiswa yo fendin ga contac t isals o inshar pcontras t withnon-habituate d gorillas.I nth ebeginnin g ofth e studyabou thal fth e contacts endedwit hth egorilla srunnin g away. Progress inth ehabituatio n processwa sno t onlyreflecte d byth echang ei n reactionstha tth egorilla sdisplaye d uponth e observers'arrival ,bu tals o ina nanalysi so f theirmovemen t patterns.A simultaneou s study ofrangin gpattern s ofth eMuny egrou p (Cipolletta, inprep )show stha tth e group's dailymovement swer e significantly higher duringth einitia lperio do fhabituation ,whe nth egorilla swer eavoiding ,i fno t fleeing, theobservers .A sth egorillas ' reactions changedwit htime ,s odi dthei r dailymovements ,

114 decreasing asthe ywer ebecomin g morehabituated , andnotabl y sowhe nth e'Ignore ' reactionsbecam eth emos t frequent reaction observed (Cipolletta, inprep.) . Onth eothe r handther ewa sn odecreas e inhom erang e size,whic hwoul dhav ebee n expected ifth e gorillaswoul d havebee ntryin gt oavoi d adisturbe d area. Furthermore wecoul dno t detect anyobviou s shifts inth ehom erang e ofth eMuny e group duet ohabituation , asha s beenobserve d in Bwindi (Butynski &Kalina , 1998b;Goldsmith , 2000).A possibl e reason forthi s apparent lack ofcorrelatio n between homerang e sizean dprogres si n habituation couldb eth e gorillas' strong attractiont oa smal l area(th ecor e ofwhic hwa s onlyabou t 4km 2),o rth ehig hcost s involved inmovin gt o adifferen t area (Cipolletta,i n prep.). Infact , duringmos t ofth e studyperio dth eMuny e group seemedt ous ethi ssmal l area almost exclusively, andver y few encounterswith , ortrace s of, othergroup swer e recorded inthi scor e area.Thi si si ncontras t toth eprevailin g situation inwester n lowlandgorillas ,wher ehom erange stypicall yoverla pt oa hig hdegre e (Gabon:Tutin , 1996;Tuti n &Abernethy , 1997;Congo :Olejniczak , 1996, 1997;Bermejo , 1997; Magliocca &Querouil , 1997;Magliocca , 1999;Magliocc a et al., 1999).Eve na tNdaka n (Fay, 1997)an dMondik a (Doran,pers .comm.) ,i nth eNdok i sectoro fth epark ,a swel l aspreviousl y atth e BaiHoko u site,severa l gorillagroup s seemt ooverla p inthei rhom e ranges.Fo rexampl e Remis(1994 )estimate d that atleas t 5group s and 5lon e silverbacks usedhe r studyare a atBa iHokou .Late r Goldsmith(1996 )estimate d that 6gorill a groups anda tleas t4 lone silverbacks wereusin gth e sameBa iHoko u studyarea ,whic hlargel y overlapped withou r areaalthoug hthei rare a extended severalkilometer s further east. However, the differences observed inhom erang e overlap,a tleas t inth e samestud ysite , are likely tob einfluence d byth enatur ean dth e sizeo fth e sampleo fdail y follows recorded (Cipolletta, inprep) .A sw ewer econtinuousl y following theMuny e group,w e obtained aclea rpictur e ofthei rhom erang ean dcoul ddetec t nosimultaneou s useb y other gorillas.Howeve rw eca nno tentirel y exclude homerang e overlapwit h different groups inarea suse da tdifferen t times.Th efac t thatth e Munye groupwa svirtuall y the onlygrou pusin g theare amad efo r mucheasie rtrackin g oftha t specific groupan dthu s probably facilitated thehabituatin g process aswel la sidentificatio n ofth egroup . Allthes e factors indicatetha tprogres stoward sth ehabituatio n ofth eMuny e groupwa smade .Importan t for similar endeavors inhabituatin g either in Dzanga-Sangha orelsewher e ist oanalyz e factors thatmigh thav ea nimpac t onth ebehavio r ofth e gorillasan dho wt omitigat epossibl enegativ e factors ast oallo wfo r asmoothe r habituation process. Thenumbe r ofcontact so nth esam eda ydi dno t seemt omak emuc h difference inth e Munye group's first orlas treaction .Eve nthoug hw ereduce dth e numbero frecontacts ,thi smigh tno thav ebee no fmajo r influence. Onth eothe rhan di t did seemt omatte rho wman yday sth egrou pha dbee n followed. Aggression wasnotabl y reducedwhe n thegrou pha dbee n followed overa longe rnumbe r ofdays .Thi s indicates that itmigh tb eimportan t toestablis hregula r daily contactan dt okee pu pwit hth e gorillas.Thi smigh tb emor e important thanth enumbe ro fcontact spe rday . Thetyp eo fhabita tha sa significan t influence onbot hth efirst a swel l aslas t reaction ofth eMuny e group.I nth edens eunderstor y (ebuka) habitatth e gorillassee m most likely toignor eth eobserve r andles slikel yt oru n away. Themor e openth ehabitat , themor e likelyth e Munye groupra naway .Dens eunderstor y forest doesprovid emor e coverfo r the gorillas,whic h seemst oreduc ethei r levelo fstres swhe ncontacte db y

115 observers,resultin g in lesspronounce dfirst an dlas treactions .Thi scorrespond s withth e findings ofTuti n &Fernande z (1991)fo r bothgorilla s and chimpanzees atLope . When ina tre e theMuny e group showed ahighe rpercentag e ofcuriou san d ignore behavior then when onth eground ,bu tth eheigh t atwhic h thegorilla swer ea tth e momento fcontac t didno t seemt omatter . Bonobos showed asimila rreactio n to observers,a sthe ywer e more likely toreac t ina positiv ewa ywhe nthe ywer e ina tre e instead ofo nth e ground. (Krunkelsven, etal. , 1999).Th egorilla s wereals o less likelyt o run awaywhe n ina tree . Thismigh tb eexplaine d byth efac t thatth egorilla swhe n coming downwer e getting closert oth eobserver s andmigh t havefel t "trapped" inth e tree,thei rescap e routeblocke d byobservers .Althoug hthi smigh t indeedhav e occasionally happened, theobserver swer e careful inavoidin gtreein g the gorillas.Als o thecalme r first reaction doesno t indicatetha tthi s isa majo r problem.A mor elikel y explanation istha tth egorilla s didno twan tt oexpen d theadditiona l energy ofleavin gth e tree inaccordanc e withTuti n andFernandez' s costhypothesi s (Tutin &Fernandez , 1991).Tuti n andFernande zpostulat e thatth e cost ofinterruptin g ongoing activitiesa t anyparticula r encounterma yb eimportan t in determiningth e responseo fth eapes . Johns' (1996)findin g that chimpanzees were less likelyt ofle e orcharg ewhe neatin g meattha nwhe n eatingmor ereadil y availableplant s seemt oconfir m thishypothesis . Treesar efavorit e food patches,mostl y consisting offruits . Onth e ground onth eothe r hand, such food patcheswit h fruits arerelativel y uncommon. In contrastt o our findings Tutin andFernandez' s (1991)foun d thatbot h gorillas andchimpanzee s respondedwit h more alarmwhe ncontacte d intrees . Thehorizonta l distancebetwee nth e observer andth e Munye group influenced responset oobservers :th egreate rth econtac t distance the lesspronounce d thefirst an d last reaction ofth egorillas .Fro m theresult s it isclea rtha t contacts within 10 meters shouldb eavoided , asthes e leadt omor epronounce d reactions.Likewis e inLop eal l encountersa t 5meter s orles scause d fear andalar m (Tutin &Fernandez , 1991).Anothe r goodreaso n toavoi d such close contacts isdiseas e (e.g.Kalema , 1998; Sholley, 1989; Wallis& Lee ,i nprep. )an dparasit etransmissio n (e.g.Mudikikwa , 1998;Macfie , 1996). Overtim eth e observerswer e gaining experience andth e frequency atwhic hth e gorillas wereactivel y contacted (usually byclacking ) increased. Ifth eobserve rwa s detected before establishing contact byclackin g the gorillaswer emuc hmor elikel yt o reactwit haggressio n orfea r andru n awaytha nwhe nthe ywer e contacted byth e observer. Thusth eclackin g sound seemst ob eeffectiv e inreducin g stress andmakin g the contactmor e agreeable for bothparties .A n important factor forth epotentia l of gorilla tourism development isth eimpac t ofth enumbe ro fobserver so nth e reactiono f the gorillas.Wha t isth emaximu m number ofvisitor spossibl ewithou tcausin g additional stress ona gorill a group? Fromth emeasurement s weuse dt oevaluat e suchstress ,th e first reaction andth ewa yi nwhic hth e contact ended,neithe r showed a significant difference. Careshoul d betake n asmos t contacts (98.6% )wer ewit heithe r3 o r4 observers.I twil l beessentia l to continuemonitorin gth e gorillas' behavior inrelatio nt o thenumbe ro fobservers .John s(1996 )foun d thatu pt o 5visitor sha dn oimpac t onth e chimpanzees' initialreactio n and incase si nwhic h upt o 15observer s werepermitted ,th e only significant changewa sincrease d vocalization rate.A pruden t course ofactio n inBa i Hokou would bet o slowly increaseth enumbe ro fvisitor swhil e carefully monitoringth e impact ongorill abehavior . Groups ofu pt o 6visitor s including guides wouldb eoptimal .

116 In anyeven tmor etha n 8visitor s isno trecommended . Moretha n 8 visitors would decreasetouris t satisfaction aswel la ssecurit yo fgorilla san dhuman salik e(se eals o Johns, 1996fo r similarrecommendation s for chimpanzees). Overall,base d onth e step-wisediscriminan t analysis ofou rresults ,i t seemstha t time andth ewa yth econtac twa sestablishe d areth emos t important factors contributing to successful habituation. Persistence overtime ,whil e makingth eobservers ' presence knownt oth egorilla sb y clacking seemt ob eessential . Tryingt okee pa respectabl e distance and/or contactingth e gorillas onth e ground inth edens eunderstor y habitat contribute significantly toachievin g habituation. Nomeasuremen t existst oevaluat ei fape sar efull y habituated. Ofcours e habituation isa nongoin gproces s andape swil lneve rb ehabituate d to such anexten ttha t theyalway s ignoreth e observers.Ther ewil l alwaysb e somesurpris e encounters inth e denseforest . Infac t withmountai ngorilla si nsom ecase sth egorilla sn olonge rignor eth e observers,bu t rather interact withthe mi npla y ordispla y (Blom,pers .obs ;Doran ,pers . comm.).I twoul db eusefu l toobtai n ameasuremen t ofprogres s inhabituatio n toallo w comparisons between sitesan dt ob eabl et o evaluate efforts andcost sversu s success.W e suggest heretha t gorillas couldb ecalle dhabituate d whenmor etha n 50% o fth etim e upon contactswit hth eobserver sthe yignor eth eobservers ,an di nles stha n 10 %o fth e casesthe yreac t inaggressio n and/or fear, orru n awayupo nbein gcontacted . Ifw eappl y thisprincipa l toou r studygroup ,th eMuny egroup ,w e seetha t since August 1999th e groupignore dobserver smor etha n5 0% o fth etim e(Figur e 6).Howeve r onlyfo rtw oo f thelas t 5month so fth e studydi d allth econdition s apply, including lessthe n 10 %o f reactions withaggressio n andfear , andles stha n 10% runnin g awayafte r contact. Bythi s proposed standard itindicate stha tth eMuny egrou pi sclos et ohabituation . Inconclusio nw ejudg e thathabituatio n isprogressin g well.Th egorilla sdi d experience negative impacts duringth eproces s ofhabituation , sucha spossibl y an increase inrangin g anddisturbanc e inthei rbehavior . However, impacts diminishedove r time. Severalfactor s influence theproces so fhabituatio n and shouldb etake nint o consideration in similarprograms .W erecommen d the following specific actionsbase d onou rresults : 1. Bepersisten t andtr y contacting thegorilla s atleas t onceever yda y 2. Tryt oavoi d sudden contactsb ymakin gyou rpresenc eknow nb y clacking 3. Keepa distanc e ofa tleas t 10 meters atal ltime s 4. Tryestablishin g contactwhil e gorillas areeithe r in atre eo ro nth e groundi n densevegetatio n Thedecisio nt ostar thabituatin ggorilla so ran yothe rprimate sfo rtha tmatter ,shoul d not be taken lightly (e.g. Butinsky & Kalina, 1998a, b; Forthman, et al., 1996). There are severalimportan t issuest oconsider , including environmental impacts,poaching ,behaviora l changes, disease transmission, research opportunities and economical costs and benefits (Blom, et al., in prep, c; McNeilage, 1996). However this study, as well as other attempts elsewhere (Tutin& Fernandez, 1991;Bermejo , 1997; 1999; Doran,e tal. , 1996)sho wtha ti t isfeasibl e to,a tleas tpartially ,habituat ewester nlowlan dgorillas .

117 Acknowledgement

Thisresearc hwa ssupporte d byth eDzanga-Sangh a Project, specifically through fundingfrom th eWorl dWildlif e Fund,Inc .an dgrant sfrom th e WorldWid eFun dfo r Nature- Germany. Wewoul d liket othan k the lateGunthe rMer zfo rhi swor k onbehal f ofDzanga-Sangha :hi sdedicatio n togorilla swa s instrumental infindin g the funding to maketh ehabituatio n programa reality . Several studentsworkin g onthi sprogra m received student grantsfro m theFON AFoundation , Lucie Burgers Foundationfo r Comparative Behaviour Research andth e Wageningen Agricultural University Foundation. Wewoul dlik et othan kth e field team, consisting ofth epermanen t field staff, students,volunteer san dal lth eBaAk atrackers .Dat acollecte db yJean-Bosc o Kpanou, Kenneth Otto,Pladel e Godobo,Eugen e Mbea,Jea nTetoungbou , FlavienPani , Jason Fink, DavidRitchie ,Davi dGreer ,Franc a Donati,Andre a Almasi,Claudi a Sieler, Linda Haartsen,Rober t vanZalinge ,Sandr ad eJong ,Igo rDijkers ,Birgi t Janssen,Nasj a Arends,Esthe rva nde rWal ,Pir nVugteveen , GuusKruitwagen , LiesbethNoor , Christine de Saint-Rat, Amalfaltino, Veronica Vecellio,Giuli a Grazianian d Brigitte Mbassangoa contributed significantly tothi spape rTh efirs t authorwoul d liket othan k theStat e University ofNe wYor k atSton yBroo kfo rprovidin gth eopportunit y tous ethei r facilities. Furthermore wewoul d liket othan k ConradAveling ,Richar dCarroll ,Dian e Doran,Michel e Fernandez,Jean-Mar c Garreau, Michele Goldsmith,Davi d Greer, Jefferson Hall,Davi dHarris ,Igna sHeitkonig ,Annett eLanjouw , HanOlff , Guy Rondeau,Natash a Shah,Lis a Steelan d Caroline Tutinfo rthei rassistance , comments and suggestions.Finally ,w ewoul d liket othan k the lateUrbai nNgatoua , Director ofth e Dzanga-Sangha Project andhi sentir e staff andth e WWFstaf f inBangui , Washington andFrankfur t forthei r support.

References AlmaSi, A., Blom, A., Otto, K., Knapou, J-B. and Prins, H.H.T. (in prep.) Survey of elephants (Loxodonta Africana) in the Dzanga-Sangha reserve, Central African Republic

Almasi, A,Blo m A,an dPrin s H.H.T. (1999) TheMongamb e Research Camp, Dzanga- NdokiNationa l Park,Centra lAfrica n Republic.Gorill a ConservationNew s 13:5

Aveling,C .(1996 )Updat eo ngorill anew sfrom th eECOFA Cprogramme .Gorill a Conservation News 10:7-9

Beresford, P.(1999) .Speciatio ni nAfrica n forest robins(Stiphronis) :specie slimits , phylogenticrelationships ,an dmolecula rbiology .America nMuseu mnovitates , 22 p.;ill .(som ecol) ,map .America nMuseu mo fnatura lHistory ,Ne wYork .

Bermejo, M.(1997 ) Studyo fwester n lowland gorillasi nth e Lossi forest ofNort h Congo anda pilo tgorill atouris mplan . Gorilla conservation news 11:6-1

Bermejo, M. (1999) Update onth e Lossi gorillas study andfutur e sancuary of gorillas, 1998, Popular Republic ofCongo .Gorill aconservatio n news 13

118 Blom,A .(199 3a )Lis t ofth e largemammal so fth eDzanga-Sangh a DenseFores t Reservean dth eDzanga-Ndok i National Park.Worl d Wildlife Fund -CAR .

Blom,A .(199 3b )Lis t ofth ebird so fth eDzanga-Sangh a Dense ForestReserv e andth e Dzanga-Ndoki National Park.Worl d Wildlife Fund -CAR .

Blom,A. ,(1999 )Te nyear s Dzanga-Sangha project 1988- 1999.Unpublishe d manuscript, WWF-CAR

Blom,A .(i npress ) Theimpac t oftouris m onprotecte d areamanagemen t andth eloca l economy in Dzanga-Sangha (Central African Republic).Journa lo f Sustainable Tourism.

Blom,A. ,Almasi ,A. ,Heitkonig , I.M.A.,Kpanou , J.-B.& Prins ,H.H.T .(i npress )A surveyo fth eape si nth eDzanga-Ndok iNationa l Park, CentralAfrica n Republic. African Journalo fEcolog y

Blom,A .& Yamindou , J.(i nprep.) . Statuso fth eprotecte d areas andgazette d forests of the CentralAfrica n Republic.

Blom,A ,Cipolletta , C.& Prins ,H.H.T . (inprep ,a )Potential san dpitfall s ofgorill a beasedtouris mi nth eDzanga-Sangh aNationa l park,Centra l African Republic.

Blom,A. ,Kpanou , J.-B.,Otto ,K. , Mbea,E. ,Godobo ,P .& Almasi ,A .(i nprep ,b ) Antelope survey ofth e Dzanga sectoro fth eDzanga-Ndok i National Park,Centra l African Republic

Blom,A.va nZalinge ,R. , Mbea,E. ,Heitkonig ,I .& Prins ,H.H.T . (inprep ,c )Huma n impacto nwildlif e population within aprotecte dcentra lAfrica n forest.

Butynski,T.M . andKalina ,J .(1998a ) Gorilla Tourism: Acritica l look Milner-Gulland, E.J. Mace,R . Conservation ofbiologica l resources.Oxfor d Blackwell Science 294-370

Butynski,T .an dKalina ,J . (1998b) IsGorill a Tourism Sustainable? Gorilla Journal, 16:15-19

Cameron,K. , Cooper,J. , Drciru,M. ,Falcon ,A. ,Kalema ,G. ,Mudakikwa , A.,Nizeyi ,J - B.,Sherman ,D. ,an d Sleeman,J . (1997)Mountai ngorill aPHV Aworkshop : health anddiseas eworkin g groupfina l report,pp . 13 p

Carroll,R.W . (1986a )Statu so fth elowlan dgorill a andothe rwildlif e inth e Dzanga- Sangharegio n ofsouthwester n CentralAfrica n Republic.Primate Conservation 7, 38-41.

119 Carroll,R.W .(198 6b )Th ecreation ,development , protection, andmanagemen t ofth e Dzanga-Sangha dense forest sanctuary andth eDzanga-Ndok iNationa l Parki n southwestern CentralAfric a Republic.Unpublishe d report.Ne wHaven :Yal e University.

Carroll,R.W . (1986c )Th e status,distribution , anddensit y ofth e lowland gorilla (Gorilla gorillagorill a (Savage andWyman)) ,fores t elephant (Loxodonta africana cyclotis),an dassociate d dense forest fauna in southwestern Central African Republic:researc htoward sth e establishment ofa reserv e for theirprotection . Unpublished report.Ne wHaven :Yal eUniversity .

Carroll,R.W . (1988a )Relativ e density,rang e extension, andconservatio n potential of the lowland gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) inth eDzang a -Sangh a region of southwestern Central African Republic.Mammalia, 52, 309-323.

Carroll,R.W . (1988b)Elephant s ofth eDzanga-Sangh a dense forest of southwestern C.A.R.Pachyderm, 10,12-15 .

Carroll, R.W. (1997)Feedin g ecologyo flowlan d gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla)i n Dzanga-Sangha Reserve ofth eCentra lAfrica n Republic.Ph Dthesis ,Universit yo f Yale.

Cipolletta, C.(i nprep.) .Rangin gpattern s ofa wester n lowland gorilla group duringth eproces s ofhabituatio n tohumans ,i nth eDzanga-Ndok i National Park, Central African Republic.

Cranfield, M.R. (1999)Mountai n gorilla veterinary project. MS .pp.8.

Doran,D.M .& McNeilage ,A .(1998) .Gorill aecolog y andbehavior . Evolutionary Anthroplogy, 6(4) : 120-129.

Doran,D. ,McNeilage ,A. ,an dDemmers ,P .(1996 )Mondik a Research center,Centra l African Republic.Gorill a Conservation News 10:9

ESRI, 1998a.Ar cVie wGIS ,versio n 3.1. for Windows.Environmenta l Systems Research Institute,Inc .

ESRI, 1998b.Ar cVie wSpatia lAnalyst ,versio n 1.1.fo rWindows .Environmenta l Systems Research Institute,Inc .

Fay,J.M . (1989)Partia l completion ofa censu s ofth elowlan d gorilla (Gorilla ggorilla ) inth e CentralAfrica n Republic.Mammalia , 53,203-215 .

Fay,J.M .(1991a )A nelephan t {Loxodonta africana) surveyusin gdun gcount si nth e forests ofth eCentra lAfrica n Republic.Journal of Tropical Ecology, 7,25-36 .

120 Fay, J.M. (1991b) Forest elephant populations in the Central African Republic andCongo : theCentra lAfrica n Republic.Pachyderm, 14,4-12.

Fay,J.M . (1997)Th edistribution , habitat, ecology,evolution , andorigi n ofth eWester n Lowland Gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla Savagean d Wyman).PhD .thesis , Washington University

Fay J.M. and Agnagna, M., (1992) Census of gorilla in northern Republic of Congo. AmericanJournal ofPrimatology, 27, 275-284.

Fay,J.M. , C.A. Spinage,B .Chardonne t andA.A .Gree n (1990)Centra l African Republic.I nEast ,R . (ed.)Antelopes global survey andaction plans (pp.99-109 ) Gland:IUCN .

Forthman, D.L., Burks, K.D. and Maple, T.L. (1996) Letter to the editor: African great apeecotouris mconsidered . African Primates2:52-54 .

Fossey, D.(1983 )Gorilla s inth emist .Boston : HoughtonMiffli n Co.

Goldsmith, M.L.(1996 )Ecologica l Influences onth erangin g andgroupin gbehaviou ro f werstern lowland gorillasa tBa iHokou ,Centra l African Republic.Ph dthesis . StateUniversit y ofNe wYor ka t StonyBrook ,Ne wYor k

Goldsmith, M.L.(1999 )Ecologica l constraints onth e foraging effort ofwester n lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) atBa iHokou , CentralAfrica n Republic. International Journal ofPrimatology, 20(1) : 1-23.

Goldsmith,M.L . (2000)Effect s ofecotouris m onth ebehaviora l ecology ofBwind i gorillas,Ugnada :preliminair yresults .America n Journal ofPhysica l AnthropologyAAPA Abstracts Supplement30: 161

GondaNgbalet , M.(1995 )Donnee s demographique deDzanga-Sangha . Rapport intermediare.Proje t Dzanga-Sangha, Universite deBangui .

Harcourt,A.H .(1996 )I sth egorill a athreatene d species -Ho w shouldw ejudge ? Biological Conservation 75:165-176

Harris,D .(1994 )Interi m check-list toth evascula rplant so fth eDzanga-Sangh a Project Area Central African Republic.Unpublishe dreport .Universit y ofOxfor d 31pp.

HomsyJ (1999 )Consultanc y onap etouris m andhuma n disease.IGC Pregiona lmeeting . Rwanda.

Hooge,P.N . &Eichenlaub ,B. , 1997.Anima lmovemen t extension toarcview .Ve r 1.1. Alaska Biological ScienceCenter ,U.S .Geologica l Survey,Anchorage ,AK ,USA .

121 Johns,B .(1999 )Response s ofchimpanzee s tohabituatio n andtouris m inth eKibal e forest, Uganda.Biologica l conservation 78:257-262.

Kalema,G .(1998 )A noutbrea k ofsarcopti cmang e infree-rangin g mountian gorillas (Gorillagorill aberengei ) inBwind i Impenetrable National Park, Southwerster n Uganda.AAZ Van dAAW Vjoin t conference, pp.438 .

Klaus,G .(1998 )Natura l licksan dgeophag y (soil ingestion)b y largemammal s inth e rainforest ofth eCentra lAfrica n Republic,Universita t Zurich,Zuric h

Klaus-Hugi,C.S .(1998 )Hom erange ,feedin g behaviour andsocia l organization ofth e bongo(Tragelaphu s eurycerus) inth e rainforest ofth e CentralAfrica n Republic, Universitat Zurich,Zurich .

Krunkelsven, E.van ,Dupai n J., Elsacker L.va n& Verheyen ,R . (1999)Habituatio no f bonobos (Panpaniscus) :firs t reactiont oth epresenc eo fobserver san dth e evolution ofrespons e overtime .Foli aPrimato l 70:365-368

Lee,P.C. ,Thornback , J.& Bennett ,E.L . (1988).Threatene dprimate s ofAfrica : The IUCNre d databook . Gland, Switzerland,IUCN .

Lunde,D .& P .Beresfor d (1997).Noteworth y recordso fbat sfro m the Central African Republic.Ba tResearc hNews ,3 8(2) :19-20 .

Macfie, L. (1996)Cas erepor t on scabies infection inBwind i gorillas.Gorill ajourna l .19- 20

Magliocca,F .(1999 ) 1998Updat e onth egorilla s ofth e OdzalaNationa l Park,Popula r Republico fCongo .Gorill aConservatio nNew s13 :

Magliocca, F.& Querouil , S.(1997 )Preliminair y report onth eus eo fth e Maya-Maya north saline (OdzalaNationa l Park, Congo)b y lowland gorillas.Gorill a Conservation News, 11:5.

Magliocca, F.,Querouil , S.,an dGautie rHion ,A . (1999)Populatio n Structure andGrou p Composition ofWester n Lowland Gorillas inNorth-Wester nRepubli c ofCongo . American Journal ofPrimatolog y 48:1-14.

McNeilage,A.(1996 )Ecotouris man dmountai n gorillasi nth eVirung aVolcanoes .V . Tayloran d N.Dunstone .Th eexploitatio n ofmamma lpopulation s London Chapman andHill ,p :334-344 .

Mudakikwa, A.B.(1998 )A nindicato r ofhuma n impact: gastrointestinal parasiteso f mountaingorilla s(Gorill agorill aberengei )fro m theVirung avolcanoe sregion , centralAfrica . AAZV andAAW Vjoin t conference, pp.436-437 .

122 Noss,A.J . (1998)Th eimpact so fcabl e snarehuntin g onwildlif e populations inth e forests ofth eCentra lAfrica n Republic.Conservatio n Biology, 12,390-398.

Olejniczak, C.(1996 )Updat eo nth eMbel iBa igorill a study,Nouabale-Ndok iNationa l Park, Congo.Gorill a conservation news 10:6-1

Olejniczak, C.(1997 ) 1996updat e onth e Mbeli Baigorill a study,Nouabale-Ndok i national park, Congo.Gorill a conservation news 11:7-10

PNUD(1995 )Rappor tmondia l surl edeveloppemen t humain 1995. Paris:Economi c

Ray,J.C .& Hutterer , R.(1996) . Structure ofa shre wcommunit y inth ecaentra l african republicbase do nth e analysis ofcarnivor e scats,withth e description ofa ne w sylvisorex (Mammmalia; Soricidae).Ecotropica , 1:85-9 7

Remis,J.M . (1994)Feedin gEcolog y andPositiona l Behavior ofwester n lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) inth eCentra lAfrica n Republic.Ph.D .thesi sYal e University,Ne wHaven ,C T

Remis,M.J . (1997)Rangin g andgroupin g patterns ofa wester n lowland gorillagrou pa t BaiHokou ,Centra lAfrica n Republic.America n Journalo fPrimatology ,43 , 111- 133.

Rondeau, G.& Blom ,A .(i nprep. )Th eavifaun a ofDzanga-Sangha , Central African Republic

Schaller, G.B.(1963 )Th emountai ngorilla : ecologyan dbehavior . Chicago:Universit y ofChicag oPress .

Sholley, C.R. (1989)Mountai n gorillaupdate . Oryx.57-58 .

Sokal,R.R . &Rohlf ,F.J . (1995)Biometry. Third edition.W.H .Freema n and company, NewYork .

SPSS(1997 )SPSS Base 8.0, SPSS,Inc. ,Chicag o

TELESIS (1991)Sustainabl e economic development options for the Dzanga-Sangha Reserve,Centra lAfrica n Republic.USA :TELESIS , Inc.

TELESIS (1993)Supplementar y studyo fth e sustainable economic development options for theDzanga-Sangh a Reserve,Centra lAfrica n Republic.USA :TELESIS , Inc.

Tutin, C.E.G.(1996 )Rangin g and social structure of lowland gorillas inth e LopeReserve , Gabon.In :Grea tAp e Societies,ed : McGrew,W.C. ,Marchant , L.F.an dNishida ,T . pp.58-70 .Cambridg eUniversit yPress .

123 Tutin,C.E.G. , andAbernethy , K.A. (1997) Station d'Etude desGorille se tChimpanzes , Reserved e laLope ,Gabon .Gorill a Conservation News 11:

Tutin.C.E.G., Abernethy, K.A. and Fontaine, F. (1996) Station d'Etude des Gorilles et Chimpanzes, Reserve de laLope ,Gabo n- 1995.Gorill a Conservation News 10:4- 5

Tutin, C.E.G. and Fernandez, M. (1991) Responses of wild chimpanzees and gorillas to the arrival of primatologists: behaviour observed during habituation: Primate responsest oEnvironmenta l change.

Wallis, J. and Lee, D.R. (in prep.) Primate conservation: the prevention of disease transmission.: 27p .

Waser,P .(1977 )Feeding ,rangin g andgrou psiz ei nth eMangabe y Cercocebus albigena.I n THClutton-Broc k(ed.) :Primat eEcology ,pp . 183-222

Watts, D.P.(1997 ) Long-term habitat use bymountai n gorillas (Gorilla gorilla beringei). 1. Consistency, variation, and home range size and stability: International Journal of Primatology 19(4),August , 1998:651-680 ,Illustr .

Wonnacott, T.H and Wonnacott, R.J. (1977). Introductory Statistics (3* ed),Joh n Wiley& Sons,Ne wYork .

124 Chapter7

Themonetar y impact oftouris m onprotecte d area management andth eloca l economy in Dzanga-Sangha (Central African Republic).

AllardBlo m

World Wildlife Fund, BP 1053,Bangui , CentralAfrica n Republic Correspondence address:Zuivelwe g 5B,725 5 XA, Hengelo (Gld), TheNetherland s

(Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8(3): 175-189)

Summary

Thispape ranalyse sth epremis etha trevenue s from tourismca nprovid e economic sustainability for themanagemen t ofbot hth eDzanga-Sangh a SpecialDens eFores t Reservean dth eDzanga-Ndok iNationa l Park. Second,th epape rexamine sth eimpac to f tourism onth eloca leconomy . Theresult s demonstrate thatth epresen t form oftouris mha ss ofa r beenunabl et o become self-financing. Especially ifinvestment s anddepreciatio n aretake n intoaccoun t itbecome s evidenttha tprivat e commercial financing of similarinvestment s isunlikel yt o beviable .Touris m aloneprovide s insufficient revenuet ocove rth e operating costso fth e Parkan dReserve . Theimpac t oftouris m onth e local economy issubstantial .Revenu e from tourism contributed toth eacceptanc e ofth eDzanga-Sangh a Project byth e localpopulatio n and, althoughimpossibl et oquantify , hasprobabl ycontribute dt oth eincreas ei n effectiveness ofla w enforcement. TheDzanga-Sangh a Project tourismprogra m hasa tleas t beenpartiall y successful inprovidin g analternativ e economic optiont omor eenvironmentall y destructive activities,bu tneed st orais eadditiona l revenue.Th eProjec t shouldals opersu e alternative funding mechanisms, sucha strus t funds, andgenerat e additional income through gorilla tourism, safari hunting andsustainabl e forestry.

Introduction

TheCentra lAfrica n Republic (CAR) isamon gth epoores t countries inth eworl d (PNUD, 1995).Th eCA Rgovernmen t hasmad e asubstantia l effort topreserv eth e country'snatura l heritageb y setting aside largetract s ofbot h savanna and forest as protected areas.However , inth epresen t economic setting, iti sunrealisti ct oexpec ttha t the government willb eabl et o support financially themanagemen t ofthes eareas . Incentra lAfrica , protected areamanagemen t dependsheavil y onexterna l financial assistance (Culverwell, 1998;Wilki e &Carpenter , 1998).Yet ,bot h government andforeig n funding agencies realizetha t dependence on international assistance isno ta viable long-term option andtha t alternatives arerequire d (Telesis, 1991an d 1993;Blom , 1996;Culverwell , 1998;Wilki e &Carpenter , 1998). Thislac ko flong-ter m economic sustainability isa fundamenta l problemi nth e management ofprotecte d areas,particularl y in centralAfric a (Blom, 1996;Culverwell ,

125 1998;Wilki e& Carpenter , 1998).Howeve r experience hasshow n (e.g.Rwanda ,Kenya , CostaRica ,Belize) ,touris mca nb ehighl ylucrativ e andca npartiall yfinance th e protection ofimportan t ecosystems insevera lcountries .I tha sprovide d employment opportunities toan dincrease d the incomeo floca lpeople ,a swel l asraisin gpubli c awareness ofnatur econservatio n issuesa tth enationa l level,suc ha swit hgorill atouris m (McNeilage, 1996;Butynsk i &Kalina , 1998;Lanjouw , 1999). Tourism isofte n seena sa nalternativ e economic option tomor e environmentally destructive activitiessuc ha spoaching ,diamon dmining ,an dlogging .Direc tbenefit s are mostly inth e form ofemployment , fees and souvenir sales.Indirec t income isgenerate d thoughth e saleo floca lproduct s andservice st ohotels ,t opeopl eemploye d inth e tourism sector,etc . Thispape r examinesth epotentia l oftouris m revenuet ocontribut e toth elong - termmanagemen t ofth eDzanga-Sangh aprotecte d areacomplex , aswel la s itsdirec t impact onth e localeconomy . Although studieshav ebee ncarrie d out inothe r parts ofAfrica , particularly inKeny a (e.g.,Norton-Griffith s &Southey , 1995), Zimbabwe (CAMPFIRE),Zambi a (ADMADE) andNamibi a (LIFE),th ecentra l African context isquit e different. Relatively lowprices , stable economic andpolitica l systems, anda muc hhighe rvolum e oftouris m ineas tan d southernAfric a contrast withth e situationtypica l for centralAfrica . Mostcountrie s incentra lAfric a havebee nplague db y high costs,especiall y oftransport , highturnove r ofGovernments ,strive ,an dcivi lwar . Thispape rcontribute st oon-goin gdiscussion so nprotecte d areas andthei r economic impact and sustainability incentra lAfric a (Blom, 1996;Culverwell , 1998;Wilki e& Carpenter, 1998).

Studyare a

TheDzanga-Sangh a SpecialDens eFores tReserv ean dth e Dzanga-Ndoki National Park, inth e southwestern region ofth e Central African Republic (CAR)(Figur e 1) havebee nrecognize d asprotecte d areas ofinternationa l importance.Beside s diverse rainforest flora and fauna (Fay,et al, 1990;Blom , 1993a,b ;Harris , 1994),th eare a contains oneo fth ehighes t documented densities ofwester n lowland gorillas (Gorillag. gorilla) andfores t elephants (Loxodonta qfricana cyclotis) inAfric a (Carroll, 1986a,b,c , 1988, 1996;Fay , 1989, 1991;Blom , etal, inprep .a,b,c) . TheDzanga-Sangh aNationa l Park (sectorDzang a49 5km 2; sectorNdok i 727 km2)i sa strictl yprotecte d area, allowing onlylimite d access for research andtourism . Thecreation ,i n 1990,o fth eDzanga-Sangh a SpecialDens eFores tReserv e (3159km 2) introduced ane wcategor y ofprotecte d areaint oth e country's legislation, that ofa multiple-use reserve.Th ereserv e functions asa buffe r zonefo r thenationa l parkb y allowing theus eo fnatura lresource s ina sustainabl e manner. Sustainable forestry, safari hunting andtraditiona lhuntin g andgatherin g areauthorized ,bu tminin gi sbanned .Th e limits aswel la sth e interiorregulation s ofth eprotecte d areawer enegotiate d withth e localpopulation . Asn oloca l structure existedt orepresen t theinterest s ofloca l inhabitants,th eProjec t stimulated the creation ofa loca lNo nGovernmenta l Organization (NGO),th eBayang aDevelopmen t Committee. Thehuma n population density inthi sare a islo wa ta nestimate d 1 personpe r km2,base do na censu scarrie dou ti n 1995 byWorl dWildlif e Fund (GondaNgbalet ,

126 1995;Blom ,unpublishe d data).Almos t6 0% o fth epeopl eliv ei nth etow no fBayang a (2365inhabitant s in 1995).Th eres to fth epopulatio n islargel y distributed alongth eroa d leading from thenorther n limito fth eReserv et oLindjomb o (720inhabitants) ,th esecon d largestsettlemen t inth eReserv e(Figur e 1). TheBaAk apygmie scompris eth elarges t ethnic groupi nth earea .

127 A N

• Villages /\/ Roads /\/ Streams •• Rivers 1 ,|Savann a I 1 Dzanga-NdokiNationa lPar k I IDzanga-Sangh aReserv e

Figure 1 TheDzanga-Ndok i National park andth eDzanga-Sangh a DenseFores t Special Reservei nth eCentra lAfrica n Republic

128 From 1972unti lth e early eightiesth e logging company "SloveniaBois " selectively logged a 1,000km 2area ,largel y withinth eDzanga-Sangh a area,befor e going bankrupt. Itbriefl y reinitiated activitiest o fail againwithi n ayear .I n 1993ne wowner s revived andrename dth e company "Sylvicole deBayanga" . Loggingoperation swer e resumed ona muc h smaller scale,employin g about25 0people .I tclose d onceagai ni n 1997du et omismanagement . Thetow no fBayang a grewrapidl y duringth eheyda yo f Slovenia Bois,bu tth efollowin g cycles ofboo man dbus t resulted insimila r cycleso f immigration andemigration . Theresul t hasbee n ahighl y mobilepopulatio n with significant fluctuations in inhabitant numbers inBayanga . Sincethei rgazetting ,bot hth ePar kan dth e Reservehav ebee nmanage db yth e Dzanga-Sangha Project. TheProjec t isa collaborativ e effort ofth e Central African Government, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF),an dLUS OConsul t (for theGerma n Technical Cooperation- GTZ),wit hfinancia l andtechnica l assistance provided byth e Governments ofGerman y andth eUnite d States,an db yth eWorl dBank ,a swel l asb y severalprivat eorganization s anddonors . Theobjectiv e ofth eDzanga-Sangh a Project isth e sustainable development, protection, andmanagemen t ofth e Dzanga-Sangha Dense Forest SpecialReserv ean d Dzanga-Ndoki National Park.Th eProjec t includes awildlif e protection program,touris m development, research andeducation ,rura l development, andinitiative st oensur eth e cultural integrity ofth eBaAk a Pygmies ofth eregion . TheDzanga-Sangh a areai s managed ina nintegrate d manner, similart oth e Biosphere Reservemodel ,allowin g limitedtraditiona l hunting,agroforestr y development andcommercia l logging in buffer zones,a swel l astota lpreservatio n ofth enatura l forest ecosystem inth e corearea ,th e national park (Carroll, 1992).T oachiev ethi sobjectiv eth eProjec t is,durin gthi sphas e (1998-2000),puttin ga nemphasi son :

• Improvingan dextendin gth ela wenforcemen t system • Reducingth enegativ eimpac to floggin go nth eecosyste m • Increasing revenuesfrom sustainabl eactivitie sint oth eloca leconom y • Increasingtouris mrevenu e • Improvingth einterna l organizationo fth eloca lpopulatio nt opermi tbette rparticipatio n • Improvingth emanagemen t ofresearc h • Improving overall Project administration

TheProjec t possesses amanagemen t structure working in4 differen t domains: conservation, rural development,touris m andadministration . TheConservatio n Department isresponsibl e for lawenforcemen t andsupervise sth etouris t guides.Th e RuralDevelopmen t Department, inclos e collaboration with localpartners ,implement sa variety ofactivities ,includin g adult literacy,pre-schoo lpreparatio n for BaAka children, mobilehealt h clinics,agroforestry , fish farming andtechnica l assistance andtrainin g for local initiatives andNGO's .Th eTouris m Department iscomprise d ofDol iLodge 1, whichwil lb eprivatize d through acontractua l arrangement inth e future. The Administration Department isresponsibl e for all support activities,includin g staff management, accounting andlogistics .Th eDirectio n orsenio rmanagemen t structure overseeing these Departments andrelate d activities consists ofa nationa l director,

129 representing the Government, andtw oprincipa l technical advisors,on efrom eac ho fth e twoimplementin g agencies,LUS O andWWF . TheProject' s objectives relatedt otouris m are two-fold: 1. Toprovid e aviabl e optiont oachiev e economic sustainability ofbot h theDzanga - Sangha Special Dense Forest Reserve andth eDzanga-Ndok i National Park. 2. Toprovid e alternative economic activities inplac eo fmor e environmentally destructive activities sucha spoaching , diamondminin g andlogging . Thefirst touris tvisit swer eorganize d onlyafte r the starto fth eProjec t in 1988. Dzanga-Sangha offers manyopportunitie s toobserv ewildlif e aswel l asth epossibilit y of engaging in activities sucha sfishing , palmwin e "tapping",rive rboa ttrips ,and , accompanied byloca lBaAk apygmies ,fores t hikes,medicina l plantgatherin g andne t hunting.Th eare ai srenowne d for itselephan t viewinga tth eDzang a Clearing aswel la s the opportunity tocatc ha glimps eo fth erapidl y disappearingtraditiona l lifestyle ofth e BaAka.Th eProjec t hasrecentl yinitiate d aprimat ehabituatio n program, focusing on lowlandgorillas ,wit hth e aimo fprovidin g anadditiona l andlucrativ etouris t attraction. Afeasibilit y study (Telesis, 1991,1993)an dvisitin g international touroperator sbot h underlined the area'spotentia l fortourism ,bu tals o indicated somemajo r existing obstacles.Mos tprominen t amongthes ewer eth e lack ofsuitabl eaccommodatio n and basic infrastructure inth eregion . Sincethe n investments intouris mhav e increased, culminating inth econstructio n ofDol iLodg e (US$250,000 ) anda visito rcente r (US$ 50,000).Bot h structures aswel l asa n international publicity campaignhav eraise dth e profile ofDzanga-Sangh a asa touris t destination.

Methodology

Inthi spaper ,a cas hflo w analysis ofth e in-country costs andrevenu eo ftouris m wasused . Directrevenu e aswel l asemploymen t datacom efrom Projec t records.Th e Project employsthre etype so fpersonne l directly associated withtourism .Touris t guides areresponsibl e for thevisito rcente r andfo r guidingvisitor s duringthei rtou ro fth ePar k andReserve .BaAk apygmies ,wit hthei rextraordinar y knowledge ofth e forest accompanyguide san dtourist sa strackers .Th ethir d category iscomprise d ofDol iLodg e staff. Salary figures forProjec t staff should includebas e salaryan dan yadditiona l bonusesan dpai d overtime.However ,th edat afrom th e Sylvicole deBayang a logging companyonl y includesth ebas e salaryan dth e legallyrequire d bonus for longter m employees.A tth etim eo fclosure ,th eonl yperio d forwhic h dataar eavailable ,th e companywa sno tpayin gan yovertim eo ran ynormall y attributedbonuses .Additionall y severalmonth s ofwage swer e outstanding atth emomen t ofclosure . Iti sdifficul t to estimateothe rfinancia l benefits sucha sindirec t employment opportunities andloca lpurchase smad eb ytourists ,suc ha sfoo d andbeverages .A separate study isanalyzin gthes ean dothe raspects ,suc ha sth erelativ edistributio no f costs andbenefit s between different ethnic andage/se x groups (R.Hardin ,pers .comm.) . Thepresen t studyconcentrate s onth e analysiso fdirec tcas h flows. Datao nrevenu e andth enumbe r ofvisitor s comefro m theProjec t accounting system.Fee sar ecollecte d atth e visitorcente ragains t official receipts.Likewis e expenses aremad eagains tvouchers ,allowin g for accuratetracin g ofbot h income aswel la s expenditure. Project revenue derivesfrom thre emai nsources :

130 A)Par k entrance fees arecharge dfo r eachvisitor . Thefe e atth ebeginnin g ofthi s study in 1993wa s$ 10 for tourists, $ 1 fornationals , $2 fo r carsan d $6 fo r lorries. OnJul y 1, 1996,th efe e fortourist swa sraise dt o$ 16,fo r carst o$ 8 an dfo r lorriest o$ 16.Th e fees for nationalsremaine d the same.Reduction s apply for groups,childre n andstudents . Park entrancefee s aredivide da s follows: - 40% goe sdirectl yt o aloca lNG Orepresentin g theinteres t ofth e local community. Fundsar euse d for community activities,suc ha sroa dmaintenance ,provision s for health carean ddrinkin g wateran dsmall-scal e commercial development. 50% i sallocate d toth emanagemen t ofth ePar kan dReserve . 10% goe sint oa nationa l forestry andtouris m fund, whichhelp s finance conservation activities inothe rpart so fth ecountry .

B) Souvenir salesinclud e localhandicrafts , which are solda tcos tpric eb yth e Project (all profit goingt oloca lproducer )an dothe r souvenirs sucha scalendars ,post-card s andT - shirtso nwhic h asmal lprofi t ismade . Souvenirs aresol d atth e lodge,bu tn o specific marketing effort ismade .

C)Car/boa t rental,guid e services,an dothe rrevenu e generating activities arepresente d here asrevenue ;investmen t costsar eno ttake n intoconsideration .N oeffor t wasmad et o marketth erenta l ofvehicle s orboats ,a si twa sneve rth e intentiono fth e Project to providethes e services.Th eProjec t hasoffere d itsvehicle s for rentwhil e awaiting privatization ofDol iLodge .Th eguid e service fee initiated in 1995i sinclude d inthi s sourceo frevenue . Otherrevenu e includesearning smad efro m DoliLodge .Th elodg e wasopene d inApri l 1996unde ra privat emanagemen t lease contract. Theprivat e operator canceled thisleas ei nApri l 1998an d sincethe nth eLodg eha sbee nmanage db y the Project. Salaries andoperationa l costs ofth elodg e areno wpai ddirectl y outo fit s revenue.

Althoughth eProjec t started in 1988,a mor eo rles scomplet e financial recordo f tourismrevenu eha sonl ybee n maintained since January 1993.Unti lth een do f 1994, the salaries oftracker s andsom erunnin g costswer epai d from thepar kentranc e fees.Fro m 1995onward sthes e salarieshav ebee npai d outo fth eguid e service fees.A guid efe e of$ 10 /visitor/day waslevie d from July 1995onward st orecove rthes ecosts .Al lrevenu ei s collectedb yth eProjec t andi nth e caseo fth epar kentranc e fees, theProjec t is responsible for itsdistribution . TheProjec t collaborates with local fishermen andBaAk apygmie s incertai n tourist activities sucha spal mwin e "tapping",medicina lplan t gathering andne thunting . Forthes e servicesthes e localcollaborator s arepai dfro m Project incomeo nrental san d services. Datao nemploymen t comefro m theProjec t payroll anddat ao n expenditure from accounting records.Thes edat ad ono ttak e intoaccoun tth etechnica l assistance provided byexpatriate s orinvestment s ininfrastructure . Theseexpenses ,althoug h significant, are not consideredpar to fth ebasi c operating costs ofth eProject . Besidesth e salaries,n o othercost swer e directlyrelate dt otourism ,althoug hman ycost s sucha sroa d maintenance costsan dinfrastructur e couldb epartiall yattribute d totourism . However,

131 this infrastructure wouldhav et ob emaintaine d regardless oftourism , soa st okee pth e analysis simple and straightforward, Ionl ytoo k intoconsideratio n permanent andclearl y attributable costs.I nth eanalysi sa nemphasi si spu to nemploymen t and expenditure records for 1998,a sthi syea rno t onlypresent sth e latest data availablebu t also showed thehighes trevenu e from tourism obtained inan y singleyear . Inth e context ofthi spaper , Iconside r the local economy asth e economyo f Bayangaan dit simmediat e surroundings.Th epopulatio n ofthi sare ai sestimate da t about4,50 0peopl e for 1998,base do nth ecountry' s average annual increase ofabou t2. 5 %an dth ecensu s of 1995(Gond aNgbalet , 1995,pers .comm. ;Blom ,unpublishe d data). Thisi sequivalen t toabou t 820households .

Results

Thenumbe ro fpayin g visitorsreache d ahig ho f 1090i n 1994(Figur e 2).Base d on information providedb yguide s andguards ,wh ohav eworke d in Dzanga-Sangha sinceth ebeginnin g ofth eProject , thenumbe r oftourist s gradually increased from 1988 until 1992.Th edeclin e since 1994i sattribute d topolitica l unrest inth e capital Bangui.

Number of paying visitors 1992-1998

1200

1000 - s

I 800• I totalnumbe ro f visitors •S 600 I 400 £ z 200 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 0 Year

Figure2 :Numbe r ofpayin gvisitor st oDzanga-Sangh a peryea r

Cashflow analysi s

1. Expenditure

a)Employment :

TheProjec t hasemploye d between 75an d 150 peopleannually .I nDecembe r 1998,th eProjec t employed 113 permanent staff, notincludin g expatriate staff and roughly 15 temporary workers.Th etota l amount ofsalarie san dbenefit s (taxes,socia l securityan dmedical ) averaged US$20,27 0pe rmont h in 1998(Tabl e 1).O fthes e employees, 13 permanent staff and3 temporar ytracker swer edirectl y involvedi n

132 tourism,representin g amonthl y averageo fUS $2,33 0i nsalar y andbenefit s forth e permanent staff andU S$ 22 0fo r thetemporar y trackers (Table 1). Theremainin g 100 project staff and 12 temporary workerswer emainl y involved inla wenforcement , rural development andadministration . Salary andbenefit s forth e eleven employees ofDol i Lodgeaverag eU S $2,42 0pe rmonth .Th estaf f ofDol iLodg e ispai d directly from Lodgeincome .

Table 1:Projec t local (Bayanga) expenditure inUS $(1US $= 500FCFA )fo r 1998

Typeo fexpense 3 Total Averagepe rmont h Tourism staff salaries 27,960 2,330 Trackers salaries 2,620 220 Other staff salaries 212,660 17,722 Otherloca lcost s 277,030 23,090 TOTAL 520,270 43,360

Local expenses areal lProjec t expenses excluding thosemad e outsideth e Project activity zone,suc ha sexpatriat e salaries andcapita l equipment Note:a Salaries includebenefits ; otherstaf f areProjec t staff not directly involvedwit h tourism, such asla wenforcemen t andrura l development staff; otherloca l costs areal l operational costsothe rtha n salariesan dbenefit s andinclud e for example,offic e supplies, spareparts ,fue l andinfrastructur e maintenance.

b)Othe rcosts :

In 1998,Projec t expenditures inth eDzanga-Sangh a area (excluding investments, expatriate salaries,an dspar epart s andsupplie s from Bangui)wa sUS $520,270 .Salarie s andbenefit s represented 47% o fthes ecost s (Table 1). Accounting recordsd ono t provide sufficient information toestimat e exactly whatadditiona lcosts ,suc ha stranspor t andoffic e supplies,ar eattributabl e toth etouris mprogram .However , asguide s dono t useProjec t vehicles,thes ecost s arelimite d andca nb eroughl y estimated tob eabou t$ 2,600/ yea rb y 1998,o rth e equivalent of 10%overhea d over salariesan d benefits.

2.Revenu e

Asillustrate d inTabl e 2,revenu eha sincrease d dramatically from 1993t o 1998, moretha n eight-fold. Althoughth enumbe ro fvisitor sha sdecrease d (Figure 2),th e revenuepe rvisito r hasincreased . Thisgrowt h isattribute d toth e increase inpar k fees, the introduction ofa guid e fee, andth eopenin go fDol i Lodge.Visitor s alsoten dt osta y longertha n inth epast .However ,th erevenu eincreas eha sno treache dal l intended beneficiaries toth e sameextent . TheProjec t hasclearl ybenefite d most from theincrease . Theloca lNG Oan dth eforestr y fund benefit solely from park entrance fees however, and theyonl y sawa nincreas e from 1993t o 1995.Afte r that, fee revenue declined tostabiliz e in 1997a tjus t underUS $5,00 0(Tabl e 3).A sth enumbe ro ftourist sha sdecline d since 1995,s oha sth e amountt ob edistribute d from entrance fees.

133 Table2 :Tota l annualrevenu efrom entranc e fees, rentals,guid e servicesan d souvenir salesi nDzanga-Sangh a inUS $(1US $= 50 0FCFA) .

Year Entrance Rentals& Souvenirs Total Fees Services3 Sales 1993 2,764 680 643 4,087 1994 5,952 5,931 998 12,881 1995 7,695 10,689 -1,386 16,998 1996 7,383 12,054 771 20,208 1997 4,785 27,094 244 32,123 1998 4,970 29,996 1,262 36,228

Note:a Rentals &service s since 1995hav e included aguid e fee

Table 3:Distributio n ofrevenu epe ryea ri nUS $(1US $= 50 0FCFA) .

Year Project LocalNG O Forestry Fund Total (CDB) (FDFT) 1993 2,705 1,105 276 4,087 1994 9,904 2,381 595 12,881 1995 13,150 3,078 769 16,998 1996 16,516 2,953 738 20,208 1997 29,730 1,914 479 32,123 1998 33,743 1,988 497 36,228

Theincom eo floca l serviceproviders ,suc ha sth eBaAk ane thunter s andth e palmwin e "tappers",pe ryea ri spresente d intabl e4

Table4 :Estimate d income ofloca l serviceprovider s (localfisherman an dBaAk a pygmiestha t collaborate intouris m activities)pe ryea ri nUS $(1US $= 500FCFA )

Year Estimated income 1993 1,298 1994 2,422 1995 1,664 1996 2,126 1997 1,397 1998 3,075

Thepremis etha ttouris mwoul dcontribut e toth e self-financing ofth ePar kan d Reserverequire s aclos eexamination .A tth ever y leastincom efrom touris m should coverit sdirec tcosts .Thes e costs,mainl y salariesan dbenefits , werei n 1995US $ 13,800. Ifw eloo k atth e income figure for 1995o fUS $ 13,150(Tabl e 3)revenue salmos t coveredth ecost so fstaf f salaries andbenefit s (excluding expatriates).B y 1998,incom e

134 wasUS $33,74 3an dsalarie s andbenefit s hadrise n toUS $28,011 ,resultin g ina smal l margin ofUS $5,732 . However, wehav et otak e intoconsideratio n trackers salariesan d additional costso roverhea d (mostlytranspor t costsan doffic e supplies),leavin gonl y about US$51 4a sprofi t (Table5) .

Table 5:Incom e from Tourism inrelatio n toit sdirec t costsfo r 1998.

Amount Income 33,743 Salaries and benefits -28,011 Trackers salaries -2,618 Overhead -2,600 Balance 514

(Amount inUS$ ;US $ 1 =50 0FCFA )

Discussion

A.Th erelevanc e oftouris mi nrelatio nt oth eself-financin g ofth e Project

In 1995, for the first time,th eProjec t wasabl et orecove r salary costs ofguide s from tourismrevenue .Takin gonl yloca lcost sint oconsideration ,i twa sno tunti l 1998 thatth eProjec t madea profit , albeitnegligible .A tpresent ,touris m isonl y self-financing atth eloca l level.I fpresen ttrend s inincreas e inrevenu e continue,touris m shouldb eabl e togenerat e sufficient revenuet ob eabl et o coverth eadditiona l costso fimporte dgood s andtechnica l assistance,guaranteein g itssustainabilit y without further foreign subsidies. However, tourism's contribution to afundin g mechanism for thePar kan d Reserve islikel y toremai n nominal,especiall y ifinfrastructur e investment and depreciation isfactore d intocalculations .Tota linvestmen t ininfrastructur e hasbeen ,a s mentioned above,i nth eorde ro fUS $300,000 .Evidently ,ther eha sbee n anegativ erat e ofretur n on initial investments. Fortunately, donors dono t expect arepaymen t ofthi s capital investment. However, itdemonstrate s thatprivat ecommercia l financing ofsimila r infrastructure isunlikel yt ob eviable . Itha sbee n estimated thatfo r theProjec t tokee pa complet eprotection ,guid e service,an dsuppor tprogra m going,roughl yU S$ 800,00 0pe rannu mi sneede d(Blom , 1996).Thi sdoe sno ttak e intoaccoun t anyrura l development program orsuppor t for outsidetechnica l assistance,jus t thebasi c operational costso fbot hth ePar k andReserve . Ifprojecte d costsar ecompare dt oactua lrevenu efo r 1998 wese etha ta tpresen tonl y4 % ofthi sbudge t iscovere d from revenue from tourism. Althoughvisito rnumber shav e declined inrecen t years(Figur e 2),th eclien tbas e ismor e stable andprovide sgreate r revenue(Tabl e 1). Factors contributing to anincreas e ofrevenu epe rvisito r includeth e apparent fact thatth eoversea stourist s ingenera lar e willingt ospen dmor emone y for accesst oan dals ospen dmor etim ei nDzanga-Sangha . Inearlie ryears ,mos tvisitor s wereexpatriate s living inBangui ,sometime s accompanied byvisitin g relativeso rfriends ; thesenumber s declineddurin g andpas tth e civilunres t years.Du et oth e opening ofth elodg e anda greate rmarketin g effort overseas,th e

135 majority ofvisitor sno wcom e from Europe,travellin gthroug h Cameroon inorde rt o avoid possibleunres t inBangui .Accordin g toth elarges t travel agency,reservation s are onth e increasean d iti sexpecte d that visitornumber swil lrice a sth ememor y ofcivi l unrest inBangu i fades (Ivory Tours,pers .comm.) . Clearly,presen t levelso ftouris mcanno tcove rProjec t operatingcosts .Othe r optionsmus tb einvestigate d toinsur eth econtinuatio n ofth eProject . Oneoptio n isth e development ofhig hrevenu egeneratin g tourism based onhabituate d gorillas,a s practiced successfully inRwanda ,th eDemocrati c Republic ofCong o(ex-Zaire) ,an d Uganda(e.g .Harcourt , 1986;Avelin g andAveling , 1989;Shackley , 1995,McNeilage , 1996). There touristspa ybetwee n $ 100an d$ 120pe rvisi t (Shackley, 1995).Thi s meanstha t ifDzanga-Sangh a wantedt ocove rit soperation s from "gorillatourism "alone , itwoul dnee d 8,000visitor s ayear .Althoug hth e Project's gorillahabituatio n program is progressing, iti sunlikel y thatth e capacity for gorillavisit s will surpass 1,500visitor si n the foreseeable future. Options for increasing income from tourism areprincipally : 1. Gorillatouris m 2. Raisingth epar kentr y fee. Raisingth epar k entry fee could generate substantial additional revenue.Tou r operators indicate awillingnes s topa yhighe rpar k fees bythei rclients ,i fthes e fees contributedirectl yt oconservatio n andrura ldevelopment .Howeve rth efac t remains,a s illustrated here,tha tpolitica l instability caneasil y disrupt tourism.Eve nwhe nrevenu e might dramatically increase,i ti sunlikel yt ob ea reliabl e source ofself-financin g inth e long-term. Asthes eadditiona l revenue-generating activitieswil lno tb eabl et ocove rth e Project's operating costso n any long-term basis,a noversea sendowmen t conservation trust fund mayb eth ebes t long-term financial mechanism for Dzanga-Sangha. Iti s estimated thata nendowmen t of $ 10,000,000woul dgenerat eenoug hfund s tomaintai n operations,wit hadditiona l income from tourismprovidin g investment opportunities and financing rural development (Blom, 1996).Severa l donorshav ereacte dpositivel yt o these initiatives and somehav emad ethei rpresen t funding conditional onth e establishment ofsuc hlong-ter m financial mechanisms.

B.Th eimpac to ftouris m onth eloca l economy

Asurve y carried outi n 1994showe dtha t 53% o fth eme n inBayang awer e formally employed byvariou semployer san dreceive d aregula r salary (Garreau, 1996a). Formal employment istherefor e aver yimportan t economic factor inth eregion .Th e samesurve yshowe dtha to fthos eemploye d inth eforma l sector, 34% wer eemploye db y the Project. Thebigges t employer inth eregio n duringth etim eo fth e surveywa sth eFrenc h loggingcompan y "Sylvicole deBayanga" . Atth etim eo fclosur e in September 1997, they wereemployin g25 1permanen t staff, witha monthl ypayrol l of$17,128 .Takin gthi s asa bas eline ,th eannua lpayrol l wouldb ei nth eorde ro fU S$ 205,500 . In September 1997th eDzanga-Sangh a Project wasth e second largest employer, with 89permanen t staff anda monthl ypayrol l ofU S$ 11,880.A tpresen tth e logging company isclosed ,makin gth e Project theonl ymajo r employer inth eregio n witha n

136 average 110 permanent employees in 1998an da nannua lpayroll ,includin g benefits of US$243,240 .Th eloggin gcompan y isexpecte d toreope n in 1999,however . Tourism employs 13Projec t staff directly,wit ha nannua ltota l expenditure for salaries andbenefit s of$ 27,960 .T othi sw eca nad dth e staff (11people ) ofDol iLodge , witha nannua l $29,04 0 in salaries andbenefits . Thismake sth etota lnumbe ro f employees inth etouris t sectorrepresen t roughly 17% o fpermanen t employment for Bayanga asa whole ,bu tlikel y substantially more interm so f salaries and benefits. Furthermore,ther e isadditiona l employment from temporarywor k andfrom spill-ove r effects inth e informal economy. Ofpar k fees, 40% goe sdirectl y toa loca lNG Oan dint oth eloca l economy through itscommunit yactivities .A sshow ni nTabl e 3,thi sreache d amaximu m ofUS $ 3,078i n 1995. Thetota ldirec teconomi cbenefit sfrom touris m canb eestimate d tohav e beenU S$ 18,500fo r 1995(Tabl e 6).Thi smigh tno t seemt ob emuch ,bu t inrelatio nt o the official minimum wageo f $ 1.70/dayi tdoe srepresen t over 10,000workin g daysa year directlycomin gfrom tourism .I ttranslate s inth e sameperio dt oove r $2 4pe r household peryear ,whe nyearl y incomewa sestimate d tob e $40.8 8pe ryea r for the average BaAkane thunter' s household (Noss, 1995).

Table 6:Estimate d direct economicbenefit s toth e local communityfrom touris m inUS $ (1US$= 50 0FCFA )fo r 1995.

Amount Park fee contribution 3,078 Direct income 1,600 Employment 13,800 Total 18,478

Although the income from park fees for 1998wa slowe rtha n for 1995(US $ 2,000,Tabl e 3),th etota l amount entering theloca leconom y ofUS $64,69 5wa si n fact higher. Thiswa sdu et oth e increase inth eamount s obtainedfrom touris t activitiesan d from directemployment , respectively US$3,07 5 (Table4 )an dUS $59,62 0 (Table1 plusDol iLodge) .A sminimu mwage swer eno t changed,thi stota l amount represents over 38,000workin g daysa yea r coming directlyfrom tourism . Evenwit hth e increasei n population, from anestimate d 740household s in 1995t o 820househol d in 1998,i twoul d represent overUS $7 8pe rhousehol dpe ryear . Furthermore,takin g into consideration that additional economicbenefit s arerelate dt otourism , sucha sconstructio nwork ,ba r andrestauran t services,i tbecome sclea rtha ttouris mprovide simportan tbenefit s toth e region. Iti sto oearl yt oasses s ifincrease d income andemploymen t hasresulte d ina shift towards lessenvironmentall y destructive activities.However , revenue from tourismha s contributed toProjec t acceptance anda greate rwillingnes st ocollaborat eo n conservation-related activities.Thi s isillustrate d byth e fact thatth eNG Otha treceive s therevenu efro m parkfee s issee na sa nimportan t stakeholder inth eregion . Duringa n evaluation ofth eNGO ,whic h surveyed 350people ,2/ 3 ofth eperson s interviewed underlined the importance ofth eNG Oi nth eresolutio n ofconflict s andals odesire d that

137 theNG Opu tmor eeffor t intoth eprotectio n ofnatura l resources (Garreau, 1996b).Th e effectiveness ofla wenforcemen t hasals oimprove d dramatically,wit ha nincreas e inth e confiscation of snares(89 5 %)an dillega l arms(20 0% )fro m 1993t o199 8(Blom ,i n prep.). Thisincreas e canb epartl yattribute d toa growin gwillingnes s of community members toprovid eth eProjec t withinformatio n on illegal activities. Overall,revenu e sharingi ssee n aspositiv e from bothth e local community aswel l asth edonors 'side .

Conclusions

In summary the following conclusions canb edrawn : • Thepresen t form oftouris mha ss ofa r beenunabl et obecom e self-financing, except atth eloca llevel . • Ifpresen ttrend s inincreas e inrevenu e continue,touris m shouldb eabl et ogenerat e sufficient revenuet ob eabl et ocove rth eadditiona l costso fimporte d goodsan d technical assistance,guaranteein g itssustainabilit y without further foreign subsidies. • Privatecommercia lfinancing o fsimila r investments isunlikel yt ob e economically viable. • Tourism init spresen t form contributesnominall yt oProjec t operating costsan di s unlikelyt opla y asignifican t role inth e long-term self-financing ofth ePar k andth e Reserve management. • Tourism isa significan t source ofemploymen t inth eregion . • Tourismplay sa nincreasingl y important rolei nth eloca l economy. • Revenue from tourismha scontribute d toth e greateracceptanc e ofth eProjec t among localpopulation s andcorrespondingl y improved law enforcement.

Althoughtouris m hasbecom ea nimportan t economic activity for theregion , iti s evidenttha t itwil l noto ra tleas tno t inth enea rfuture , provide asolutio n forth eself - financing ofprotecte d areamanagemen t inDzanga-Sangha , andothe roption s needt ob e developed. An increase inPar k fees shouldb econsidere d asa willingnes s topa yo nth e part ofth evisito rmigh t bepresen t ifwel linforme d aboutth ereason s for thisincrease . Even soth eProjec t needst oconside r establishing alternative sources offunding , sucha s trust funds, andgeneratin g additional income from gorillatourism , safari huntingan d sustainable forestry. Froma purel y commercial pointo fview ,th edevelopmen t oftouris m inDzanga - Sangha iseconomicall y questionable,certainl y invie wo fth ehig hris kassociate dwit h investments incentra lAfrica . However, donors andth eProjec t wereintereste d inmor e than commercial viability. TheProject' s major goal,supporte d byit sdonors ,wa sclearl y two-fold. Thefirst objective , financial sustainability ofoperations ,i sunlikel y tob e achieved inth epresen t situation.However ,th e secondobjective , substituting environmentally destructive activitieswit hmor econservation-friendl y economic activities,ma yhav ebee n at leastpartiall y achieved.

Acknowledgements

Iwoul d liket othan kth eWorl d Wildlife Fund,Inc .an dth edifferen t Government agencies for supporting thisresearch ; andUrbai nNgatou a andal lth estaf f ofth eDzanga -

138 Sangha Project for theircollaboration . I'm particularly grateful toHerber t Prins,Igna s Heitkonig,Jean-Mar c Garreau,Andre aAlmasi ,Lis a Steel,Natash a Shahan d four anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments onth emanuscript .

Note: 1. DoliLodg e has 32bed s infou r wooden bungalows on stilts.Eac hbungalo w is divided intotw ounits , each with connecting rooms- abathroom , one large master bedroom and one small room for children. The Lodge alsoha s acampsite ,bar/restauran t on a large terrace overlooking the river, a reception/shop and several service buildings. Itwa sbuil d and isowne d byth e Dzanga-Sangha project, although its management hasbee n privatized. The Lodge caters for high-level international tourism

References

Aveling,C .& Aveling ,R . (1989)Gorill a conservation inZaire .Oryx 23,64-70 .

Blom,A .(199 3a )Lis t ofth elarg emammal so fth eDzanga-Sangh a DenseFores t Reservean dth eDzanga-Ndok iNationa l Park.Worl dWildlif e Fund -CAR .

Blom,A .(199 3b )Lis t ofth ebird so fth eDzanga-Sangh a Dense ForestReserv ean dth e Dzanga-NdokiNationa l Park.Worl dWildlif e Fund -CAR .

Blom,A .(1996 )Proposa l forth e creation ofa nenvironmen t trust fund for Dzanga- Sangha.Worl dWildlif e Fund -CAR .

Blom,A .(i nprep. ) Tenyear sDzanga-Sangh a Project: 1988- 1999.Worl d Wildlife Fund -CAR.

Blom,A. ,Kpanou , J.-B.,Otto ,K. , Mbea,E. ,Godobo ,P .& Almasi,A .(i nprep ,a ) Elephant surveyso fth e Dzanga sector ofth eDzanga-Ndok i National Park, Central African Republic

Blom,A. ,Kpanou , J.-B.,Otto ,K. , Mbea,E. , Godobo,P .& Almasi,A .(i nprep ,b ) Antelopesurve yo fth eDzang a sectoro fth eDzanga-Ndok iNationa lPark ,Centra l African Republic

Blom,A. ,Kpanou , J.-B.,Otto ,K. , Mbea,E ,Godobo ,P .& Almasi ,A .(i nprep , c)A survey ofth ediurna lprimate s inth e Dzanga-NdokiNationa l Park,Centra l African Republic.

Butynski,T.M .& Kalina ,J . (1998)Gorill atourism : acritica l look. In Milner-Gulland, E.J. &Mace ,R .(eds ) Conservation ofbiological resources (pp.294-370) . Oxford: Blackwell Scientific Publications,

Carroll,R.W . (1986a )Statu so fth elowlan d gorilla andothe rwildlif e inth eDzanga - Sangharegio n ofsouthwester n CentralAfrica n Republic.Primate Conservation 7, 38-41.

139 Carroll, R.W. (1986 b) The creation, development, protection, and management of the Dzanga-Sangha dense forest sanctuary and the Dzanga-Ndoki National Park in southwestern Central Africa Republic. Unpublished report. New Haven: Yale University.

Carroll, R.W. (1986 c) The status, distribution, and density of the lowland gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla (Savage and Wyman)), forest elephant (Loxodonta africana cyclotis), and associated dense forest fauna in southwestern Central African Republic: research towards the establishment of a reserve for their protection. Unpublished report. New Haven: Yale University.

Carroll, R.W. (1988) Relative density, range extension, and conservation potential of the lowland gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) in the Dzanga - Sangha region of southwestern Central African Republic. Mammalia 52,309-323 .

Carroll, R.W. (1992) The development, protection, and management of the Dzanga- Sangha Dense Forest Special Reserve and the Dzanga-Ndoki National Park in southwestern Central African Republic. Dzanga-Sangha Reserve Project and World Wildlife Fund, Washington.

Carroll, R.W. (1996) Feeding ecology of lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) in Dzanga-Sangha Reserve of the Central African Republic. PhD thesis, University of Yale.

Culverwell, J. (1998) Long-term recurrent costs of protected area management in Cameroon: monitoring of protected areas, donor assistance and external financing, ecological and management priorities of current and potential protected area system. P.-75. WWF-Cameroon/MINEF, Yaounde, Cameroon.

Fay, J.M. (1989) Partial completion of a census of the lowland gorilla (Gorilla g. gorilla (Savage and Wyman)) in southwestern Central African Republic. Mammalia 53, 203-215.

Fay, J.M. (1991) An elephant (Loxodonta africana) survey using dung counts in the forests of the Central African Republic. Journal of Tropical Ecology 7: 25-36.

Fay, J.M., C.A. Spinage, B. Chardonnet and A.A. Green (1990) Central African Republic. In East, R. (ed.)Antelopes global survey and action plans (pp. 99-109) Gland: IUCN.

Garreau, J-M. (1996a) Enquete socio-economique sur quelques productions de la ville de Bayanga. Non-published report. Projet Dzanga-Sangha. pp. 17.

Garreau, J-M. (1996b) Demarche de developpement rural au sein du PCDI Dzanga- Sangha. Non-published report. Projet Dzanga-Sangha.

140 GondaNgbalet , M.(1995 )Donnee s demographiqued eDzanga-Sangha . Rapport intermediare.Prqje t Dzanga-Sangha, Universite deBangui .

Harcourt, A.H. (1986) Gorilla conservation: anatomy ofa campaign . InBernischke ,K . (ed.)Primates: the roadto self-sustaining populations. New York: Springer- Verlag,

Harris,D .(1994 )Interi m check-list toth evascula rplant s ofth eDzanga-Sangh a Project AreaCentra lAfrica n Republic.Unpublishe d report.Universit y ofOxfor d 31pp.

Lanjouw, A.(1999 )Tourism eau xgorille se nAfriqu e centrale.Canopee 13,25-26 .

McNeilage, A. (1996)Ecotouris m andmountai n gorillas inth eVirung aVolcanoes .I n Taylor,V .& Dunstone ,N .(eds. ) The exploitation ofMammal, London: Chapman andHall .

Northon-Griffiths, M.& Southey , C.(1995 )Th eopportunit y costso fbiodiversit y conservation inKenya .Ecological Economics 12,125-139 .

Noss,A.J .(1995 )Duikers ,cables ,an dnets : acultura l ecology ofhuntin g ina centra l African forest. PhD.dissertation . University of Florida.P .415 .

PNUD(1995 )Rappor tmondia l surl edeveloppemen thumai n 1995.Programm ede s NationsUnie spou r leDeveloppemen t (PNUD),Paris :Economic a

Shackley,M .(1995 )Th efutur e ofgorill atouris m inRwand a Journalof Sustainable Tourism 3(2),61-72 .

Telesis(1991 )Sustainbl eeconomi cdevelopmen t optionsfo rth eDzanga-Sangh a Reserve Central African Republic,Telesi sUSA ,Inc .

Telesis(1993 ) Supplementary studyo fth e sustainable economicdevelopmen toption s for theDzanga-Sangh a Reserve Central African Republic,Telesi sUSA ,Inc .

Wilkie,D.S .& Carpenter , J.F.(1998 )Th eunder-financin g ofprotecte d areasi nth e Congo Basin:s oman ypark s ands olittl ewillingness-to-pay . Biological Conservation (inreview )

141 Chapter8

Synthesis:Potential s andpitfall s oftouris mi nth eGuinean-Congolia n Forest Region.

Introduction

Accordingt oWilso n(2000 )th eplane ti sgoin gthroug ha bottlenec k causedb ya massivedi eou to fspecies .H eargue stha tbiodiversit yma yb esalvageabl edependin go nth e attentiontha ti sgive nt osustainabl emanagemen to fth eenvironment ,includin gprotectio n ofbiodiversity .Thi scoul db eaccomplishe db yprotectio n ofpriorit yarea sidentifie d by conservationexperts ,suc ha sthos etha tgathere di nLibrevill ei nFebruar y 1999fo rth e Guinean-Congolianfores t region(Blo me tal. ,i nprep.) .I nman ycase sthes epriorit yarea s alreadycontai ngazette dprotecte dsites ,bu tman ygazette darea sar eineffectivel y managed, notmanage d atal lo rmanage d largelyb yforeig n assistance.A cas estud yo fth eCentra l African Republic(CAR )clearl ydemonstrate sthi sproblem . Althoughth ecountr yha sa n impressivetota lo f 15 protectedareas ,coverin gabou t 10.9% o fit sterritory ,onl y3 2% o f theprotecte darea sar eadequatel ymanage d(Chapte r2) .Al lo fthes earea sar emanage dwit h substantialforeig n assistance.Severa lunderlinin gcauses ,suc ha slac ko finstitutiona l capacity,civi lwa ran dpoverty ,ca nb ementione dt oaccoun tfo rthi sfailur e ofth e governmentso fth eregio nt omanag eth eprotecte dare anetwork . Howeverth efundamenta l problem inth emanagemen t ofprotecte dareas , particularlyi nth edevelopin gcountrie so fth eCong oBasin ,i sth elac ko flong-ter m economicalsustainabilit y (Chapter2 ;Chapte r7 ;Blo me tal. ,i nprep. ; Spergele tal. ,i n prep.;Wilki ee tal. ,i npress) .Althoug hthes ecountrie sspen dabou tth esam epercentag eo f theirnationa lbudget so nprotecte darea sa sd owealth yEuropea nan dNort hAmerica n nations(Wilki ee tal. ,i npress.) ,thi si sclearl yinsufficien t tomanag ethei rnationa lprotecte d areasystem s(Chapte r2) .Leake y(2000 )onc eagai ncalle dupo nth eworld' sriches tnation s toprovid efundin g toth epoores tnation st ohel pconserv eth eworld' sbiodiversity .Howeve r thereseem st ob elittl ewillingnes st opa yan dth eunder-fundin g ofth emanagemen tha s seriouslyaffecte d theintegrit yo fman yprotecte darea si nth eGuinean-Congolia n region (Wilkiee tal. ,i npress ;Chapte r2) . The actual cost of effective management forms a basis for an estimation of maintainingth epresen tnetwor ko fprotecte darea s(Blom ,i nprep. ;Wilki ee tal. ,i npress) . Protectedarea sar ea ne tcos tt oloca lan dnationa leconomie s(Wilki ee tal. ,i npress) ,a sthe y dono tgenerat esignifican t revenue incontras tt olandscape swith ,fo rexample ,agricultur e andloggin g(Sperge le tal. ,i nprep.) .Th ecountrie si nth eregio nalread ycarr ythi seconomi c burdenan dar eunlikel yt ob eabl et ogenerat esubstantia ladditiona lfundin g forprotecte d areamanagemen fromt thei rlimite dnationa lbudget s(Blom ,i nprep. ;Wilkie ,e tal. ,i n press).A si ti sassume dtha tprotecte darea sar ea nessentia lcomponen to fbiodiversit y conservationan ddono rcountrie ssee munwillin gt ofinanc ethis ,i tleave sonl yth eprospect s ofuse rfee s asa realisti coptio nfo r sustainablefundin g ofprotecte darea s(Sperge le tal. ,i n prep.). Amongthes euse rfees ,thos einvolvin gtouris mpla ya leadin grol e(Sperge le tal. ,i n prep.). Therol eo ftouris ma sa long-ter m sustainablefundin g sourcefo rbiodiversit y protectionha sbee ndiscusse dfo rman ypart so fth eworl d(e.g .Boo , 1990;Brandon ,1996 ;

142 Cateran dLowman , 1994; Conservancy, 1995; Durbin, 1996; Inskeep, 1992; Langholz, 1996;Lindberg , 1991;Navru dan dMungatana , 1994;Tobia san dMendelsohn , 1991; Wells, 1996).Th esituatio ni nDzanga-Sangh aprovide du swit huniqu eopportunitie st ocarr you ta casestud yint oth epotentia lan dpitfall s oftourism .Th eDzanga-Sangh aprotecte dare a complexi slocate di nth esouthwes to fth eCAR ,a countr ytha tha sa histor yo flimite d tourismwhic hstil lretain ssom eo fthi spotentia l(Plumier , 1992; UN, 1998).Touris mwa s seena sth ebes toptio nfo r sustainabledevelopmen t forth eDzanga-Sangh aare a(TELESIS , 1991;TELESIS , 1993).Th emanager sfel ttha tape-viewin g couldrelativel yeasil y complementth euniqu ewildlif e viewingan daccessibl eBaAk a(pygmy )cultur ei nth e Dzanga-Sangha area.Touris mbase do nclos erang eobservation so fape sha sbee na majo r revenuean dpubli cawarenes sgenerato ri nothe rpart so fAfric a (Avelingan dAveling , 1989;Butynsk ian dKalina , 1998a;Butynsk ian dKalina , 1998b; Harcourt, 1986;Lanjouw , 1991;Lanjouw , 1999;McNeilage , 1996;Shackley , 1995).I tseem stha tunde rth e right circumstancesape-viewin gtouris mha ssubstantia lpotential ,bu ti tals ocarrie swit hi tcertai n risks(Butynsk ian dKalina , 1998a;Butynsk ian dKalina , 1998b;Goldsmith ,2000 ; Kalema, 1998; McNeilage, 1996; Macfie, 1996;Mudakikwa , 1998;Sholley , 1989;Walli san dLee ,i n prep.).I nthi schapter ,base do nth eDzanga-Sangh a casestudies ,I revie wth epotentia lan d pitfalls ofape-viewin gtourism .I analyz eth erol etha tthi san dothe rform so ftouris mcoul d playi nfinancing biodiversit yconservatio ni nth eGuinean-Congolia n ForestRegion .

Theexistin gprotecte d areasyste mo fth eGuinean-Congolia n Forest Region TheGuinean-Congolia n ForestRegio n isa vas t areao fove r2 millio nkm 2 consisting of 14differen t ecoregions,no t including the Congo sideo fth eRif t valley (Blome tal. , inprep.) .Ecoregion s arerelativel y largearea s delineatedb ybioti can d environmental factors thatregulat eth e structure and function ofecosystem swithi nthem . Table 1 givesa novervie wo fth eecoregion scontaine dwithi nth eGuinean-Congolia nFores t Region.

143 Table 1. Theecoregion so fth eGuinean-Congolia n ForestRegio n

Ecoregion Approximatesiz eo fare a(i n Approximatetota lsiz eo fare a km2) underprotectio n(i nkm 2) with (thepercentag eo fth e ecoregion underprotection ) Nigerian Lowland Forest 67,300 1,522 (2.3% ) Niger Delta Swamp Forest 14,400 0 (0 %) Cross-Niger Transition Forest 20,700 0 (0 %) Cross-Sanaga-Bioko Coastal 52,200 6,431(12.3%) Forest Atlantic Equatorial Coastal 189,700 26,778(14.1%) Forest Mount Cameroon and Bioko 1,100 0 (0 %) Montane Forest Cameroonian Highlands 38,000 1,469(3.9%) Forest SaoTom e and Principe Moist 1,000 0 (0 %) Lowland Forest Northwestern Congolian 434,100 30,793 (7.1 %) Lowland Forest Western Congolian Swamp 128,600 0 (0 %)* Forest Eastern Congolian Swamp 92,700 0 (0 %) Forest Central Congolian Lowland 414,800 36,560 (8.8 %) Forest Northeastern Congolian 533,500 31,256(5.9%) Lowland Forest CentralAfrica n Mangroves 29,900 0 (0 %) TOTAL 2,018,000 134,809(6. 7 %)

* Lac Tele and Likouala-aux-Herbes have been designated as a Ramsar site (4389.6 km2), but their IUCN statusi sunclear . SeeBlo me tal. ,i nprep ,fo r detailed information onprotecte d areas (Data on size of ecoregion from Blom et al.,i nprep. ; data onprotecte d areasmodifie d from IUCN, 1998;UN , 1993;Chapte r 2an dBlom ,unpublished) . Theregio n isgloball y outstanding for containing large intactblock s of lowland and swampfores t (Blome tal. ,i nprep.) . Theare a offores t remaining percapit a isth e highest inAfric a (data inWilk san dIUC NTropica l ForestProgramme , 1990). Species richness ishigh , withfo r example anestimate d 6000vascula rplant s for Gabonalon e (Wilks andIUC N Tropical Forest Programme, 1990). Over 10,000specie s ofplant sar e known from Democratic Republic ofCong oan dtha t country hasa tleas t40 9 specieso f mammals, 1086specie so fbirds , 80o famphibian s and40 0 species offish (Sayer, 1992). Approximately 400specie s ofbird shav ebee nrecorde d for the forest ofCA R(Carroll , 1987;Gree nan dCarroll , 1991).Cameroo nha s2 9specie so fprimate s init s forests (Gartlan, 1992)an d Gabon 19(Blo me tal. ,1992) . Endemism ishig hi nman yecoregion s andthu sfa r over4 2specie s ofecoregio n endemic birds andove r2 9specie s ofendemi cmammal shav ebee n found inthes e forests (Blome tal. ,i nprep.) .Al lthes e figures areunderestimate s asthi s ison eo fth e least

144 studied and surveyedarea s inth eworld ,wit hmajo r gapsi nou rknowledg e (Blome tal. , inprep.) . However, themos t striking aspect ofth e Guinean-Congolian forest blocki stha t iti son eo fth e last great wilderness areasremainin g onth eplanet ,wher e large mammals stilldwel lunde rnatura l regimeso fpopulatio n fluctuations andmigrations . Overallth epotentia l for biodiversity conservation isexceptionall y good.Howeve r this situation ischangin g rapidly,mostl y under influence ofth e logging industry. Althoughselectiv eloggin gusuall y doesno t cause significant habitat conversion, iti sth e main driving force behindth ehabita tdegradatio n andfragmentation . The infrastructure developed byloggin gan dothe rindustrie s seriously fragments the forest andprovide s markets,transpor t and access forbushmea t hunters.Th edepletio n ofth e fauna, theso - calledbus hmea t crisis,i sconsidere d thenumbe ron ethrea tt obiodiversit y conservation inthi spar to fAfric a (Blome tal. ,i nprep.) .

Avisio nfo ra neffectiv e protectedare anetwor k

Idefin e asa neffectiv e protected areanetwor k for theGuinean-Congolia n Forest Regiona sfollow s (from Blom,i nprep.) : 1. Anetwor k based onprotecte d areas,a sdefine d byIUC N(1994 )a sarea so flan dand/o r seaespeciall y dedicatedt oth eprotectio nan dmaintenanc eo fbiologica l diversity,an do f natural and associated cultural resources, andmanage d through legal or other effective means. This excludes gazetted forests defined in Chapter 2 as areas of land especially dedicated to the sustainable production of forestry products and/or protection of such resourceso nwhic hthi sproductio ni sbased . 2. Anetwor kwhic hi sbase d onrepresentation . Atleas t 10% o feac hecoregio n shouldb e gazetteda sa protecte darea . 3. Anetwor kbase d onwell-manage dprotecte dareas .

Asshow ni nTabl e 1 thetota lare aunde rofficia l protectionrepresent sa tpresen t 134,809km 2o ronl yabou t6. 7% o fth etota lare ao fth eGuinean-Congolia n ForestRegion . Evenmor etroublesom ei stha tonl yhal fo fth eecoregion scontai nan yprotecte dare aa tall . Infac tonl ytw oecoregion sreac hth esuggeste dleve lo f 10% gazette d (Table 1 andBlom , etal. ,i nprep.) .Differen t scenariosar epossibl et omediat ethi ssituatio n andt oensur etha ta t least 10 % isprotecte dunde rla wi neac han dever yecoregio n(Blom ,i nprep.) .Althoug h theremigh tb esligh tdifference s dependingo nth escenario ,th efollowin g tablegive s a roughbreakdow no fth eadditiona lprotecte dare aneede dpe rcountr yt oreac hth eobjectiv e ofminimu m 10 %gazette dpe recoregion .

145 Table2 .Existin g extentpe r country ofprotecte d areasan dadditiona l areaneede d inth e Guinean-Congolian ForestRegio n

Country Area gazetted (in Additional area Total area km2) to be gazetted needed (in (in km2) km2) Cameroon 19,480 3,477 22,957 Central African Republic 4,725 2,366 7,091 Congo 9,156 13,394 22,550 Democratic Republic of 67,816 40,323 108,139 Congo Equatorial Guinea 800 10 810 Gabon 25,845 6,576 32,421 Nigeria 6,987 9,764 16,751 Sao Tome and Principe 0 100 100

TOTAL 134,809 76,010 210,819

(data from Blom,i nprep. )

I consider anare awel lmanage d wheni tmaintain sit sspecie s assemblages,excep t for natural changes.Thi si sespeciall y critical inmultipl eus ereserves ,wher eextractio n occurs.An ymanage r mustassur etha tviabl e minimumpopulation s are maintained (Blom, inprep.) . Inpractic e iti simpossibl e tomonito r all species andi tmigh tb eto o expensivet omonito r evena rang e oftax a (Blom,pers .obs. ;se eals oBalmfor d and Gaston, 1999).Howeve r itmigh tb epossibl et ous eindicato r groups (Howard etal. , 1998),whic h alsomake seconomi c sense (Balmford andGaston , 1999).Accordin gt o Robinson (1993)protecte d areasar ecritica l for the conservation oflarg emammals . Manyo fthes e speciesar ewide-rangin g andmigrator y andar eprim etarget s for professional hunters.Depletio n ofth e large fauna isconsidere d the main short-termthrea t tobiodiversit y inth eGuinean-Congolia n forest region (Blome tal. ,i nprep.) .Monitorin g thehuma nimpac to na selectedgrou po flarg emammal swoul dprovid ea mea nt ojudg e theeffectivenes s ofmanagemen t relativet o costs.Tha t iswh yI suggeste d inchapte r5 thatmonitorin g humanpresenc ea swel l aslarg e mammalsmigh tb ea nindicato r for the overall "health"o fa particula rprotecte d area,withou thavin gt omonito r allo reve n manytaxa . Inth e case studyare ao fDzanga-Sangh a Idevelope d sucha cost-effective monitoring system (Chapter 5).Th epreliminar y results showedtha telephant si n particularwer e significantly lesscommo n inarea swit hheav y humanus ean dtha tals o otherspecie ssuc ha smonkey s showedlowe rdensitie sclose rt oth emai nroa dan dth e towno fBayang a (Chapter 5).Howeve r althoughth eresult sdi d showdifference s over time,i twa sye tto oearl y toconclud etha tthes etrend s were important andi fth e monitoringprogra mwa sindee deffective . Neverthelessth epreliminar yresult swer e encouraging andthe y alsoshowe dtha tpoacher sus e secondary (logging)road st o penetrate intoth enationa lpark ,leadin gt oth emanagemen tpolic yrecommendatio n to increase anti-poaching efforts alongthes eroad s (Chapter5) .

146 Thecost so f aneffectiv e protected area network

Forth e Guinean-Congolian Forest Regiont ob eabl et omaintai n aminimu m presence inth eexistin gprotecte d areas system ofabou t 135 thousand km2wil lrequir e roughly 1,350 staff anda tota lbudge to f $7. 4millio n ayea r(Blom ,i nprep.) .Thi s optionwoul dresul t inincreasin g conflicts withloca l communities,a sn ofundin g would beavailabl et ocompensat e localcommunitie s for lostopportunities . Notechnica l assistance orinvestment s wouldb eavailabl ewhic hwoul dlea dt oseriou s degradation of theprotecte d areanetwork . Itwoul dresul t inirreversibl e losso fbiodiversit y inth e Guinean-Congolian Forest Region. Onth e otherhand ,th e aboveoutline d vision forbiodiversit yconservatio nthroug h asyste mo feffectivel y managedprotecte darea si nth eGuinean-Congolia nFores tRegio n wouldrequir ea nadditiona l 76thousan dkm 2t ob egazette dan da ninvestmen to fove r $1.3 billion inth enex tte nyears .Afte r theseinitia lte nyear sI assum etha ta tota lo froughl y$ 100millio na yea rwoul db esufficien t tomaintai nthi ssyste m(Blom ,i nprep.) . Total spendingb yth egovernment s ofth eregio n isunlikel yt oreac h evenhal fo f whati sneede dt omaintai na minimu mpresence .Staffin g levelsar eeve nmor e problematic.Th eneede d increases instaf f levels,u pt o6,30 0fo r full implementation of thevision , areespeciall y crucial againstth epressure sb yth e International Monetary Fund that thegovernment s inth eregio n aret oreduc eth ecivi l service.Privatizatio n ofth e protected areasmigh t circumventthi srestrictio n (Blom, inprep. ) Furthermore,overal ldono rexpenditur e inth epresen tprotecte d areanetwor ki s probably lesstha n $20millio npe ryear .Assumin g thatgovernment s ofth e regionwil l carryth enationa l opportunity cost andtha tbot hth enationa l governments aswel l asth e donorcommunit y willmaintai npresen t levelso ffunding , approximately onebillio n dollarswil lhav et ob efoun d elsewhere.

Gorillabase dtouris mi nDzanga-Ndok i

Thepotentia l ofdevelopin g agorill aviewin gbase dtyp eo ftouris mwa s considered tob egoo d inth eDzanga-Ndok i National Park.Base do na neconomi c feasibility study (TELESIS, 1991,1993 )th eDzanga-Sangh a Project haddevelope dth e essential infrastructure (Blom, 1999).Ou rsurve y ofth eare a (Chapter4 )reconfirme d that gorillaswer e stillpresen t insimila rhig hdensitie sa sthe ywer ei nth epas t(Carroll , 1986; Carroll, 1988;Carroll , 1997).Furthermor e thissurve y combined withth e ongoing monitoringprogra m (Chapter 5),helpe du sidentif y thatth ebes tplac et ocarr y outth e habituation wouldb ea tBa iHokou .Ba iHoko uha dbeen ,intermittentl y since 1984,th e siteo fgorill aresearc h (Carroll, 1988;Carroll , 1997;Goldsmith , 1996;Goldsmith , 1999; Remis, 1995;Remis ,2000 ;Remis , 1993;Remis , 1994;Remis , 1997a;Remis , 1997b; Remis, 1999),a swel l asothe rresearc h ongeolog y andbongo s (Klaus, 1998;Klau se tal. , 1998;Klaus-Hugi , 1998).Additionall y datao ngorill aecolog y wereavailabl e from other nearbyresearc h sitesi nth e southernpar t ofth epar k (Doran etal. , 1996;Dora nan d McNeilage, 1998;Fay , 1989;Fay , 1997). Althoughi ti spossibl ei nsom elocation st oobserv egorilla swhil ethe yvisi t forest clearings (Magliocca, 1999; Magliocca andQuerouil , 1997;Magliocc a etal. ,1999 ;

147 Olejniczak, 1996;Olejniczak , 1997),i ngenera l iti snecessar yt ohabituat e themt oallo w forregula r observations bytourist s (e.g. Fossey, 1983;McNeilage , 1996).Habituatio n is aproces sb ywhic h wild animalsbecom e accustomed toth epresenc e ofhuman si nthei r vicinityunti lhuman s areconsidere d aneutra l element inth eanimal s environment (Tutin andFernandez , 1991).Gorill ahabituatio n carriescertai nris kan dshoul db emonitore d (Butynski andKalina , 1998a;Butynsk i and Kalina, 1998b;Tuti n andFernandez , 1991; McNeilage, 1996).Beside s theobviou s risk ofdirec ttransmissio n ofdisease s (e.g. Kalema, 1998;Sholley , 1989;Walli s andLee ,i nprep. )an dparasite s (e.g. Macfie, 1996; Mudakikwa, 1998)ther e isals oth eris k ofstress .Th egorilla s might changethei r daily pathlength , change orexten dthei rhom erang e andexperienc e other stress-induced behavioral changes (e.g.Butynsk i andKalina , 1998a; Butynski andKalina , 1998b; Goldsmith,2000) .T omonito rthes epotentia l negative impacts,th e Dzanga-Sangha Project initiated anextensiv emonitorin gprogram . Thisprogra m will notonl yassis tth e on-going habituation process,bu twil lals oprovid evaluabl e input into similar habituation programs for tourism purposes carriedou telsewher e (Aveling, 1996;Bermejo , 1997; Bermejo, 1999;Tuti n andAbernethy , 1997;Tuti n et al., 1996).Th eresult s from the health monitoring areno tye tavailable ,bu t thefirs t results ofth ebehaviora l monitoring are(Chapte r 6;Cipolletta , inprep.) . Theresult s summarized here coverth eperio do f January 1998 untilDecembe r 1999,whe nth egrou pname dMunye ,whic hwa s first identified assuc h inAugus t 1998,wa sa tleas tpartiall yhabituated . Increasei nth e duration ofth e averagecontac ttim ean da n initial decrease inth etim et olocat eth e gorillasbot h indicatetha t thehabituatio n isprogressin g (Chapter 6). Thegorilla' s initial reactions ofaggression ,fea r andavoidanc e were graduallyreplace db y curious reaction andfinall y increasinglyb y ignoring theobserver s(Chapte r 6).Durin gth elas t 5month s ofthi sstud yperio dth eMuny e grouprarel y ranawa yafte r acontac t wasmade ,i nshar p contrastt oearl yo ni nth estud y (Chapter 6).W edi dno tdetec tan yobviou sshift s inth e homerang e duet ohabituation , although thehom erang e sizewa s still increasing atth e endo fth estud y(Chapte r 6;Cipolletta , inprep.) .O nth eothe rhan d itdi d seemtha tth e average dailypat h length diminished asth ehabituatio n progressed (Chapter 6;Cipolletta , inprep.) . Overallth eaverag edail ypat h lengthswer e similart othos e found byRemi s (1994)an dGoldsmit h (1996)a tth e samestud ysite . Theresult s sofa r indicatetha t althoughhabituatio n might temporarily impactth e gorilla'sbehavior ,thes einfluence s seemt odecreas eove rtime .Althoug hhabituatio no f western lowland gorillas isnotoriousl y difficult (Tutin andFernandez , 1991),ou rresult s summarized here,a swel l asothe rrecen t initiatives (Bermejo, 1997;Bermejo , 1999) showtha t itca nb edon e successfully.

Potential andpitfall s oftouris m

Asmentione dabov ew ehav eshow ntha twester nlowlan dgorilla sca nb ehabituate d fortouris mpurpose san dth eprogra mha sno wopene dfo rlimite dexperimenta l visits. The excellenttrackin gskill so fth eBaAk aassistant sa swel la sth efac ttha tth eMuny egrou p seemt ohav ebee nth eonl ygrou pextensivel yusin gth eBa iHoko ustud ysit ecertainl y contributedt oth ecircumstance stha tmad ehabituatio npossible .I estimat etha ti ttake sabou t 2year st ohabituat ea grou po fgorilla sfo rtouris m inthes ecircumstances . Asexperienc ei s gainedi tmigh tb epossibl et oreduc ethi samoun to ftim econsiderably .Nevertheles si ti s

148 cleartha thabituatin g gorillasi sa tim econsumin gan dexpensiv eendeavor .Th eorigina l three-yearbudge tfo rou rprogra mwa s$ 463,800 .Althoug hth eexac texpenditur ei sno t knowni ti ssaf e toassum etha ti twil lcost sa tleas t$250,00 0ove ra two-yea rperio dt o habituatea grou po fgorilla sunde rsimila rcircumstances .Thi si sprobabl ya nunderestimat e ifI conside rtha tw edi dno ttak eint oaccoun tan yhealt hmonitorin g inthi sestimat e(carrie d outo na separat ebudget) ,whic hshoul dfor m parto fth eoveral lmonitoring . Priort oth egorill aviewin gprogra mi nDzanga-Sangh atouris mwa sunabl et o becomeself-financin g (Chapter 7).Eve nthoug hrevenu ewa sincreasin gan dshoul db eabl e tocove rit srecurren tcosts ,simila rprivat ecommercia lfinancing is no teconomicall yviable . Likewise,give nth esubstantia linvestmen tneede dt odevelo pgorill atouris man dpresen t numberso fvisitors ,I d ono texpec ttha tthi styp eo ftouris mt ob eviabl efro m apurel y commercialpoin to fview .Howeve rth edonor sfinancing thi sprogra mar eno tonl y interestedi ncommercia lviabl eenterprises .Touris mi sa nimportan tloca lindustry ,bot ha s a sourceo frevenu ea swel la semploymen tan dgorill ahabituatio ni sa significan t contribution totha teconomy .Th eadditiona ljob san drevenu ehav eimprove dloca lattitude stoward sth e nationalpar kan dreserv ean dfacilitate d lawenforcemen t (Chapter7) . Althoughtouris mha sbecom ea nimportan teconomi c activityi nDzanga-Sangha ,a t presentlevel si tcanno tcove rth eprotecte d areamanagemen t costs.Gorill aviewin gi s potentially ahig hrevenue-generatin g typeo ftouris m (e.g.(Avelin gan dAveling ,1989 ; Harcourt, 1986; McNeilage, 1996;Shackley , 1995)though tt ob eabl et osubstantiall yrais e theexistin gleve lo frevenu ei nDzanga-Sangha . Giventh efac ttha ttourist sar ewillin gt o payfee s of$10 0an dmor epe rvisi t(Shackley , 1995),i twoul dtak eabou t8,00 0visitor spe r yeart ocove rth eDzanga-Sangh a recurrentmanagemen tcost s(Chapte r 7).Althoug hth e contributionsfrom th egorill ahabituatio nprogra mi ncoverin gth erecurren tcost scoul db e significant iti sunlikel yt oapproac hth elevel so ffundin g needed,a sth egorill aviewin g capacitywil lno tsurpas s 1,500 visitorsa yea ri nth enea rfutur e (Chapter7) . Dzanga-Sanghaprovide sgrea tpotential sfo recotourism ,wit hit scombinatio no f visiblemegafaun a andBaAk aculture .Althoug hisolated ,i tdoe shav eit sow nairstrip , makingacces st othi sare arelativel yeas yan dcertainl ycomparabl et omos tothe rprotecte d areasi nth eGuinean-Congolia n ForestRegion .Overal lDzanga-Sangh a certainlyprovide s oneo fth ebes topportunitie sfo ra successfu l ecotourismventur ei nth eGuinean-Congolia n ForestRegion .Eve nso ,an deve nthoug htouris mha sbecom ea nimportan tloca lindustry ,i t iseviden ttha ti twil lno tprovid ea solutio nfo rth eself-financin g ofth eprotecte dare a managementi nDzanga-Sangha . Basedo nthi scas estud yi non eo fth epotentiall ybes t opportunity sitesfo r ecotourismi nth eGuinean-Congolia n ForestRegion ,I conclud etha t therol eo ftouris mi ngeneratin grevenu e forprotecte dare amanagemen t islimite da tbes ti n thispar to fth eworld .Thi scas estud yillustrate sth efac ttha talthoug hsom euse rfee shav e thepotentia lt ogenerat esubstantia lrevenu efo rprotecte darea si nth eGuinean-Congolia n ForestRegio nthes efee swil lb efa rfrom sufficien t tomanag eth epropose dprotecte dare a system(se eals oSperge le tal. ,i nprep. ;Wilki ean dCarpenter , 1999a;Wilki ean dCarpenter , 1999b;Wilki ee tal. ,i npress) . Inth ecas eo fDzanga-Sangha ,th edevelopmen to fit stouris mprogram ,includin g thegorill aviewing ,ar eeconomicall yquestionable ,especiall yi nth eligh to fth ehig h risks associatedwit hinvestment si ntouris m inCentra lAfrica . Furthermoreth eris ko fseriou s disturbancest oth egorilla smak ethi soptio nmor etha nonl yeconomicall yquestionable .Th e tourism inDzanga-Sangh a hascertainl y increasedloca lrevenu ea swel la semploymen t

149 opportunitiesan da ssuc hha shelpe dmitigate dsom eo fth eloca lopportunit ycost san d improvedloca lperception so fth epar kan dreserve .Thos ear eimportan tgains ,bu tmanager s havet ocarefull y weighthes eadvantage sagains tth ebackgroun d ofrisk yeconomic so f tourisman dth eapes ' wellbein g(chapte r6 an d7) . Ifth einternationa l donorcommunit yi sseriou sabou tbiodiversit y conservationan d willingt ohel pimplemen tth evisio noutline dabov ei twil lnee dt ochang ecurren t funding strategies.The yshoul dsto pdemandin gtha tprotecte dare asystem si nth eGuinean - CongolianFores t Regionbecom eaut ofinance d inth eforeseeabl e future. Rathertha ninves t atbes ti nrisk yalternativ eeconomi cventures ,suc ha secotourism ,donor sshoul d investthei r moneyi nestablishin gmechanisms ,suc ha strus tfunds , forstabl ean dsustainabl esourc eo f revenuet ofinance th econsiderabl erecurren tcost so fth epropose dprotecte dare asystem . Userfees , including safari hunting andnatur etourism ,hav eth epotentia lt o generate substantial revenue for protected areas,bu t onlyi na limite dnumbe r ofcase si n theGuinean-Congolia n ForestRegion .Eve nunde rth ebes to fcircumstances ,thes e fees willb efa r from sufficient tomanag e eventh eexistin gprotecte d area system.Th esimpl e fact remainstha t ifth e international communityvalue sth ebiodiversit y ofth e Guinean- Congolian Forest Region iti sgoin gt ohav et opa yth ecosts .I recommen d thatthi s shouldb eachieve db yestablishin genvironmenta l trustfund s for individualareas , managedb y(semi)-privat e national institutes,possibl y in alarge rnationa l orregiona l framework. Thesourc eo fcapita li smos t likelyt ocom efro m multilateral donors, especially underpressur e ofa potentia l clean development mechanism (CDM)withi nth e Kyotoprotocol ,bilatera ldonor so rprivat eorganizations .However ,th epotentia lo f private sectorcorporatio n contribution orcorporat e sponsoring shouldb e further investigated.

Acknowledgments

Iwoul dlik et othan kth eWorl dWildlif e Fund,Inc .(USA )an dth eWorl dWid e Fundfo rNatur e(Germany) ,an dth edifferen t Governmentagencie sfo r supportingthi s research.Th elat eUrbai nNgatou aan dal lth estaf f ofth eDzanga-Sangh aProjec twer e essentiali nmakin gthi shappen .I than kChlo eCipollett aan dal lth estaf f andstudent s at BaiHoko ufo rthei rcollaboration . Iwoul dlik et oacknowledg eth eStat eUniversit yo fNe w Yorka tSton yBroo kfo rprovidin gth eopportunit yt ous ethei rfacilitie s duringth ewritin g ofthi spaper . Ia mgratefu l toHerber tPrins ,Aren dBrunsting ,Igna sHeitkonig ,Davi d Wilkiean dNatash a Shahfo rthei rconstructiv e commentso nth emanuscript .

References

AvelingC (1996 )Updat eo ngorill anew sfro m theECOFA Cprogramme .Gorill a ConservationNew s: (10) :7-9 .

AvelingC ,an dAvelin gR (1989 )Gorill aconservatio ni nZaire .Ory x23: (2) : 64-70.

Balmford A,an dGasto nK J(1999 )Wh ybiodiversit ysurvey sar egoo dvalue .Natur e: (398): 204-205.

150 BermejoM (1997 )Stud yo fwester n lowlandgorilla si nth eLoss ifores t ofNort hCong oan d apilo tgorill atouris mplan .Gorill aconservatio nnew s// : 6-7.

Bermejo M(1999 )Updat eo nth eLoss igorilla sstud yan dfutur e sancuary ofgorillas ,1998 , PopularRepubli co fCongo .Gorill aconservatio nnew s 13:.

BlomA (1999 )Te nyear sDzanga-Sangh a Project: "Dzanga-Sangha Project". Bangui, RCA: Dzanga-Sangha Project, pp.17 .

BlomA (i nprep. )A nestimat eo fth erecurren tcost so fbiodiversit yconservatio nthroug ha systemo fprotecte darea si nth eGuiena-Congolia n ForestRegion .Worl d Wildlife Fund.

BlomA ,Aler sMPT ,Feistne rATC ,Barne sRFW ,an dJense nK L(1992 )Note so nth e currentstatu san ddistributio no fprimate si nGabon .Oryx :(26) : 223-234.

BlomA ,Kamde mToha mA ,D'Amic oJ ,O'Har aD ,Abel lR ,an dOlso nD (inprep. ) Assessment ofbiologica lpriorirtie sfo rconservatio ni nth e Guinean-Congolian ForestRegion .Washington , DC:Worl dWildlif e Fund..

BooE (1990 )Ecotourism :th epotential san dpitfalls .Washington :Worl dWildlif e Fund.

BrandonK (1996 )Ecotouris man dConservation :A Revie wo fKe yIssues .Environmen t DepartmentPapers ,Biodiversit y Series,Worl dBank :(33) : 69.

ButynskiT ,an dKalin aJ (1998a )I sGorill aTouris m Sustainable?Gorill aJournal :(16) : 15- 19.

ButynskiTM ,an dKalin aJ (1998b )Gorill aTourism :A critica llook .I nE JMilner-Gullan d andR Mac e(eds.) :Conservatio no fbiologica lresources .Oxford : Blackwell Science,pp .294-370 .

CarrollR W(1986 )Th eStatus ,Distribution ,an dDensit yo fth eLowlan dGorill a(Gorill a gorillagorill a(Savag e& Wyman)),fores t elephant(Loxodont aafrican a cyclotis, andassociate dden sfores t fauna inth esouthwester nCentra lAfrica n Republic: researchtoward sth eestablishmen t ofa reserv efor .Ne wHaven :Yal eUniversit y Schoolo fForesatr yan dENvironmenta lStudies ,pp .82 .

CarrollR W(1987 ) so fth eC.A.R .Malimbu s 10: (10): .

CarrollR W(1988 )Relativ edensity ,rang eextention,an dconservatio npotentia lo fth e Lowlandgorill a(Gorill agorill agorill ai nth eDzanga-Sangh aregio no fsouthwester n CentralAfric a Republic.Mammali a52: (3) : 310-323.

CarrollR W(1997 )Feedin gecolog yo fth ewester nLowlan dGorilla s(Gorill agorill a gorilla)i nth eCentra lAfrica n Republic,Yal eUniversity ,Ne whaven .

151 Cater E, and Lowman GE (1994) Ecotourism: a sustainable option? (p.1-101). Wiley: Chichester: Wiley.

Conservancy TN (1995) Compatible Economic Development: Ecotourism: The Nature Conservancy.

Doran D, McNeilage A, and DemmersP (1996) Mondika Research center, Central African Republic. Gorilla Conservation News : (10): 9.

Doran DM, and McNeilage A (1998) Gorilla ecology and behavior. Evolutionary Anthroplogy 6:(4) : 120-129.

Doumenge C, Garcia Juste J-E,Gartla n S, Langrand O, andNding a A (in prep.) Conservation de labiodiversit e foretiere en Afrique atlantique: leresea u d'aires protegees est-il adequat? table of MS ;.

Durbin JC (1996) Can tourism make a major contribution to conservation ofprotecte d areas inMadagascar ? Biodiversity and conservation: (5):345-353 .

Fay JM (1989) Partial completion of a cencus ofth e western Lowland gorilla (Gorilla g. gorilla (Savage and Wyman)) in southwestern Central Africa Republic. Mammalia 53: (2):203-215 .

Fay JM (1997) The ecology, social organization, populations,habitat and history of the Western Lowland Gorilla (Gorilla gorilla gorilla Savage and Wyman, 1847), Washington University.

Fossey D (1983)Gorilla s inth emist . Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.

Gartlan S (1992) Cameroon. In JA Sayer, CS Harcourt and NM Collins (eds.): The conservation oftropica l forests: Africa. Hants: IUCN, Macmillan Publishers Ltd, pp. 110-118.

Goldsmith ML (1996) Ecological influences on the ranging and grouping behaviour of werstern lowland gorillas at Bai Hokou, Central African Republic, State University of New York at Stony Brook, New York, Stony Brook.

Goldsmith ML (1999)Ecologica l constraints on the foraging effort ofwerster n lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) at Bai Hokou, Central African Republic. International Journal of Primatology 20: (1): 1-23.

Goldsmith ML (2000) Effects of ecotourism on the behavioral ecology of Bwindi gorillas, Ugnada: preliminairyresults . American Journal of Physical Anthropology AAPA Abstracts Supplement 30: 161.

152 HarcourtA H(1986 )Gorill aconservation :anatom yo fa campaign .I nK Ernischk e(ed.) : Primates:th eroa dt oself-sustainin g populations. NewYork :Springer-Verlag .

HowardP ,Viskani cP ,Davenpor tT ,Kigeny iF ,Baltze rM ,Dickinso n C,Lwang aJ , MatthewsR ,an dBalmfor d A(1998 )Complementarit yan dth eus eo findicato r groupsfo rreserve . Nature 394: 472-475.

InskeepE (1992 )Achievin gsustainabl etouris mdevelopment .WTO-News. :(6) : 4-6.

IUCN(1994 )abstrac to ndefinition sfrom: Guideline sfo rprotecte darea smanagemen t categories.Cambridge ,U Kan dGland , Switzerland:IUCN .

IUCN(1998 ) 1997Unite dNation slis to fprotecte dareas .Glan d& Cambridge:: WCMC/IUCN.

KalemaG (1998 )A noutbrea ko fsarcopti cmang ei nfree-ranging mountia ngorilla s(Gorill a gorillaberengei )i nBwind iImpenetrabl eNationa lPark ,Sout hwerster nUganda . AAZVan dAAW Vjoin t conference,pp . 438.

KlausG (1998 )Natura llick san dgeophag y(soi lingestion )b ylarg emamma lspecie si nth e rainforest ofth eCentra lAfrica n Republic,Universita tZurich ,Zurich .

KlausG ,Klaus-Hug iC ,an dSchmi dB (1998 )Geophag yb ylarg emammal sa tnatura llick s inth erainfores t ofte hDzang aNationa lPark ,Centra l African Republic.Journa lo f TropicalEcology : (14): 829-839.

Klaus-HugiC S(1998 )Hom erange ,feedin g behaviouran dsocia lorganizatio no fth ebong o (Tragelaphuseurycerus )i nth erainfores t ofth eCentra lAfrica n Republic, Universitat Zurich,Zurich .

LangholzJ (1996 )Ecotouris m impacto nindependantl y ownednatur ereserve si nLati n Americaan dSub-Sahara nAfrica . TheEcotouris mEquation :Meausurin gth e Impacts.Yal eF&E SBulleti n .-.

Lanjouw A(1991 )Tong oChimpanze eConservatio nProject :a nexperimen ti nlong-ter m conservation.Understandin g Chimpanzees Symposium.

Lanjouw A(1999 )Touris mau xgorille se nAfriqu e centrale.Canope e 13: 25-26.

LeakeyR (2000 )Extinction spas tan dpresent .Tim e755 :(17) : 35.

LindbergK (1991 )Policie sfo rmaximizin gnatur etourism' secologica lan deconomi c benefits: WorldResourc eInstitute ,pp .37pp .

Macfie L(1996 )Cas erepor to nscabie sinfectio n inBwind igorillas .Gorill ajournal :(13) : 19-20.

153 MaglioccaF (1999 ) 1998 Updateo nth egorilla so fth e OdzalaNationa lPark ,Popula r Republico fCongo .Gorill aConservatio nNew s: (13): .

MaglioccaF ,an dQueroui l S(1997 )Preliminair yrepor to nth eus eo fth eMaya-May anort h saline(Odza lNationa lPark ,Congo )b ylowlan dgorillas . GorillaConservatio nNew s .(11):5 .

Magliocca F,Queroui l S,an dGautie rHio nA (1999 )Populatio n Structurean dGrou p Compositiono fWester nLowlan dGorilla si nNorth-Wester nRepubli c ofCongo . AmericanJourna lo fPrimatolog y 48: (1): 1-14.

McNeilageA (1996 )Ecotouris man dmountai ngorilla si nth eVirung aVolcanoes .I nV Tayloran dN Dunston e(eds.) :Th eexploitatio no fmamma lpopulations .London : Chapmanan dHill ,pp .334-344 .

MudakikwaA B(1998 )A nindicato ro fhuma nimpact :gastrointestina lparasite so f mountaingorilla s(Gorill agorill aberengei )fro m theVirung avolcanoe sregion , centralAfrica . AAZVan dAAW Vjoin tconference ,pp . 436-437.

Navrud S,an dMungatan aE D(1994 )Environmenta l valuationi ndevelopin gcountrie s : the recreationalvalu eo fwildlif e viewing.Ecologica lEconomic s 11:(2) :135-151 .

Olejniczak C(1996 )Updat eo nth eMbel iBa igorill a study,Nouabale-Ndok iNationa lPark , Congo.Gorill aconservatio nnew s10: 6-7.

Olejniczak C(1997 ) 1996updat eo nth eMbel iBa igorill astudy ,Nouabale-Ndok inationa l park,Congo . Gorillaconservatio n news11: 7-10 .

PlumierJ F(1992 )Natur econservatio n inth enorther nregio no fth eCentra l African Republic.Tropicultura . 10: (4):163-165 .

RemisM (1995 )Effect s ofbod ysiz ean dsocia lcontex to nth earborea lactivitie so flowlan d gorillasi nth eCentra lAfrica n Republic. AmericanJourna l ofPhysica l Anthropology97: (4): 413-433.

RemisM (2000 )Preliminar yassessmen to fth eimpac to fhuma nactivitie so ngorill a (Gorillagorill agorilla )an dothe rwildlif e atDzanga-Sangh a Reserve,Centra l African Republic,.Ory x34: (1):.

RemisM J(1993 )Nestin gBehavio ro fLowlan dGorilla si nth eDzanga-Sang aReserve , CentralAfric a Republic:Implication s forPopulatio nEstimate san dUnderstandin g ofGrou pDynamics .Tropic s2: (4) : 245-255.

154 RemisM J(1994 )Feedin gecolog yan dpositiona lbehaviou ro fwester nlowlan dgorilla s (Gorillagorill agorilla )i nth ecentra lAfrica n Republic,Yal eUniversity ,Ne w Haven.

RemisM J(1997a )Rangin gan dGroupin gPattern so fa Wester nLowlan dGorill aGrou pa t BaiHokou ,Centra lAfrica n Republic.America nJourna lo fPrimatolog y : (43): 111- 133.

RemisM J(1997b )Wester n LowlandGorilla s (Gorillagorill agorilla )a sSeasona l Frugivores:Us eo fVariabl eResources .Am .Journ .o fPrim. :(4) :87-109 .

RemisM J(1999 )Tre estructur ean dse xdifference s inarbrealit yamon gwester nlowlan d gorillas(Gorill agorill agorilla )a tBa iHokou ,Centra lAfrica n Republic.Primate s 40: (2): 383-396.

RobinsonJ G(1993 )Limit st ocaring :sustainabl elivin gan dth elos so fbiodiversity . ConservationBiolog y7: 20-28.

SayerJ A(1992 )Zaire .I nJ ASayer ,C SHarcour tan dN MCollin s(eds.) :Th econservatio n oftropica lforests :Africa . Hants:IUCN ,Macmilla nPublisher sLtd ,pp .272-282 .

ShackleyM (1995 )Th efutur e ofgorill atouris mi nRwanda .Journa lo fSustainabl e Tourism.3: (2) : 61-72.

SholleyC R(1989 )Mountai ngorill aupdate .Ory x. • (23): 57-58.

SpergelB ,Wilki eDS ,an dBlo mA (i nprep. )Prospect sfo r sustainablefinancin g of protectedarea si nth eCong oBasi nthroug huse r fees.:.

TELESIS(1991 )Sustainabl eeconomi cdevelopmen t optionsfo rth eDzanga-Sangh a Reserve,Centra lAfrica n Republic.USA :TELESIS , Inc.

TELESIS(1993 )Supplementar y studyo fth esustainabl eeconomi cdevelopmen t optionsfo r theDzanga-Sangh a Reserve,Centra lAfrica n Republic.USA :TELESIS , Inc.

TobiasD ,an dMendelsoh nR (1991 )Valuin gecotouris mi na tropica lrain-fores t reserve. Ambio.20: (2):91-93 .

TutinCEG ,an dAberneth yK A(1997 ) Stationd'Etud ede sGorille se tChimpanzes ,Reserv e del aLope ,Gabon .Gorill aConservatio nNew s .(11):.

TutinCEG ,Aberneth yKA ,an dFontain eF (1996 )Statio nd'Etud ede sGorille se t Chimpanzes,Reserv ed el aLope ,Gabo n-1995 .Gorill aConservatio nNews : (10): 4-5.

155 TutinCEG ,an dFernande zM (1991 )Response so fwil dchimpanzee san dgorilla st oth e arrivalo fprimatologists :behaviou robserve ddurin ghabituation . InB H.O .(ed.) : Primateresponse st oenvironmenta l change. NewYork :Chapma n and Hall,pp . 187-196.

UN(1993 ) 1993 Unitednation sLis to fNationa lpark san dprotecte dareas . www.wcmc.org.uk/cgi-bin/pa_paisquery:.

UNUNDPWT O(1998 )Pla ndirecteu rpou rl edeveloppemen td utourisme ,republiqu e Centrafricaine, volune 1: diagnosticse torientations :"Unite dNation sDevelopmen t Program& Worl dTouris m Organization,Madrid" .Madrid :Unite dNation s Development Program & WorldTouris mOrganization .

WallisJ ,an dD.R .L (i nprep. )Primat econservation :th epreventio no fdiseas etransmission . :27p.

WellsM P(1996 )Economi cPerspective so nNatur eTourism ,Conservatio nan d Development. Environment DepartmentPapers ,Environmenta l EconomicsSeries , WorldBank : (5):54p .

WilkieDS ,an dCarpente rJ F(1999a )Ca nnatur etouris mhel pfinanc e protectedarea si nth e CongoBasin ?Ory x33: (4) : 332-338.

WilkieDS ,an dCarpente r JF(1999b )Th epotentia lrol eo fsafar i huntinga sa sourc eo f revenuefo rprotecte darea si nth eCong oBasin .Ory x33: (4) : 339-345.

WilkieDS ,Carpente rJF ,an dZhan gQ (i npress )Th eunder-financin g ofprotecte darea si n theCong oBasin :s oman ypark san ds olittl ewillingness-to-pay . Biodiversityan d Conservation:.

WilksC ,an dIUC NTropica lFores tProgramme .(1990 )L aconservatio nde secosysteme s forestiers duGabon .Gland ,Suisse :UIC Nl'Allianc emondial epou rl anatur e: Commissionde sCommunaute s europeennes.

WilsonE O(2000 )Vanishin gbefor e oureyes .Tim e155: (17): 29-34.

156 Summary TheGuinean-Congolia n ForestRegio ni son eo fth elas tgrea twildernes sarea s remainingo nth eplanet ,wher elarg emammal sstil ldwel lunde rnatura lregime so f populationfluctuation s andmigrations .I ngeneral ,th epotentia lfo rbiodiversit y conservationi nthi sregio ni sexceptionall ygood ,althoug honl y6. 7% o fth elandscap ei s protectedunde rlaw ,an dman yo fthes econservatio narea sar eprotecte donl yo npaper . The international conservation communityenvision sth ecreatio no fa neffectiv e managedsyste m ofprotecte darea scoverin gabou t 135,000km 2i nth eGuinean-Congolia n Forestblock ,a n increaseo f76,00 0k m . Giventh efac ttha teve nth eexistin gprotecte dare ai sseverel y under-financed, thiswoul drequir e anestimate d investmento fove r$1. 3billio ni nth enex t tenyears ,wit ha nadditiona l $100millio nneede deac hyea rafte r thatt ocove rrecurren t costs. Inthi sstudy ,w ecriticall yexamine dth estatu so fprotecte darea san dgazette d forests inon eo fth ecountrie so fthi sregion ,th eCentra lAfrica n Republic (CAR).Th eCA Rha s1 5 protectedarea scoverin gabou t 10.9% o fth ecountry ,wit ha nadditiona l 1.0 %se tasid ea s gazettedforests . Thegazette d forests aremainl yintende dfo rth esustainabl eproductio no f forest resources.Ou ranalysi sshow stha tonl y3 2% o fth eprotecte darea san donl y2 o fth e 47gazette dforest s areadequatel ymanaged .Poachin gpose sth elarges tthrea tt obiodiversit y conservation,an di nnon eo fth eprotecte darea swa sla wenforcemen t sufficient toentirel y controlpoaching . Wemonitore dho whuma nactivitie saffecte d largemammal si non erelativel ywell - managedprotecte dare ao fth eCAR ,th eDzanga-Sangh a ProtectedAre aComplex . The Dzanga-Sangha complexconsist so ftw oseparat e sectorso fth eDzanga-Ndok iNationa l Park,an dth eDzanga-Sangh a DenseFores t SpecialReserve ,whic hfunction s asa buffer zonefo rth enationa lpark . Monthlymonitorin go flarg emammal san dhuma nsign s from January 1997 toAugus t 1999 confirmed thatpoachin gremain sa proble mi nthi sprotecte d area. Elephantsan dmonkey swer esignificantl y lesscommo ni narea sregularl yuse db y humans,suc ha sclos et oth emai nroads .Ou rstud yals ofoun devidenc etha tpoacher suse d secondary (logging)road st openetrat e intoth enationa lpark .Th emai nreaso ntha tla w enforcement isinsufficien t here,an delsewher ei nth eCAR ,i slac ko fsustainabl e funding. Tourism,especiall yinvolvin gap eviewing ,ha sbee npromote da sa viabl eoptio nt o generate significant revenuefo rprotecte d areas.W eteste dthi shypothesi si nDzanga - Sangha,a nare awit hon eo fth ebes topportunitie sfo r asuccessfu l ecotourismventur ei nth e Guinean-CongolianFores tRegion .W ecarrie dou tsurvey so fth ediurna lprimate si nth e Dzangasecto ro fth epar ki norde rt oestimat egorill aan dchimpanze edensities .Base do n thelin etransec tsurve ymetho dw eestimate da densit yo f 1.6weane dgorillas/km 2. This estimateconfirme d theimportanc eo fth eare afo rwester nlowlan dgorill a{Gorilla gorilla gorilla) conservationan dunderline dth epotentia lo fdevelopin ga touris mventur ebase do n gorillaviewing . Gorillahabituation ,whic hwa spar to fthi sstudy ,wa sinitiate di nth eDzang asecto r ofth enationa lpar ki nAugus t 1996an di sstil longoing . Datao nth ehabituatio nproces s from August 1996t oDecembe r 1999 arepresente dhere .Fro mAugus t 1998onwards , we wereabl et ofocu sth ehabituatio nproces so non especifi c gorillagroup ,th eMunye .Durin g thispar to fth estudy ,ou rai mwa st omonito rth eimpac to fth ehabituatio nproces so nth e gorillasthroug hchange si nth egorillas 'behavior .A shabituatio nprogressed , itbecam e easiert olocat ean dt oremai nwit hth egorillas .Upo nbein gcontacted ,th eMuny egrou p

157 increasinglyignore dth eobserver srathe rtha nexhibitin gth einitia lreaction so faggression , fear, andvocalization ,whic hwer emor ecommo nearl yi nth ehabituatio nprocess .Th ewa y inwhic hcontact swit hth eMuny eende dals obecam emor esubdue dove rtime .However , habituationdi dinitiall yhav enegativ eimpact so nth egorillas :rangin gdat aindicat etha tth e averagedail ypat hlengt ho fth eMuny egrou pdiminishe dove rtime ,indicatin gtha tth e groupwa srangin gfurthe r (avoidingth eobservers )a tth ebeginnin go fth estudy .Fro mou r results,w econclud etha tth egorilla sexperienc enegativ eimpact sdurin gth ehabituatio n process,bu ttha tthes eimpact sd odiminis hove rtime .Althoug hhabituatin g gorillast oallo w touristst ovie wthes eanimal si sfeasible , itrequire sa substantia linvestmen ti ntim ean d moneyan di sno twithou trisks . Ourexperienc ewit hth eMuny egrou pals oprovide ssevera l specific recommendations forth ehabituatio nprocess .Regula rdail ycontac tseem st ob e an important factor inpromotin ghabituation .Likewise ,contactin ggorilla swhil ethe yar ei n a treeo ri ndens efores t seemst oprovid ebette rresults .O nth eothe rhand ,contact swithi n1 0 metersan dcontact swithou t forewarning thegorilla s(achieve di nou rstud yb ytongu e clacking)shoul db eavoided . Ouranalyse so fth emonetar yimpac to ftouris mi nDzanga-Sangh a onth eprotecte d areamanagemen t andth eloca leconom ydemonstrat etha tprio rt oth egorilla-viewin g option,touris mwa sunabl et obecom eself-financing . Tourism,wit ho rwithou tgorill a viewing,i sunlikel yt oprovid esufficien t revenuet ocove rth eoperatin gcost so fth epar k andth ereserve .O nth eothe rhand ,th eimpac to ftouris mo nth eloca leconom yi ssubstantia l andfacilitate s therelation sbetwee nth econservatio nprojec t andth eloca lcommunity .Eve n thoughthi styp eo ftouris mca nbrin gimportan tgain st oth eregion ,suc ha srevenu ean d employment,manager shav et ocarefull y weighthes eadvantage sagains tth eapes 'wel l beingan dth erisk yeconomic so ftouris mi nCentra lAfric a before decidingo nhabituatin g theseapes . Giventh efac ttha tDzanga-Sangh aprovide son eo fth ebes topportunitie sfo rthi s typeo ftouris mi nth eGuinean-Congolia nFores tRegio nan dtha teve nher eth eeconomi c successi shighl yquestionable ,i ti sunlikel ytha tnatur etouris mwil lb ea realisti coptio ni n buta fe wexceptiona lplace si nthi spar to fth eworld . Thiscas estud yclearl ydemonstrate s thatalthoug h someuse rfee s haveth epotentia lt ogenerat esubstantia lrevenu e forprotecte d areasi nth eGuinean-Congolia n ForestRegion ,thes efee s willb efa r from sufficient to manageth epropose dprotecte dare asystem . Thus,i fth einternationa l donorcommunit y isseriou sabou tbiodiversit y conservation,the ynee dt ochang ethei rfundin g strategies. Rathertha ninvestin gi nrisk y alternativeeconomi cventure ssuc ha secotourism ,donor sshoul dinves tthei rmone yi n establishingmechanisms ,suc ha strus t funds, fora stabl ean dsustainabl esourc eo frevenu e tofinanc eth econsiderabl erecurren tcost so fth epropose dprotecte dare asystem .

158 Samenvatting

DeGuinean-Congoles eBo sRegi oi see nva nd elaatst-overgebleve n grotewildernis - gebiedente rwereld ,waa rd emega-faun a nogsteed sonderhevi gi saa n natuurlijke fiuctuaties inhu ndichthede ne nno gvrijblijven d kunnenmigreren .I nhe talgemee ni she t potentieelvoo rnatuurbeschermin gi ndez eregi ouitzonderlij k goed,alhoewe l slechts6, 7% vanhe tlandscha pwettelij k beschermdi se nee nbelangrij k aantalva ndez ebeschermd e gebiedenslecht so ppapie rbestaan .D einternational enatuurbescherming sgemeenscha p hooptee neffectie f beheerdsystee mva nbeschermd egebiede nt ecreere nda t 135.000km 2 vanhe tGuinean-Congoles e Bosza lbeschermen ,ee ntoenam eva n76.00 0km 2.Gezie nhe t feit dathe thuidig e systeemva nbeschermd egebiede na lgrot egeldtekorte nheeft , vraagtdi t voorgesteldesystee mee ninvesterin gva nmee rda n 1,3miljar d dollarove rd ekomend etie n jaar.N adez eeerst einvesterin gi se rno geen s$10 0milljoe nnodi gpe rjaa ro md elopend e kostent edekken . Indez estudi e onderzochten wed ehuidig etoestan dva n debeschermd e gebieden alsmedeva nd egeclasseerd ebosse n ind eCentraa l Afrikaanse Republiek (CAR),ee nva n delande n indez eregio .D eCA Rheef t 15 beschermde gebieden metee noppervlakt eva n ongeveer 10,9% va nhe ttotal elan dme tdaarnaas tno geen s 1,0 % in geclasseerde bossen. Degeclasseerd ebosse n zijn metnam ebedoel d voord eduurzam eproducti eva n hout. Onzeanalys eva nd esituati egeef t aanda t slechts 32% va nd ebeschermd e gebieden en slecht 2va nd e4 7 geclasseerde bossen effectief beheerdworden .He t grootste gevaarvoo rd enatuurbeschermin g isd e stroperij eni ngee nva nd ebeschermd e gebieden wasd erechtshandhavin g voldoende omd estroperi j geheelonde r controlet e houden. Inhe tDzanga-Sangh abeschermd e complex,ee nva nd erelatie f goedbeheerd e natuurgebieden inCAR ,onderzochte n weho emenselijk e activiteiten invloedhebbe no p demega-fauna . HetDzanga-Sangh abeschermd e complexbestaa t uittwe e stukkenva n hetDzanga-Ndok iNational e Parke nhe tDzanga-Sangh a Speciale BosReservaat , datee n bufferzone vormtvoo rhe tnational epark .Onz emaandelijks e controleva npermanent e transecten opspore nva nmense ne ngrot ezoogdiere nva njanuar i 1997to taugustu s 1999 toonde aanda t stroperij nog steedsee nproblee m isi ndi tbeschermd e gebied.I ngebiede n regelmatigbezoch t doormensen , zoalsrandom wegen ,ware n olifanten enape n significant minder aanwezig. Onzestudi evon d ookbewij s voorhe t feit datstroper s gebruikmake nva n secundaire (bosbouw) wegeno mhe tnational epar kbinne nt e dringen.O nvoldoend e financiering opd elang etermij n isee nva nd ehoofdredene n dat handhaving encontrol eonvoldoend e waren indi te nander e gebieden ind eCAR . Toerisme,inclusie f deopti eva nhe t observeren vanmensapen ,word tbevorder d alsee nva nd eoptie so mvoldoend e inkoment elevere n voorhe tbehee rva nbeschermd e natuurgebieden. Omt ezie n ofdez eopti e realistisch isi ndez ebosregi oonderzochte n wij desituati ei nDzanga-Sangha ,waa rd emogelijkhede n vooree ndergelijk e onderneming totd ebest e ind eregi obehoren .Allereers t maakten weee n schattingva n dedichthede n vanmensape n ind eDzanga-secto r vanhe tpark .Gebaseer d opd eresultate n vanonz e transecten schattenwi j dedichthei d vannest-bouwend e gorillas (allegorilla sbehalv e babies) op 1,6 individuen perkm 2.Dez ehog e dichtheidbevestigd e hetbelan gva n Dzanga-Sangha voord ebeschermin gva nd ewesterlijk e laaglandgorill a(Gorilla gorilla

159 gorilla) enonderstreept e demogelijkhede n vanhe tontwikkele n van eentoerism e gebaseerd ophe tobservere n vangorilla s inhe twild . Hethabituere n vangorillas ,da tonderdee l uitmaakte van deze studie,wer d ondemomeni nd eDzanga-secto r vanafaugustu s 1996e ngaa t nog steedsdoor . Wij presenteren hier deresultate n vanhe thabituatie-proces s tussen augustus 1996 en december 1999.Vana faugustu s 1998,ware n wij in staat omhe t habituatie-process to concentreren opee n specifieke groep,d eMunye .On sdoe lgedurend e dit gedeelteva nd e studiewa so m teobservere n hoehe thabituatie-proces s het gedragva n degorilla s beinvloedt.Naarmat ed ehabituati e vorderdewer d hetgemakkelijke r omd egorilla st e vinden eno mbi j zet eblijven . DeMuny egroe pnegeerd eon smee re nmee rwannee rw e contactmaakte ne nvertoond e minder,zoal s inhe tbegin ,agressie ,angs t en schreeuwen. Daarnaast werd demanie rwaaro phe tcontac t eindigde ookgeleidelij k kalmer. Habituatie had echter inhe tbegi n zekernegatiev e effecten opd egorillas : dedagelijks e reisafstand vand eMuny e groepwer d geleidelijk korter,wa taanga f dat degorilla s debezoeker s ontweken inhe tbegi nva nhe t habituatie-process. Onzeconclusie ,gebaseer d oponz e resultaten geeft aanda tgorilla snegatiev e effecten ondervonden alsgevol gva nhe t habitueren,maa rda tdez eeffecte n ind eloo pde rtij d afnamen. Alhoewelhe t habitueren mogelijk blijkt tezijn , vraagthe t grote investeringen en isnie tzonde r risico. Onzeervaringe n met deMuny e groep leiddento tenig e specifieke aanbevelingen voorhe thabitueren . Regelmatigdagelijk s contactme td egorilla s isbelangrij k voorhe t habitueren. Contact makenme t degorilla s indicht evegetati e ofwannee r zei nee nboo m zijn lijkt ookpositiev e resultaten tegeven .Daa rtegenove r staat datcontacte nbinne n1 0 metere ncontacte n zonderd egorilla sva nt evore nt ewaarschuwe n (indez estudi edoo rt e klakken metd etong )moete nworde n vermeden. Onzeanalys e overd egeldstrome n inverban d methe tbehee re nd elokal e economiei nDzanga-Sangh a voord eaanvan g vanhe tgorilla-toeris m wezenero pda t toerismenie t in staatwa szichzel ft efinancieren . Heti sonwaarschijnlij k dattoerisme , met ofzonde rd eopti eva n gorillaobservatie , in staat iso mvoldoend e inkoment e genereren omd ekoste n vanhe tbehee rva nhe tnational epar ke nhe treservaa tt e financieren. Aand eander ekan t ishe twe lz oda ttoerism ebelangrij k isvoo r delokal e economie enheef t bijgedragen totbeter e relatiestusse n debeheerder s van Dzanga- Sanghae nd elokal ebevolking .Alhoewe ltoerism edu sbelangrijk e bijdragen kanlevere n tot delokal e economie,i nd evor mva n inkomen enwerk ,moete nbeheerder s deze voordelen afwegen tegen hetwelzij n van degorilla s end eriskante investeringe n in toerismei ncentraa l Afrika voordatee nbeslissin gove rhabituere nword tgenomen . Gezienhe tfei t datDzanga-Sangh a eenva nd ebest egelegenhede nbied tvoo rhe t ontwikkelenva nee ndergelij k typeva ntoerism ei nd eGuinean-Congoles e BosRegi oe nda t zelfshie rhe teconomisc hsucce sva nee ndergelijk e ondernemingtwijfelachti g is,i she t onwaarschijnlijk datecotoerism eee nrealistisch eopti ei si ndez eregio ,ee naanta l uitzonderlijke plaatsen daargelaten .Dez estudi elaa tduidelij k zienda tofschoo n eenaanta l gebruikersbijdragen demogelijkhei d biedvoo rbelangrijk e inkomstenvoo rbeschermd e gebiedeni ndez eregio ,dez ehonorari abi j langen anie tvoldoend einkomste n leverenvoo r hetfinanciere n vanhe tbehee rva nhe tvoorgesteld esystee mva nnatuurbeschermings - gebieden. Alshe tdu sd e international gemeenschap ernst isme td enatuurbeschermin gda n moetd efinancierings-strategieen worde n gewijzigd. Inplaat s van teinvestere n in

160 riskante alternatieve economische opties,zoal secotoerisme ,zo uhe tbete r zijn omt e investeren infinanciele constructies , zoalsfondse n (trustfunds) , vooree nstabiel ee n langdurige bronva ninkomste no md eaanzienlijk e kostenva nhe tbehee rva nhe t voorgestelde systeemva nnatuurbescermings-gebiede nt e financieren.

161 Resume

LaRegio n Forestiere Guinneo-Congolaise estun ede sderniere s grandes regions intactes surl aplanete ,o ugrand smammifere s vivent encore sousu nregim e natureld e fluctuation etd emigration . Engeneral ,l apotentialit epou rl aconservatio n del a biodiversite danscett eregio n est exceptionnelle, etbie n que6,7 %d upaysag e soient protegespa rl a loi,beaucou pd ece szone sson tuniquemen tprotegee ssu rpapier .L a communauteinternational e de laconservatio n envisage lacreatio nd'u n systemed e gestion efficace desaire sprotegee s couvrant environ 135.000km 2dan sl eblo c forestier guinneo-congolais, 76.000km 2d eplus .Etan t donne quemem ele saire sprotegee s existantesmanquen t de financement, celarequier t un investissement estime aplu sd e 1,3 milliardsd edollar sdan sle sdi xan s avenir ,ave cun eadditio nd e 100millio nd edollar s necessaires tousle san sapre scela ,pou r couvrirle sdepense speriodique sd e fonctionnement. Danscett e etude,nou savon s examineave ccritiqu e lestatu tde saire sprotegee se t desforet s classees dansu nde spay sd ecett e region,l aRepubliqu e Centrafricaine (RCA). LaRC Aabrit e 15aire sprotegee s couvrant environ 10,9%d upays ,ave ce nplu s 1,0% etabliescomm eforet s classees.Le sforet s classees sontprincipalemen t destinees al a production durablede sressource sforestiers .Notr eanalys e montrequ eseulemen t32 % desaire sprotegee s et2 de s4 7foret s classees sont gerees convenablement. Le braconnagerepresent e leplu sgran ddange rpou rl aconservatio n del abiodiversite ,e t dansaucun e dece saire sprotegee si ly au nrenforcemen t suffisant desloi spou rl e controle dubraconnage . Nousavon s observe etanalys e comment lesactivite s humaines affectent les grandsmammifere s dansun eair eprotege e relativement bien geree duRCA ,l ecomplex e des airesprotegee sd eDzanga-Shanga . LeComplex eDzanga-Shang a consiste endeu x secteurs distincts :l ePar eNationa l deDzanga-Ndoki ,e tl aReserv e Speciale deFore t Densed eDzanga-Shang a qui fonctionne commeun ezon etampo nd uPar eNational .L e suivi mensuel desgrand smammifere s etde strace s d'activiteshumaine s deJanvie r 1997 aAou t 1999confirm e quel ebraconnag e resteu nproblem edan scett e aireprotegee .Le s elephantse t lessinge s etaient significativement moinscommun sdan sce sregion s regulierement utiliseespa r leshumains ,telle s quele szone sproche sde sgrande sroutes . Notre etudemontrai t egalement despreuve s quele sbraconnier s utilisaient desroute s secondaires (exploitation forestiere) pourpenetre r dansl ePar eNational .L emanqu ed e financement durablerepresent e laprincipal eraiso nd el'insuffisanc e durenforcemen t des loisdan sc ePare ,e tautr epar t enRCA . Letourisme ,specialemen t lesvisite s desgrand s singes,a et eprom ucomm eun e optionviabl epou rgenere r desrevenu s consequents pour lesaire sprotegees .Nou savon s testecett ehypothes e aDzanga-Shanga , uneregio n aun e desplu sgrand epotentialit e ecotouristique dansl aRegio nForestier e Guinneo-Congolaise. Nousavon smen ede s etudes surle sprimate s diurnes dansl esecteu r Dzangad uPare ,dan sl ebu td'estime rle s densitesde sgorille se tde schimpanzes .Base e surl amethod ed utransec t enligne ,nou s avonsestim eun e densite de 1,6 gorilles sevres/km .Cett eestimatio n a confirme l'importanced el aconservatio n desgorille s debass eplain e (Gorillagorilla gorilla) del a region occidentale,e tell ea egalemen t souligne lapotentialit e dedeveloppe ru ntourism e d'aventuree td edecouvert e sur lesgorilles .

162 L'habituation desgorilles ,qu ietai tun eparti e decett e etude,a et einitie edan sl e secteurDzang a duPar eNationa l aumoi sd'Aou t 1996e tcontinu e encore.De sdonnee s sur leprocessu sd el'habituatio n dumoi sd'Aou t 1996a umoi s deDecembr e 1999son t presentees ici.A parti rd umoi sd'Aou t 1998,nou savon sp unou sconcentre r surl e processus d'habituation d'un groupe specifique degorilles ,l eMunye .Pendan tcett eparti e deetude ,notr ebu t aet ed'analyse r l'impact duprocessu s de l'habituation desgorille s a traversde schangement s decomportemen t dece sgorilles .A ucour sd uprocessu s d'habituation, iletai tdeven uplu sfacil e delocalise r lesgorille se td ereste r aveceux . Habitues auxcontacts ,le sgorille s dugroup e Munye ignoraient deplu se nplu sle s observateurs,alor squ'il smontraien tde sreaction s d'agressivite, depeur ; etd e vocalisation, quietaien tplu s communes audebu t duprocessu s d'habituation. La facon dont lescontact s avecl egroup e Munye ontpri sfin, devenai t egalement plusattenue e avecl etemps .Neanmoins , l'habituation ad uavoi rinitialemen t desimpact snegatif s sur lesgorilles .De sdonnee s surleur sdeplacement s indiquent quel amoyenn e dechemi n parcouru quotidiennement diminuait avec letemps ,indiquan t quel egroup e sedeplacai t (evitantle sobservateurs ) plus loinavan t ledebu tde setudes .Ave cno sresultats ,nou s avons conclu quele sgorille s enduraient desimpact snegatif s pendant leprocessu s d'habituation, maisce simpact snegatif s diminuaientave cl etemps .Bie nqu e l'habituation desgorille s aitrend upossibl e auxtouriste s dele svoir , celaa requi su n investissement substantiel entemp se tfinancierement, e tcel an' apa s ete sansrisque . Notre experience avecl egroup e Munyenou sa egalemen t donne denombreuse s recommandationspou rl eprocessu s d'habituation. Descontact sjournalier s etregulier s semblentetr eu nimportan t facteur pourpromouvoi r l'habituation. Dememe ,contactan t lesgorille s quandil sson t dansle sarbre s oudan sle sforet s denses semblefourni r debon s resultats.D'u n autre cote,de scontact s demoin sd e 10 metres etde scontact s sans prevenir lesgorille s (effectues dansnotr eetud e enclaquan t lalangue )doiven t etreevites . Nosanalyse s surl'impac t financier dutourism e aDzanga-Shang a surl agestio n del'Air eProtege e etsu r l'economie locale demontrentqu'avan t l'option "visitede s gorilles",l etourism en' apa sp udeveni rfinancierement autonome .L etourisme ,ave co u sansvisite sde sgorilles ,a pe ud echanc ed efourni r desrevenu ssuffisant s pourcouvri r lescout sd efonctionnemen t duPar ee td el aReserve .Pa rcontre ,l'impac t dutourism e sur l'economie localees t substantiel etfacilit e lesrelation s entre leproje t deconservatio n et lescommunaute slocales .Mem es ic egenr e detourism epeu t apporter desgain s importants al aregion ,comm ele srevenu sfinanciers e templois ,le s gestionnaires doivent peserave cprecautio n lesavantage sentr el ebien-etr ede sgorille se tle srisque s economiques dutourism e enAfriqu e Centrale avantd edecide r d'habituer cessinges . Etantdonn e queDzanga-Shang a fournit unede sgrande sopportunite s pourc e genred etourism edan sl aregio n forestiere deGuinneo-Congolaise , etqu emem el e succes economique esthautemen t discutable,e'es tpe uprobabl e quel'ecotourism e neser a uneoptio nrealist equ edan su nnombr erestrein td esite sexceptionnelle s danscett eparti e dumonde .L eca setudi e montreclairemen t malgreun egrand epotentialit e degenere rde s revenues substantiellespou r lesaire sprotegee sdan sl aregio n forestiere deGuine e Congolaise,qu ece sfrai s serontloi nd'etr esuffisant s pour gererl e systeme d'aireprotege e propose. Alors, sil acommunaut einternational e debailleur sd efond s estsoucieu x avecl a conservation del abiodiversite ,il son tbesoi n dechange rleu rstrategi cd e financement.

163 Plutotqu ed'investi r dansde salternative s economiquesaventureuse s et arisque stel squ e l'ecotourisme, lesbailleur s de fonds doivent investir dansl'etablissemen td umecanisme , telsqu ele sfond s fudiciaires, pourun e source stablee tdurabl e definancemen t descout s defonctionnemen t dusystem ed'air eprotege epropose .

164 Curriculum vitae Allard Blomwa sbor n onMa y 8, 1962i nBreda ,Th eNetherlands .H ehold s aB.Sc . ("KandidaatsDiploma" ) inBiolog y ofWageninge n University, anda M.Sc .("Ingenieur s Diploma") inBiolog y from the sameUniversity , withecolog y andwildlif e management asmai n subjects. Hisfirs t experience inAfric a wasi nGabon ,durin ghi sMSc .Whil ei n Gabonh eobtaine dhi sfirs tjo b in 1987carryin gou ta nation-wid e surveyo felephant s for Wildlife Conservation International. Thisprogra mwa sextende d withth e helpo fsevera l donors andpermitte d himt ocontinu e inEquatoria l Guinea andZaire ,wit ha brie fperio d atCambridg e inEnglan dt oanalyz eth edata .Thi swa sfollowe d by aperio d ofwor k asa consultant inIvor y Coast andKenya ,befor e takingth ejo b asWorl d Wildlife Fund (WWF)projec t director inth eItur i forest inZaire .Ther eh ehelpe d establish theOkap i Wildlife Reserve in 1992.Afte r theestablishmen t ofth ereserve ,th eprojec t was discontinued andh emove dt oth eCentra l African Republic inJanuar y of 1993t otak e overa sprincipa l technical advisor ofth e Dzanga-Sangha project. Between 1995an d 1998h ecombine dthi sjo bwit hth ejo b ofnationa lcoordinato r (countryrepresentative ) of WWFi nth e Central African Republic.Durin gthi sperio dh eobtaine d authorization and funding tose tu pth egorill ahabituatio n program.Whe nthi sprogra mbecam e fully operational he left hisjo b toconcentrat e onhi sPh.D .research .H elef t theCentra l African Republic atth e endo f 1999t o settle onLon g Islandclos et oth e State University ofNe wYor k at Stony Brook,wher eh ei sa nadjunc t professor, whilewritin g uphi s thesis.H ei splannin gt oretur n tocentra l Africa inth enea r future.

165 Printedby : Ponsen& Looijen , Wageningen, TheNetherland s Cover design:Willemie n Schouten Coverphotos :Allar dBlo m Gorillas,member s ofth eMuny e group intre e

Thisstud ywa s financially supported byth e World Wildlife Fund,Inc .- USAan d the World WideFun d forNatur e- Germany.