Historical Mammal Distribution Data: How Reliable Are Written Records? Research Article Boshoff & Kerley
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Historical mammal distribution data: How reliable are written records? Research Article Historical mammal distribution data: How reliable are written records? Authors: Andre F. Boshoff1 ABSTRACT Graham I.H. Kerley1 Written historical records are widely used to estimate the previous distributions of the larger mammals in southern Africa. However, such records have some limitations and the use of those Affiliation: older than 100 years has been questioned. Written historical records, from the broader Eastern 1Centre for African Cape, South Africa, were investigated to examine this contention critically. They were classified Conservation Ecology, according to record quality (acceptability of identification and precision of locality) and analysed Nelson Mandela according to two levels: ‘all’ species and ‘noticeable’ versus ‘non-noticeable’ species. Records Metropolitan University, that comprise acceptable identification and precise locality information are the most suitable for Port Elizabeth, South Africa mapping historical distributions; they form 33% of the records for the 27 mammal species analysed. A further 49% of the records have acceptable identification but imprecise locality information; they Correspondence to: can fulfil a useful function when supported by records where both parameters are of good quality. Andre Boshoff Thus, the majority (82%) of written historical records from the study area are useful for compiling historical distribution maps and the quality of these records is consistent back to 1750 for this email: data set. The number and quality of written historical records varies between species. Historical [email protected] distribution data should be evaluated for reliability (quality) and degree of usefulness, rather than simply discarded a priori. Postal address: Centre for African Conservation Ecology, Nelson Mandela INTRODUCTION Metropolitan University, Distributional data form the basis of the science of zoogeography, which has applications in, inter alia, Port Elizabeth 6031, ecology and conservation.1,2,3,4 These data are essential for establishing the link between the occurrence of South Africa 55 a species on a landscape and its typical habitat. They are also important for investigating the presence, South African Journal of Science absence or nature of spatial and temporal patterns and trends of a species across a landscape, as well Keywords: as guiding the restoration of species to areas from which they have been extirpated.6,7 The benefits of mammals; historical combining the (usually) parallel disciplines of environmental history (being primarily an interpretation distribution; written of the past) and conservation biology (which primarily seeks to shape the future) are largely the records; record reliability; Article #116 increased confidence in the understanding of distribution information, and hence implementation of translocation policy; any management actions.8 South Africa Historical distribution data refer to written records found in the diaries, journals and correspondence Dates: of people, most notably explorers, settlers, hunters, missionaries and naturalists during historical times, Received: 03 June 2009 namely that period for which such records are available. The value of historical distribution data has Accepted: 11 Dec. 2009 been widely recognised for aiding the reconstruction of animal assemblages for a region, over a certain Published: 11 Mar. 2010 time period, and for understanding the structure, function and processes of ecosystems by ecologists and conservation biologists.5,6,7,8,9,10,11 How to cite this article: Boshoff AF, Kerley GIH. There are many examples in the literature of the use of published historical distribution records, based Historical mammal on, inter alia, sightings, to estimate historical ranges of mammals (especially the larger ones) for a range distribution data: How of applications. For example, published historical information was used to describe changes in the reliable are written distribution of the caribou Rangifer tarandus in Quebec Province, Canada12, to measure range contractions records? S Afr J Sci. and expansions of North American carnivores and ungulates13, to determine historical mammal species 2010;106(1/2), Art. #116, richness in Canadian national parks14, to establish mammal distribution in the United States in the early 8 pages. DOI:10.4102/sajs. 19th century, based on the well-known Lewis and Clark journals15, to study global range contraction v106i1/2.116 dynamics16 and to identify areas where the establishment of protected areas is required for effective wildlife conservation in Africa.17 On a continental scale, for example in North America, oral narratives This article is available and actual field sightings have provided insight into historical mammal distribution.17,18 at: http://www.sajs.co.za In South Africa, historical distribution data have been used to inform the spatial distribution component of the conservation plan for the globally critically endangered black rhinoceros Diceros bicornis.19 The value placed on such data is exemplified by one of the principles that govern the re-establishment or removal of species into South Africa’s national parks, namely this ‘should only take place where there is good evidence that the species occurred in the area in historical times’.20 Notably, these data have provided the basis for determining national and regional policies and principles for the translocation of indigenous and alien mammals, as embodied in the National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act (Act 10 of 2004). Historical distribution data have also been successfully used for landscape-level conservation planning purposes for the larger mammals in the biodiversity-rich Cape Floristic Region.7,21 Notwithstanding the wide use of written historical records for depicting historical distributions of, inter alia, mammals, caution has been urged in the interpretation and use of some of these data.10 For example, the © 2010. The Authors. contents of historical documents, such as the journals kept by Lewis and Clark, must be ‘evaluated for their Licensee: OpenJournals accuracy and thoroughness’22, especially as far as ecological information is concerned.23 Identifications Publishing. This work can be problematic, with either no, short or inadequate descriptions of the species provided with the is licensed under the record. While large and charismatic species are relatively easy to identify from written accounts, this is Creative Commons not the case for taxa with many similar-appearing species.24 There were significant discrepancies in a Attribution License. series of ‘independent’ range maps of the gray wolf Canis lupus in North America, which were compiled http://www.sajs.co.za Vol. 106 No. 1/2 Page 1 of 8 S Afr J Sci 26 Research Article Boshoff & Kerley largely from museum specimens and the diaries and journals of TABLE 1 early trappers, hunters, settlers and explorers; problems with The number of historical (1750–1924) records (Types 2 and 3) for 27 species of medium- and large-sized mammals in the Eastern Cape, and the year when last identification and record location description are suggested as recorded, where appropriate (extracted from Skead29) two important reasons for these discrepancies.25 The pitfalls of written records, ranging over a variety of sources from No. of Year when last explorer’s accounts to local histories to census records, have Common name Scientific name records recorded been highlighted.26 Here, the principal problems in using written Klipspringer Oreotragus oreotragus 3 Extant evidence relate to nomenclature (compounded by the lack of Brown hyaena Parahyaena brunnea 4 1919 widely accepted names), geographical location (exacerbated by a lack of geographical knowledge) and the personal biases of Gemsbok Oryx gazella 4 1845 authors. Mountain reedbuck Redunca fulvorufula 4 Extant Serval Leptailurus serval 6 Extant In the South African context, certain weaknesses in early Cheetah Acinonyx jubatus 8 1888 (historical) distribution records have been highlighted.11,24,27,28,29 Recently, it has been postulated that while there is a high level Bushpig Potamochoerus larvatus 11 Extant of certainty attached to historical distribution records from Southern reedbuck Redunca arudinum 11 Extant the past 100 years, this decreases rapidly between 100 and Cape warthog Phacochoerus 12 1863 500 years ago and therefore records from more than 100 years aethiopicus ago may have limited value.30 In this discourse, however, it is important to distinguish between the different types of historical Grey rhebok Pelea capreolus 12 Extant distribution records, which comprise sight records, rock art and Cape mountain Equus zebra zebra 14 Extant rock engraving records, and archaeological and ethnographic zebra records. There are pitfalls associated with the interpretation True quagga Equus quagga 17 1873 and use of all of these types of records. The present study, Spotted hyaena Crocuta crocuta 18 1894 however, deals only with written historical records, which have been widely used to reconstruct early distribution patterns of Kudu Tragelaphus strepsiceros 21 Extant mammals on southern African landscapes.24,29,30,31,32,33,34 Black rhinoceros Diceros bicornis 23 1885 Blesbok Damaliscus pygargus 27 1889 It is important, though, to recognise the limitations associated phillipsi with written historical records. Most notably, early observers Oribi Ourebia ourebi 33 Extant did not keep systematic records (i.e. they did not