sign in sign up
<<
Home , African buffalo, Black wildebeest, Cape mountain zebra, Grey rhebok, Klipspringer, Mountain reedbuck

Article #116 South African Journal of Science 26

, 7,21

inter inter The 19 . inter alia Research Article Identifications

The benefits of For example, the the example, For 23 6,7 10 17,18 written

Diceros bicornis S Afr J Sci Notably, these data have concerned. 20 are

, to measure range contractions range measure to , 12 , to study global range contraction 15 in North America, which were compiled were which America, North in , to determine historical mammal historical determine to , 13 There were significant discrepancies in a 24 reliable

Canis lupus Canis ow They are also important for investigating the presence, the investigating for important also are They 5 5 : H ABSTRACT in Quebec Province, Canada Province, Quebec in ? INTRODUCTION , to establish mammal distribution in the United States in the early the in States United the in distribution mammal establish to , 14 data

On a continental scale, for example in North America, oral narratives 17 These data are essential for establishing the link between the occurrence of occurrence the between link the establishing for essential are data These , , especially as far as is ecological information 5,6,7,8,9,10,11 22 Rangifer tarandus Rangifer 1,2,3,4 8 records Vol. 106 No. 1/2 Page 106 1 of 8 No. 1/2 Vol. , sightings, ranges of (especially the to estimate historical larger ones) for a range and to identify areas where the establishment of protected areas is required for effective 16 distribution

inter alia , mammals, caution has been urged in the interpretation and use of some of these data. these of some of use and interpretation the in urged been has caution mammals, , Written historical records are widely used mammals to estimatein southern . the suchHowever, records previous have some limitations distributions and the use of of older those the than larger 100 has been questioned. Written Cape, historicalSouth Africa, records,were investigatedfrom to theexamine broader this Easterncontention critically. Theyaccording wereto record classifiedquality (acceptability of identification andprecision of locality) and analysed according to two levels: ‘all’ speciesthat comprise acceptable and identification and ‘noticeable’ precise locality versus mammalspeciesanalysed. 27 information the for ‘non-noticeable’ recordsthe are of historicalthe mapping33% species.distributions;most form they suitable for Records impreciseidentificationacceptable but locality records have the further of information;A 49% they canfulfil useful a function records supportedwhere bothwhen parameters by good quality. of are written of Thus,the majority historical (82%) records from the study area are useful compilingfor historical distribution maps and the quality of data set.these The number recordsand qualityis of writtenconsistent historicalback records to varies between1750 for species.distributionreliability evaluatedforthis beshould Historicaldata degreeusefulness,and (quality) of ratherthan simply discarded a priori. value placed on such data is exemplified by one of the principles that govern the re-establishment or removal of species into ’s national parks, namely this ‘should only take place where there is good evidence that the species occurred in the area in of translocation the for historical principles and policies regional and national determining for basis the times’. provided Biodiversity Management: Environmental National the in embodied as mammals, alien and indigenous Act (Act 10 of 2004). Historical Region. distribution Floristic data Cape have biodiversity-rich also the been in successfully mammals larger used the for for landscape-level purposes planning conservation 19th century, based on the well-known Lewis and Clark journals dynamics wildlife conservation in Africa. and actual field sightings have provided insight into historical mammal distribution. not the case for taxa with many similar-appearing species. wolf gray the of maps range ‘independent’ of series In South Africa, historical distribution data have been used to inform the spatial distribution component distribution spatial the inform to used been have data distribution historical Africa, South In of the conservation plan for the globally critically endangered black rhinoceros of, distributions historical depicting for records historical written of use wide the Notwithstanding their for ‘evaluated be must Clark, and alia Lewis by kept journals the as such documents, historical of contents accuracy and thoroughness’ can be problematic, with either no, short or inadequate descriptions of the species provided with record. the While large and charismatic species are relatively easy to identify from written accounts, this is namely that period for which such records are available. The value of historical distribution data has been widely recognised for aiding the reconstruction of assemblages for a region, over a certain time period, and for understanding the structure, function and processes of ecosystems by ecologists and conservation biologists. There are many examples in the literature of the use of published historical distribution records, based on, of applications. For example, published historical caribou information the of was distribution used to describe changes in the ungulates and American North of expansions and parks national Canadian in richness Distributional data form the basis of the science of zoogeography, which has applications in, conservation. and ecology habitat. typical its and landscape a on species a absence or nature of spatial and temporal patterns and trends of a species across a landscape, as well as guiding the restoration of species to areas from which they have been extirpated. interpretation an primarily (being history environmental of disciplines parallel (usually) the combining of the past) and conservation biology increased (which confidence in primarily the understanding of seeks distribution information, to and hence shape implementation of the any management actions. future) are largely the Historical distribution data refer to written records found in the diaries, journals and correspondence times, historical during naturalists and missionaries hunters, settlers, explorers, notably most people, of mammal

1 1 istorical H Centre for African is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License. © 2010. The Authors. © 2010. Licensee: OpenJournals Publishing. This work at: http://www.sajs.co.za 8 pages. DOI:10.4102/sajs. v106i1/2.116 This article is available distribution data: How reliable are written records? S Afr J Sci. Art. #116, 2010;106(1/2), How to cite this article: Boshoff Kerley AF, GIH. Historical mammal Dates: Received: 03 June 2009 Dec.Accepted: 2009 11 Published: 2010 Mar. 11 records; record reliability; translocation policy; South Africa South Africa Keywords: mammals; historical distribution; written Conservation Ecology, Metropolitan University, ElizabethPort 6031, [email protected] Postal address: Centre for African Correspondence to: Andre Boshoff email: Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Africa South Elizabeth, Port Affiliation: 1 Conservation Ecology, Authors: BoshoffAndre F. Graham Kerley I.H. http://www.sajs.co.za Historical mammal distribution data: How reliable are written records? 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 , and the 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 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 gazella 4 1845 authors. Mountain Redunca fulvorufula 4 Extant Leptailurus serval 6 Extant In the South African context, certain weaknesses in early 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 larvatus 11 Extant of certainty attached to historical distribution records from Redunca arudinum 11 Extant the past 100 years, this decreases rapidly between 100 and Cape 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 Pelea 12 Extant distribution records, which comprise sight records, rock art and Cape mountain Equus 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 strepsiceros 21 Extant mammals on southern African landscapes.24,29,30,31,32,33,34 Black rhinoceros Diceros bicornis 23 1885 pygargus 27 1889 It is important, though, to recognise the limitations associated phillipsi

with written historical records. Most notably, early observers Ourebia ourebi 33 Extant did not keep systematic records (i.e. they did not record every animal that they saw, or attempt to achieve equal spatial Lycaon pictus 40 1919 coverage) and they did not always document and/or publish Black Connochaetes gnou 48 1869 their observations. They also tended to confuse the identification Panthera pardus 51 Extant of similar looking species, keeping to flat open areas that could be traversed by , ox and wagon (resulting in few records Eland Tragelaphus oryx 54 1891 from mountainous areas, secluded valleys and densely vegetated Hippopotamus amphibius 73 1895 habitats) and they did not normally travel at night (resulting in Red Alcelaphus buselaphus 74 1860s very few records of nocturnal species).29,33 In North America, Panthera leo 94 1879

Article #116 early descriptions of fauna and flora are usually restricted to species that were easily visible from major transportation routes, African Loxodonta africana 96 Extant 26 such as rivers and frequently travelled roads. Consequently, Antidorcas marsupialis 115 Extant early written records should be interpreted with circumspection. African Syncerus caffer 120 Extant South African Journal of Science The recent publication of Historical incidence of the larger mammals Extant = species not exterminated. in the broader Eastern Cape, provides an extensive collection of historical records of these mammals in this region.29 We the accuracy of the description of the habitat (where available). employed this data set, which was initially used to create detailed distribution maps, to assess and comment critically upon the With regard to the first criteria, the identity of a species was reliability of historical distributional data and specifically those accepted only if the description (sometimes accompanied by emanating from written records. an illustration) was sufficient to establish its identity beyond reasonable doubt.29 METHODS Given that the time (year) of death of that provided Distributional data pertaining to selected medium- to large- specimens (e.g. bones, teeth, tusks) is not known, Type 1 records sized (= larger) mammals in the Eastern Cape (Table 1) were cannot be used to indicate the period when the species was extracted from the distributional information documented in living on that particular landscape and they were therefore 29 Skead and geo-referenced (at 1′ x 1′ resolution). For each record excluded from the analyses. In the definitions used above, a of each species, both the year in which the record was made (if ‘precise’ locality is one where the sighting falls within an area available) and the record type, were listed. ‘Record type’ refers with a diameter of < c. 5 km, whereas an ‘imprecise’ locality is to the scheme used in Skead29 to classify each distribution record one where the sighting falls within an area with a diameter of according to one of five categories, based on record quality: < c. 50 km, but > 5 km. • Type 1 – accurate identification; precise locality (specimen) • Type 2 – accurate identification; precise locality (sighting) Only Type 2 and Type 3 records, for the period 1750–1924 (see • Type 3 – accurate identification; imprecise locality below), were used to calculate the number of historical records • Type 4 – questionable identification; precise locality per species. The common and widespread species (such as • Type 5 – questionable identification; imprecise locality. chacma Papio hamadryas, vervet monkey Cercopithecus To achieve consistency, all record interpretation, categorisation pygerythrus, black-backed jackal Canis mesomelas, Caracal and geo-referencing was done by the same person, who is caracal, common Sylvicapra grimmia, highly familiar with the mammal species and the geography and campestris, bushbuck Tragelaphus scriptus) and a range of shy and topography of the Eastern Cape. The following criteria guided unobtrusive species (such as the otters, the foxes, African wild the process: (1) how well the species was described, (2) the cat Felis silvestris, Cephalopus monticola), all of which 29 accuracy of the description of the behaviour of the species (where did not receive comprehensive documentation in Skead , were available), (3) the amount of locality detail provided, and (4) excluded from this analysis.

27 S Afr J Sci Vol. 106 No. 1/2 Page 2 of 8 http://www.sajs.co.za Article #116 28 South African Journal of Science Research Article (klipspringer) to (klipspringer) S Afr J Sci ) illustrates the contribution made by RESULTS analyses. 2 χ ; only 2 records Type (solid squares) and 3 records Type 29 Equus quagga . 29 35,36,37 for the post-1924 period, these have not been included in included been not have these period, post-1924 the for 29 The number of records per species varies from 3 from varies species per records of number The dominate together, records, 3 and 2 Type 1). (Table (buffalo) 120 data species ‘noticeable’ and species ‘all’ the for types record the sets, whereas the proportions of record types are evenly spread among the types for the ‘non-noticeable species’ data set (Table 2). The map of Type latter. the 2 with former the of congruence and the illustrates 1) (Figure Type 3 records for the true quagga Furthermore, although there are some distribution records Skead in the analysis, mainly because Skead did not focus on this period for his literature search for historical records, and because the 1920s are considered to have witnessed the start of ‘organised’ zoology in southern Africa, demonstrated field-collecting by expeditions, an increase the in growthcollections, the advent of natural of museum of handbooks, modern , and as exemplified by the the work development Vivian of, notably, Fitzsimons, John Shortridge. Hewitt, Austin Roberts and The GC results of the analyses are expressed as, (1) the number of records within each time period, for each record type, and (2) the proportion (%) of each such type, within each time period. The latter reflects the relative importance of the various types of data. Differences in the numbers of the records, proportion of per record types, between type, the time periods, and were explored using A distribution map (Figure 1) for a representative species (the true quagga (mainly) Type 2 and Type 3 records. The years in which certain their when by or Cape, Eastern the in recorded last were species taken were region, this in reduced drastically been had numbers from Skead FIGURE 1

29 Prior to (open triangles) (see text) are shown 29 Vol. 106 No. 1/2 Page 106 3 of 8 No. 1/2 Vol. 19th and early 20th century). 20th early and 19th

. 29 . 29 Thus, ‘noticeable’ is a catchword that combines two Historical distribution records of the true quagga Equus quagga in the Eastern Cape as defined by Skead 29 1775–1799 1800–1824 1825–1849 1850–1874 1875–1899 1900–1924. 1750–1774 Adapted from Skead • • • • • • • 1750, records in South Africa are too sparse to enable meaningful enable to sparse too are Africa South in records 1750, analysis. Each historical record was allocated to a 25-year time period, as some years had too following time periods apply: few records for analysis. The half of the 18th century that European travellers and settlers started becoming prominent in the region missionaries, hunters, now known as the Eastern Cape, with number of the written animals being made accounts by some of of them. a observed (i.e. seen) in the field. For this study we have taken ‘historical’ to as mean 250 as years (i.e. far about back 1750) because it was only in the latter observers in historical times due to rarity. its behaviour, habitat or species a which with ease relative the namely parameters, broad be could it which with ease relatively the and identified be could and abundance, was probably relatively easily seen or noticed by noticed or seen easily relatively probably was abundance, and (18th, times historical in observers A ‘non-noticeable’ species is one that was easily confused with other, similar, species or was not easily seen or noticed by and information in Skead A ‘noticeable’ species is one that appears to recognised have (identified) and, as been a result easily of its behaviour, habitat Analysis and interpretation refers to (1) all 27 larger mammal species, and (2) a subset of seven ‘noticeable’ and seven ‘non- noticeable’ larger mammal species; species per records of number the of combination a to according the subset was selected http://www.sajs.co.za Historical mammal distribution data: How reliable are written records? Research Article Boshoff & Kerley

TABLE 2 variation, and there are no clearly discernible patterns or trends; Proportions (%) formed by record Types 2–5, per species group consequently, these data are not shown here.

No. of Group Record type ‘Noticeable’ versus ‘non-noticeable’ species species 2 3 4 5 When the 27 species are ranked according to the number of All species 27 33.3 49.1 5.4 12.2 records (Figure 4), it is evident that there is a positive relationship between the independently derived level of ‘noticeability’ and Noticeable species 7 34.7 55.1 1.9 8.3 the number of records per species. The relatively limited number Non-noticeable 7 22.6 26.4 22.2 28.7 of records for the black rhinoceros may reflect its scarcity rather species than its noticeability. Record types are (2) accurate identification and precise locality; (3) accurate identification and imprecise locality; (4) questionable identification and precise locality; (5) questionable The number of Type 2 records for the selected ‘noticeable’ species identification and imprecise locality. varies between the last six 25-year time periods (1775–1924) Thus, even though Type 3 records do not have precise locality (χ2 = 65.9; p < 0.001; df = 5) (Figure 3c). After low initial reporting attributes, when plotted in conjunction with Type 2 records, for the period 1750–1774, there is, overall, a temporal decline in which do have these attributes, they are supported. Inspection the number of Type 2 records of the selected ‘noticeable species’. of such maps can also be used to identify outliers among Type However, the proportion of Type 2 records for ‘noticeable’ 3 data records. species (around 35% of the records, from 1750 to 1924) is stable over time (χ2= 3.97; p = 0.68; df = 6).

‘All’ species On average, Type 2 records formed only 18% of the records of There are few Type 2 and Type 3 records from the 1750–1774 the selected ‘non-noticeable’ species in the early time periods period, constraining the analysis of the data for this period (1775–1899) (Figure 3d); this proportion increased to 70% in the (Figure 2, a and b). The number of Type 2 records varies between 1900–1924 period. There is a temporal decrease in the proportion the remaining six 25-year time periods (1775–1924) (χ 2 = 39.8; p < 0.001; of Type 4 records as the most recent period is approached; df = 5), as it does for Type 3 records (χ 2 = 297; p < 0.001; df = 5). The except for the proportion for the 1775–1799 period, which is number of Type 2 and Type 3 records per time period decreases, anomalously low (Figure 3e). overall, from the 1775–1799 period to the 1900–1924 period, inclusive (Figure 2, a and b). Exterminations and near-exterminations A total of 14 species (brown and spotted hyaenas, cheetah, lion, The number of Type 4 records varies between the six 25-year African wild dog, black rhinoceros, quagga, Cape warthog, 2 time periods (1775–1924) (χ = 28.6; p < 0.001; df = 5), as it does for hippopotamus, eland, , , blesbok, 2 Type 5 records (χ = 32.1; p < 0.001; df = 5) (Figure 2, c and d). The gemsbok) are known to have been exterminated in the Eastern numbers of Type 4 and Type 5 records increase, overall, between Cape (as defined in Skead29, Figure 5) during the historical the 1750–1774 period and the 1825–1849 period, after which they period under review (Table 1). These exterminations started show a marked decrease (Figure 2, c and d). in the 1840s and ended in the 1910s (Figure 5). In addition to these exterminations, a further seven species (leopard, African The proportions of Type 2 (χ2 = 6.2; p > 0.05; df = 5) and Type buffalo, southern reedbuck, springbok, African elephant, 3 (χ 2 = 11.8; p = 0.038; df = 5) records are relatively stable over serval, Cape ) underwent significant decreases time, being consistently around 33% and 49% of the records, Article #116 in numbers and ranges in this region, leading in some cases to respectively (Figure 3, a and b). There is thus no indication of near-extermination. In the case of the latter group of species, the predicted decline in these proportions for older records. The their decline also took place mainly during the latter half of the proportions of Type 4 and Type 5 records show much temporal 19th century and the early part of the 20th century.29 South African Journal of Science DISCUSSION Some species had physical, behavioural or habitat characteristics that aided the determination of their identity. For example, reference to ‘an erectly held tail whilst running’ identified the Cape warthog beyond doubt, and prevented confusion with records of the bushpig. Furthermore, there is often confusion in the written accounts about the identities of the similar looking grey rhebok and the two (mountain and southern); here, reference to the habitat as ‘marshy’ confirmed the identity of the southern reedbuck. Similarly, locality and described habitat could be used, in certain cases, to help distinguish between records of the true quagga (flat, or relatively flat, areas) and the (mountainous areas). The high variation in number of records per species (Table 1) is considered to reflect a variety of factors, including: distinctiveness (i.e. identification potential), behaviour (diurnal or nocturnal, group size [solitary, groups, herds], shy/ unobtrusive), habitat (open or closed vegetation, mountains or valleys and plains), rarity (naturally scarce species, e.g. black rhino and cheetah), global range (marginal in the Eastern Cape, e.g. gemsbok) or economic value (source of tusks, hides and meat).

For example, were extensively hunted for ivory38 and they are large, social and are typically found in lowland habitats Raw data sourced from Skead29. close to water; consequently, this species is well represented in FIGURE2 the written historical records. In contrast, the klipspringer is Number of (a) Type 2, (b) Type 3, (c) Type 4, and (d) Type 5 historical distribution small, specific to rugged habitats and of very limited economic records from the Eastern Cape, of 27 larger mammals, according to seven 25- year time periods (first year of period shown) value; it is very poorly represented in the historical records.

29 S Afr J Sci Vol. 106 No. 1/2 Page 4 of 8 http://www.sajs.co.za Article #116 30 South African Journal of Science . This is 30 argues for 10 Research Article S Afr J Sci , who states that older data, 9 This hypothesis is supported 29 contention that older records are less 30 supported by the view of Morrison earlier of product a rather are but quality, lower of not are se, per and different data gathering techniques. Rackham the critical interpretation of occurrence records in Great Britain dating back to the Middle Ages (1 000 years). ‘Noticeable’ versus ‘non-noticeable’ species The temporal decline in the ‘noticeable’ species is ascribed to the progressive disappearance number of Type 2 from records the for landscape, or significant decline numbers,in of represent about 33% of Bernard the and records. Parker’s This does reliable. not In support contrast to of the Type 3 observed records (Figure 2b), decline the proportion in of records this group the of also number remains consistent absence of over a time decrease after here periods the in records (Figure 5 and may 4 Type of decrease) (a numbers be 3b). due to The the relatively low 1849 (Figure 2). The latter pattern is also likely to be influenced by the decline or extermination of several prominent species in the region; exterminations started in the Eastern 1840s (Figure 5). Cape in the Only 17.6% of the records are Type 4 or Type 5 (Table purposes. On the therefore of little use for distribution mapping 2), and therefore and 2) (Table 2 Type are records the of 33% hand, other ‘stand-alone’ a on used be to them enables which quality, good of basis for distribution mapping purposes. A further 49.1% of the records are Type 3 (Table 2) and, because of their lack of precise locality data, cannot be used on a ‘stand-alone’ basis; they can, however, be used in support of the Type 2 records (see below). Therefore, overall, some records can be used for mapping purposes. 82% of the historical distribution The use of Type is 2 appropriate records as for the historical quality consistent over time, that of is, back distribution to 1750 (Figure 3a). these The same maps records has holds remained for Type 3 records (Figure 3b). These data it indicate is that important to evaluate the quality of each historical record critically, both in terms of the correctness of identification and the level of precision of the location. doubtful records This to be process treated as will such. It allow is thus apparent that historical records cannot be summarily discarded on the basis of age alone, as proposed by Bernard and Parker would improve in more recent periods. This would presumably have been expected to reflect bothobservers, as well as thethe improved information describing each increasingnumber of species (hence more accurate identifications regarding – see improved also geographic below knowledge). This decrease progressive trend the of reflection a as may, explained be however, in the occurrence and abundance of certain species, especially the large and charismatic ones. by the temporal increase in the number of exterminations in the region in question (Figure 5) and also the fact seven that five species of that the underwent major declines, or exterminated, were are almost large and/or charismatic the above species. hypothesis If strengthens the valid, use of records certain to reflect not historical only the distribution of some species, but over time. also their relative abundance The temporal decrease in the number of Type 3 records (Figure 2b) may additionally reflect the fact that, over time, geographic locations (e.g. towns, roads, railway sidings) were established and landscape features (e.g. mountains, in rivers) the were language named, of the recorders. This the would location of have sightings facilitated on the landscape Therefore, by we early can recorders. predict that those observers who were able to identify the species (one of the record) requirements were for more a Type recently species identified correctly 2 the also of number greater a thus able location, to provide an accurate would also have been precisely located. This effect is not clearly demonstrated by a complimentary increase in the proportion number of or Type 2 records (discussed above), and 3 records. overall decline in the total number of Type 2 reflecting an consistently and 3a) (Figure time over robust are data 2 Type The

39,40

Vol. 106 No. 1/2 Page 106 5 of 8 No. 1/2 Vol. FIGURE 3 Cape, through seven 25-year periods . 29 The proportions of record (%) types, in relation to the total number of records for all record types within each period, of selected larger mammals from the Eastern 7 ‘noticeable’ species (number of records per period shown); 2 Type records(d) for 7‘non-noticeable’ species; (e) Type 4 records for 7 ‘non-noticeablefrom Skead species. Raw data sourced (a) Type 2 records(a) for 27 species; Type 3 (b) records for 27 species; Type 2 records (c) for century, with large numbers arriving during the 19th century. 19th the during arriving numbers large with century, The temporal decrease in the number of Type 2 records (Figure 2a) is counterintuitive, as it would be expected that reporting It is postulated that the low number of records from the 1750–1774 the from records of number low the that postulated is It in observers literate few relatively the of consequence a is period the Eastern Cape at that time; settlement by European colonists 18th the of end the towards increase to began only region this in historical reporting frequency and this bias should be considered be should bias this and frequency reporting historical when evaluating the utility of records for each species. Trends over time: ‘all’ species This clearly indicates that there are species-specific biases in the http://www.sajs.co.za Historical mammal distribution data: How reliable are written records? Research Article Boshoff & Kerley

African buffalo Springbok African elephant Lion Red hartebeest Hippopotamus Eland Leopard Black wildebeest African wild dog Oribi Blesbok Black rhinoceros Kudu Noticeability Spotted hyaena True quagga Cape mountain zebra Grey rhebok Cape warthog Southern reedbuck Bushpig Cheetah Serval Gemsbok Brown hyaena Klipspringer

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 Number of records

Black bars indicate ‘noticeable’ species selected for further analysis, and grey-shaded bars indicate ‘non-noticeable’ species selected for further analysis (see text). Open bars indicate species that were not selected for further analysis. FIGURE 4 The number of historical records (1750–1924) (Types 2 and 3) for 27 species of larger mammals in the Eastern Cape (extracted from Skead29), with degree of ‘noticeability’ (see text) indicated

Article #116 the species selected for this analysis (Table 1; Figure 5). This In contrast to the trends for the ‘all species’ and ‘noticeable is supported by the fact that five of the seven species that species’ data, the trends of improved precision in historical underwent major declines or were almost exterminated are large records for the ‘non-noticeable’ species over time does support and/or charismatic species and hence were included in this Bernard and Parker’s30 statement that historical records decline

South African Journal of Science category of ‘noticeable’ species. As with the ‘all species’ data, the with age (i.e. increase in Type 4 records with age). However, the use of historical Type 2 data for estimating historical distribution data also clearly show that there is still a significant proportion patterns of ‘noticeable’ species is appropriate, as the quality of of usable records (49%) as one goes back in time. This again these records has remained robust over time, that is, back to emphasises the need to examine the data critically, rather than 1750. Similarly, as for the ‘all species’ findings, the proportion of discard all records on the basis of some arbitrary age cut-off, as 30 Type 3 records is high (55.1%; Table 2) and when these records advocated by Bernard and Parker . are supported by Type 2 records, almost 90% of all records (Table 2) can be used to map distributions of ‘noticeable’ species. Time scales and changes in communities This supports Cramer and Mazel’s27 contention that for large The study area experienced considerable fluctuations in climate charismatic species, such as the Giraffa camelopardalis, it during the Late Quaternary, with the Last Glacial Maximum is unlikely that early recorders would fail to mention them. This supporting palaeocommunities typical of colder and drier again emphasises the point that the utility of historical records conditions.40 Modern communities, including the large mammal will vary between species, but there is no evidence that this faunal assemblages, emerged in the last 5 000 years under what 41 declines with the age of the record. are considered to be typically modern climatic conditions. The moderately stable climatic conditions that have prevailed The increased proportion of Type 2 records of ‘non-noticeable’ since then, indicate that anthropogenic effects have been the main drivers of change in the distribution and abundance of species after 1900 is considered to be a reflection of the improved the larger mammals, mainly within the past 2 000 years, but levels, over time, of identification of the species selected for this especially within the past 400 years.41,42,43,44 In support of this, it is analysis. This effect is therefore mirrored in the temporal decline noteworthy that the extermination of 14 larger mammal species in the proportion of Type 4 records of ‘non-noticeable’ species. in the Eastern Cape occurred over a relatively short period of 70 Despite the tendency of observers to confuse the identity of years (1840s–1910s, Figure 5), when the region was starting to 29 these species (a key feature of Type 2 and 3 records), it must be experience the combined impacts of excessive hunting45, habitat recognised that over time 49.1% of the records comprise Type 2 transformation and degradation,39 and predator control46,47. and Type 3 records (Table 2). These data indicate that historical The availability and analysis of the historical records assessed records can still be very useful in indicating the distributions of here are therefore crucial in our understanding of the changes even ‘non-noticeable’ species. Again, the discrepancy between experienced by these communities. the proportions of Type 2 and 3 records for ‘noticeable’ species versus those of ‘non-noticeable’ species (89.8% vs 49%) clearly The issue of ‘false positives’ emphasises the point that historical records vary in quality Estimates of historical species distributions may be prone between species. to error because a species may be considered to have been

31 S Afr J Sci Vol. 106 No. 1/2 Page 6 of 8 http://www.sajs.co.za Article #116 32 South African Journal of Science n Research Article S Afr J Sci se. ), but also the location of the records the of location the also but ), 5 2001;36:245–273. . REFERENCES Afr Zool

are useful for compiling historical distribution ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 29 The progressive large impacts mammal on fauna transformation the from and region’s near- to species certain of excessive degradation, decline the to example, for leading, indigenous and , predator habitat control, of others. and to the extermination extermination A temporal increase in geographic knowledge (e.g. naming precise more in resulting ranges), mountain rivers, towns, of record location data. the identify to observers of ability the in increase temporal A species. various larger mammal The variation in the number and quality of records betwee species. medium- to large-sized mammals Region, in the based Cape requirements. Floristic on Egan historical D, accounts handbook: Howell a restorationist’s guide to reference EA, ecosystems. and Washington DC: Island Press; 2005. editors. habitat The Kerley historical GIH, Pressey RL, medium- ecology and large Cowling of conservation the RM, for Options R. Boshoff Castley AF, Sims- sized mammals in the Cape Floristic Region hotspot, South Africa. Biol Conserv. 2003;112:169–190. Fjeldsa J, Burgess ND, Blyth S, De Klerk HM. Where are the major gaps in the reserve network for Africa’s Oryx. 2004;38:17–25. mammals? Lomolino MV, Channell R. of geographic Splendid range isolation: collapse in patterns Mammal. 1995;76:335–347. endangered mammals. J Planning al. et CB, Chetkiewicz KH, Redford EW, Sanderson to save a species: 2002;16:58–72. the jaguar as a Sanderson model. EW, Redford KH, Weber Conserv B, et al. The Biol. ecological future of the term, North large-scale American conservation : of 2008;22:252–266. wildlife. conceiving Conserv long- Biol. Boshoff AF, Kerley GIH. Potential distributions of the 6. 7. if they are combined with other information, known particularly the ecological requirements of Kerley the and Boshoff by done species concerned (as landscape. in relation to major physical features on the Thus, written historical distribution records can serve a useful degree and reliability for evaluated be should they but function, a priori. of usefulness, rather than simply discarded We thank Derek du Preez for creating Figure Landman 1 for assistance and with data analysis. Marietjie We are particularly grateful to the late C.J. (Jack) Skead for stimulating our interest in the value and study of records. historical mammalian distribution 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. • • • • Notwithstanding these the reliability of the data were evident. patterns and trends in constraints, discernible temporal Records that species) 27 of study this comprise in records all of acceptable (33% information locality identification and precise are particularly useful for estimating Additionally, historical records distributions. that have acceptable imprecise locality information (49% of identificationall records in this study) but can fulfil a useful function when they are supported by records where both parameters are of good quality. In both cases, quality the of the records is the consistent back majority to (82%) 1750. Eastern Therefore, of Cape written historical maps, records despite their from age. the identification Written but records good with questionable questionable location identification and imprecise attributes location data, are of little or no use for this purpo and those with The usefulness of written historical records can be enhanced - Equus or by 5,7,21 Vol. 106 No. 1/2 Page 106 7 of 8 No. 1/2 Vol. and Burchells’ zebra Burchells’ and Therefore, owing to the non- 13,14 FIGURE 5 While such data may be frustrating to frustrating be may data such While first year of decade 49 . 29 CONCLUSION Connochaetes taurinus Connochaetes , as described in this paper, are considered to be 29 . For example, where written records may indicate 48 in South Africa. South in A temporal and spatial increase in the number observers of literate (i.e. as the settled and farmed, by European colonists from the west to region became explored, the east). hunted, Trend in the cumulative number of larger mammal species that were extermi nated in the Eastern Cape, by decade from the 1750s to the 1910s. Plotted by • The analysis and interpretation of written historical record data from Skead variables: five following the between interplay the by influenced and Burchell’s extralimital if introduced south of the . zebra should be considered burchelli ecologists wanting to estimate distributions of species at a fine scale, they are nevertheless of significant value in determining policy. In this case, for example, it may be concluded that information is of a highly imprecise nature. For example, based on early observer accounts, the Orange (Gariep) River featured prominently as the southernmost limit in the distribution of the wildebeest blue landscape features (e.g. mountain be useful ranges, in rivers), establishing the can species, notwithstanding the fact that, regional in such cases, the locality also distribution of certain from distribution maps, unless they are clear outliers. General statements made by early the observers larger about mammals some that they of saw, in relation to prominent Even though Type 3 attributes, they records can, when plotted do in conjunction with not Type records, 2 which have do have precise these attributes, locality be supported latter (Figure 1). Hence, Type 3 records should not be discarded by the re-introduction locally (e.g. into a national park) must depend on the existence of suitable habitat. Imprecise location sight records distribution records with species’ ecological habitat requirements, requirements, habitat ecological species’ with records distribution including the use of an expert knowledge approach modelling possible is it area, general a in species a of incidence historical the records, to create a so-called ‘extent of occurrence’. The effects of ‘false positives’ on the distribution estimation of a can species’ be ameliorated by combining historical the issue of ‘false positives’. systematic nature of assumed that a historical species historically occurred everywhere within sight records, a convex polygon created it by joining the outermost distribution cannot be present in an area, whereas it was not. This occurs because the historical distribution map reflects theintroducing thereby ‘”extent occupancy”’, of of“area the occurrence” necessarily not and Information sourced from Skead http://www.sajs.co.za Historical mammal distribution data: How reliable are written records? Research Article Boshoff & Kerley

8. Meine C. Its about time: conservation biology and history. 32. Roberts A. The mammals of South Africa. Cape Town: Conserv Biol. 1999;13:1–3. Central News Agency; 1951. 9. Morrison ML. Techniques for discovering historic animal 33. Skead CJ. Historical mammal incidence in the Cape Province: assemblages. In: Egan D, Howell EA, editors. The historical Vol.1 – the Western and Northern Cape. Cape Town: ecology handbook: a restorationist’s guide to reference Provincial Administration of the ; 1980. ecosystems. Washington DC: Island Press, 2005; p. 295–316. 34. Smithers RHN. The mammals of the southern African 10. Rackham O. The history of the countryside: the classic subregion. University of Pretoria; 1983. history of Britain’s landscape, fauna and flora. London: 35. Brain CK, Roberts A. A lifelong devotion to South Africa’s Phoenix Press; 2000. birds and beasts. Cape Town: John Voelcker Bird Book Fund; 11. Skead CJ. The use of early historical references in the study 1998. of bird and mammal distribution. Ann Cape Prov Mu. 36. Hewitt J. A guide to the vertebrate fauna of the Eastern 1962;2:138–142. Cape Province. Part 1 – mammals and birds. Grahamstown: 12. Courtois R, Ouellet JP, Gingras A, Dussault C, Breton Albany Museum; 1931. L, Maltais J. Historical changes and current distribution 37. Shortridge GC. The mammals of South . Vol I & of caribou, Rangifer tarandus, in Quebec. Can Field-nat. II. London: Heinemann; 1934. 2003;117:399–414. 38. Carruthers J, Boshoff A, Slotow R, Biggs H, Avery G, 13. Laliberte AS, Ripple WJ. Range contractions of North Matthews W. The elephant in South Africa: history and American carnivores and ungulates. BioScience. 2004;54:128– distribution. In: Scholes RJ, Mennell KG, editors. Assessment 138. of South African elephant management. Johannesburg: 14. Habib LD, Wiersma YF, Nudds TD. Effects of errors in range Witwatersrand University Press, 2008; p. 23–83. maps on estimates of historical species richness of mammals 39. Beinart W. The rise of conservation in South Africa: settlers, in Canadian national parks. J Biogeogr. 2006;30:375–380. livestock and the environment 1770–1950. London: Oxford 15. Laliberte AS, Ripple WJ. Wildlife encounters by Lewis University Press; 2003. and Clark: spatial analysis of interactions between native 40. Mostert N. Frontiers. London: Jonathan Cape; 1992. Americans and wildlife. BioScience. 2003;53:94–103. 41. Deacon J, Lancaster N. Late quaternary paleo-environments 16. Channell R, Lomolino MV. Trajectories to extinction: spatial of southern Africa. London: Clarendon Press; 1988. dynamics of the contraction of geographical ranges. J 42. Klein RG. The taxonomic status, distribution and ecology of Biogeogr. 2000;27:169–179. the blue , leucophaeus (Pallas, 1766). Ann 17. Feldhamer GA, Thompson BC, Chapman JA. Wild mammals S Afr Mus. 1974;65:99–143. of North America: biology, management and conservation. 43. Klein RG. Paleo-environmental implications of quaternary Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press; 2004. large mammals in the region. In: Decaon HJ, 18. Hall ER, Kelson KR. The mammals of North America. New Hendey QB, Lambrechts JJN, editors. Fynbos paleoecology: York: Ronald Press; 1959. a preliminary synthesis. South African National Scientific 19. Emslie RH. Conservation plan for the black rhino (Diceros Programmes Rep. 1983;75:116–138. bicornis) in South Africa 2003–2012. Revised Edition. SADC 44. Radloff FGT. The ecology of large native to the Rhino Management Group; 2007. coastal lowlands of the Fynbos Biome in the , 20. SANParks. South African National Parks coordinated policy South Africa. Ph.D thesis, University of Stellenbosch, 2008. framework governing park management plans. Pretoria: 45. Roche C. Ornaments of the Desert – springbok treks in the South African National Parks; 2006. Cape Colony, 1774–1908. M.Sc. thesis, University of Cape Article #116 21. Boshoff AF, Kerley GIH, Cowling RMC. A pragmatic Town, 2004. approach to estimating the distributions and spatial 46. Beinart W. The night of the jackal: sheep, and requirements of the medium- to large-sized mammals in the predators in the Cape. Past and Present. 1998:158;172–206. Cape Floristic Region. Divers Distrib. 2001;7:29–43. 47. Van Sittert L. Keeping the enemy at bay: the extermination

South African Journal of Science 22. Wood WR. Ethnohistory and historical method. Archaeol of wild carnivores in the Cape Colony, 1889–1910. Environ Meth Theory. 1990;2:81–110. Hist. 1998;3:311–332. 23. Forman RT, Russell EW. Evaluation of historical data. Ecol 48. Illoldi-Rangel P, Sánchez-Cordero V, Peterson AT. Predicting Soc Bull. 1983;64;5–7. distributions of Mexican mammals using ecological niche 24. Rookmaaker LC. The zoological exploration of southern modelling. J Mammal. 2004;85:658−662. Africa 1650–1790. Rotterdam: AA Balkema; 1989. 49. Harris WC. Portraits of the and wild animals of 25. Shelton SL, Weckerly FW. Inconsistencies in historical Southern Africa delineated from in their native haunts, geographic range maps: the gray wolf as an example. Calif during a hunting expedition from the Cape Colony as far as Fish Game. 2007;93:224–227. the Tropic of Capricorn, in 1836 and 1837, with sketches of 26. Edmonds M. The pleasures and pitfalls of written records. the field sports. W Pickering: London; 1840. In: Egan D, Howell EA, editors. The historical ecology handbook: a restorationist’s guide to reference ecosystems. Washington DC: Island Press, 2005; p. 73–100. 27. Cramer MD, Mazel AD. The past distribution of giraffe in KwaZulu-Natal. S Afr J Wildl Res. 2007;37:197–201. 28. Goodman PS, Tomkinson AJ. The past distribution of giraffe in Zululand and its implications for reserve management. S Afr J Wildl Res. 1987;17:28–32. 29. Skead CJ. Historical incidence of the larger mammals in the broader Eastern Cape, 2nd ed. Centre for African Conservation Ecology, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth; 2007. 30. Bernard RTF, Parker DM. The use of archaeological and ethnographical information to supplement the historical record of the distribution of mammalian herbivores in South Africa. S Afr J Sci 2006;102:117–119. 31. Du Plessis SF. The past and present geographical distribution of the Perissodactyla and Artiodactyla in southern Africa. MSc thesis, University of Pretoria, 1969.

33 S Afr J Sci Vol. 106 No. 1/2 Page 8 of 8 http://www.sajs.co.za