Distribution, habitat use and activity patterns of nocturnal small carnivores in the North Luangwa Valley, Zambia Paula A. WHITE Abstract Surveys of the diversity, distribution, habitat use and nocturnal activity patterns of small carnivores were conducted in a protected part of the North Luangwa Valley, Zambia, during three periods: dry season (September–November) 2003; dry season (Sep- seven habitats, whereas the second and third took place in two forest habitats and used only camera-traps. Camera-traps were tember–November) 2004; and wet season (May–June) 2005. The first used direct-observation and camera-trap surveys across 13set carnivoreover scented species. lures The and camera-trapsoperated nightly, operated during for 17h30–05h30. 690 trap-nights In theexposing first season, 315 frames, observations 62% of ofwhich animals contained were made an animal. while Ofdriving the animals along 2,500 photographed km (100 daylight (n = 194), hours) 68% and (n 150 km (8 night-time hours) of dirt track. These first-period surveys detected Hyaenidae, Viverridae and Felidae. Viverrids accounted for nearly half (46%) of carnivores photographed, followed by mongooses = 131) were carnivores, of 11 species in five families: Mustelidae, Herpestidae,- currence in the area. Extreme daytime temperatures constrained camera-sensor operation to nights; thus, diurnal species were (35%), hyaenas (13%), mustelids (4%) and cats (2%). No species of Canidae were camera-trapped, despite their confirmed oc under-recorded. Species-specific differences observed in visitationBdeogale times between crassicauda habitats and suggestMeller’s differences Mongoose inRhynchogale species activity mel- leripatterns.) were During photographed the second most and often third (83%), survey followedperiods combined, by viverrids camera-traps (genets Genetta recorded, 9%; 674 African photographs Civet Civettictis of five carnivore civetta, 7%) species and mustelidsin the two (Ratel forest Mellivora habitats: capensismongooses, <1%). (Bushy-tailed Within the twoMongoose forest habitats, carnivore distribution, and both the timing and amount of visitation, varied by season. The highest visitation levels were in Hill Miombo in the wet season. The changing visitation rates through the night suggest that spotlighting (a popular nocturnal carnivore survey method, rarely conducted uniformly through the night) may bias detection and thus status assessments for some species. Keywords: Bdeogale crassicauda, camera-trap, Genetta, Herpestidae, miombo woodland, Rhynchogale melleri, Viverridae, wildlife survey Distribution, utilisation de l’habitat et patrons d’activité des petits carnivores nocturnes dans la Vallée de Luangwa Nord, en Zambie Résumé La diversité, la distribution, l’utilisation de l’habitat et les patrons nocturnes d’activité des petits carnivores ont été étudiés dans une partie protégée de la Vallée de Luangwa Nord, en Zambie, lors de trois périodes: 1) saison sèche (septembre–novembre) pendant2003, 2) lessaison deuxième sèche (septembre–novembre)et troisième saisons seuls 2004, des etpièges-photos 3) saison humide ont été (mai–juin) utilisés dans 2005. deux Durant habitats la première forestiers. saison, Les appareils l’étude a été menée dans sept types d’habitats et était basée sur l’observation directe et l’utilisation de pièges photographiques, alors que- vations directes d’animaux ont été faites lors d’inventaires effectués en voiture le long de 2’500 km (100 heures à la lumière du photographiques, associés à des leurres odorants, opéraient chaque nuit de 17h30–05h30. Durant la première saison, des obser animal.jour) et Des150 animauxkm (8 heures photographiés pendant la ( nnuit) = 194), de pistes 68% (enn terre. L’étude a permis de détecter 13 espèces de carnivores. Les pièges- photos ont opéré durant l’équivalent de 690 nuits de piégeage, fournissant 315 clichés dont 62% d’entre eux contenaient un (46%) de tous les carnivores photographiés, suivis par les= 131) mangoustes étaient des (35%), carnivores les hyènes appartenant (13%), les à 11mustélidés espèces réparties(4%) et les en félins cinq familles taxonomiques: Mustelidae, Herpestidae, Hyaenidae, Viverridae, Felidae. Les viverridés représentaient presque la moitié- (2%). Aucun canidé n’a été photographié malgré la confirmation de leur présence dans la zone d’étude. En raison des tempé ratures extrêmes durant la journée, le fonctionnement du senseur des appareils photographiques a été restreint aux périodes nocturnes, si bien que les espèces diurnes étaient sous-représentées. Les différences observées au niveau de l’heure des visites- des pièges-photos suggèrent des différences interspécifiquesBdeogale dans les patronscrassicauda d’activité. et Mangouste Lors des de seconde Meller etRhynchogale troisième périodes melleri) d’étudesont été photographiés combinées, les le pièges-photos plus souvent (83%),ont permis suivis d’obtenir par les viverridés674 photographies (genettes de Genetta cinq espèces, 9%), Civette de carnivores africaine dans Civettictis les deux civetta habi, tats7%) forestiers.et les mustélidés Les mangoustes (Ratel Mellivora (Mangouste capensis à queue, <1%). touffue A l’intérieur des deux habitats forestiers, la distribution des carnivores ainsi que l’heure d’occurence et le nombre de visites ont varié de manière saisonnière. Les niveaux de visite les plus élevés ont été durantobservés la dansnuit) lepeuvent miombo biaiser collinéen la détection durant la et saison ainsi les humide. évaluations Les variations du statut dans de certaines les taux de espèces. visite durant la nuit suggèrent que les études nocturnes au phare (une méthode populaire pour recenser les carnivores nocturnes rarement conduite de façon uniforme 37 Small Carnivore Conservation , Vol. 48: 37–46, July 2013 White Mots clés: Bdeogale crassicauda, forêt de miombo, Genetta Rhyn- chogale melleri, viverridés , inventaire faunistique, mangoustes, piège-photographique, Introduction pestidae), hyaenas (Hyaenidae), civets and genets (Viverridae) and cats (Felidae) (Kingdon 1977, 1997, Ansell 1978, Skinner Many African small carnivore species are inconspicuous noc- turnal forest dwellers (Ewer 1973, Smithers 1983) that are dif- The Luangwa Valley is experiencing rapid human popula- & Smithers 1990). - Nevertheless, forest carnivores are of interest both from an sulting in environmental change (Stuart et al. 1990, Dalal-Clay- academicficult to detect: standpoint as a consequence, and in light oflittle global is known trends about prioritising them. tion growth and rural expansion (Chenje & Johnson 1994) re- environmental impacts (Greene 1988). It is often assumed that ton & Child 2003, WWF-SARPOet al. 2011), 2003). the Apart ecology from of a fewLuangwa stud byresource virtue extractionof their size, and small use withoutcarnivores adequate are less consideration prone to direct of Valley’sies that focusedsmall carnivore on larger community species (Yamazaki is unknown. 1996, The Yamazaki Luangwa & persecution than are the larger species. However, illegal trade Bwalya 1999, Anderson in bush meat and skins (e.g. Colyn et al. 1988, Ray et al. 2002, monitoring programme focused on small carnivore conserva- tion.Valley The is justpresent one studyof many therefore areas insurveyed Africa lacking carnivores a long-term by cam- conversion and deforestation are all current threats to at least era-traps and direct observations in the dry and wet seasons of someGolden small 2009, African Shepherd carnivore & Shepherd species 2010,(Crooks Dolch 2002, 2011), Kauffman land 2003–2005. It took place in an area of protected, intact habitat et al - with minimal human disturbance. Thus, its results provide a man practices threaten regional populations of small carni- starting point for future studies, especially in other regions vores. 2007, is only Dunham beginning & Gaubert to be investigated 2008). The (Colón extent 2002, to which Crooks hu within and beyond the Luangwa Valley that are experiencing 2002, Azlan 2003, Kauffman et al. 2007, Cheyne et al. 2010a, rapid human population growth, rural expansion and resultant Mathai et al. 2010, Wilting et al. 2010). The paucity of baseline anthropogenic change. data about many small carnivore species hinders assessment of impacts and development of appropriate conservation strat- Methods egies (Greene 1988, Ray et al. 2002). Camera-traps are growing in popularity as an invaluable Study area The study took place in the North Luangwa National Park (11°47′S, 32°10′E), Luangwa Valley, north-eastern Zambia, researchtool for detecting such as secretiveradio-collaring. species Increasingly, (e.g. Foresman camera-traps & Pearson south-central Africa (Fig. 1). The Luangwa Valley is a trans- 1998, Cutler & Swann 1999), replacing more invasive types of verse extension of the greater African Rift Valley system, bor- et al - dered northwest by the Muchinga Escarpment and southeast ther-Hansenare documenting 2003, first Rovero records et alof. 2006,little-known Charoo carnivores et al. 2010, in by Malawi’s Nyika Plateau. To the northeast lie Tanzania’s Cheynelittle-known et al ecosystems (Brinket al . 2002, Goldmanet al .& 2010), Win Eastern Arc Mountains. The Luangwa River arises from the and may clarify species abundance (Gerber et al. 2010). For - . 2010b, Jenks . 2010,Bdeogale Moqanaki crassicauda , a spe- ennial Mwaleshi River that originates in the Muchinga Escarp- cies previously considered rare (Taylor 1987), was among the Mafinga Mountains at about 2,400 m a.s.l. It is fed by the per example,