2012. Review of Significant Trade - Cites

Balearica regulorum
River Nile. Similarly, a habitat suitability modelling study showed that most of the suitable
habitat was found in south-west Uganda (Stabach et al., 2009).
Population trends and status: Uganda is home to a globally significant population of
B. regulorum (BirdLife International, 2009), with approximately half of the remaining global
birds found in the country (Howard, 2010).
Population declines of up to 70 or 80 per cent since the early 1970s were reported (National
Biodiversity Data Bank in prep. cited in Taylor, 2011; K. Morrison, in litt. to UNEP-WCMC,
2011). The population was estimated to be 35 000 individuals in 1985 declining to possibly
less than 30 000 in 1994 (Mafabi pers. comm. with Urban cited in Urban, 1996). In 2004, the
population size was estimated to be 13 000-20 000 individuals (Beilfuss et al., 2007).
In a 2005-2006 study, breeding pairs were recorded in 21 out of 224 sites visited, while
sightings of the species were made in 22 per cent of the visited sites. However, these 21
breeding sites were considered to be “likely an underestimate” of the total breeding sites in
the country (Olupot et al., 2009).
In surveys conducted in the Mburo-Nakivali wetland area in western Uganda using timed
species counts, less than five individuals of B. regulorum were recorded (Nalwanga-
Wabwire et al., 2009). In similar surveys conducted in the Lake Opeta and Lake Bisina
Ramsar sites in Eastern Uganda, the species was recorded present (Nalwanga-
Wabwire et al., 2009). Decreases in flock sizes and the number of breeding pairs were
reported by Muheebwa (2007b).
Threats: The conversion of land for agricultural purposes was considered to be a major
threat (Muheebwa, 2007b; Olupot et al., 2009) with the loss of breeding areas and poor
breeding conditions causing population declines (Mafabi, 1991; Olupot et al., 2009). The
collection of eggs, hunting and live-trapping, as well as nest destruction were regarded as
the most common direct threats to breeding birds (Olupot et al., 2009).
Meine and Archibald (1996b) stated that “capture for domestication and for the export trade
is most extensive in Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania, and should be considered a serious
threat (Mafabi, 1991; Katondo, 1996; Mirande et al., in press).” In studies conducted in 2007
in five districts along the Tanzanian border and the western shoreline of Lake Victoria, it
was found that the majority of cranes (referring to all three species occurring in the area)
were captured for traditional medicine. Cranes were also captured for domestication due to
their symbolic value, and their meat was sold as chicken in some areas (African Crane Trade
Project, 2007). Large numbers of cranes were being caught for illegal trade, commonly
marketed through Tanzania due to poor control in the border, but sometimes also through
the capital Kampala (Muheebwa, 2007a). The inappropriate handling, poor aeration and
feeding, and overall stress were reported to commonly cause injuries or death during
capture, transport and captivity (African Crane Trade Project, 2007).
The removal of cranes from the wild was considered to likely be unsustainable, with
mitigation measures required to avoid extinction (Muheebwa, 2007a).
Trade: According to data in the CITES Trade Database, no trade from Uganda was reported
2000-2010. Annual reports have been received from Uganda for all years except 2010.
R. Beilfuss (Muheebwa, 2007a) considered the trade from Uganda to be particularly
significant, noting that although it was largely illegal, a portion of it was recorded at border
points, but CITES permits were rarely issued and the trade was usually not reported to
CITES.
Management: The Uganda Wildlife Statute (1996) specified the need of permits for hunting
43