Pian-Upe Wildlife Reserve - Frontier-publications.co.uk

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Pian-Upe Wildlife Reserve: biological and socio-economic survey 29 Figure 3.9 Distribution of Bohor and mountain reedbuck in Pian-Upe Wildlife Reserve Porcupines, hares, and hedgehogs Porcupine quills were recorded in grassland near Moruajore and in cultivated land south of the reserve in the CWA. A single hare and a single hedgehog were observed in grassland near Moruajore. 3.5 Discussion No records were made of Grant’s (Bright’s) gazelle (Gazella granti (brighti)) or roan antelope (Hippotragus equinus): Lamprey & Michelmore (1996ab) recorded gazelle in the west of the reserve in October 1995 and roan south of Kadam in both October 1995 and May 1996. No records were made of hartebeest, which Lamprey & Michelmore (1996ab) recorded near Kadam in October 1995 and in the north of the reserve (i.e., outside this survey’s sampling area) in May 1996, although it is possible that spoor attributed to topi, which was observed, may in fact have been that of hartebeest. A single indirect record was made of giraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis) in November 1996, but it was of remains of an animal that had been dead for several years. Reports from rangers and local people indicate that the giraffe recorded by Lamprey & Michelmore (1996a) south of Kadam in October 1995 have been poached. No direct records were made of zebra, warthog, buffalo, and bushbuck, and for none of these were there many indirect records either. This survey made direct records of several small antelope not recorded by Lamprey & Michelmore (1996ab), including blue duiker, dik-dik, klipspringer, and mountain reedbuck, as well as numerous indirect records of waterbuck. Direct records were also made of small or nocturnal species not likely to be recorded from the air, such as vervet and patas monkey, mongoose, hyena, serval, hyrax, hare, and hedgehog. Frontier-Uganda Wildlife Protected Areas Project January 1998 Baseline Surveys Programme Report No. 13
Pian-Upe Wildlife Reserve: biological and socio-economic survey 30 There has been a drastic decline in the numbers of large mammals within the reserve over the past 30 years, including the eradication of species such as lion (Panthera leo), elephant (Loxodonta africana), black rhinoceros (Diceros bicornis), and probably giraffe, and animal densities are currently so low that in over 2,500 person days spent in the reserve, only oribi were observed on more than a few occasions. 3.6 Conclusions Although not abundant, the reserve still has a diverse large mammal fauna, which includes almost a quarter (24%) of the country’s large mammals species. Over a third (35%) of the species recorded are listed as ‘conservation dependent’ or ‘near threatened’ in the 1996 Red List (Baillie & Groombridge, 1996), while others, such as zebra, are of national conservation interest. Many are of high tourist interest, although they are at low densities and tend to be very shy. However, they continue to be under severe threat from poaching by hungry people armed with automatic weapons. Although this poaching is opportunistic, because local people are armed at all times, is just as devastating as if it were systematic. Because valuable species are already so few in numbers, almost every animal encountered is fired upon, and usually killed, as was observed in broad daylight on more than one occasion during the second phase of the survey. Reducing the level of poaching will require a strong UWA presence and considerable community outreach and law enforcement activities, but until the wider issues of insecurity and food security in the region are addressed and resolved, it is unlikely to be eliminated. Ironically, however, absolutely terrible insecurity in the south of the reserve has allowed the wildlife here some respite from poaching compared with elsewhere in the region, as the area is effectively a no-man’s land between the Pian Karamojong and the Pokot, and is thus subject to lower levels of poaching. Opportunities for generating revenue from tourism are limited as there are no roads or other facilities within the reserve, the small numbers of animals are very shy, and the area is too insecure. At current population levels even small harvests are unlikely to be sustainable, precluding any formal harvesting scheme from providing legal benefits to local people in the near future. However, the reserve covers a large area, and the vegetation and habitats are essentially undisturbed, and if given adequate protection, many of the current small populations may recover and be viable in the long term. There are fewer land use conflicts here than in most other parts of the country, and wildlife conservation and cattle keeping at moderate densities are intrinsically quite compatible. In time, if populations are allowed to increase, the potential exists for both tourism and sustainable harvesting schemes Frontier-Uganda Wildlife Protected Areas Project January 1998 Baseline Surveys Programme Report No. 13
Page 1 and 2: Frontier-Uganda Wildlife Protected
Page 3 and 4: Pian-Upe Wildlife Reserve: biologic
Page 37: Pian-Upe Wildlife Reserve: biologic

Pian-Upe Wildlife Reserve - Frontier-publications.co.uk

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?