GRNB - Cebem
Transcription
GRNB - Cebem
BIODIVERSITY BASELINE OF THE QUIRIMBAS NATIONAL PARK Mozambique Final Report January 2010 GRNB Team of consultants Almeida Sitoe Valério Macandza Paulo Jorge Albano Gabriel Mário Carvalho Faura Amade (Team Leader) (Terrestrial Fauna) (Geography and GIS) (Terrestrial Flora) (Marine Fauna) (Marine Flora) GRNB Grupo de Gestão de Recursos Naturais e Biodiversidade Faculdade de Agronomia e Engenharia Florestal Universidade Eduardo Mondlane C.P. 257, Maputo, Moçambique Acronyms AFD CBD CPUE CRES DCB DEF DNAC FAO GEF IDPPE IIP IUCN MAP MCIZ MOMS QNP PPANNCD SOCMON UEM WWF ZTSM French Development Agency United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity Capture Per Unity Effort Swahelian Regional Center of Endemism Department of Biological Sciences (UEM) Department of Forestry (UEM) National Directorate for Conservation Áreas United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization Global Environment Fund Instituto de Desenvolvimento de Pesca de Pequena Escala Instituto de Investigação Pesqueira World Conservation Union Monitoria Acústica Passiva Inhambane-Zanzibar Coastal Mosaic Management-oriented monitoring system Quirimbas Nacional Park Projecto de Pesca Artesanal a Norte de Nampula e Cabo Delgado Socioeconomic monitoring Universidade Eduardo Mondlane Fundo Mundial para a Natureza Sahelian-Maputaland Transition Zone iii Table of contents Table of contents.......................................................................................................................iv List of Tables.............................................................................................................................vi List of Figures..........................................................................................................................vii Executive summary.................................................................................................................viii 1. Introduction............................................................................................................................1 2. Geography..............................................................................................................................3 2.1 Location............................................................................................................................3 2.2 Limits...............................................................................................................................3 2.3 Climate.............................................................................................................................6 2.4 Landscape and Hydrography ...........................................................................................8 2.5 Soils..................................................................................................................................9 2.6 Bathymetry.....................................................................................................................10 2.7 Land use.........................................................................................................................11 2.8 Population.......................................................................................................................11 3. Marine Componente.............................................................................................................14 3.1 Marine Vegetation..........................................................................................................14 3.1.1 Mangrove................................................................................................................14 3.1.2 Seagrasses ...............................................................................................................16 3.1.3 Seaweeds.................................................................................................................18 3.1.4 Conservation status and threats of marine vegetation.............................................19 3.2 Marine Fauna..................................................................................................................21 3.2.1 Marine invertebrates of the intertidal zone..............................................................22 3.2.2 Coral Reefs .............................................................................................................22 3.2.3 Reef Fish and Commercial Fish .............................................................................26 3.2.4 Sea Turtles, dugong, whale and shark ....................................................................35 3.2.5 Monitoring Programs .............................................................................................37 3.2.6 Conservation status and threats for marine life ......................................................38 3.2.7 Limitations of knowledge about marine fauna .......................................................39 4. Terrestrial Component..........................................................................................................40 4.1 Terrestrial Vegetation and Flora ...................................................................................40 4.1.1 Phytogeography.......................................................................................................40 4.1.2 Vegetation...............................................................................................................40 4.1.3 Flora........................................................................................................................44 4.1.4 Threats to conservation of terrestrial flora..............................................................46 4.1.5 Conservation Aspects..............................................................................................48 4.2 Terrestrial Fauna............................................................................................................50 4.2.1 Mammals.................................................................................................................51 4.2.2 Birds........................................................................................................................60 4.2.3 Reptiles ...................................................................................................................62 4.2.4 Amphibians.............................................................................................................62 4.2.5 Insects......................................................................................................................63 4.2.6 Terrestrial fauna management issues......................................................................66 5. Bibliography.........................................................................................................................67 iv v List of Tables Table 1. Distribution of population by Administrative Post ...................................................12 Table 2. Occurrence of mangrove species per site in QNP O = Occurs; N = Does Not occur 15 Table 3. Occurrence of seagrasses species in each site of QNP . O = occurs, -- = does not occur.........................................................................................................................................18 Table 4. Threats and conservation measures for marine vegetation of the QNP.....................19 Table 5. Number of common taxa recorded by Whittington et al. (1997,1998);.....................22 Table 6. Number of genus and species of reef and commercial fishes recorded at northern island group (Macaloe, Mogundula,Rolas e Matemo), according to Whittington et al (1997,1998)..............................................................................................................................26 Table 7. Number of genus and species of reef and commercial fishes recorded at central island group (Ibo, Quirimba, Sencar and Quilalea), according to Whittington et al (1997,1998)..............................................................................................................................26 Table 8. Number of genus and species of reef and commercial fishes recorded at southern islands group (Mefunvo, Quisiva and Quipaco), according to Whittington et al (1997, 1998). ..................................................................................................................................................27 Table 9. Data from Artisanal Fisheries Census of Cabo Delgado Province............................30 Table 10. Total Catch (Tons) estimated in 3 distrits of Quirimbas National Park, at 2006 and 2007 .........................................................................................................................................32 Table 11. Catch, effort and CPUE of the artisanal fisheries studies reported by IIP, Ministry of Fisheries (MP) and Loureiro (L)..........................................................................................33 Table 12. Species of dolphins and whales recorded at Quirimbas National Prak and all around ..................................................................................................................................................36 Table 13. The area covered by the different types of vegetation in the QNP..........................41 Table 14. Number of plant species per families identified in the QNP (Bandeira et al., 2008). ..................................................................................................................................................44 Table 15. Number and endemism among plant species per vegetation type in the QNP........45 Table 16. Summary of the number of species and conservation status of terrestrial fauna of the QNP....................................................................................................................................50 Table 17. Estimates of population size and index of abundance of terrestrial mammals of the QNP (Araman and Mahommed, 2006)....................................................................................52 Table 18. Summary of the existing knowledge and gaps of knowledge about terrestrial fauna ..................................................................................................................................................64 v List of Figures Figure 1. Geographic location of the QNP.................................................................................4 Figure 2. Spatial distribution of rainfall in QNP .......................................................................7 Figure 3. Spatial distribution of annual average temperature in QNP.......................................8 Figure 4. Shaded Relief and hydrography of the QNP..............................................................9 Figure 5. Soil map of the QNP.................................................................................................10 Figure 6. Bathymetry of the coast of QNP...............................................................................10 Figure 7. Spatial distribution of population in QNP................................................................12 Figure 8. Height of trees by species in different islands of the QNP. Am = Avicennia marina, Bg = Bruguiera gimnorrhyza Ct = Ceriops tagal, Rm = Rhizophora mucronata, Sa = Sonneratia alba.. ......................................................................................................................15 Figure 9. Structural Attributes of Species in QN.....................................................................16 Figure 10. Number of species of seagrasses in the site of QNP .............................................17 Figure 11. Number of seaweeds by the Local QNP. Cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) Rhodophyta (red algae), Clorophyta (green algae) and Phaephyta (brown algae)..................19 Figure 12. Map of Reef Corals and other coastal and marine habitats within Quirimbas National Park, according to Anadarko (2007).........................................................................24 Figure 13. The Inhambane Zanzibar Coastal Mosaic setting according to White (1983), showing the Swahelian Regional Centre of Endemism – SRCE (XIIIa) (source: Burguess & Clark 2000). ...........................................................................................................................40 Figure 14. The vegetation types in the Quirimbas National Park (Bandeira et al., 2008).......41 Figure 15. The diversity of habitus among terrestrial plants of the QNP................................44 Figure 16. Incidencies of bush fires in the QNP for the years 2006 and 2009 based on the MODIS satellite data. ..............................................................................................................48 Figure 17. Location of the total protection blocks in relation to the spatial distribution of density of human settlements in the QNP (Araman, 2007)......................................................57 Figure 18. Location of areas with high incidence of human-wildlife conflicts in the QNP (source: Ntumi 2005)...............................................................................................................59 Figure 19. Main elephant movement routes (yellow lines and arrows) used to get in and out of the QNP, overlaid on the vegetation types and main Rivers (source: Ntumi, 2005)...........60 vi Executive summary The present study was requested by WWF-Mozambique with the aim to evaluate the state of the knowledge of the biodiversity of the Quirimbas National Park (QNP). The study answers some of the challenges that the QNP faces in the conservation of marine and terrestrial biodiversity. The present study contributes in the systematization of the existing information, identifies gaps in the knowledge of the state of biodiversity and proposes conservation, research and monitoring measures. Therefore, based on the objectives of current and future management of the park and the priorities of development, the general objective of this study (according to the established terms of reference) is to prepare a concise and integrated research and monitoring strategy of the QNP that can inform effectively the park management on decision-making. The general management plan of the QNP translates the commitment of the Government of Mozambique in the conservation of biodiversity, rural development, and in the promotion of sustainable tourism in a plan of concrete action for conservation, use and management of one of its largest natural resources, the Quirimbas Archipelago. The activities of the Department of Research of the QNP are oriented to the generation of management information. Indeed, since its creation, the QNP has been carrying out activities towards the resolution of the problems that originated the creation of the park, in particular the reduction of human-wildlife conflicts, the establishment of fishing sanctuaries, monitoring of the utilization of the biological resources of the QNP, among others. The specific objectives of this study include: (i) to conduct a critical review of the state of scientific knowledge in the QNP area, including an analysis of the scope and quality of scientific studies done to date; (ii) to review critically the ongoing monitoring and research activities of the park and their effectiveness and utilization by the park administration in making informed management decisions: these ongoing activities include MOMS’s, SOCMON, annual mammal surveys, Measures research activities and others; (iii) to identify the main gaps in the present state of scientific knowledge in relation to the current and possibly future management objectives of the park; (iv) to integrate the various studies into an overall report of the state of biodiversity in the QNP; (v) to suggest management and zoning interventions based on the results of the review and in close relation to the management priorities and objectives for the park; (vi) to suggest a prioritized, integrated and concise program for research and monitoring for the next five years that informs management objectives and priorities (this can include already ongoing research and monitoring activities) including financial implications and implementation modalities; (vii) to analyze and make recommendations on how the various research initiatives in the QNP landscape are planned, carried out and coordinated. vi The methodology for the elaboration of the study consisted of the consultation of literature, including studies carried out by the QNP, IIP, IDPP, statistical reports of the Ministry of Fisheries, studies made by the oil-producing companies that are carrying out prospection in the region, studies driven by diverse foreign and national researchers and the existing monitoring databases prepared by the QNP. Additionally, a one-day seminar was organized to evaluate the preliminary report and help to prepare the research program, which is part of this study. The results of the study are presented in two essential parts. The first part is the report of the current state of biodiversity of the QNP, containing: (i) description of the current state of the biodiversity of the QNP (ii) analysis and identification of gaps in scientific knowledge about the biodiversity of the QNP, (iii) the current threats to biodiversity conservation and (iv) management options. The second part is the biodiversity research and monitoring plan of the QNP. From the analysis of the available literature we found that several studies exist in the marine and terrestrial components. About the current state of biodiversity the following results were found: (i) Marine vegetation: Six species of mangrove trees were identified in the QNP, of which Rhizophora mucronata was the most common species found in all the islands and Xilocarpus granatum the rarest. Sonneratia alba, a species that occurs only in the Central and Northern region of Mozambique was also found. The islands of Ibo (5) and Quirimba (5) presented higher diversity of species. The mangrove in the QNP is threatened by local people cutting wood for several reasons such as for building materials, wood fuel, fencing, etc. The islands with the highest impact of mangrove wood cutting are Ibo, Matemo, Mefunvo, Quipaco and Mogundula. The species preferred by the wood cutters in Mogundula is Ceriops tagal and in Quipaco is Bruguiera gymnorrhiza, while in the remaining islands there is no specific preference. Ten seagrass species were identified in the QNP. The most common species found are Thalassia hemprichii and Thalassodendron ciliatum. The islands of Quirimba (9), Matemo (7) and Ibo (7) presented the highest diversity of species. Enhalus acaroids, found in the QNP is rare in the South and Central Mozambique. The threats for the seagrass beds are fishing, presence of boats, nets and fishing traps, and collection of invertebrates. About 259 seaweed species were identified in the QNP. The groups with more species were Rhodophyta (red seaweed) and Chlorophyta (green seaweed). The islands with highest diversity of seaweed were Quirimba (151 species) and Ibo (126 species). The threats for the seaweed are collection of invertebrates, fishing, and the use of fishing nets and traps. Local residents do not explore seaweed for consumption. (ii) Terrestrial flora: ix The vegetation of the QNP is barely known. A recent study of the vegetation carried out in the QNP (commissioned by the park) used the Flora Zambesiaca classification system based on floristic, having identified six categories of terrestrial vegetation namely (in order of occupied surface): Miombo woodland, Acacia-grasslands, mixed forest, mangrove, miombovelloziaceae and coastal thicket respectively. In the QNP a total of 540 species of plants were identified among herbaceous (38%), trees (37%), bushes (18%), lianas (4%), succulents (2%) and palms. The botanic families of Fabaceae, Poaceae, Euphorbiaceae and Asteraceae are the ones with the larger number of species. The presence of a large number of species of Poaceae in the park is considered a natural contribution for the occurrence of fauna, mainly the grazers. The terrestrial vegetation of the QNP faces several threats that can result in the fragmentation of the ecosystems and/or alteration of its ecological conditions being able to drive to the reduction of the biodiversity. From among the main threats were indicated (a) the exploitation of woods, (b) conversion of natural areas for agriculture and dwelling, (c) uncontrolled burning. (iii) Marine fauna: There is a large variability in the composition and of the coral reefs depending on the water depth and local. The following genera of massif coral were identified: Porites, Diploastrea, Galaxea, Acropora, Echinopora, Pachyseris, Lobophyllia, Tubastrea and Millepora. Concerning the composition of hard corals, the predominant reefs are Porites, Playigyra, Diploastrea, Acropora, Pocillopora, Pachyseris, Echinopora and Montipora. The following genera of soft coral were identified: Lihotphyton, Sarcophyton and Sinularia. In general, the state of conservation of the coral reefs is good. In the Archipelago of the Quirimbas and proximities the occurrence of 7 marine mammal species were confirmed, being 4 dolphins (Stenella longirotris, Tursiopsis truncatus, Grampus griseus and Sousa plumbea) and 3 species of whale (Megaptera novaeangliae, Physeter macrocephalus and Globicephala macrorhynchus). A high probability of occurrence of other 5 species of dolphins exists and other 5 species of whales. In the Quirimbas Archipelago, were listed about 160 species of corals. Of these, five are listed on the IUCN Red List, namely the sea turtles (Chelonia mydas, Eretmochelys imbricata and Lepidichelys olivacea), a dolphin (Turpiops truncatus) and the Dugong (Dugong dugon), anecdotally reported within the QNP. There were also recorded 140 species of molluscs, including some with the status of threatened species such as Charonia tritonis, Cypraecassis rufa, Cassis cornuta and Tridacna squamosa. Regarding the coral reefs fishes, Quisiva find itself in better state of conservation, compared to the others reefs already studied and is the area where large commercial size fish is captured. The fishing art that deserves most attention is the dragging net, therefore in all of the localities where this was predominant, small size fish was the most common, case of the Island of Quirimba and coast of Quissanga. x In 2004, the QNP initiated the monitoring of the population of ictiofauna of the sanctuaries of Matemo, Ibo and Quilalea and its impact on the artisanal (small scale) fishing in the adjacent areas. The monitoring uses cages and marking of two species of fish namely Cephalopodis argus (grouper) and Scarus ghobban (parrot). The study registered inside and outside of the sanctuaries, 53 species belonging to 17 families. The study identified large predators of Lethrinidae, Lutjanidae and Serranidae, inside the sanctuaries of Matemo and Ibo not found in the adjacent fishing areas. The average number of fish by cage was significantly higher inside the sanctuaries of Matemo and Ibo than in the adjacent fishing areas.. Conversely, in the sanctuary of Quilalea higher diversity of species was observed outside the sanctuary. These contradictory results are attributed to the preliminary character of the results. Of the studies carried out on the captures of artisanal fishing there are some divergences in the reported figures, particularly in the district of Quissanga. Although the studies of the IIP have been carried out in at least two periods (2006 and 2007), these hide the methodological details, which complicates the interpretation of the results and explanation of the differences observed. On the basis of that observation and considering that studies carried out by the QNP present the methodological details and a larger sample, despite having been carried out observations in only one period (2007), we consider these as more feasible to be used as base line. (iv) Terrestrial fauna: In the QNP at least 46 species of medium-large mammals were identified. Of these, 6 are threatened to extinction and 13 protected by Law in Mozambique. About 447 species of birds were identified, of which at least one species, Bucorvus leadbeateri, is threatened and 12 protected by Law in Mozambique. Despite the lack of updated information, at least 23 species of reptiles, 10 species of amphibians and 750 species of insects inside and near the Park were registered. Populations of mammals were estimated, the areas of high concentration of fauna, the elephant’s migration routes and the zones of high incidence of human-wildlife conflicts were identified and mapped. Inside the limits of the QNP the areas with severe human-wildife conflicts are the Villages of Muaja, Naputa, Ndique, Namanje, Ntessa, Tapara and Tororo (District of Quissanga); Manica, Muagamula and Machova (District of Macomia); Pedreira, Mitambo, Massassi and Unguia (District of Meluco); Ngura and Jiúte (District of Ancuabe) and Aldeia 25 de Junho belonging to the District of Pemba-Metuge. With the proclamation of the QNP these conflicts have been reducing in frequency and severity due to a series of measures that the authorities of the park are implementing in coordination with the local communities. The organization of machambas in block is the approach that most contributed for the reduction of the destruction of crops, ensuring better agricultural yield. Although the studies referred in this report have created a base for the knowledge of the current situation of the biodiversity of the QNP, there is still a lot to be investigated in view to provide information for decision-making to the Park management. Among the important aspects considered as major knowledge gaps are the following: xi α) β) χ) δ) ε) φ) γ) η) ι) ϕ) The current knowledge of the migratory routes of big terrestrial mammals allows us to have an overview of the localities of collision and the focus of humanwildlife conflict, but still there is little information about the real possibilities to make it compatible between the conservation of biodiversity and the community development in a park with several inhabitants Several studies of terrestrial fauna were conducted for big and medium mammals, thus leaving out the small mammals, reptiles, amphibians and insects, which can represent an important role in the stability of the ecosystems as well as serve as indicator of alterations of the quality of the habitat The efforts of monitoring, in particular the use of the MOMS, established a base to start systematic observation of the terrestrial and marine flora and fauna. However, the data collected still are not satisfactory and do not provide the necessary knowledge base for decision-making for the conservation of biodiversity. A mechanism that transforms the data of the MOMS into a platform of decision-making for the management of the Park is still missing The resources state of the terrestrial flora is affected by the patterns of utilization of the resources (lawful and illegal) and the land use patterns by local communities. However, little it is known about the impacts of land use and cover change, the impacts of wildfires, exploitation of forest products (timber and non-timber) on the conservation of the biodiversity. Apart from the man-made changes on the vegetation, the vegetation can change naturally following a plant succession process or from climatic changes in the long term. This dynamic, that can result in important consequences for biodiversity conservation, in particular in the quality of the habitats, was little studied Regarding the quality of the terrestrial habitats, nothing was documented about the incidence of fires, distribution, quality, and availability of water and its impact on the terrestrial fauna throughout the year. However it was reported that it is in course the mapping of the permanent water bodies and their distribution There are several studies about marine fauna that emphasize the identification and occurrence of different species in the marine region of the QNP. However, there is little information about the quantities (abundance, frequency, etc.) as well as the dynamic (including the seasonal variation, reproduction, growth, mortality, etc.) of the marine fauna About the marine fauna there are limited studies that evaluate the relationship between the fauna and its habitat including the foraging habits, standards of reproduction, age structure and the relation between the occurrence and abundance of the fauna and marine flora There are no biological studies of the Banco de São Lázaro. The existence of this information would permit a better management of the bank especially in terms of recreational and sport fishing Currently there is no systematized information about the patterns of exploitation of the marine invertebrate (including the trade of protected species); the existence of this information would contribute to the elaboration of the management measures of important inter-tidal and sublitorais?? zones; xi κ) The Knowledge about the real impact of the marine sanctuaries is also incipient. It is necessary to carry out more studies to evaluate if the established marine sanctuaries function as nurseries of reproduction, or as areas of feeding or as shelter or still as a source of youngsters for the adjacent fishing areas; Based on the observations indicated above, and in line with the objective of the QNP management plan, we identified some priority actions for monitoring and research oriented to provide technical support to the Park management. Among these, the most priority are: (i) Continue to monitor the fish captures (ii) Establish a monitoring systems for the impact of the marine sanctuaries (iii) Monitor the distribution and occurrence of sea turtles (iv) Monitor the captures of marine invertebrates (ex: molluscs, holothurias, crustaceous) (v) Continue and improve the collection of data in the context of MOMS (vi) Monitor the conversion of natural habitats into agricultural land or housing (vii) Monitor the utilization of forest resources, timber and non-timber by local communities (viii) Evaluation of the impact of fire (as management tool or wildfire) in the species composition and structure of the vegetation (ix) Inventory of carbon (baseline) (x) Monitoring of the commercialization of meat and others products obtained from hunting inside and outside of the QNP (xi) Determination of the size, distribution and movement of the population of elephants and other species of medium-large mammals (xii) Factors influencing the occurrence of human-wildlife conflicts and the impacts of the programs of mitigation of human-wildlife conflicts on humans and wildlife populations (xiii) Study of the impact of the electric fence in the exclusion of the elephant from the residential zones (villages) (xiv) comparative study of the approaches to mitigate human-wildlife conflicts The implementation of these actions requires coordinated effort among the authorities of the QNP and others partners such as the National Institutes (e.g. IIP, IDPPE), Universities (e.g. EMU, UniLurio), National Centers (CDS- Coastal Zones), among others. xi 1. Introduction The present study was commissioned by WWF-Mozambique with the main objective to evaluate the state of the biodiversity of the Quirimbas National Park (QNP). The study answers some of the challenges that the QNP has in view to guarantee the conservation of ecosystems and species of plants and animals on marine and terrestrial ecosystems. Previous studies revealed that the high human population density, particularly in the coastal region, imposes a high pressure over the biological resources, since fishing, hunting and exploitation of forest resources are among the major livelihood strategies for local communities. In addition, the crossing of large-scale fauna routes (such as elephants) with the routes of human circulation and the establishment of agricultural fields about these routes has turned out in conflicts between the fauna and the local residents. However, despite of these constraints the work done by the project of the Development of the Quirimbas National Park established mechanisms of adaptive management having identified areas where the population density is low and that the conservation would be possible with the minimum of conflict and routes of large-scale animals. The recognition of the QNP as an area of global priority for conservation of the biodiversity due to its richness in the terrestrial ecosystems as well as marine ecosystems brings about the need to reflection about assuring such conservation. At the same time, having noticed the limited knowledge about the state of conservation and the dynamic of the biological resources of the QNP, it was proposed this study with the objective to contribute in the systematization of the existing information, identify gaps in the knowledge of the state of biodiversity and propose measures of conservation, research and monitoring. Therefore, this study has the general objective (according to the terms of reference): Based on the Park’s current and possibly future management objectives and priorities develop a concise and integrated research and monitoring strategy for the Quirimbas National Park that effectively informs the park administration and its decision making. This should be done through: (i) Identifying the current state of scientific knowledge from previous research done, (ii) Review ongoing research and monitoring activities and their quality and effectiveness in informing the park administration and their relation to the Park’s current and possibly future objectives; (iii) Make recommendations on their improvemen. The specific objectives for the present study are to: (i) Conduct a critical review of the state of scientific knowledge in the QNP area, including an analysis of the scope and quality of scientific studies done to date; (ii) Critical review of the current ongoing monitoring and research activities of the park and their effectiveness and utilization by the park administration in making informed management decisions; (iii) Identify the main gaps in the present state of scientific knowledge in relation to the current and possibly future management objectives of the park; (iv) Integrate the various studies into an overall report of the state of biodiversity in the QNP; (v) Suggest management and zoning interventions based on the results of the review and in close relation to the management priorities and objectives for the park; (vi) Suggest a prioritized, integrated and concise program for research and monitoring for the next five years of the park that informs management objectives and priorities (this can include already ongoing research and monitoring activities) including financial implications and implementation modalities; (vii) Analyze and make recommendations on how the various research initiatives in the QNP landscape are planned, carried out and coordinated. The methodology for the achievement of the objectives of this study consisted of the revision of literature, concentrated on the studies and reports about the QNP and adjacent areas. 1 Additionally it was carried out a seminar to prepare the research program and analysis of the preliminary report. The results of the study was presented in two essential part, being the first part consisting of (i) the description of the current state of the biodiversity of the QNP (ii) identification and analysis of knowledge gaps on the biodiversity of the QNP, (iii) the current threats to the conservation and (iv) management options; and the second part that contains the research biodiversity monitoring plan. 2 2. Geography 2.1 Location Created in 2002, the Quirimbas National Park (QNP) is located in northern coast of Mozambique. More specifically the park has its boundaries within Cabo Delgado Province which are made up by parts of six central districts of the same province, namely: Meluco, Ancuabe, Macomia, Ibo, Pemba-Metuge and Quissanga. The latter is the only district that has its entire surface within the park. QNP covers an area of approximately 7506 km2, of which about 80% (5984 km2) is occupied by the mainland and the remaining 20% (1,522 km 2) are composed of island and marine habitats. Astronomically the park is situated between within the following geographic coordinates: Latitude: 12° 00 '00 " S and 12 ° 55' 04" S Longitude: 39° 10 '00 " E and 40 ° 39' 44" E The QNP extension is approximately 100 km starting from the mouth of Tari River, up to Mucojo village in Macomia District (Figure 1), including the undersea of the Banco de S. Lázaro, which is located 42 nautical miles east of Ibo island (MITUR, 2003). 2.2 Limits The QNP bordered to the East by Indian Ocean and to the North by the EN243 road (MelucoMacomia) and also the villages along the floodplain of Messala River. In the South the park is limited by the human settlements situated along the agricultural lowlands of PembaMetuge distric. The western boundary of the park is more complex and bounded down the rivers: Montepuez Nacojo, Nenete, Messala and Muagide, including inselbergs of Meluco district and the upper meanders of Messala River (MITUR, 2003). 3 Figure 1. Geographic location of the QNP The marine side of the park consists of 11 islands in the southern part of the Quirimbas Archipelago, of which four (Ibo, Matemo, Quisiwe and Quirimba) have a long tradition of permanent human occupation. The other islands in the perimeter of the park include: Quipaco, Mefundvo, Quilalea, Sencar, Quirambo, Fion and Rolas Island. (i) Macaloe Island Macaloe island falls within the following geographic coordinates: 11o 59 '00 "S and 40o 55' 00" E. It is close to Ponta Pangane, an important site for coastal trade and fishing. There is no permanent camp on the island, neither a source of fresh water. However, in the south beach of the island, it can be seen some migrant fishermen camps. The island was made up by coralline material, thus there is a huge predominance of dry shrub. Mangrove trees can only be found in the north of the island, near the shoreline (Mozambique Frontier 1997, 1998a and 1998b; EIA Rovuma Basin, 2006). (ii) Mogundula Island The island of Mogundula is about 1 km from Ponta Pangane and it’s located within 12 o 02 '32''S and 40o 32' 36''E geographic coordinates. The island, which has an oval shape, is relatively small (0.5 km x 0.7 km). There is a small temporary camp for about 15 people in the Westside of the island. Additionally, the island has no source of fresh water although there is a shallow lagoon in the centre of the island with 150 m in diameter, which is surrounded by mangrove vegetation. (Frontier Mozambique 1997, 1998a and 1998b; EIA Rovuma Basin, 2006). 4 (iii) Rolas Island The Rolas Island is located in the North Matemo Island: 12o 08 '48 " N and 40o 33' 42" E. The island is small with its size being 1 km x 0.5 km. There are no signs of people living permanently, but this site is used by fishermen, who set up their camps. There is fresh water on the island (Mozambique Frontier 1997, 1998a and 1998b; EIA Rovuma Basin, 2006). (iv) Matemo Island Matemo island is located within 12 o 12 '30 "N and 40 o 36' 00" E. It is the largest island in the park, and its size varying from 7.3 km x 3.3 km. A wide number of campsites can be seen along the eastern side of the island. The island has about 2000 inhabitants. There is a source for fresh water in south of the island. Matemo has a variety of habitats, including mangrove swamps which include a small plantation of coconut palms. Matemo Sanctuary was established in 2003 in the north-western coast of the island and has 3 km long (Frontier Mozambique 1997, 1998a and 1998b; EIA Rovuma Basin, 2006). (v) Ibo Island Ibo is located at 12o 41 'S and 40o 35' E, with a size of about 3.6 km x 4.5 km. The island has the largest population and has historically been the largest port (now transferred to Pemba). Fresh water can be found through wells and boreholes. An extensive mangrove area of 4.5 km can be seen in the north coast of Quirimba island. Quissanga channel separates the island from the mainland by Ponta Quissanga where a large area of mangrove lies upon (Mozambique Frontier 1997, 1998a and 1998b; EIA Rovuma Basin, 2006). (vi) Quirimba Island With an approximately size of almost 6.2 km x 2.9 km, Quirimba island is located at 12o 25 'S and 40o 37' E. The island has a village in the north which is the residence of approximately 3000 people. This population has increased mainly due to the influx of people during the civil war. Nearly 75% of the island was converted into coconut plantations. In the north of the island a narrow channel separates the mangrove area of the island, to those of Ibo Island, whereas coral reefs and seaweeds can be found in the East side of the island. The south side of the island is comprised by a large intertidal area (shared by the Sencar and Quilalia islands) which shares the border with the Montepuez Channel. (vii) Sencar Island Sencar island is located in south of the Quirimba island, at 12o 28 '42 "N and 40o 39' 00" E. It has a size of about 1.6 km x 0.6 km. A considerable stretch of mangrove is located in South and Central parts of the Island. Sencar has only 60 inhabitants which occupy the north lands of the island. (EIA Rovuma Basin, 2006). (vii) Quilalia Quilalaia island lies in south of the intertidal zone of the Quirimba island and it is located at 12o 29 '36''S and 40o 36' 12 "E. This is also a small island and measures 0.65km x 0.35 km in size. Quilalia is the less populated island with approximately than 50 inhabitants, some of 5 them living there in permanent basis. There is no fresh water on the island. (Frontier Mozambique 1997, 1998a and 1998b; EIA Rovuma Basin, 2006). (ix) Mefunvo Island Mefunvo is situated in the South of Montepuez Bay more precisely at 12o 33 '00 "S and 40o 36' 00''E, The island measures 3.3 km x 3.1 km in size. The population of island estimated in 2000 inhabitants. Likewise Quilalia and others, this island has no fresh water. The island has also an intertidal zone with two distinct patterns: The Westside predominantly occupied by sandy platform and some seagrass beds and in the eastside mainly comprised by an association of algae and seagrass (Frontier Mozambique 1997, 1998a and 1998b; EIA Rovuma Basin, 2006). (x) Island Quissiva Quissiva is located in south of Mefunvo island and East of Arimbi Bay, more precisely at 12 o 35 '42 "S and 40o 37' 00" E. The island is small with only 2.8 km x 1.2 km in size. It has been inhabited for 40 years. The shore is characterized by areas with sand banks along the western boundary. A sandy platform and seagrass beds can be found in the north and south parts of the island. There are not mangrove areas in the island (Frontier Mozambique 1997, 1998a and 1998b; EIA Rovuma Basin, 2006). (xi) Island Quipaco Quipaco Island is situated in the South Bay within Arimbi Bay of Quipaco. Precisely it is located at 12 o 41 '00 "N and 40 o 36' 42" E. The island is also small in size (1 km x 0.9 km). Although the island has no population that resides permanently, this place is regularly visited by fishermen and people exploring mangroves (Frontier Mozambique 1997, 1998a and 1998b; EIA Rovuma Basin, 2006). 2.3 Climate The climate of QNP is in general, the same type of climate of Cabo Delgado province. Hence, according to Köppen's climate classification, QNP has tropical dry savanna climate (Aw). Specifically, the area covered by the park is characterized by dry sub-humid weather. These climates have a pronounced dry season, with the driest month having precipitation less than 60 mm. This type of climate is normally comprised by two distinct seasons: the dry and rainy. Thus, the rainy season that is felt is the region is associated with the presence on the region of the ITCZ. This is the reason why the park has an extensive network of watercourses of which four are the major rivers, namely: Messala, Montepuez Muagamula and Muaguide and many others of secondary, but all with a significant importance to agriculture and wildlife. Spatial distribution of rainfall is not uniform throughout the park. Rainfall is more abundant on the coast, decreasing steadily inwards inland. The average annual rainfall ranges from 800 6 mm to 1200 (Figure 2). In general, most of the rainfall occurs in the period between November and March, varying significantly either in quantity, as well as spatially. Geographically, high levels precipitation (1000 mm to 1200 mm) occurs in the coastal districts of Macomia and Quisanga. Continentality1 and altitude represent the factors that most influence the spatial variation of rainfall along the surface of the park. The annual average potential evapotranspiration varies from 1300 mm to 1600 mm, creating a deficit in water balance of the park (FAO, 1995). Figure 2. Spatial distribution of rainfall in QNP Likewise, within the QNP temperature values vary significantly throughout the year, varying between 20o and 28o C. However, temperature spatial distribution is almost uniform across the park boundaries (Figure 3). The coldest months are June and July, where the minimum annual average temperature can reach 15º C. In contrary, the warmest months of the year are January and February, with temperatures reaching are above 33º C (FAO, 1995). 7 Figure 3. Spatial distribution of annual average temperature in QNP 2.4 Landscape and Hydrography In terms of geomorphology, the QNP is located in the gneiss-magmatitic complex of Mozambique 'belt', where 'inselbergs' stand out on intrusive rocks of the Pre-Cambrian. Relief pattern of park is similar to that of the country, which is in a form of stairs. Thus, the altitude increases from the coast to the interior. The highest elevations are located in the west of park, in Meluco district and can reach up 800 m. The highest peak is Mount Kuero (SDDS, 2006). A considerable part of the interior is made up by lowlands with altitude varying from 200 m and 500 m, (Figure 4). There is some correlation between the topography, especially the altitude and agro-climatic conditions of the region. Generally, high rainfall values are recorded at higher altitude zones. The area of the park is crossed by a number of periodic rivers and watercourses. The main rivers in the park include: Messala, Montepuez Muagamula, Muaguide, Mivoroto, Mezingue, Sivuca. The largest logon is Bilibiza which is located in Quissanga district. These characteristics are so essential for agricultural activities and wildlife within the park. 8 Figure 4. Shaded Relief and hydrography of the QNP 2.5 Soils The park consists of a variety of soil types. The islands have predominantly sandy soils of coastal dunes. Large areas of the coast are characterized by sandy loam soils, that often have good drainage and also by alluvial soils with coarse texture. In the interior of the park it can be found predominantly red soils of loam and brown clay soils. The western part is mostly occupied by red clay soils which has high depth and excellent capacity for water retention (Figure 5). Most of the soils are sandy, but with significant presence of clay loam. These soils are classified as good to moderate soils, generally with good drainage. In contrary, the river valleys are dominated by alluvial soils (Fluvisols), that present dark and heavy texture, normally classified as medium to moderately poor soils. These types of soils are often subject to regular flooding (FAO, 1995). 9 Figure 5. Soil map of the QNP 2.6 Bathymetry The coastal region of QNP does not present significant variations in depth. However, the entire coastal zone presents an irregular bathymetry with values ranging from 90 m 400 m depth (Figure 6). This variation of the sea depth is responsible for the effect of wave’s diffraction along the entire coast. This phenomenon is extremely important because it reduces the impact and the speed of the propagation and oscillation of the waves. One of the most important features of the region is the Banco de S. Lázaro, which constitute a mountain "island" at the bottom of the sea (Figure 6). Figure 6. Bathymetry of the coast of QNP 10 2.7 Land use In terms of land use, two distinct patterns can be seen in the park. The coastline which is characterized by mangrove trees and the interior land, which is predominantly occupied by herbaceous shrubland and open forest (DINAGECA, 1999, see Section Terrestrial Vegetation). Urban areas occupy tiny portions of land within the park. However, some areas of Meluco, Macomia, Quissanga and Metuge are also occupied by smallholder farmers with rainfed based agriculture. 2.8 Population The population of the QNP is distributed across the103 villages located in 6 districts that comprise the park. Since 2006, QNP the population has risen and now it is estimated that there 93 697 inhabitants living there. This figure does not include the residents of the buffer zone, which are estimated to be 30 714 inhabitants, distributed by 26 villages. Quissanga district is the only one with their size entirely within the park boundaries. Therefore Quissanga is the most populous district within the park and has about 40 781 inhabitants distributed by 47 villages. The majority of the population living in the QNP is along the coastline (mainly in the districts of Quissanga, Macomia and Pemba-Malema) and along the main roads. Nevertheless, many villages within the park are scattered over large areas resulting in low population density, particularly in the districts of Meluco and Quissanga (Figure 7). The majority of the population living in the park is employed in agriculture, including animal husbandry and fisheries. Agriculture is predominant inside the park boundaries whereas is more fishing predominant on the coast. Agricultural activity is carried out using traditional techniques in small family farms. 11 Figure 7. Spatial distribution of population in QNP Table 1. Distribution of population by Administrative Post District Administrative Post Ancuabe Acuabe Mesa Ibo Quirimba Chai Macomia Mucojo Meluco Muaguide Metuge Bibiliza Mahate Quissanga Total Ibo Macomia Meluco Pemba-Metuge Quissanga Total Population (2007) 45.521 31.732 5.997 3.512 16.565 27.845 28.459 14.697 10.487 37.757 12.067 18.657 4.468 257.764 Source: INE, 2008 As stated in the chapter on geographical location, the district Quissanga is the only having its entire boundaries within the QNP. In this regard, the figures of the population size presented in Table 1 and the population density shown in the map of Figure 7, where highlighted as a demographic indicator of the districts comprising the QNP. Hence, the values of population size for each administrative post do not constitute necessarily the real figures of QNP population. This applies also to administrative posts, which are the smaller territorial units 12 than a district. Updated data on population size by villages would be ideal to estimate accurately the total population living in the QNP. Nevertheless, data from the last population census2, will be made available soon for the village level. 13 3. Marine Componente 3.1 Marine Vegetation 3.1.1 Mangrove The QNP’ mangroves differ in its distribution, probably conditioned by factors such as soil type, degree of exposure of the site to tidal action, which influences the availability of physical and chemical parameters (salinity, pH), so important aspects in the development of mangrove vegetation. In terms of species, there are species that occur in some islands and not in others, depending on the characteristics of each site. Sonneratia alba, is a species found in the QNP that occurs only in the northern and central Mozambique (Bandeira et al, 2009), so its presence in the park is important for better conservation, so QNP is single marine conservation area / coastal area in the North. Regarding the structural attributes of the mangrove vegetation, the description provided by Frontier (1997 and 1998) may not reflect what was in place, because the methodology used to quantify mangrove is not appropriate as can be found in some studies made by Kairo et al. (2002); Bosire et al. (2003); Kairo et al. (2008), Amade (2008) and Bandeira et al. (2009). For example, the plot size used, 5 m x 5 m, is used only to quantify saplings of mangroves or in juvenile stage. To quantify the trees in the adult stage, has been used larger plots of 10 m x 10 m. Therefore the extrapolation may not be correct. The interpretation of structural attributes in the mangrove forest has been done through indexes, such as index to value the importance of species (which indicates the contribution of each species in terms of occurrence, abundance and basal area), and the complexity index (which assesses the vegetation of the site, and this is given by the total number of species, average height of trees, density of stems per hectare and total basal area of trees) that best summarizes the characteristics of vegetation (Kairo et al., 2002; Bosire et al., 2003; Kairo et al. 2008 e Amade, 2008). Studies of the Frontier (1997 and 1998) do not indicate accurately the conservation status of species of mangrove in QNP, only indicate where it is highly exploited, which makes it impossible to know the degradation level, and if it is need or not to aply urgent conservation strategies. Unusually for Ibo island, Bandeira et al. (2009), made the description of the mangrove, through plots of 10 m x 10 m, and got the importance of species, which showed Sonneratia alba as the most important species and presented relative density (24.36%), relative frequency (36 %) and relative dominance (77.69%). The index of complexity of the forest was 14 1.43 and it resulted of the product of the diameter (10.62 cm), number of species (4), stem density (2080 ha-1), height (2.98 m) and basal area (2.72 m2 ha-1). Ibo and Quirimba islands, presented the highest number of mangrove species compared to the other islands of the park. The species R. mucronata was found in all the islands and the X. granatum was the less found. In the Quilaluia, Quisiva and Rolas islands, the mangrove vegetation was not found (Table 2.) Table 2. Occurrence of mangrove species per site in QNP O = Occurs; N = Does Not occur Species Macaloe Mogundula Matemo Avicennia marina N O N Bruguiera gymnorrhiza O N O Ceriops tagal N O O Rhizophora mucronata O O O Sonneratia alba N N N Xilocarpus granatum N N O Altura (m) 25 Am 20 Ibo O O O O O N Bg Quirimba Sencar Mefunvo Quipaco O N N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N S N N O N N Ct Rm Sa 15 10 Quipaco Mefunvo Sencar Quirimba Ibo Matemo Macaloe 0 Mogundula 5 Figure 8. Height of trees by species in different islands of the QNP. Am = Avicennia marina, Bg = Bruguiera gimnorrhyza Ct = Ceriops tagal, Rm = Rhizophora mucronata, Sa = Sonneratia alba.. In studies of the Frontier (1997 and 1998), some data about trees height are missing, and which exist were obtained through the estimation and not by calculating the average measurements in the field, as was done in other studies such as Kairo et al. (2002); Bosire et al. (2003), Kairo et al. (2008) and Amade (2008) (Error: Reference source not found). The tallest trees were found in Mogundula and Sencar, and the lowest at Ibo and Mefunvo islands. These characteristics often have been caused by differences in some factors such as salinity, vegetation, topography, soil texture (Amade, 2008). 15 Xg Am 40 Bg Ct Rm Sa Xg 2 Sa Diâmetro Médio (m /ha) Rm Am Bg Ct Sa 800 400 Rm Quipaco Mefunvo Sencar Sa Xg 75 50 25 Am 20 Bg Ct Rm Quipaco 0 25 1200 Quirimba Ibo Matemo Mogundula Macaloe Xg Ct Mefunvo Quipaco Mefunvo Rm Altura (m) 1600 Sencar Quirimba Ibo Matemo Sa 15 10 Figure 9. Structural Attributes of Species in QN The Sencar and Ibo islands presented the highest number of trees per species. The largest average diameters and relative density of trees were found in Sencar, Quirimba and Ibo. Matemo showed higher basal area of the forest. The major regeneration of the species C. tagal, R. mucronata and X. granatum was found in Sencar, and S. alba in Mefunvo (Figure 9. ). 3.1.2 Seagrasses There were a higher occurrence of species of seagrass in Ibo, Quirimba, and Matemo Islands. Species that occurred more in QNP are Thalassia hemprichii, Thalassodendron ciliatum, and Cymodocea serrulata was less found Table 3.. Enhalus acaroides species is rare in southern Mozambique (www.seagrassnet.org), so it is essential that there is a good strategy of management to protect this species, because of its restricted distribution in the country. Their existence in the park can also be important for its preservation. 16 Quipaco Mefunvo Sencar Quirimba Ibo Matemo 0 Mogundula Quipaco Mefunvo Sencar Quirimba Ibo Matemo Mogundula 5 0 Macaloe Macaloe 0 Mogundula 30 Bg Sencar 60 Am 100 Quirimba 90 0 Ibo Xg 10 Matemo Sa 20 Mogundula Rm 30 Macaloe Ct 2 Bg Quipaco Mefunvo Sencar Local Número de Juvenis/m Am Ibo Matemo Mogundula 0 Quirimba 25 Macaloe Dominância Relativa (%) 2 Ct 50 120 Área Basal Total (m /ha) Bg 75 Macaloe Densidade Relativa (%) Am 100 Studies of the Frontier (1997 and 1998), presented only the species of seagrasses that occur in the QNP but does not talk about abundance, density and frequency of them. It doesn’t indicate the degree of coverage and the conservation status of species (www.seagrassnet.org). Quipaco Quisiva Mefunvo Quilaluia Sencar Quirimba Ibo Matemo Rolas Mogundula 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Macaloe Número de Espécies de Ervas Marinhas Transects were made and plots, but is not indicated the number and size of plots used for the study. The interpretation of the data was not made through indexes and statistics to allow a better precision of the structure of seagrass meadows in each site. Figure 10. Number of species of seagrasses in the site of QNP The greatest number of species of seagrasses were found in Ibo, Quirimba and Matemo (Figure 10. ). 17 Table 3. Occurrence of seagrasses species in each site of QNP . O = occurs, -- = does not occur Species Cymodocea rotundata Cymodocea serrulata Enhalus acaroides Halodule uninervis Halophila ovalis Halophila stipulacea Holodule wrightii Syringodium isoetifolium Thalassia hemprichii Thalassodendron ciliatum M a c a l o e S S S S S M o g u n d u l a S - R o l a s S M a t e m o S S S S S S S I b o S S S S S S S Q u i r i m b a S S S S S S S S S S e n c a r S S Q u i l a l u i a S S S S M e f u n v o S S S S S S Q u i s i v a S S - Q u i p a c o S S S S S 3.1.3 Seaweeds The seaweeds were grouped into 4 groups of algae Cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) Rhodophyta (red algae), Clorophyta (green algae) and Phaephyta (brown algae). Were found more species of the group of red algae in all islands of QNP . The largest group of Rhodophyta, Clorophytas and Phaephyta were found in Quirimba and Ibo the islands. The seaweeds per group can be seen in Annexes 1, 2 and 3 (Error: Reference source not found). In studies of the Frontier (1997 and 1998), seaweeds have been grouped in four groups mentioned above, but there was no information about the percentage of coverage in site and the conservation status of species. Transects were made, but is not indicated the number and size of plots used for the study, like often it has been done. There is no evidence through indexes and statistics that indicate the accurate sites with more or less diversity of the species (Figueiredo et al., 2004). 18 Cyanophyta Chlorophyta Phaeophyta Rhodophyta 80 60 40 Quipaco Quisiva Mefunvo Quilaluia Sencar Quirimba Ibo Matemo Rolas 0 Mogundula 20 Macaloe Grupos de Macroalgas 100 Figure 11. Number of seaweeds by the Local QNP. Cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) Rhodophyta (red algae), Clorophyta (green algae) and Phaephyta (brown algae) 3.1.4 Conservation status and threats of marine vegetation Table 4. Threats and conservation measures for marine vegetation of the QNP Category - Threats Site Mangroves Cutting mangroves for various purposes (primary source of fuel wood and construction materials, fence Mefunvo - all species that occur in local Ibo, Matemo – unspecified; Mogundula mainly Ceriops tagal Quipaco Bruguiera gymnorrhiza Most endangered Species (Ceriops tagal); Bruguiera gymnorrhiza Conservation Measures Made cutting of trees near the upper limit of the mangrove, or not less than 10 meters from the coastline, to avoid disruption of protective barrier formed by the trees near the shoreline, promote the use of resources that do not degrade ecosystems; Promote the replanting / restoration of mangrove areas where exploitation is made; Promote the plant19 ing of crops / trees of rapid growth, as an alternative of mangrove trees. Seagrasses Fishing All sites with activities, seagrasses presence of boats, nets and fishing traps, collection of invertebrates Unspecified Monitoring the activities conducted in the sites with seagrasses meadows whenever possible, avoiding to use instruments that could damage the habitat; the local people aware of the importance of these sites in the maintenance of adjacent habitats. Seaweeds Collection of All local with invertebrates, seaweeds fishing activities, the presence of networks and fishing traps Unspecified Monitoring the activities conducted at these sites, avoiding whenever possible to use instruments that could damage the habitat, the local population aware of the importance of these sites in the maintenance of adjacent habitats. According to Decree No 45/2004 which describes the Rules of the Environmental Impact Assessment, the national and international law considers the mangrove forests, native forests, and other ecosystems as having protected status. This is in accordance with the Convention on Biological Diversity, which has as main objectives the conservation of biological diversity and the sustainable use of its components. From the CBD (Convention on Biodiversity), both genetic resources and traditional knowledge associated with these are no longer freely accessible, creating in this way criteria for their regulation through standards for fair distribution of benefits to holders resources as well as the people in possession of traditional knowledge about them. 20 Despite the law (Decree No. 45/2004) and the biodiversity convention, emphasizing the importance of protecting themselves and avoid activities that may damage ecosystems like mangrove forests, seagrasses and seaweed, in many places these instruments are not used to preserve the biodiversity, on one hand because they don’t know its importance and another because of the negligence its importance. 3.2 Marine Fauna Biogeographically, the taxonomic composition suggests that the marine fauna existing in the Quirimbas Archipelago is composed predominantly by tropical species with Indo-Pacific affinity, apparently due to the presence of coral reefs and the direct influence of the South Equatorial Current, whereas the channel Mozambique, which has influence on the Mozambican coast corresponds to the branch of the South Equatorial Current that by approaching the African continent precisely in Cabo Delgado (Latitude 11ºS) from the North Pacific and the Indonesian archipelago, it flows to the south of the continent in parallel with the Mozambican coast, in general, and the Coast of Cabo Delgado, in particular, providing the marine and coastal habitats of the Quirimbas Archipelago with larvae that brings from the North Pacific and Indonesia (Fieux & Reverdin 2001; Fieux 2001). The many consultations with communities, research works, and meetings with stakeholders resulted in identifying a number of priority issues to be addressed by QNP such as (i) overfishing in artisanal fisheries, (ii) recreational and sport fishing, (iii) the pressure on resources and intertidal habitats, (iv) the regeneration of coral reef after the El Niño / Southern Oscillation in 1998 / 9, (v) the conservation of sea grass habitats, (vi) conservation of the Banco de São Lázaro, (vii) conservation of marine turtles, dugong, whale shark, (viii) trade of protected species, and (ix) harmonization of objectives and interests of tourism and fisheries. To this end, some government institutions and NGOs including the Ministry of Tourism, WWF and the Provincial Government of Cabo Delgado and as well as individual projects have provided some work to answer some of these issues. For the introduction of management measures aimed at conservation of these resources, there is urgent need for studies to the knowledge of the point of the actual situation. In general, little is known about the marine life in the Quirimbas Archipelago given the remote location and logistics that the region requires for any type of research. Existing known and available studies date from 1996, when a marine research project, Whittington et al (1997 and 1998) gave a description of the diversity and patterns of use of coastal and marine resources of 11 islands (Macaloe, Mogundula, Rolas, Matemo, Igbo, Quirimba, sense, Quilalea, Mefunvo, Quisiva and Quipaco) and Gell (1997), in the same project, gave a characterization of artisanal fisheries of the seagrass Island Quirimbas. With establishment of the Quirimbas National Park in 2002, multiply the efforts to improve the knowledge of marine fauna and are being implemented monitoring programs aimed at sustainable management of the Park, involving several institutions / individuals Ministry Tourism, WWF, the Provincial Government of Cabo Delgado and individual projects, graduate students, consultants and local community. 21 3.2.1 Marine invertebrates of the intertidal zone The intertidal zones are transitional environments between land and sea, with high biological interest, and are prone ecosystems for fixing the epifauna such as gastropods, bivalves, echinoderms, barnacles, and crabs, as well as flora and migratory species (fish and birds), who visit the area to feed, or as a shelter or to reproduce, thereby making the intertidal areas are considered "nursery" and have natural connections with the marine and coastal systems adjacent. Like other beaches in East Africa, the tides are semi-diurnal (Ngusaru 1997), which means that in 24 hours, the intertidal organisms are subjected to two cycles of exposure to air and submersion in seawater. According to Tide table, the theoretical maximum length of an emergence, ie the time interval between a low tide and the lowest peak of high tide in the highest tides is about 6 hours. According to the geological classification of the Mozambican coast, the substrate of the coast of Cabo Delgado is coral, consolidated from coral reefs during the Pleistocene (Ngusaru 1997). As characteristic of the entire north coast, the coast of Cabo Delgado has a succession of sandy beaches, dunes, coral reefs, mangroves and rock (especially at the mouth of streams) (Fischer et al. (1990). Some areas are covered with sand, seagrass beds and pebbles from the collapse of coral. The biota of the intertidal zone of Cabo Delgado is determined by the direct influence of the Mozambique Channel, which has an annual average surface temperature of 25 ° C and average salinity of 35 ‰ (Burchett 2000). However, coastal waters are warmer more than the Channel, reaching values higher than immediately after the tides. According to studies by Whittington el al. (1997.1998), the richest fauna was found in the islands of Central and South America (Table 5). Table 5. Number of common taxa recorded by Whittington et al. (1997,1998); Group of Islands Taxa Gastropod Bivalves 13 32 Northern (Macaloe,Mogundula, Rolas e Matemo) Central (Ibo, 30 Quirimba, Sencar e Quilaleia) Southern (Mefunvo, 13 Quisiva e Quipaco) Total Echinoderms Crustaceans 10 4 59 14 17 3 64 31 4 2 50 3.2.2 Coral Reefs Coral reefs of the Quirimbas Archipelago and their associated fauna are best described in a series of studies by Whittington et al (1997,1998) that, through the Program for Marine 22 Research Darwin / Frontier Mozambique, conducted between 1996 and 1998 studies on (i) distribution, structure and composition of the reefs, including the presence and abundance of endangered species or commercially important, (ii) on the species composition of marine invertebrates, and (iii) assessment on the size and diversity of 73 species of 6 families of key reef fish (including Acanthuridae, Chaetodontidae, Pomocanthudae, Tetradontidae, Mullidae and Balistidae) (iv) patterns of resource uses accessible to artisanal fisheries, and on (v) natural and anthropogenic impact on the corals. In 2002, Motta performed a study at Channel Sencar inserted in the CORDIO program to evaluate the degree of bleaching and the level of coral regeneration following the El Niño / Southern Oscillation in 1998 / 9. The province of Cabo Delgado holds about 525 km2 of coral reefs, classified as fringing type. Within the Quirimbas National Park (QNP) coral reefs occur in several ways, with the exception of some sites of the western shores of the islands, dominated by sand banks and sea grass beds. The main types of reefs found include steep walls, often found in the Southeast of the islands, and shallow coral gardens, with gentle slope. Figure 12 illustrates the distribution of the main stands of coral reefs found within the Quirimbas National Park 23 Figure 12. Map of Reef Corals and other coastal and marine habitats within Quirimbas National Park, according to Anadarko (2007). From the standpoint of diversity, the southern islands of the Quirimbas registered 160 species representing 55 genera, suggesting the existence of a great diversity. During a rapid assessment held by Telford et al 1999, in the northern islands of the Quirimbas were 24 identified 20 genera (including 15 hard corals and soft corals 5) belonging to 11 families. The main genera found appear to be Acropora and Porites, and the most common species include Favites spp. Platygyra spp. Lobophyton spp. Sinularia spp. and Sacrcophyton spp, whose abundance and species diversity varies between the islands: ROLAS ISLAND: This island is characterized by a poorly developed reef with gentle slope and low roughness. The most dominant is the staghorn coral, which comes to form homogeneous colonies. MATEMO ISLAND: This island has major differences with respect to the slope. In this context, on the east coast the island has a gentle slope in the southeast and there are vertical walls of coral. The composition of the substrate varies from rocky (most dominant) and the mixed sand. The most prevalent forms of corals include branching and massive. The southern island is a reef wall, with great diversity of corals and fish that are an attraction for diving and recreational fishing and sport. IBO ISLAND: On this island the reef is distributed in the north and east coast, with a slope generally mild with the exception of the existing wall at the tip of the island. Many sites are dominated by bedrock, reaching 50% form the substrate. The biota is dominated by hard corals. Forms of corals most prevalent include staghorn, branching and foliose. Were recorded the following genera Porites, Diploastrea, Galaxea, Acropora, Echinopora, Pachyseris, Lobophyllia, Tubastrea and .Millepora. QUIRIMBAS ISLAND: The main stands of corals occur on the east coast of the island, with very gentle slope (5-10%). We identified the following genera Porites, Playigyra, Diploastrea, Acropora, Pocillopora, Pachyseris, Echinopora and Montipora. Regarding the soft corals were recorded following genres Lithophyton, Sarcophyton and Sinularia. SENCAR ISLAND: The morphology of the reef varies considerably within the same island, forming a generally gentle slope (0-5%). The most common identified corals include Porites, Platygyra, Favites, Goniastrea, Galaxea, Acropora, Pocillopora, Echinopora, Turbinaria, Pachyseris, Lobophyllia, and Plerogyra Tubastrea. QUILALEA ISLAND: it is a relatively small island and its reef is characterized by large morphological differences with respect to the type and coverage of the substrate. The biota is dominated by coral with a mixture of different types of coral. The most abundant genera include Porites, Acropora and Tubastrea. MEFUNVO ISLAND: The coral reef is more developed in the northeast of the island, with hard and soft corals in equal proportions. QUISIVA ISLAND: The reef varies in slope. On the east coast corals occur at reef wall, which is dominated by hard corals. QUIPACO ISLAND: The reef more or less developed occurs in the northeast of the island and has a gentle slope not supeiror to 10%. The biota is dominated by coral boulders interspersed with sand banks and seagrass beds. 25 3.2.3 Reef Fish and Commercial Fish Species diversity of reef fish within the QNP appears to be consistent in the sites studied by Whittington et al. (1997, 1998), with low diversity reefs in the undeveloped reefs and high diversity in well developed reefs. In total, 375 species were recorded, of which over 300 were recorded in the reefs of South Quirimbas, where the diversity is described in more detail at channels of the Sencar Island. The most abundant species were identified in the family Acanthuridae (47%), Lutjanidae (22%), and Chaetondontidae (14%). Large part of fish observed were of small size and were herbivores, comprising 48%, followed by carnivorous fish (37%) while coralivorous and omnivorous comprised about 10% each, in abundance. The Table 6, 7 and 8 illustrate the number of species of reef an commercial fish recorded by family and by gender, in each group of islands. Table 6. Number of genus and species of reef and commercial fishes recorded at northern island group (Macaloe, Mogundula,Rolas e Matemo), according to Whittington et al (1997,1998). Family Acanthuridae Balistidae Chaetodontidae Mullidae Pomacanthidae Tetradontidae Lethrinidae Lutjanidae Scaridae Serranidae Haemulidae Carangidae Sphyraenidae Siganidae Total Nr of Genus 5 6 3 3 4 1 3 3 4 5 2 1 1 1 41 Nr of Species 17 10 23 7 11 5 6 9 16 18 7 3 1 1 134 Table 7. Number of genus and species of reef and commercial fishes recorded at central island group (Ibo, Quirimba, Sencar and Quilalea), according to Whittington et al (1997,1998). Familiy Acanthuridae Antennaridae Anthiinae Apogonidae Balistidae Belonidae Blenniidae Bothidae Nr of ° de Genuss 4 1 2 4 6 1 4 1 Nr of Species 19 1 3 8 11 1 4 2 26 Caesonidae Callyonimidae Carangidae Chirocentridae Chaetodontidae Cirrhitidae Clupeidae Dactylidae Echeneidae Engraulidae Entriscidae Fistularidae Gerreidae Gobiidae Grammistidae Haemulidae Hemiramphidae Holocentridae Labridae Lethrinidae Lutjanidae Microdesmidae Mullidae Muraenidae Nemipteridae Ostracidae Pegasidae Pinguipedidae Platacidae Platycephalidae Plotosidae Pomocanthidae Pomacentridae Priacanthidae Rhynchobatus Scaridae Scorpaenidae Serranidae Siganidae Sphyraenidae Syngnathidae Synodontidae Teraponidae Tetraodontidae Zanclidae Total 2 1 7 1 3 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 17 3 2 1 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 4 9 1 1 6 3 5 1 1 2 2 1 3 1 115 8 1 10 1 21 4 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 7 3 5 44 14 12 1 16 2 2 2 1 2 2 3 1 11 20 2 1 17 5 21 4 5 3 2 1 10 1 326 Table 8. Number of genus and species of reef and commercial fishes recorded at southern islands group (Mefunvo, Quisiva and Quipaco), according to Whittington et al (1997, 1998). 27 Family Acanthuridae Balistidae Chaetodontidae Mullidae Pomacanthidae Tetradontidae Lethrinidae Lutjanidae Scaridae Serranidae Haemulidae Carangidae Siganidae Total Nr of genus 5 6 4 3 4 1 3 3 4 5 2 1 1 42 Nr of Species 17 10 23 7 11 5 6 9 16 18 7 3 1 133 At the Banco de S. Lázaro, Saetre and Silva (1979) found only stocks of species of snapper Lutjanus bohar, suggesting the existence of a considerable stock of this species. However, interviews with recreational and sport fishermen in September 2006 suggest that fish stocks have declined in the last 10 years as a result of illegal fishing. For its part, Gell (1997) determined the species composition and fishing effort in the sea grass of the West Coast of the Quirimba Island, based on sampling of two gears (seine nets and cage). In this context, Gell identified 195 species belonging to 52 families. The annual production estimated in this study was 438 tonnes for seine net and 60 tonnes for the cages. In the seine nets, the most represented families were Lethrinidae (31.5), Siganidadae (22%) and Scaridae (11%). The main species include Lethrinus lentjan (Lethrinidae 23.9), Lethrinus variegatus (Lethrinidae 8%), Siganus sutor (Siganidae 25.1%), Leptoscarus vaigiensis (Scaridae, 8%), and Gerres oyena (Gerreidae, 3.5%) . And for cages the most abundant species were Leptoscarus vaigiensis, Siganus sutor, Parupeneus barberinus, P. macronema and Calotomos spinidens. Whittington et al. (1996, 1997, 1998) used basically non-specialist volunteers in all surveys. Globally, it is common to use non-specialist volunteers in various projects and conservation guidance to conduct baseline studies and monitoring to both in marine and terrestrial habitats. The advantage of using volunteers is to (a) provision of sufficient manpower to conduct extensive survey, (b) savings in financial resources for the provision of voluntary labor, (c) increased level of public awareness of environmental problems through of an active participation in research projects, and (d) provision of simple and inexpensive research techniques that can be continued at long term by using local skills and low financial resources. However, despite this obvious advantage, the use of volunteers is often criticized because the information collected is not safe as a result of both insufficient and inadequate training and lack of consistency (precision and accuracy) of different observers. The information on the commercial fish comes from small samples and data sampled at intervals of short time periods (eg days, 1 week), which makes it impossible to extrapolate and make inferences about the representativeness of the sample and seasonality, among other things. In 2003, the QNP in partnership with WWF and the Department of Aquaculture of the Fisheries Research Institute conducted a feasibility study on the culture of indigenous 28 shellfish at Ibo Island. This study concluded that 5 native species of oysters could be grown. The recommended species for culture are Pinctata capensis and Sacrostrea cuccullata (Ibo Mussemuco and Matemo) and the culture of crab (in Mussemuco) or lobster (the island of Quirimba). Moreover, in 2003 with the implementation of the Artisanal Fisheries Project for Northern Nampula and Cabo Delgado (PPANNCD), coordinated by the Institute of Developing of Small-Scale Fisheries (IDPPE), the Institute for Fisheries Research (IIP) introduced the system of random sampling of catches, species composition and fishing effort in the province of Cabo Delgado, including the zone of influence of QNP. However, for technical reasons and organizational aspects, reports on these samples only began to be published / available from 2006. The gear studied and considered in this study are: beach seine, spear, gillnet and handline. These data were not always feasible for the management objectives of the QNP, mainly due to a low intensity of sampling within the park, many of the fishing centers excluded because it was a program to cover the entire province. The low sampling results in poor precision and therefore low confidence for the application of the results in making management decisions. Furthermore, although the methodology was appropriate, there were many irregularities in the collection of field data associated with lack of intensive surveillance to samplers. This may have reduced the quality of the results to guide the management of the park. The reports of the IIP do not provide details on aspects of study design and the factors considered in the selection of sampling points. The lack of methodological details somewhat limits the interpretation of the results, particularly variations observed between 2006 and 2007, the explanation is not given in the reports and the methodology does not explain enough to infer the possible causes of change in the catch. In September 2004, the Quirimbas National Park began a program of monitoring of marine sanctuaries, with support of WWF Mozambique with the aim of providing scientific information on the dynamics of fishery resources within the sanctuaries and their impact on fishing in Matemo, Ibo and Quilalea Islands, over time. Fishing was prohibited in the sanctuaries established by the QNP and after a year, based on sampling the catches of traditional cages (locally called marema), Costa (2006) reported greater species diversity, size, weight and catch per unit effort (CPUE ) sanctuaries in areas adjacent to the pressure of fishing, outside the sanctuaries in Matemo and Ibo. Yet in Quilalea, species diversity and CPUE were lower than in outside the sanctuary. The study also led to the identification of 53 species belonging to 17 families. Furthermore, the results of the monitoring program showed that some species that apparently had disappeared, such as Sparisoma abilgaardi and Mugil liza, are reappearing. The opening of sanctuaries for artisanal fisheries in 2007 and 2008 resulted in an increase in fish catches. This has encouraged the acceptance of the sanctuaries by the fishing communities of the QNP (Gabriel et al. 2008). Therefore, with the shrines were recovered populations / stocks declining in helping to conserve biodiversity while simultaneously the needs of the communities where fish were met due to the increase in CPUE after the opening of a haven for fishing. In terms of methodology, the quality of the results of the monitoring program of shrines could be improved by visual census of fish within and outside the sanctuaries, sampling an equal number of stations (5-10 stations). At the centers of landing far would be sampled for verification of the impact on fishing. Finally, the data collected were analyzed statistically to evaluate the level of significance of differences found. Additionally, an assessment of potential habitat for the fish should have been conducted before the establishment of 29 sanctuaries, to help explain possible differences in the parameters measured between inside and outside the sanctuaries. Later, in September 2005 Costa (2006) initiated a program of monitoring the movement of two species subject to fishing, Cephalopoda argus (grouper) and Scarus ghobban (parrotfish) by marking techniques. The program aims to quantify the movements of these species and determine if the movements of fish may influence the function of the sanctuaries. The activities of monitoring of movements were performed between 2006 and 2008. The results of the first year of the program (2005-2006) showed that of 195 parrots marked, 84 were recaptured within the sanctuaries, but no grouper was recaptured. This result suggests that the parrots perform short strokes and has a high fidelity to their place of occupation. Failure recaptures grouper may indicate that all recaptures were fish, the grouper has low fidelity to local occupancy and seasonal movements long held out the sanctuaries or it may indicate that the proportion of individuals captured in the total population of grouper is very low and therefore the probability of recapturing individuals marked is very low. However, the ultimate explanation of movements requires long-term monitoring. The uncertainty in explaining the results of monitoring of movement limits their application for making management decisions. Rousselot (2005), based on socio-economic characteristics of the fishing community of Isle of Quirimba found that the specific composition of the trawl catch was identical to that found by Gell (1997). Reported that the number of active boats in this fishery did not show great variation (30 in 1997 and 32 in 2005). The author also stated that the estimated catch in 2005 was 190 tons, i. is 249 tons less than in the year 1997. For evolution of catches, of 105 inquired by Rousselot, 81% said that the catch decreased, which increased 3% and 16% said they had no idea. And about 72% of respondents answered that the average length of the fish decreased. These data, the author interpreted as the result of factors supposed to socioeconomic conditions, lack of funds for the maintenance and repair of vessels and acquire better fishing nets (which also favors the use of harmful fishing gears and limits the mobility of fishermen away from marine protected areas). The results of studies using the survey are influenced by the sequential order of the questions under investigation and that the same survey may give different results, depending on how the questions are arranged. According to the census data of fishing undertaken by IDPPE (2007), the fleet fishing in the coastal region and islands of Cabo Delgado province consisted of 4349 vessels, manned by about 14,261 fishermen, distributed in about 197 centers fisheries (Table 9). The Quirimbas National Park covers 5 fishing centers in Macomia, in Quissanga 10, 14 and 1 in the Ibo in Malema, totaling 30 centers artisanal fishing in the sea (representing 23.1% of all fishing centers in the province. The number of fishermen covered a total of just over 4.756 (composed of all of the fishers of the districts of Quissanga and Ibo and the fishermen of Macomia and Pemba-Metuge), which corresponds to just under 30% of fishermen recorded in the province. Regarding studies of IIP, the system used allow to define the state of exploitation of resources. Moreover, the system was designed so that, in addition to statistical data capture and fishing effort to the collection of biological data of the main species caught as well as meteorological data and the data do give estimates of overall catches by charging (extrapolation). Table 9. Data from Artisanal Fisheries Census of Cabo Delgado Province. 30 Items/Year Nr of fishermen Nr of fishing gears Nr of fishing boats Nr of fishing centres Source: IDPPE 1995 4,469 475 1,885 114 2002 15,875 4.359 4,124 141 2007 14,261 4,764 4,439 197 The evolution of the data shows that although the number of fishermen has decreased between 2002 and 2007, the number of fishing gear, boats and fishing centers increased (Table 9). The objective of reproducing make effective management and conservation of fishery resources in the QNP, Loureiro (2007) set up a monitoring system for collecting statistical data for management of fishery resources, that include species and size composition, catch and fishing effort, based on the sampling scheme designed by the Institute for Fisheries Research (IIP). This work began with a process of stratification, which was the characterization of the fishing centers, quantification of the necessary technical and identification of sites for setting the sampling and registration of fishermen, gear and fishing vessels. Thus, for the study of artisanal fisheries in QNP were selected 10 stratum or zones for the collection of data of which 4 are located in the district of Ibo, 3 and 3 in Quissanga in Macomia. With this sample at least 65% of the total fishing centers existing around the park were covered (Loureiro 2007). However, some fishing centers located on the mainland and the islands uninhabitable for human populations (Fion and Rolas) were not included in the sample because of access limitations. However, along with better sample coverage, data from Loureiro (2007) were collected by samplers under constant supervision, thus ensuring a better quality of data. Therefore, the data from the QNP, i.e. Loureiro (2007) are potentially more reliable to guide management decisions that the data obtained by the IIP. A limitation of the monitoring program of fish catches in the QNP is that until the date of preparing this study only 2007 data were available, making it impossible to evaluate the consistency of the data produced over time. Moreover, in 2006 and 2007, IIP has made the monitoring of catches and fishing effort in three fishing centers within the QNP particular Quissanga_Quissanga Beach, Ibo_Sede and Quirimba_Quiuandala. 31 Table 10. Total Catch (Tons) estimated in 3 distrits of Quirimbas National Park, at 2006 and 2007 Fishing arts Districts MACOMIA Beach nets Harpoon seine Superficial gillnet QUISSANGA IBO 2006 2007 2006 2007 2006 2007 910,88 611 172,41 278 - 82 85,08 - 5,4 634,69 23 16,2 368 - 108 205,24 27 47,94 41 - 151 521,16 312 9,09 406 - 22 2.357,05 973 251,04 1093 - 363 - Deep gillnet Handline Total Source: IIP, 2006, 2007 In Table 10, it appears clearly that the catches declined dramatically from 2006 to 2007 in the district of Macomia and substantially increase the district Quissanga. This apparent discrepancy must be examined with caution, because, the oscillation may not be only associated with a possible real increase in fish production, but above all the difficulty in covering the system, variations in the process of collecting and analyzing data. Table 11 shows that in 2007 for gill nets and surface handline fishing effort were undertaken in Quissanga more than 5 times higher than in Macomia. Therefore, this difference in the trend of total catch and the various gears is probably a reflection of differences between the districts on the trend of fishing effort. Other important factors that could help substantiate the oscillations recorded include the study of fishing patterns and dynamics of environmental conditions. As shown in Table 11, the highest catches were estimated by the Ministry of Fisheries, the district Quissanga. According to Loureiro 2007, art that is more effort in all districts is towed to the beach, and Macomia the district with the highest effort of art (7.286 active gear). The beach seine was also the art with highest yield (CPUE) except the island of Igbo, which has a yield of 21 kg / rede.dia. Comparing estimates Loureiro (2007) with the results published by the Ministry of Fisheries, we can observe large differences, where the biggest stories of Loureiro, especially in Quissanga and Macomia (except handline in Macomia). The large differences between Loureiro (2007) and IIP (2007) are explained by sampling differences in coverage and quality of supervision of samplers. For example, to hand line the IIP reports an effort of 16,963 active gear in Quissanga, which suggests a minimum of 46 days of active gear, samplers assumed what IIP worked 365 days a year, which does not seem realistic and into account the low sample coverage in the study of IIP. Moreover Loureiro (2007) 32 indicates, for the same period, active gear for 3110 in a year, i.e. an estimated average of 9 days of active gear, which is possible given the broad spatial coverage of sampling. These apparent irregularities in the recording of data in the IIP and Quissanga Macomia may be the cause of large differences in the fishing evaluated. However, the results of two studies do not show large differences in Igbo. It has been stated before that the reports do not indicate the IIP methodological details (eg sampling rate, frequency of observations, etc..), So it is believed some of the differences in the results, particularly Quissanga, may be associated with methodological. Table 11. Catch, effort and CPUE of the artisanal fisheries studies reported by IIP, Ministry of Fisheries (MP) and Loureiro (L). Fishing gears Beach Seine nets Superfici al gillnet Handline DISTRITS Macomia IIP L. Catch(tons) 611 239 Effort( active 5056 7286 nets) CPUE 121 28 (Kg/net.day) Catch (tons) 23 80 Effort (active 546 2987 nets) CPUE 42 26 (Kg/net.day) Catch(tons) 312 49 Effort (active 3012 7162 nets) CPUE 103 7 (Kg/net.day) Items Total Catch 946 368 MP 195 473 668 Quissanga IIP L. 278 132 2737 3193 102 35 368 4974 50 3522 74 15 406 16963 26 3110 24 11 1052 208 MP 172 16 9 197 Ibo IIP 82 2450 L.. 114 5740 34 21 108 1635 157 2685 66 54 22 3988 41 3947 6 11 212 312 MP 3 2 4 9 Loureiro (2007) , estimated the prodution of 1241 tons of diverse fish, and Macomia distrit accounted for the highest contribuition to the total catch with 505 tons (43% of total catch), followed by Ibo distrit with 431 tons (correspndent to 36% of catch) and finally the Quissanga distrit with 250 tons (correponding 21% of total catch). -The most caught species include Mugil cephalus (mullet flat head), Lutjanus fulviflama (Porgy cartridge), Siganus sutor (Coelho shoemaker), Leptoscarus vaigiensis (thief spotted), Lethrinus mahsena (thief Masena) Hemirhanphus far (half stained needle) Pterocaesio tile (banded fusiler), Lethrinus variegatus (thief mottled) and Trachinotus blochii (southern pompano). - Of the cartilaginous fish is to emphasize the capture of shark Carcharinus leuca (porbeagle bulls), Loxodon macrorhinus (porbeagle acute), Hemipristis elongatus (weasel sharks), Shyrna zygaena (smooth hammerhead shark) and rays Himantura gerrardi (uge thorny tail), Himantura uarnak (Bura comb), Taeniura lyma (Myocastor mottled) and Pteromylaeus bovinus (Myocastor veal). 33 - Of the marine invertebrates was higher capture Pueruleus angulatus (banded whip lobster), Octopus vulgaris (common octopus), Actinopyga achinites (deep water cucumber), Acethes erythraeus (sergestid shrimps) and Sepia sps (cuttlefish). - The greatest diversity was recorded in the families Serranidae (groupers, 33 species), Carangidae (Jacks, 27 especies) Lutjanidae (Snappers, 26 esp) Haemulidae (Grunts, sweetlips and Scaridae (parrotfish, both 25 species each), Lethrinidae (LEmperors,pig face breams, 16 species), Mullidae (Goatfishes, 15 especies), Sparidae ( Hottwntots) and Acanthuridae (Surgeons, both 12 species) there are other families with contributions of less than 11 species of the total catch. In the seine nets, Loureiro showed even greater presence of herbivores and Leptoscarus vaigiensis Siganus Sutor, and in fewer quantities are observed other species of fish from stone, rocky and coral habitats. Comparing the volumes of catches of seine net gears, it is observed that in the last years the volumes estimated by IIP at Ibo district (Quirimba and Ibo islands, 2007) is significantly lower (-356 tons) than the capture registered 10 years before at Quirimba Island by Gell( 1997). As for gill net, there was greater capture of coastal pelagic fish and greater emphasis on the species of coastal estuaries (Mugil cephalus) and typical coastal islands (Hemirhamphus far). In hand line, there was greater abundance of species belonging to the family Lethrinidae and Lutjanidae. The most abundant species in this gear is Lethrinus mashena, believed to be the most abundant in the area, because it had been observed in relatively large quantities in the fence traps, seine nets. In the fence traps, although it is not reflected in tabela9, the most abundant species are of different origin, since herbivores on reefs and rocks (Acanthurus sp. and Lethrinus sp), herbivores (Acanthurus and Leptoscarus), sandy estuarine (Acanthopargus and Argyrops) and offshore (Acanthocybium). For the study of Gell (2007), families frequently caught were Lethrinidae, Siganidae and Scaridae, while the study of the IIP, the catches were dominated by families Caesionidae Siganidae. This difference can be explained by the use of different methodological approaches for collection, processing and analysis of data between the two studies. Looking at the specific composition of the four studies including Gell (1997), Rousselout (2005), IIP (2006) and Loureiro (2007), there is a similarity of about 60% over the first three, and one difference between them and the study de Loureiro (2007), which may be reassessed with increased sample size in the study of Loureiro According to the IIP, the estimated annual production in 2008 was just over 858 tonnes of fish throughout the QNP (corresponding to 24% of total annual production in the provinces), mainly caught by beach seine. In 2008, Vita aiming to (i) provide reliable data on catches and fishing effort, (ii) establish a viable report on the exploration and migration patterns of marine resources, and (iii) combined with other programs (and SOCMON and MOMS) to analyze the patterns of exploitation of fishery resources by populations within parks (QNP and Bazaruto), developed 34 a database using the Wildlife 1.3 computer system, having as beneficiaries park manegers, government, WWF and local communities. • To develop this database the author sampled the following gears harpoon, trap fence, hand line and gill net and quinia. To develop the database Vita used catch samples from harpoon,, seine net, basket traps, handline, gill nets and quinia gears. The total catch registered was about 1,246 tons of diverse fisheries resources, with Darumba stratum, Macomia distrit having the highest catch 241 tons caught with seine nets(135,140 active gears). • The fishing gear accounted for the highest effort was seine net(484,156 gears), with fish being the most recurso caught in the catches; • Tha lowest total catches were recorded at Ibo and Tandanhangue strata, respectively Ibo and Quissanga distrits, using the following fishing gears harpoon, handline and and hand collection. 3.2.4 Sea Turtles, dugong, whale and shark Existing studies and available on marine mammals in the QNP include the work of Hughes (1971), Whittington et al (1997, 1998), Louro et al. 2006, Costa (2007), Anadarko (2008) and Seabird Exploration (2009). Much of the information on the existence of dugongs in the Quirimbas is anecdotal despite Guissamulo (2004) reported the occurrence of dugongs in the islands of Macaloe, Rolas and Matemo and kill. Hughes (1971) and Whittington et al (1997, 1998), reported important areas for nesting of 3 species of sea turtles, both on the shores of continents and on islands. Louro et al (2006) conducted a survey on the state of knowledge and conservation of marine turtles in Mozambique, based on a review of published and available bibliography. In this study, he affirmed that all 5 species existing in the Indian Ocean, including Caretta caretta, Chelonia mydas, Dermochelys coriacea, Eretmochelys imbricata and Lepidochelys olivacea) also occur along the coast of Mozambique Coast, including the region of QNP. Louro et. al. (2006) affirmed also that the populations of marine turtles in Mozambique are facing a continuous decline, which will persist if they are not implemented management measures and conservation, such as legislation, education and public awareness. On the other hand, Costa (2007) identified in the Quirimbas National Park, 13 sites with suitable conditions for nesting. Reported the occurrence of 3 species (Chelonia mydas, Lepidochelys olivacea and Eretmochelys imbricata) in 7 of the 11 islands that are part of the QNP including Ibo, Matemo, Sencar, Quilalea, Mefunvo and Quisiva. The green turtle (Chelonia mydas) and olive ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea) are more abundant on the island of Ibo while a hawksbill turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) tends to occur abundantly in the islands and Quilala Sencar. According to this study, nesting occurs from October to January and spawning ends in April. The best time to observe sea turtles in the QNP is from May to September. 35 In 2007, CSA International, Inc. made an aerial census of marine mammals and turtles covering Block Grant of the Rovuma and QNP, culminating with the sighting of humpback dolphins and 114 individuals of sea turtles not identified to specific level. Anadarko (2008), based on visual observation and Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM), recorded 165 detections (67 visual and 98 MAP) comprising 7 species positively identified. Marine mammals observed in decreasing frequency, include fiadeiro Dolphin (Stenella longirotris), bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops trunactus) and golfinfo of Risso's (Grampus griseus) and Peponocephala electra whales, Globicephala nacrorhynchuse and Physeter mcrocephalus. In 2009, Seabird Exploration has, in deep water, observations of marine mammals and showed 36 animals (32 for visual observations and Passive Acoustic Monitoring 4), including 5 species positively identified. Mammals observed in descending frequency were spinner dolphin (Stenella longirotris), bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops trunactus), dolphin head melon (Poponocephala electra), Risso's dolphin (Grampus griseus), humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae). There were no dugongs and sea turtles during the search. Anadarko (2008) and Guissamulo (2009) based on visual observation and Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) identified 7 species of marine mammals, including dolphins and whales. 5 other species of dolphins and 5 species of whales have not been confirmed but the likelihood of its occurrence in QNP area is high (Table 12). Table 12. Species of dolphins and whales recorded at Quirimbas National Prak and all around Common names Species Occurrence Spinner dolphin Long_snouted sppinner dolphin Risso’s dolphin Indian Humpback dolphin Humpback whale Stenella longirotris Tursiopsis truncatus Confirmed Confirmed Period residency Over a year Over a year Grampus griseus Sousa plúmbea Megaptera novaeangliae Physeter macrocephalus Globicephala macrorhynchus Delphinus delphis Stenella attenuata Stenella coeruleoalba Steno bredanensis Peponocephala electra Balaenoptera acutorostrata Kogia breviceps Mesoplodon densirostris Pseudorca crassidens Ziphius cavirostris Confirmed Confirmed Confirmed Over a year Over a year Over a year Confirmed Over a year Confirmed Over a year Most probable Most probable Most probable Most probable Most probable Unknown Over a year Over a year Over a year Over a year Most probable Most probable Most probable Seazonal (June to November) Over a year Over a year Most probable Most probable Over a year Over a year Sperm whale Shor finned pillot whale Dolphin Spotted dolphin Striped dolphin Rough-toothed-dolphin Melon-headed-whale Minke whale Pygmy-Sperm Whale Balainville’s Beaked Whale Fale killer whale Cuvier’s Beaked whale of 36 3.2.5 Monitoring Programs a) Monitoring Program Oriented Management (MOMS) In order to monitor the development of special species, illegal activities, etc. The QNP has been developing since 2006 a monitoring system-oriented management. According to available information, illegal activities were high in 2006, particularly the island of Igbo, where 22 people were involved in illegal fishing. Were apprehended 2 networks and 8 boats. And the observation of special species, it should be noted that were observed 115 turtles and whale 1. In 2007, illegal activity significantly reduced, having been confiscated 1 net and 2 vessels and also were observed 17 sea turtles. The main limitation of MOMS in marine component was the weak of technical capacity in data collection, which is reflected in the bad registration forms in the yellow book and fish form. This was mainly due to an insufficient number of technicians for monitoring and oversight of the process of filling the yellow book. b) Monitoring the Impact of Marine Sanctuary The monitoring of sanctuaries began in 2004 and is made by QNP as is discussed in Section 3.2.3. However, the observations made in 2007 and 2008 show a positive impact of the sanctuaries in species diversity and the quality of fish caught by artisanal fishermen. However, it was strange to note contrary results in the sanctuary of Quilalea Existing results can be considered as preliminary, particularly taking into account the variations observed in the catch of artisanal fisheries as discussed in section 3.2.3. Consequently, it is desirable that the observations are continued for a longer time to confirm the impact of the sanctuaries. Additionally, studies of the sanctuaries do not show the characteristics of habitats both within and outside the shrines, which could be partly the cause of variation of these parameters between inside and outside the sanctuaries. c) Monitoring Fish Catches The monitoring of artisanal fisheries in the QNP is performed by several specialized agencies, including the IIP, the Ministry of Fisheries and by the QNP. Detailed results of the monitoring work of those institutions were discussed in Section 3.2.3. What can you conclude from these is that the monitoring of catches of fishing is still weak and results are variable and are not, but easy to recognize the true causes of variation due to differences in procedures ranging from human expertise, access the centers of fishing, sampling rate, duration and frequency of observations, among others. d) Monitoring of Sea Turtles 37 The program began in 2006 and is the capture and tagging sea turtles with metallic devices ("tags"). 16 have been marked turtles to monitor their migration movements and details of the growth, reproduction, reproductive patterns and population size. Preliminary results indicate migrations of turtles to Reunion Island and Mayotte (Gabriel et al. 2008). But the program still has documented results that can guide management decisions and further public awareness and surveillance efforts for the conservation of sea turtles. In addition to marking, the program includes the monitoring of nesting sites. A limitation of this program in the QNP is insufficient number of technicians to the constant monitoring of the turtles in all places of occurrence of turtles identified by Costa (2007). 3.2.6 Conservation status and threats for marine life The Quirimbas Archipelago is a chain of 28 islands, housing complex habitats capable of supporting, among others, some species considered to be internationally protected, vulnerable, endangered / critically endangered and / or endangered species such as corals, sea turtles, dugongs , dolphins and some species of whales, some species of sharks and mollusks. Studies conducted by the Frontier Mozambique from 1996 to 1998, found the reefs in good condition, well developed and supporting diverse biota. At that time, the islands Rolas, Quirimbas, Quilaluia, Mefunvo, Quisiva and Quipaco showed some evidence of disturbance by anchors, while the reef Quipaco suffered from sedimentation and input of fresh water. In the Quirimbas Archipelago, were listed about 160 species of corals. Within the Red List of IUCN, there are the sea turtles (Chelonia mydas, Eretmochelys imbricata and Lepidichelys olivacea), a dolphin (Turpiops truncatus) and the Dugong (Dugong dugon), anecdotally reported within the QNP. Were also recorded 140 species of molluscs, including some with the status of threatened species as Charonia tritonis, Cypraecassis rufa, Cassis cornuta and Tridacna squamosa. According to Whittington et al. (1997, 1998), the resources for food had become available in all the islands studied, varying in abundance according to the level of local pressure. But even then it was observed that the resources for commercial purposes, began to make threats and, to some extent exhausted, example of this is to quote the holothurians and the gastropods Lambis lambis, Strombus mutabilis, Cypraea tigris and Pinna sp. These resources were already heavily exploited for sale to Tanzanians and some local merchants. As for corals, the most negative human impact on these has been the harpoon, in the artisanal fisheries and mainly due to excessive anchoring on the coral substrate. Other causes that have created high destruction of coral reefs are bleaching and sedimentation in estuaries. Sea turtles are endangered mainly due to illegal trade especially the green turtles. Other causes of threats recorded were, coastal erosion, tourism that destroys the nests of the turtles, and one example of this is the island of Matemo. Regarding to reef fish, Whittington et al (1997,1998) states that the coral reefs of the islands of Matemo, Sencar, Quisiva are in better condition, compared to other reefs already studied and which is catch larger fish trade. The coral islands of Rolas and Quisiva need more attention. For fisheries, the gear that critically one must have more attention is the beach 38 seine, because in every place where it was prevalent, there was plenty of fish with very small size, the case of Quirimba and Quissanga. Other features that deserve more attention are marine invertebrates, which catch reaches up to 10 kg or more per person in a tidal wave empty. Among the features included apparently depleted sea cucumbers, octopus, mussels of the genus Anadara spp Pinna spp, and Barbatia spp Trachycardium spp and gastropods such as Cypraea spp, Conus spp, Lambis spp Cypraecassis spp, Cassis cornuta, Phalium spp, Tonna sp, Oliva sp, Engina mendicaria, Terebra spp, Pleuroploca sp. and Chicoreus spp. 3.2.7 Limitations of knowledge about marine fauna Based on the available information on marine biodiversity in the Quirimbas National Park is clear that the knowledge of the QNP is just beginning, especially with regard to: a) The knowledge of the species diversity of corals is still incipient. There is not yet a full checklist of species of corals and little is known about the factors underlying its occurrence. Knowledge of habitat types and ecological factors responsible for the distribution and abundance would facilitate their management. In this context, urges the need to conduct training of personnel in the fields of taxonomy, biology and ecology; b) There are not yet biological studies on the Banco de S. Lázaro. The existence of this information would allow lead to better management of the bank especially in terms of recreational and sport fishing; c) Actually there is not a systematic knowledge about the patterns of exploitation of marine invertebrates (including the trade of protected species); The existence of this information could contribute to the development of management measures in some important intertidal and sublitoral areas; d) Knowledge about the real impact of marine sanctuaries is also incipient. It is necessary to undertake further studies to determine whether the declared marine sanctuaries act as nursery areas for breeding or feeding areas or as a shelter or as a source of juveniles to the adjacent fishing grounds; e) There are not yet studies on the impact of tourism (diving, anchoring of boats and recreational and sport fishing) on coral reefs. 39 4. Terrestrial Component 4.1 Terrestrial Vegetation and Flora 4.1.1 Phytogeography The eastern area of Cabo Delgado is phytogeographically under the Inhambane Zanzibar Coastal Mosaic (IZCM) (White, 1983). The mosaic extends from the Rovuma river (in the north) to Limpopo (in the south), in a belt form through the coastal area being more constricted in the central part of Mozambique (Figure 13). In Cabo Delgado, the IZCM occupies, in a irregular form, the terrestrial extension from the coast to the mountains in the interior. A recent study undertaken by Burgess and Clark (2000), which describes the biological diversity of the ecoregion, suggests division of the ecoregion into two subzones, namely, the Swahelian-Maputaland Transition Zone (SMTZ) and the Swahelian Regional Centre of Endemism (SRCE). The Quirimbas National Parque (QNP) is located in the latter zone. Figure 13. The Inhambane Zanzibar Coastal Mosaic setting according to White (1983), showing the Swahelian Regional Centre of Endemism – SRCE (XIIIa) (source: Burguess & Clark 2000). 4.1.2 Vegetation The vegetation of the country has widely been described based on the Wild and Barbosa (1967) classification system. This system is based on floristic composition attributes considered appropriate for conservation purposes. The information on vegetation of the QNP is scarce due to the fact that the area has not been sufficiently explored. A recent study on the vegetation in the QNP (commissioned by the park) identified six (06) terrestrial vegetation types (Bandeira et al., 2008) (Figure 14). 40 Figure 14. The vegetation types in the Quirimbas National Park (Bandeira et al., 2008). According to the study, the distribution of the different vegetation types in the park follow altitudinal gradient which varies from the coast to the interior. From the coast to the interior, in a sequential order, mangroves are followed by coastal thicket, Acacia-grassland mosaic, miombo woodlands, mixed miombo, and miombo velloziace in the iselbergs (Bandeira et al., 2008). The area covered by each vegetation type in the park is shown in the Table 13. According to this information, the miombo woodland and the Acacia – grassland mosaics are the most widespread and the coastal thicket, the smallest unity. Table 13. The area covered by the different types of vegetation in the QNP. Vegetation types Mangrove Coastal thicket Woodland mosaic Miombo woodland Acacia – grassland mosaics Miombo-Velloziacea Other Total Source: Bandeira et al. (2008) Area covered (Km2) 239,4 52,4 1709,4 3275,1 2655,7 67,3 19,1 8018,4 Perce ntage (%) 2,99 0,65 21,32 40,84 33,12 0,84 0,24 100,0 41 The vegetation types defined by Bandeira et al.(2008) are very broad, probably as an artfact of the sampling strategy adopted for the field and / or because of use of small number of sampling points for the classification of the vegetation. The report does not give any information regarding the distribution of sampling points. Eventually, the proportional distribution of sampling points per vegetation type could have resulted on a better data collection and a better classification and description of the different vegetation unities identified in the satelite imagery. Furthermore, the above mentioned study does not show the factors which clearly determine the occorence and/or espatial distribution of the different vegetation types identified. The association of vegetation type and the determining factors for their occurrence in a given settings is importnat for management purposes. Knowing the factors, it is possible to forecast the impacts of a proposed utilization of a given vegetation type from which appropriate mitigation measures can be suggested. Thus, the identification of the vegetation types, per se, is not enough information for management purposes. A previous description of the vegetation by Burguess et al. (s/d) identified, in the same area, ten (10) different vegetation types namely, mangrove, coastal thicket, riverine forest, forest on mountains (inselbergs), miombo woodlands, Acacia woodlands, Grasslands(damboos), bamboo woodland, palm veld and succullent vegetation on mountais. This classification (by Burgess et al., (s/d)) is more detailed and indedify unities of vegetation easily recognisable in the field, being therefore, more appropriate for management purposes of a conservation area. Despite that the study by Burgess et al. (s/d) does not include the spatial distribution of the different vegetation types, it considers altitude and soil moisture as the determinant local factors for the occurrence of the vegetation. According to the authors, the vegetation follows a regional trend of distribution, extending from the park to the interior (e.g. miombo) and to the northern surroundings (e.g. coastal forests). The trends in occurrence and distribution of the vegetation types (the coastal forests, in particular), in Cabo Delgado, and specifically in the QNP, has been supported by recent botanical surveys in the neighbourhoods of the park (e.g. União Europeia, 2000; Impacto, 2007; Timberlake, 2009). In the QNP, the riverine forest along the drainage channels (including rivers and streams) and the forests on the mountain bases are (or nearly) always evergreen during the dry season of the year (Burgess et al., s/d). The riverine forests along the edges of permant waters are composed of evergreen trees, dense shrub stratum and sparsely distributed grass stratum. The dominat tree species incluede Khaya nyasica, Albizia gummifera, Adansonia digitata, Sterculia appendiculata, Bombax rhodognaphalon, Pteliopsis myrtifolia, Cordyla africana among others. Some of the accompaning species include Margaritaria discoidea, Cleistochlamys kirkii, Vitex payos. The common herbaceous species are Achyranthes aspera, Panicum maximum, Cucumis rehmannii and Corchorus trilocularis. The forests on mountains occur on altitudes above 300m. The tallest trees on this vegetation type can reach about 8 to 12 meters. The common species include Brachystegia spp., among Millettia stuhlmannii, Annona senegalensis, Afzelia quanzensis and Combretum zeyheri species. On drier areas, away from superficial water tables and water courses, the vegetation changes according to the edaphic conditions, moisture and perturbation effects. Included in these areas are vegtation types such as bamboo woodlands, miombo woodlands, coastal thickets and Acacia woodlands. The bamboo woodlands sparsely distributed are dominated by Oxytenanthera abyssinica. The accompaning species include Terminalia sericea, T. 42 stenostachya, Millettia spp., Hymenocardia ulmoides, Lonchocarpus bussei, among others, associated or not with other species such as Baphia sp., Acacia nigrescens, Hugonia sp., Combretum spp., and Xeroderris stuhlmannii. On sanddy and brown dark clayey soils occur, in a sparse manner, species of Albizia harvey, Acacia nigrescens, Acacia polyacantha, Vangueria spp and Strychnos sp.. The miombo woodland in the QNP is semi-deciduous during the whole dry season being dominated by species of Brachystegia spp. and Julbernardia globiflora. Variations in the species composition do occur at the local level, being justified mainly by diference in moisture content. In humid areas the miombo woodland is more closed with two strata being the arboreal composed of trees which can reach 20 metres of height and more than 20 cm of diameter at breast height (dbh) (Bandeira et al., 2008). The grass estatum is dominated by grass which can reach about 2 meters of height along valleys. The common trees include Millettia stuhlmannii, M. bussei, Terminalia spp., Pteliopsis myrtifolia, Combretum spp., Dalbergia melanoxylon, Diplorhynchus condylocarpon, Afzelia quanzensis, Pterocarpus angolensis, Cordyla africana among others. As the soil moisture content reduces, the miombo woodlands tends to be less dense and poorer in terms of species composition. The grass stratum is much more abundant and dominated by grass species such as Heteropogon contortus, Heteropogon melanocarpus, Urochloa mosambicensis, Digitaria eriantha, among others. The dense miombo woodlands are, here and there, interspaced with patches of deciduous forests composed of trees whose crowns (sometimes) overlap including or not the presence of herbaceous stratum dominated by grass. In the cases where the stratum is present, it is poor. The factors which determine the occurrence of the patches of deciduous forests in the park are not yet known. However, this patches sparsely distributed in the middle of the woodland have been designated as ‘coastal forests’ by Burgess et al. (s/d). The fact that these patches are small and occur in a discrete manner within miombo woodland they have escaped the attention from most researchers (e.g. Bandeira et al., 2008), the reason why they have never been adequately studied and clearly mapped. In the neighboring Tanzania, however, the coastal forests are home of plant endemics, important habitat for birds, small mammals, reptiles and amphibians, despite the high fragmentation tendency of the ecosystem (Burguess et al., s/d). It is, therefore, urgent to assess the biodiversity status of the coastal forests in the park as well as its vulnerability to fragmentation. The valleys and depressions with alluvial soils are covered with damboos (grasslands) and palm velds. These areas are colonized by abundant grass startum dominated by grass species and few dispersed trees and/or shrubs. The damboos occur as seasonally flooded or inundated grassland areas in the park. The edges of these areas are dominated by characteristic vegetation type of palm veld with Hyphaene sp., Digitaria sp., Corchorus trilocularis, etc.. On inundated areas occur species such as Typha sp., Cyperus spp., Phagmites autralis on darker soils (mananga). This habitat type, in other parts of Eastern Africa, does not include rare species of plant and animal life, however, high diversity of common species of big mammals such as elephants (Burguess et al., s/d). On exposed mountains areas (inselbergs), a typical flora composed of succulent species does occur. This flora exhibits as, fundamental characteristics, adaptation to survive over extreme temperatures, variations on water availability, tolerance to desiccation on high altitudes, etc.. The common species incluede Xerophyta retinotii, Vellozia sp., and Aloe spp. (Bandeira et al., 2008). 43 4.1.3 Flora According to White (1983), the IZCM has a high diversity of plant species estimated to be more than 3000 species, including more than 100 endemic. Some endemic genera include Stulhmania, Hymenaena and Bivinia. The Coastal forests of Eastern Africa , alone, contribute with more than 554 endemic plant species (Burgess et al., 2000). The knowledge about the flora of the QNP is still incipient, the fact justified by scacity of detailed botanical surveys. On a recent study undertaken in the park by Bandeira et al., (2008) a total of 540 plant species were identified among trees, shrubs, herbs, lianas, succulent and palms (Figure 15). 4% 2%1% 18% 38% Herbaceas Arvores Arbustos Lianas Suculentas Palmeiras 37% Figure 15. The diversity of habitus among terrestrial plants of the QNP. The study shows that the park has higher number of herbs (38%), followed by trees (37%). The palms are the least represented group of plants with about 0.5% of the total number of species identified. The families of Fabaceae, Poaceae, Euphorbiaceae and Asteraceae exhibit the highest number of species in the park (Table 14). The diversity of families in the flora of the park conforms with the findings by União Europeia (2000) for the rest of the Cabo Delgado province. União Europeia (2000) found higher diversity of species in the families Fabaceae, Euphorbiacea and Asteraceae. The high diversity in the number of grass (Poaceae) species in the park is a great natural contribution for the occurrence of wildlife, specifically the grazers. Table 14. Number of plant species per families identified in the QNP (Bandeira et al., 2008). 44 Family Fabaceae Poaceace Euphorbiaceae Asteraceae Thymelaceae Malvaceae Combretaceae Lamiaceae Acanthaceae Apocynaceae Capparaceae Anacardiaceae Cyperaceae Ebenaceae Vitaceae Convolvulaceae Annonaceae Bignoniaceae Meliaceae Moraceae Rubiaceae Vellozaceae Aloaceae Commelinaceae Ochnaceae Olacaceae Rutaceae Asclepiadaceae Connaraceae Loganiaceae Number of species 105 49 33 30 18 17 15 14 12 12 12 11 9 9 9 8 7 7 7 7 7 6 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 According to Bandeira et al.(2008), the vegetation on mountains and mixed woodlands are the highly diverse ecosystems in terms of plant species (Table 15) but knowledge about the ecology of these vegetation types is rare. Table 15. Number and endemism among plant species per vegetation type in the QNP Vegetation type Number of species Coastal thicket 38 Acacia-Grassland mosaic 104 Mixed woodland 183 Miombo woodland 59 Miombo –Villoziacea 77 Source: Adapted from Bandeira et al. (2008) Number of endemic or quasiendemic species 2 6 5 7 Studies undertaken on similar ecosystems elsewhere in eastern Africa confirm these high endemism levels (Burgess et al., s/d). In Cabo Delgado, a plant survey conducted recently in 45 the neighborhoods (northern side) of the park confirms this result. According to the findings, about 10 to 20 plant species identified in the area are new records for Mozambique and 2 to 5 species are new to science (Timberlake, 2008). Based on the available data and recent records in the region, the author indicates that there are more than 30 plant species considered new records for Mozambique or the Flora Zambesiaca area confined to different vegetation types in Cabo Delgado. A total of 32 plant species have been listed in two studies undertaken independently within and in the neighborhoods of the park. The study undertaken by Bandeira et al. (2008) in the park lists 17 plant species considered important for conservation. Earlier study undertaken by SEED (2003) in the north of the park listed 15 plant species among endemics collected previously in the study area, endemic species which occur in the study area and vulnerable species as per IUCN categories. This indicates that these species may well occur in the park. Therefore, more detailed studies on the different types of vegetation in the park should be a priority if conservation is to be made based on sound scientific evidence about the real value of the ecosystems. 4.1.4 Gaps on the knowledge Based on the information gathered on the plant biodiversity of the Quirimbas National Park, it is more than evident that the knowledge about the park is rather limited, mainly that concerned with: 1. The spatial extension (coverage) and classification of the vegetation types in the park do not provide sufficient detailed information for the purpose of management. Detailed vegetation types and the determinant ecological factors for their spatial distribution in the park are instrumental for implementation of the management objectives of the park. 2. There is no comprehensive data about the dynamics and conservation status of each vegetation type identified in the park. This information is, specifically, more relevant for the mountain vegetation (inselbergs), mixed woodlands, coastal forests and dambos. Emphasis should be given in relation to the relevance and magnitude of the factors and agents (direct and indirect) which contribute for ecosystem fragmentation. 3. The knowledge about the diversity of different vegetation types is still incipient. There are no complete listings of the diversity of species important for conservation as well as their distribution per vegetation type. The availability of this information would direct conservation efforts to where it is desperately needed saving technical efforts and money. 4. There are no studies about the phenological behavior of the main species used by the game as pasture, in the park. The availability of this information would contribute for a better management of the pasture available in the park per season in a year. 4.1.4 Threats to conservation of terrestrial flora The vegetation at QNP faces threads which may lead to ecosystem fragmentation and/or changes/alteration of its natural ecological conditions and, thence, reduction of the local biodiversity. Various natural and/or anthropogenic factors may contribute to this phenomena. The magnitude and dimension of the anthropogenic factors need to be given much more 46 attention as their impacts can hardly be contained through the natural resilience capacity of the ecosystems. Thus, the relevant sources of thread for the park include: Exploitation of timber products from the forests The local communities explore a diversity of products and commodities from the forest. These products include the timber and non-timber forest products. In spite of the lack of accurate data about the quantities of the products, the species explored, the vegetation used as source of the products, a preliminary study undertaken recently in the park confirms the exploitation of timber products. Poles and plywood explored for selling and construction purposes are, among other products, those whose exploitation may have tremendous impacts to the conservation of the vegetation in the park (Araman 2006). On the other hand, however, the technical progress report for 2008, reports the apprehension of different quantities of logs and poles in the Districts of Ancuabe, Meluco and Quissanga apparently from illegal exploitation. The report states that the park used administrative measures to solve the situation. Should administrative measures help to contain the increased tendency of illegal exploitation of forestry products? In fact, the illegal exploitation of forestry products could, in a short, medium and long run impact negatively on the overall plans and objectives of conservation of the ecosystem in the park. Forest encroachment for agriculture and urbanization The rural communities in Mozambique have, from immemorial times, been characterized as nomadic due to factors such as natural disasters, irregular distribution of means for productions and reduced access to technological development. The slush and burn agriculture is one of the secular activities of the local communities. The practice of agriculture incorporates the utilization of fire as well as shifting cultivation to allow the soil to replenish its fertility. The slush and burn agriculture requires the acquisition of new areas for agriculture at a cost of conservation of natural ecosystems. Despite that slush and burn agriculture is a common practice in the park there is no data on the deforestation rate of intact vegetation, the types of vegetation affected, neither the estimate of the minimum time span for a soil to recover its fertility before it is used again for farming. Some authors (ex.:Araman, 2006) believe that major deforestation activities occur along access roads. This assertion is supported by the fact that the farmers will later on use the roads to transport the produce to commercial centers. The continuous deforestation of new intact areas contributes significantly for the fragmentation of natural ecosystems in the park impacting negatively on the conservation of the overall biodiversity. Bush fires Fire has been used as a tool in agriculture and hunting since the long back in Human history. The impact of fire on earth, namely, habitat degradation with effects on the reduction of biodiversity has widely been discussed. In Cabo Delgado, various vegetation types have been exposed to bush fires almost every year. A recent preliminary study undertaken in the park elected grasslands as the most vulnerable to fires due to their grass composition. The grass is a combustible material vulnerable to fire hazards. It is evident, however, from the studies undertaken elsewhere in eastern Africa (e.g. Burgess & Clark, 2000) that, the coastal forests are less susceptible to fires and the frequent occurrence of fires in this ecosystem may lead to 47 species composition changes, allowing colonization of the site by typical miombo species (Burgess & Clark, 2000). In northern Mozambique, the fires occur mainly in the dry season (May to October). In the QNP, fires occur commonly between July and October (Fig.16). Figure 16. Incidencies of bush fires in the QNP for the years 2006 and 2009 based on the MODIS satellite data. Further analysis of the data on QNP, it shows a tendency of fires close to residential areas or selected vegetation types. The open vegetation types with dominance of grass stratum are most vulnerable to fire incidences. In order to determine the most appropriate period for fires on the grasslands, a study has been undertaken in the park. Despite that the setting up and outcome of the study needs consideration, it recommends the use of cold fires. This shows the need for further studies on the frequency of fires in the different vegetation types, identification of the reasons for the fire outbreak, as well as the right time to use cold fires. 4.1.5 Conservation Aspects Objectives/Challenges “To protect, conserve and whenever necessary restore the ecosystem processes, species and the genetic diversity of all the marine and terrestrial resources (living and non-living) in the park and its surrounding” is the main objective of the Quirimbas National Park. 48 In order to fulfill this objective, the QNP faces challenges derived from the fact that the area of the park is scientifically not very well known, specifically, in terms of its conservation value. According to Burgess et al. (s/d), the scarcity of scientific based information about the area precludes development of a comprehensive management plan as well as the possibilities of the terrestrial component to attract adequate funding. The funding agencies need to ensure that the biological value of the area is sufficiently known before funds are liberated for conservation purposes. For instance, the WWF and the Conservation International have considered the southern Tanzania as the southern limit for funding purposes, in the framework of the ‘Global 200 ecoregions’ and ‘Hotspots’(Burgess et al., s/d). They argue that consistent scientific information for the northern Mozambique and southwards is lacking. Therefore, the need for science based information is crucial for defining the the southern limit “priority” for conservation purposes. It should, however, be noted that four ecoregions declared of global importance are represented in the QNP, despite that the knowledge about their biodiversity value in the park is still scarce. International conventions The Eastern Africa Coastal forest Ecoregion Conservation Strategy is a guiding document aimed at setting up inclusive biodiversity conservation actions for the park and ecoregion. Signed by the Governments of Kenya, Tanzania and Mozambique the document highlight the importance of coastal forests in the ecoregion and establishes the general framework for conservation of the ecosystem. Thus, the document describes the action plans for the regional and national levels and the need for their implementation by the signatory nations. Legislation The relevant legislation for the conservation objectives of the QNP is the Forest and Wildlife Act (Act n. 10/99), which states that the aim of a national park is the preservation of natural ecosystems, mainly those of greater landscape beauty which are representative of the natural and/or historic asset. The global objective of this legislation envisages: “…the promotion of sustainable use of forestry and wildlife resources in view to promote initiatives which ensure the protection and conservation of the resources and finally better conditions for the wellbeing of the local communities”. The article 4 of this act states that: “…the objective is protection, conservation, development and sustainable use of forest and wildlife for economic, social and ecological wellbeing of the present and future generations.” Implementation of the management objectives The implementation of the management objectives should be done through the following actions: o Management of terrestrial vegetation This component includes the management of biodiversity, management of the threads (in general), management of fires (monitoring of its frequency and extension) and management of species of importance for conservation (endemic, threatened, rare, in danger of extinction) such as Strophantus hypoleicus, Phyllanthus guineense, Dombeya cinccinata, Combretum umbricola, Quettarda speciosa, Croton megalocarpus, Diospyros consolatae, Indigophera 49 ormocropoides, Carpodiptera africana, Grewia glandulosa, Euphorbia cooperi, Euphorbia confinalis, Alloe chaubaudii, Alloe maunii, Euphorbia knutii, Ceropegia sp. (Bandeira et al., 2008). o Protection of the vegetation which maintains the critical ecological processes The vegetation types whose protection is critical for the maintenance of ecological processes include the coastal forests, vegetation on the mountains (Inselbergs and succulent vegetation) and dambos. o Management of Invasive plant species It is important the control of invasive plants in order to halt their propagation/dispersion. Some of the species identified as invasive in the study area include Catharanthus roseus, Pennisetum purpureum, Opuntia sp., Eleusine cocarane, Solanum panduriforme. 4.2 Terrestrial Fauna There is limited documented information about the terrestrial fauna of the Cabo Delgado province due to a limited number of scientific studies undertaken with the aim of assessing the current status of fauna. However, the existing information is sufficient to conclude that the Cabo Delgado province is rich in terrestrial wildlife, both in terms of species diversity and abundance. Among terrestrial vertebrates, the great proportion of species corresponds to birds (União Europeia, 2000). The heterogeneity of pristine habitats, the large extent of the province, the low density of human population and the limited development of social and economic infrastructure contribute to the great diversity and abundance of fauna in the province. The gazzetment of the Quirimbas National Park (QNP) is a major opportunity for the conservation of the diverse and abundant fauna of the province. Table 16. Summary of the number of species and conservation status of terrestrial fauna of the QNP Group Number of species Mammals 46 Birds 447 Reptiles 23 Amphibians 10 Insects 750 Total 1018 * Data deficient Threatened species (IUCN, 2009) 6 1 1 * * 7 Species protected by Law (Rep. de Moçambique, 2002) 13 12 1 * * 26 50 4.2.1 Mammals At least 46 species of mammals occur in the QNP (Bento, 2003; Schneider, 2004; Araman, 2007) (Table 17). According to DNTF (2009) the QNP is one of the five areas of the country with the highest diversity of medium-large mammals. Four of the “big fives” occur in the park, except Rhinoceros (Diceros bicornis e Cerathoterium simum), whose occurrence has not been confirmed. The great diversity of mammal species in the QNP is attributed to factors such as the prevalence of large patches of pristine habitats, low human population density and the influence of the Niassa Reserve, which is the conservation area with the highest diversity and abundance of large mammals in the country. Besides the structure and composition of the vegetation as the key habitat components, the availability of surface water is fundamental for the occurrence and distribution of fauna species, particularly the use of habitats and the seasonal movements of water dependent species. 51 Table 17. Estimates of population size and index of abundance of terrestrial mammals of the QNP (Araman and Mahommed, 2006) Scientific Name Loxodonta africana Aepyceros melampus Neotragus moschatus Papio cynocephalus Phacochoerus aethiopicus Potamochoerus porcus Raphicerus campestris Sylvicapra grimmia Tragelaphus strepsicerus Canis mesomelas Canis adustus Cephalophus natalensis Cercopithecus mitis Chlorocebus aethips Hippotragus niger Hystrix africaeaustralis Kobus ellipsiprymmus Common Name Population estimate index of abundance Elephant Impala Suni Savanna Baboon 1108 (2.93) 452 (2.62) 1759 (3.08) 6261 (17.6) Warthog 1758 (6.16) Bushpig and Lower 95% confidence limit Upper 95% confidence limit Conservation Status (Rep. de Moçambique 2002, IUCN 2009) 365 3360 Near Threatened, increasing population 131 839 2027 702 1567 3686 19334 4406 Lc, stable population Lc, stable population Lc, stable population Lc, declining population 1640 15707 Lc, declining population 835 8110 Lc, stable population 376 602 2339 5263 Lc, stable population Lc, stable population 5075 (5.54) Steenbok Common Duiker 2602 (1.85) 938 (2.31) Kudu Black-backed Jackal Side-striped Jackal 1780 (8.01) Red Duiker Samango Monkey Vervet Monkey Sable Antelope (1.69) (2.31) Porcupine (0.62) Lc, stable population, § (0.31) Lc, stable population, § Lc, declining population Lc, declining population, § Lc, stable population, § Lc, stable population Lc, stable population (3.54) Lc, declining population Waterbuck (1.54) 52 52 5 Lepus saxatilis Oreotragus oreotragus Ourebia ourebi Cephalophus monticola Procavia capensis Syncerus caffer Taurotragus oryx Tragelaphus scriptus Hippopotamus amphibius Scrub Hare (0.77) Klipspringer Oribi (0.46) (1.39) Blue Duiker Hyrax Buffalo Eland Bushbuck (0.15) (0.31) (0.31) (0.62) (0.92) Panthera leo Lion Panthera pardus Leopard Lycaon pictus Wild Dog Acinonyx jubatus Felis silvestris lybica Cyvettictis civetta Mellivora capensis Cheetah African Wild Cat Civet Honey Badger Southern Lesser Bushbaby Tree Squirrel Zebra Galago moholi Paraxerus cepapi Equus burchelli Thryonomys swinderianus Orycteropus afer Paraxerus palliatus Lc, declining population Lc, stable population, § Lc, declining population Lc, stable population Lc, unknown trend Lc, declining population Lc, stable population Vulnerable, declining population Vulnerable, declining population Near Threatened, declining population Endangered, declining population, § Vulnerable, declining population, § § Lc, unknown trend, § Lc, declining population, § Lc, stable population, § Hippopotamus (0.15) Lc, stable population Lc, stable population Lc, unknown trend Great Cane Rat Aardvark Red Squirrel Lc, unknown trend Lc, unknown trend 53 53 5 Crocuta crocuta Epomophorus sp. Chaerephon pumila Elephantulus sp. Crocidura hirta Aethomys chrysophilus Spotted Hyaena Fruit Bat Little Free-tailed Bat Short-snouted Elephant-shrew Lesser Red Musk Shrew Lc, declining population, § Lc, unknown trend Lc, unknown trend Lc, unknown trend Red Vel Rat Lc – species of least conservation concern globally, including populations widely distributed and abundant worldwide (IUCN, 2009) § - species protected by Law in Mozambique according to the Forest and Wildlife Law (República de Moçambique, 2002), i.e. species whose hunting is prohibited in Mozambique The numbers in brakets indicates the index of abundance, estimated as number of animals seen every 100 km of transects walked during wildlife ground counts (Araman and Mahommed, 2006) 54 54 5 Mammal species were identified by direct observation of animals during sample area ground counts along systematic transects set in the blocks A, B and C (Figure 15). These blocks are the areas with higher potential for wildlife conservation than other areas of the park (Araman and Mahommed, 2006). At the Mareja Reserve, in the surroundings of the QNP, the clecklist of species was prepared using results obtained from a combination of survey methods such as pitfall traps, Sherman traps, mist nets, search and observation of animals and or their indirect signs such as droppings, footprings, paths, etc (Schneider, 2004). The species appearing in Table 16 without estimates of population size are those seen rarely during ground counts, and therefore population estimates would be within wide confidence limits due to a low number of observations. Other species without information on population size are the species with occurrence registered only on the basis of observation and identification of indirect signs of animal presence. Besides the species recorded during ground counts and trapping, Doggart and Burgess (2002) recorded the occurrence of roan antelope (Hippotragus equinus) on the basis of the skin shown by humans. For most species estimates of population size were within wide confidence limits (Table 16). This low precision of the estimates shows that ground counts produced unreliable results. This is a consequence of a low frequency of observation due to a low sampling intensity. Furthermore, species distribution maps show areas of non-occurrence of species that might not be realistic (Type II in distribution mapping). These gaps in animal occurrence are probably a result of large spacing between transects during ground counts. For species with substantial impacts on ecosystems, involved in human-wildlife conflicts and with high economic value such as elephant, reliable estimates of population sizes would be crucial for the management of animal populations and for the mitigation of conflicts with humans. Despite low precision of the estimates, ground counts allowed the mapping of the distribution of small-medium mammal species, which would not be possible with the use of other inventory methods. In addition to population estimates and maps, terrestrial counts produced the index of abundance for selected species, which is a relative measure of population status and can be used for monitoring to detect population trends for each species. The number of animals of different mammal species is generally low in the QNP. The most abundant species include savanna baboon, bushpig, warthog, kudu and suni (Table 16). Medim and large mammals are concentrated in the interior of the Meluco, Quissanga, Macomia and Ancuabe districts (União Europeia, 2000; Ntumi, 2005). Three blocks have been identified as potential zones for total protection due to a low density of human population (Figure 15) and therefore, these are areas with low incidence of threats to species and/or their habitats. The occurrence of wildbeest in the QNP is restricted. This species was seen in the open mountain forest, between the Mwitiri and Messalo River in the buffer zone to the North-West of the park. Buffalo were also hardly seen during ground counts, in closed forests near permanent water sources between the Nairoto and Messalo River, in the buffer zone to the North-West of the park and between the Bilibiza and Miaphia Lakes in block B. Common duiker are widely distributed in the park and use a wide range of habitats including patches of closed-open vegetation in the blocks A, B and C. The distribution of klipspringer is restricted to rocky areas, from the Meluco mountains to the region of Chirima and Ngura mountains in the south of Montepuez River. Red duiker are common in the park, occurring in closed woodlands in proximity to perennial water sources in block C, along the Muagamula River 55 and from Lake Bilibiza to the swampy area of Mahipa in block B. Suni is a common species using closed woodlands across the park, but with major concentrations in the blocks A and C (Figure 15). Kudu were also abundant and widely distributed in patches of open and closed woodlands across the park. Eland is a rare species in the park. This species was recorded in tall grass grasslands in the north of block C, south of block B at Namacula and in the NorthWest of block C in Ravia and Namagico. Elephant are abundant, widespread and use a wide variety of habitats from closed woodlands to grasslands, but always close to perennial sources of water (Araman and Mahommed, 2006; Araman, 2007). Data obtained during the national wildlife census (DNTF, 2009) also showed the occurrence of elephant across the whole park. Elephant were particularly common resident in the regions of Tororo, Muagamula, Namacula, Arimba and Pulo in the south of block B, in block A in the proximities of Ngura/Miegane and in the north of the Manica village in block C (Araman and Mahommed, 2006; van Aarde, 2009). Warthog is an abundant species and occurs across the entire park in habitats characterized by short grasslands and perennial water sources. Bushpig are common and inhabit patches of semi-arid woodlands in the central region of block C in Nambine and in the north of block B in the Namaluco area. The occurrence of hippopotamus was recorded in deep waters of the Messalo River in the north-west of the park and in Lake Bilibiza (Bento, 2003; Araman, 2007). Bushbuck is abundant and occurs across the park, in closed woodlands near Rivers and other water sources. Bushbucks were seen by Bento (2003) in the banks of the Muagamula River. Impala were rarely seen in the park, with records in open forests close to water sources in the north of block A and in the buffer zone to the north-west of the park between the Mwiriti and Nairoto Rivers. Sable antelope distribution was restricted to the south-east of block A in patches of open woodlands in the proximities of Mera and Mitepo mountains in the north of Montepuez River in Meluco. Waterbuck were hardly seen. This species used open woodlands near water sources, with concentrations in the proximities of Lakes Bilibiza and Miaphia. Zebra is also a rare species in the QNP, where the distribution of this species was restricted to grasslands and open woodlands between the Mwiriti and Messalo Rivers in the buffer zone to the north-west. Wild dog were very rare, occurring in open woodlands, particularly in the Muagamula plains. Side-stripped jackals were abundant and widely distributed in the park, in open-closed woodlands. Spotted hyenas were common and found in open woodlands across the park. Cheetah was hardly seen, with a distribution restricted to open woodlands of the Muagamula plains. Lion used a wide range of habitats and were common and widespread in the park (DNTF, 2009), but with concentrations in Bilibiza, Tipamoco, Nancaramo, Muagamula and buffer zone in the north-west of the park. Leopard is also a common species, using openclosed woodlands across the park. Savanna baboons were abundant and recorded in a broad range of habitats but always near water sources. Vervet monkey is also a species recorded in a wide range of habitat types and widely distributed in the park. 56 Figure 17. Location of the total protection blocks in relation to the spatial distribution of density of human settlements in the QNP (Araman, 2007). Terrestrial Mammal Conservation Issues Mammals with special conservation status: species of large mammals of special importance for conservation include elephant, lion, wild dog, hippopotamus and cheetah. Elephants are protected by the Forest and Wildlife Law of Mozambique (República de Moçambique, 2002) and are Near Threatened globally, but with population increasing (IUCN, 2009). Apart from data obtained during ground counts, elephant spatial distribution was determined from space use data downloaded monthly from collars fitted on selected animals by the University of Pretoria (van Aarde, 2009). These data allowed the identification of areas of concentrated use of space, migration routes and hence areas of potential human-elephant conflicts. Wild dogs are Endangered and their population is declining worldwide (IUCN, 2009) and are protected by Law in Mozambique (República de Moçambique, 2002). Population size and spatial distribution, threats and management options to reduce the threats and promote the conservation of wild dog in the QNP have been studied (André, 2006). The vulnerability of this species to extinction could be due to habitat fragmentation for wild dog packs that use extensive home ranges, due to competition with larger carnivores and due to low population densities (André, 2006). Besides QNP, wild dog also occur in the Niassa Reserve. Therefore, there is a challenge of determining whether the population is continuous or there are two isolated subpopulations and apply appropriate approaches for the conservation of this species in northern Mozambique. Lion, cheetah and hippopotamus are Vulnerable and with populations declining worldwide (IUCN, 2009). In addition, cheetah is protected by Law in Mozambique (República de Moçambique, 2002). Although populations of sable antelope and roan antelope are probably stable ou increasing in Mozambique, the populations of these species are declining in several conservation areas of southern Africa (Grant and van der Walt, 2000). Accordingly, the conservation of these species in the QNP contributes to the regional efforts for the conservation of these species. Furthermore, roan antelope is a species protected by Law in Mozambique (República de Moçambique, 2002). 57 Uncontrolled fires: bushfires, generally caused by shifting agriculture, are among the main causes of alteration of habitat structure. Over the long term, fires can change grassland species composition. However, a fire regime appropriate to the agro-ecological conditions of the park would increase animal carrying capacity because veld burning promotes the use of grass species generally neglected by animals (Tainton, 1999). Araman (2007) recommended burning every five years for grasslands dominated by palatable grass species such as Themeda triandra and Digitaria eriantha and an interval of two years between fires for grasslands dominated by unpalatable grass species such as Andropogon spp. Neverthesess, the foundation for this burning frequency is unclear because the study by Araman (2007) was conducted for a short period (3-6 months between the beginning and the end of the dry season). Burnt areas should be monitored through regular assessment of the vegetation to establish the impact of fire frequency and season, combined with grazing, on grassland species composition over the long term. There is a need for patch mosaic burning, through ignitions in different months of the year to create different habitats in terms of grassland height, which will promote coexistence among animals with different food niches (grass height preferences). Poaching: illegal hunting is carried out for the subsistence of the families, although sometimes hunted animals are sold. The main threat is the use of unselective hunting techniques such as snares and traps, which capture animals of both sexes, any age and even non-edible animal species. Apart from trapping, poachers use traditional fire arms to kill animals. QNP patrolling data show that antelope species and bushpig are the most captured species. Hunting for the protection of people and their goods is also a pratice in the QNP and the target species have been elephant, lion and hippopotamus. For this hunting, conventional fire arms are used by authorized community hunters. Human-wildlife conflicts: conflicts between humans and wild animals result from competition for space and resources therein between the human and animal populations, both in an increasing trend. Due to these conflicts many people were killed or injured by wild animals, lost domestic animals or crops due to attacks by wild animals. Wild animals were also killed, injured, lost their habitats and other preferred resources or their migration routes were blocked by humans (Ntumi, 2005). The human-wildlife conflict combined with the lack of direct benefits from conservation to local communities is a threat to biodiversity conservation due to the negative attitude that conflicts create on humans. Elephants and lions are the main problem species, although crocodiles, hyaenas, bushpig, monkeys and birds also contribute to the conflict (Ntumi, 2005; DNTF, 2009). DNTF records and the national wildlife census (DNTF, 2009) also revealed that the QNP is an area with high incidence of human-wildlife conflicts due to a concentration of elephants and cultivated fields. According to Ntumi (2005), within the QNP boundaries, the areas with more records of conflicts are the villages of Muaja, Naputa, Ndique, Namanje, Ntessa, Tapara and Tororo (Quissanga District); Manica, Muagamula and Machova (Macomia District); Pedreira, Mitambo, Massassi and Unguia (Meluco District); Ngura and Jiúte (Ancuabe District) and the 25 de Junho village in the Pemba-Metuge District (Figure 18). A need of mitigating human-wildlife conflicts was the main reason for local communities to request the proclamation of the QNP (Ministério do Turismo, 2004). In fact, conflicts have been reducing in frequency and severity due to a number of measures implemented by park managers in collaboration with local communities. Among these applied measures to mitigate the conflict, is the organization of cultivation fields in blocks, fencing of cultivated fields, 58 frightening and driving away elephants using pepper guns or fire arms, etc. Results show that organizing cultivated fields in blocks contributed to the reduction of crop raiding by elephants (Araman, 2007), ensuring an increase in crop yields. Subsequently, there was an increase in the number of blocks of cultivated fields due to the abandonment of isolated cultivated fields by farmers (Araman, 2007). In addition, the identification of elephant migration routes made possible the erection of a fence to protect cultivated fields with a minimum interference on the seasonal patterns of elephant movements. Figure 18. Location of areas with high incidence of human-wildlife conflicts in the QNP (source: Ntumi 2005). The closed forests of the Meluco District are the centre of many groups of elephants in the QNP. There are two main elephant routes that start in the closed forests of block A in Meluco (Figure 18). In the first route, elephants move from the proximities of the Sitati village and follow the riverine forest of the Muaguide River to the Quissanga District, passing through the Tororo, Tapara, Merussa, Bilibiza, Namadhai, Ngirirumba villages to the Nipácue village. The prevalence of a closed forest in the proximities of Nipácue village makes this area an area of concentrations of elephant herds coming from Meluco. In the second route, from Meluco elephants go through the banks of the Ncueto River to the Mitambo village, near Quissanga (Ntumi, 2005). These two routes are linked by another route that starts in the Macomia District and ends in Quissanga. It is believed that elephants come from the Niassa Reserve, follow the Lugenda River and reach the Messalo River. From this River elephants go through the lowlands of the Mueda and Muedumbe Districts and through the area between the Chicomo and Nguida villages and subsequently reach the Muagamula River. After concentrations in the woodlands of the Muagamula River, elephants move through the Muto-wamuenhe River until Quiterajo. From Quiterajo in the coast of Macomia District, elephants move through the Mucojo, Namaluco, Nipalica and Ntuane villages until the Nraha village in Bilibiza. In Bilibiza elephants subdivide in small groups that follow different routes. At the end, elephants concentrate again in Bilibiza and return to Macomia, passing through the same villages (Figure 19). 59 Figure 19. Main elephant movement routes (yellow lines and arrows) used to get in and out of the QNP, overlaid on the vegetation types and main Rivers (source: Ntumi, 2005) The areas of high concentration of fauna, including the elephant migration routes, such as the banks of the main Rivers (Montepuez, Muaguide and Muagamula) and the Lake Bilibiza (Figure 19), are also areas with concentration of villages/human settlements (Figure 7). This overlap in the use of space results in high incidence of conflicts between humans and wild animals (Figure 18). 4.2.2 Birds There is a great diversity of birds in the QNP. The diversity of bird habitats and microhabitats is also high, including the sea, intertidal space, mangrove, grasslands, wetlands, islands, woodlands in regeneration, miombo woodlands, forests and cultivated fields (Bento, 2003; Artumas, 2007). Bento (2003) identified 204 species of birds in the park, although some potential habitats such as shrubby areas, woodlands in regeneration, grasslands and cultivated fields were not included in the sampling and bird survey was conducted only during the dry season. The results obtained by Bento (2003) were complemented by the study by Wilson (2009), which also included bird survey during the rain season. Wilson (2009) indicated the possibility of occurrence of 447 bird species in the QNP (Appendix 4). Among the identified species, at least one, the ground hornbill (Bucorvus leadbeateri) is globally threatened by extinction (IUCN, 2009). Major concentrations of birds were recorded in perennial Lakes and Rivers. The Lake Bilibiza is a location of high concentrations of birds. About 26 species of aquatic birds were identified in only three hours of survey that covered only about 30% of the lake’s surface (Bento, 2003). Therefore, the number of bird species identified is an under-estimate of the species richness in Lake Bilibiza and surrounding areas. The riverine forests and other woodlands associated to rivers are habitats for a great diversity of species due to a combination of distinct microhabitats in a small area (Bento, 2003). In only one day, Bento 60 (2003) identified more than 100 bird species in these habitats. The coastal zone is also inhabited by high numbers of a wide variety of species, including paleartic migratory aquatic birds. According to Bento (2003), the QNP is where southern African birds meet with east African birds. Accordingly, the park offers a unique opportunity to watch a huge diversity of birds, from the coastal zone to the closed woodlands and water bodies in the inland of the park, particularly during the rain season when the migratory birds return from Asia. Dry woodlands far from water showed low number of species (Bento, 2003). The diversity of aquatic birds in the Lake Bilibiza indicates that this lake is of national importance for the conservation of wetlands, especially as habitats for aquatic birds (waterfowls). Apart from resident aquatic birds, the Bilibiza Lake provides habitat for migratory birds. At least 44 migratory species were identified (Wilson, 2009), out of which two species, Pelecanus Onocrotalus and Falco naumanni, are listed in the Appendix 1 of the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), which means that at the global level these species are threatened by extinction in the entire or in a significant proportion of their distribution range (CMS, 2002). Species listed in the Appendix II of CMS, i.e. migratory species with a non-favourable conservation status, hence requiring international cooperation for the conservation of species or their habitats, include Ixobrychus sturmi, Mycteria ibis, Platalea alba, Pandion haliaetus, Pandion haliaetus, Crex crex, Sterna nilotica, Sterna bengalensis, Sterna fuscata, Sterna hirundo, Sterna bergii, Sterna sandvicensis, Sterna albifrons, Sterna saundersi, Chlidonias leucopterus e Merops apiaster. The remaining migratory bird species are common and of least concern for conservation. Individuals of some species of migratory birds were tagged for the monitoring of their movements. However, results of this monitoring program are still not available. There is no quantitative data on the abundance and frequency of bird species. However, Araman (2007), following the work conducted by Bento (2003), classified bird species as abundant, common and rare based on the number of individuals seen and on the frequency of observation in the park. Rare species are priority for conservation due to a low frequency of observation, which could be associated to a restricted distribution due to specialization in habitat use. Twenty-six species of birds were classified as locally rare, including Schoutedenapus myoptilus, Pluvialis squatarola, Pandion haliaetus, Onychognathus morio, Nicator gularis, Nectarinia venusta, Microparra capensis, Megaceryle maxima, Lybius melanopterus, Hirundo albigularis, Erythropygia leucophrys, Egretta garzetta, Dendropicos fuscescens, Cypsiurus parvus, Cossypha heuglini, Charadrius pecuarius, Campethera cailliautii, Campethera abingoni, Burhinus vermiculatus, Bucorvus leadbeateri, Apalis flavida, Alcedo cristata, Acrocephalus schoenobaenus, Thamnolaea cinnamomeiventris, Lagonosticta rhodopareia. According to the Red Data List (IUCN, 2009) all these rare species are of least conservation concern globally, despite being locally important for biodiversity conservation. The Bilibiza Lake was the site with higher number of rare species, with a total of five species identified, followed by islands, the Montepuez and Muagamula River and the riverine habitats associated to these Rivers (Araman, 2007). According to República de Moçambique (2002), the following species that occur in the QNP are protected by Law in Mozambique, i.e. the hunting of these species is prohibited: Bubulcus ibis, Bucorvus leadbeateri, Ardea cinerea, Ardea melanocephala, Ardea goliath, Ardea purpurea, Casmerodius albus, Egretta garzetta, Egretta intermedia, Egretta ardesiaca, Ardeola ralloides, Butorides striatus. Threats to the conservation of birds in the QNP 61 Burnt areas are inhabited by a lower number and diversity of bird species than unburnt areas (Bento, 2003). This suggests that burning represents a threat to bird conservation in the park due to habitat destruction, reduction in habitat quality, destruction of nests and hatchlings, and consequently reducing population growth rates. Habitat fragmentation and habitat loss caused by shifting agriculture is another threat to bird conservation by reducing the extent of habitat patches, particularly in the proximities to human settlements. The change in vegetation cover also associated with shifting cultivation could alter the composition of bird communities in favour of species that prefer grasslands, while jeopardizing bird species that use forests as key habitats. 4.2.3 Reptiles The herpetofauna of Mozambique, incluing the QNP and surrounding areas is poorly documented. Existing data indicate the occurrence of at least 23 species of reptiles in the QNP and its surroundings, among lizards, tortoises, snakes and agamas (Bento, 2003; Schneider, 2004; Araman, 2007). However, only 10 of these 23 species were identified on the basis of direct observation of individuals (Bento, 2003; Schneider, 2004; Araman, 2007). The occurrence of the remaing species was documented on the basis of interviews with local people (Schneider, 2004), which reduces considerably the reliability of the data. The other limitation of the study by Schneider (2004) is that this study was conducted during only a week of the rain season (November), and hence the study did not consider the likely seasonal variation in the occurrence of species. Some reptile species identified include the python (Python sebae natalensis), which is locally rare and protected by Law in Mozambique (República de Moçambique, 2002). Python were recorded near rivers in the Muagamula region. Nile monitor (Varanus niloticus) are also rare in the park, occur in open woodlands in the Ngura region in the south of Montepuez River, in block B and in the Bilibiza Lake. Crocodile (Crocodylus niloticus) are common in water bodies such as the Messalo, Nairoto and Montepuez Rivers and Bilibiza Lake (Bento, 2003; Ntumi, 2005; Araman, 2007). Black mamba (Dendroaspis polylepis) are common and were recorded in grasslands close to the Muagamula River from the Ningaia region to Napala. Other reptile species recorded in the QNP and surrounding areas include Mabuya quinquetaeniata margaritifer, Nucras ornata, Agama mossambica, Thelotornis capensis, Psammophis subtaeniatus orientalis, Nucras caesicaudata, Philothamnus semivariegatus. However, this list is an under-estimate of the reptile diversity because there is no study in the QNP that covered the diversity of potential habitats for reptiles during different seasons of the year. 4.2.4 Amphibians At least 10 species of amphibians occur in the QNP and surrounding areas, including toads and frogs (Doggart and Burgess, 2002; Schneider, 2004). Nevertheless, only five of these species were really seen (Doggart and Burgess, 2002; Schneider, 2004), the remaining five species were recorded based on information about their occurrence provided by local people (Schneider, 2004). The study conducted by Doggart and Burgess (2002) is very limited 62 because it lasted only two days of the rain season and only covered two habitat types, namely the riverine habitats and the inselbergs. The identified species included Phrynobatrachus mababiensis, Chiromantis xerampelina, Ptychadena sp., Arthroleptis sp., Afrixalus sp. and Hyperolius sp. Similar to reptiles; amphibians have not been studied in the QNP despite their importance as indicators of environmental changes. Therefore, the existing data is an underestimate of amphibian diversity in the park. 4.2.5 Insects A wide variety of methods of insect survey such sweep nets, pitfall traps, searches and identification of individuals, etc was applied in the Mareja Reserve, in the buffer zone of the QNP by Schneider (2004) and by Rasplus et al. (2009) in the coastal forests of Cabo Delgado. The objective of these surveys was to assess insect diversity and endemism. Results showed a diversity of insects consisting of 750 species associated to a great diversity of habitats in these areas with climate and vegetation similar to QNP. At least 60 species of butterflies, 60 species of moths, about 450 species of beetles and other orders within the insect class were identified. However, no specific study has been conducted on the insects of the QNP, despite the enormous functions of this taxonomic group in the maintenance of ecological processes. There is a need of a survey to improve the invertebrate database and to map the hotspots of diversity, rarity and endemism. 63 Table 18. Summary of the existing knowledge and gaps of knowledge about terrestrial fauna Taxonomic Group Existing knowledge • Preliminary list of mammal species occurring in the QNP • Estimates of population sizes for species of medium-large mammals, although these estimates are within wide confidence limits Preliminary mapping of the distribution of medium-large mammals MAMMALS • • • • • • • BIRDS • REPTILES AND • Areas with high concentrations of elephant and areas with high incidence of human-elephant conflicts identified and mapped Methods to mitigate human-elephant conflicts identified and ongoing studies to identify the most efficient methods Ongoing mapping of perennial water sources Some ongoing studies to assess the effect of management interventions (for exemple veld burning and fencing) on species movements and distribution patterns, particularly elephants A detailed study on the wild dog ecology List of species and identification of habitats with higher species diversity Ongoing study on the movements of migratory birds Preliminary list of species occurring in the Gaps (knowledge that is relevant for management but is not available) • Lack of reliable estimates of population sizes, including for species of conservation importance such as elephant • Lack of reliable maps showing areas of species concentrations and habitats supporting higher species diversity and abundance • Lack of list of small mammals, particularly for the documentation of priority species for conservation such as rare endemic and threatened species. The habitats supporting higher diversity of small mammals are not known • • • 64 Identification of bird nesting sites, particularly for rare species Identification of threats and of habitats most threatened by human activities List of species and identification of areas and AMPHIBIANS QNP and surrounding areas • 65 habitats with higher species diversity Identification of threats and of reptile habitats most threatened by human activities 4.2.6 Terrestrial fauna management issues Management interventions should be directed at reducing the threats for conservation that are identified in this document. Accordingly, the following management actions are priority for implementation: • Strengthening of patrolling activities to reduce poaching, particularly in regions of the park with high diversity and abundance of animals; • Continuous implementation of actions to mitigate human-wildlife conflicts; • Prevention of uncontrolled fires; • Regulate the expansion of shifting agriculture and other causes of habitat destruction and fragmentation; • Consider the possibility of establishing artificial water sources to reduce human-wildlife conflicts, promote the dispersion of animal in the landscape, increase animal density and the potential for ecotourism development in the QNP; • To study movements and space use by animals, with emphasis on the effect of management interventions such as the application of fire in the distribution of animals in the landscape. 66 5. Bibliography Amade, F.M.C. (2008) Estudo da Estrutura, do Estado de Conservação e dos Factores Ambientais, em Duas Florestas de mangal no Estuário Espírito Santo e no Saco da Inhaca. Tese de Mestrado. FAEF/UEM. André, J-M. 2006. Conservation status and ecology of the African wild dog (Lycaon pictus) in the Quirimbas National Park (Cabo Delgado province), Northern Mozambique Anadarko. 2008. Environmental Impac Assessment Report. Deepwater Exploration Drilling Operations in the Rovuma Offshore Area 1, Mozambique. Impacto, Lda Araman, A. 2007. Gestão dos ecossistemas terrestres e marinhos do Parque Nacional das Quirimbas Araman, A. e Mahommed, J.D. 2006. Ground Count of Mammals of interest in the Quirimbas National Park – Final Report Artumas. 2007. Prospecção Sísmica de Hidrocarbonetos no Bloco Terrestre (onshore) da Bacia do Rovuma - EIA Bandeira, S. O., C. C. F. Macamo, J. G. Kairo, F. Amade, N. Jiddawi and J. Paula (2009) Evaluation of mangrove structure and condition in two trans-boundary areas in the Western Indian Ocean. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems. 19: 46–55. Bento, C. 2003. Birds of Quirimbas. Relatório para o Parque Nacional das Quirimbas Boletim da República – Decreto n. 43/2003 de 10/12 – Regulamento Geral De Pescas Marinha. Costa (2006) Report on Fish Monitoring in Quirimbas National Park September 2004 to September 2005: Evaluation of Fish Population Within Matemo, Quilalea and Ibo Sanctuaries. Costa A., 2007. Preliminary results of Fish catches inside the strict marine protected zone and adjacent fished area: the case of Matemo and Ibo TMPZ within Quirimbas National Park, 10p Gabrie, C.; You H. and Mercier, JR. 2008. Development programme for the Quirimbas National Park in Mozambique - Capitalisation Report. Agence Française de Developpement Davidson, J. Bento, C. and Costa A. (2003). Assessement of coral biodiversity and Health, and Establishment o a Monitoring Program in Cabo Delgado Biodiversity and Tourim Project, Zoological Society of London. 118 pp. London Davidson, J. Bento, C. and Costa A. (2003). Assessement of coral biodiversity and Health, and Establishment o a Monitoring Program in Cabo Delgado Biodiversity and Tourim Project, Zoological Society of London. 118 pp. London 67 Decreto N0 45/2004, Regulamento Sobre o Processo de Avaliação do Impacto Ambiental. Boletim da República. I Série, Número 39. Despacho Ministerial de 20 de Dezembro de 2003. DINAGECA, 1999. Base cartográfica digital à escala 1:250 000. Direcção Nacional de Terras e Florestas (DNTF) (2009). Inventário Nacional de Fauna Bravia. Relatório não publicado Dogcart N. and Burgess N. 2002. Field visit report to Quirimbas National Park, Mozambique 9th – 12th November. Unpublished report. Estudo de impacto ambiental (EIA) na bacia do Rovuma, em 2006 em todas Ilhas do Arquipélago das Quirimbas; FAO, 1995. Land resource inventory of Mozambique. Rome. Italy. Figueiredo, M. A.O., M. B. B. Barreto e R.P. REIS (2004) Caracterização das macroalgas nas comunidades marinhas da Área de Proteção Ambiental de Cairuçú, Parati, RJ – subsídios para futuros monitoramentos. Revista Brasil. Bot., V.27, n.1, p.11-17. Frontier Mozambique (1997 e 1998) Marine Biological and Resouces Survey of the Quirimba Archipelago, Northern Island Group (Macaloe, Mogundula, Rolas e Matemo), Central Island Group (Ibo, Quirimba, Sencar e Quilaluia) e Southern Island Group (Mefumo, Quisiva e Quipaco); Frontier Mozambique (1997). Stanwell-Smith, D. António, C.M. Heasman, M. Myers, D. Whittington M. W. (1998). Southern Island Group – Mefunvu, Quisiue e Quipaco Island. Marine Biological and resource use Survey of the Quirimba Archipelach. Frontier Mozambique Enviromental Research Report 4. Society for Enviromental Exploration, London and Ministry for the Co-Ordination of Environmental Affairs, Maputo. Frontier Mozambique (1997). Whittington, M. W., António C. M., Corrie, A., Gell, F.. Central Island Group – Ibo, Quirimba Sencar and Quilaluia Island. Marine Biological resource use Survey of the Quirimba Archipelag. Frontier Mozambique Enviromental Research Report 3. Society for Enviromental Exploration, London and Ministry for the Co-Ordination of Environmental Affairs, Maputo. Frontier Mozambique (2004) Gell, F. (eds) The seagrass Fishery of Quirimba Island, an interin report: Marine Biological and Resources Use Surveys of the Quirimba Archipelago, Mozambique. Frontier Mozambique Environmental Research Report 5. Society of Environmental Exploration UK and the Ministry for the coordination of Environmental affairs, Maputo. Grant, C.C. e van der Walt. 2000. Towards an adaptive management approach for the conservation of rare antelope in the Kruger National Park – outcome of a workshop held in May 2000. Koedoe 43: 103-111 Guissamulo, A.T. 2009. Análise de Impactos da prospecção sísmica 2D e 3D e das perfurações exploratórias de poços nas águas costeiras pouco profundas pela empresa AMA1 sobre os mamíferos marinhos e tartarugas marinhas na Área da Bacia do Rovuma, Moçambique. Consultoria para a Impacto, Lda INE, 2008. III Recenseamento Geral da População e Habitação. Dados provisórios. INE, Maputo 68 IUCN. 2009. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2009.1. (www.iucnredlist.org). Downloaded on 10/08/2009 J. E. Rousselot (2005). Caracterizacao sócio económica da comunidade piscatória da I. de Quirimba, Norte de Mocambique. Universidade de Algarve, Portugal. Louro, C. M. M., M. A. M. Pereira, A. C. D. Costa(2006), Reporto n the Conservation Satus of Marine Turtles in Moçambique. MICOA, 45 pp Mocambique. Ministério do Turismo. 2004. Plano de Maneio do Parque Nacional das Quirimbas (2004 – 2008). WWW-Moçambique MITUR, 2003. Plano de Maneio 2004-2008: Parque Nacional das Quirimbas. Maputo. Não identificado (2003) Coastal Aquaculture Surveying for Bivalve Culture in Quirimba Natural Park – Ibo. IIP, Maputo, Mozambique. Ntumi, C.P. 2005. Wildlife and Food security: The impact of human and wildlife conflicts in food security in Cabo Delgado Province case study. Report to FAO PEDD, 2006. Plano Estratégico do Desenvolvimento 2001- 2005. Documento produzido para a “Segunda Conferência de Desenvolvimento da Província de Cabo Delgado”, Pemba. Rodrigues M. J., H. Motta, M.W. Whittington e M. Schleyer (in prep). Coral Reef of Western Indian Ocean – Their Ecology and Conservation. Eds McClanahan, T. R. Sheppard, C. e Obura, D. Oxford University Press Schneider, M.F. 2004. Checklist de Vertebrados e Invertebrados da Reserva de Mareja. Departamento de Engenharia Florestal, Universidade Eduardo Mondlane. Silva C. e Sousa, M.I. (1988), Recursos Marinhos de Moçambique. BO n. 21. IIP. Maputo. Moçambique. Stanwell-Smith, D. António, C.M. Heasman, M. Myers, D. Whittington M. W. (1998) Northern Islands Group – Macaloe, Mogundula, Rolas e Matemo Islands Marine and Biological resource use Survey of the Quirimba Archipelag. Frontier Mozambique Enviromental Research Report 2. Society for Enviromental Exploration, London and Ministry for the Co-Ordination of Environmental Affairs, Maputo. Tainton, N. 1999. Veld Management in South Africa. University of Natal Press. Pietermaritzburg União Europeia. 2000. Livro Branco dos Recursos Naturais da Província de Cabo Delgado (Moçambique). Fauna e Recursos Cinegéticos. Volume 1. Pemba. van Aarde, R. 2009. Preliminary assessment of elephant movements in the Quirimba district, northern Mozambique. Interim Report to Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF Mozambique) Whittington M. W., Stanwell-Smith, D. António, C.M. Heasman, M. Myers, D. Whittington M. W. (1997). Southern Island Group – Mefunvu, Quisiue e Quipaco Island. Marine Biological and resource use Survey of the Quirimba Archipelach. Frontier Mozambique Enviromental Research Report 4. Society for Enviromental Exploration, London and Ministry for the Co-Ordination of Environmental Affairs, Maputo. Whittington, M. W., Stanwell-Smith, D. António, C.M. Heasman, M. Myers, D.. (1998) Northern Islands Group – Macaloe, Mogundula, Rolas e Matemo Islands Marine and Biological resource use Survey of the Quirimba Archipelag. Frontier Mozambique 69 Enviromental Research Report 2. Society for Enviromental Exploration, London and Ministry for the Co-Ordination of Environmental Affairs, Maputo. Whittington, M. W., António C. M., Corrie, A., Gell, F. (1997). Central Island Group – Ibo, Quirimba Sencar and Quilaluia Island. Marine Biological resource use Survey of the Quirimba Archipelag. Frontier Mozambique Enviromental Research Report 3. Society for Enviromental Exploration, London and Ministry for the Co-Ordination of Environmental Affairs, Maputo. 70 Annexes 71 Annex 1. List of species of large seaweed in the Northern Island (Macaloe, Mogundula, Rolas and Matemo) Intertidal flora – Large seaweed Cyanophyta 1. Lyngbya majuscula Chlorophyta 1. Anadyomere whigthii 2. Avrainvillea erecta 3. Boergesenia forbesii 4. Boodlea composita 5. Bornetella oligospora 6. Bryopsis spp. 7. Caulerpa lentillifera 8. C. occidentalis 9. C. racemosa var. clavifera 10. C. racemosa var. turbinata 11. C. sertularioides 12. Chaetomorpha aerea 13. C. crassa 14. Chamaedoris delphinii 15. Chlorodesmis sp. 16. Cladophora fascicularis 17. C. mauritiana 18. C. sibogae 19. Cladophora sp. 20. Codium sp. 21. Dictyosphaeria cavernosa 22. D. verluysii 23. Enteromorpha kylinii Phaeophyta 1. Chonospora implexa 2. Cistoseira myrica 3. C. trinodis 4. Dictyota adnata 5. D. cervicornis 6. D. ceylanica 7. D. divaricata 24. E. ramulosa 25. Enteromorpha sp. 26. Halimeda cilindracea 27. H. discoidea 28. H. opuntia 29. H. renschii 30. H. tuna 31. Microdictyon montagnei 32. Neomeris van bosseae 33. Spongocladia vaucheriaerformis 34. Udotea indica 35. Ulva fasciata 36. U. lacyuca 37. U. pertusa 38. U. pulchra 39. Ulva reticulata 40. U. rigida 41. Valonia aegagrophila 42. V. fastigiata 43. V. macrophysa 44. Valoniopsis pachynema 45. Ventricaria ventricosa 8. Hormophysa triqueta 9. Hydroclathrus clatrathus 10. Padina boryana 11. Padina gymnospora 12. P. tetrastomatica 13. Pocockiella variegata 14. Sargassum asperifolium 72 15. S. aquifolium 16. S. binderi 17. S. duplicatum 18. S. ilicifolium 19. S. latifolium 20. S. swartz 21. Sargassum sp. 22. Turbinaria canoides 23. T. ornata var. ornata Rhodophyta 1. Acanthophora deodorised 2. A. muscoides 3. A. specifera 4. Acrocistis nana 5. Actinotrichia fragilis 6. Amphiroa anceps 7. A. beauvoice 8. A. fragilissima 9. Cf. trigilissima 10. A. cf. tribulus 11. Bostrychia tenella 12. Caulacanthus ustulatus 13. Centroceras clavulatum 14. Ceramium sp. 15. Champia sp. 16. C. dasiphylla 17. C. sedifolia 18. Dasyopsis cf. pilosa 19. Digenia simplex 20. Endosiphonia clavigera 21. Eucheuma dendiculata 22. Gelidiella acerosa 23. G. fasciculata 24. G. myrioclada 25. Gracilaria arcuata 26. G. fergusoni 27. G. folifera 28. Gracilaria sp. 29. Griffithisia rhizophora 30. Kappaphycus sp. 31. Halymenia venuta 32. H. Hamulosa 33. H. musciformis 34. H. cf. nidica 35. H. cf. nidulans 36. H. pannosa 37. Jania adhaerens 38. Laurencia columellaris 39. L. complanata 40. L. distichophyta 41. L. obtusa 42. L. papillosa 43. L. poiti 44. Liagora sp. 45. P. Pulvinata 46. Pterocladia parva 47. Rabdonia cf. africana 48. Sarconema filiformis 49. S. scianaioides 50. Soliera robusta 51. Spyridia sp. 52. Vanvoorstia spectabilis 53. Wurdemannia miniata Subtidal Area Cyanophyta 1. Lyngbya majuscula Chlorophyta 1. Acetabularia sp. 2. A. Obscura 3. Bornetella oligospora 4. Caulerpa sp. 5. C.cupressoides var. typica 6. C. mexicana 7. C. racemosa cf. macrodisca 8. C. racemosa var. typica 9. C. selago 10. C. serrulata 73 11. C. sertularioides 12. C. taxifolia 13. Chamaedoris delphinii 14. Chlorodesmis sp. 15. Codium sp. 16. Dictyosphaeria cavernosa 17. Halimeda cilindricea 18. Halimeda gigas 19. Halimeda sp. 20. H. milanesica 21. H. opuntia Phaephyta 1. Dictyopteris cf. deliculata 2. Dictyota adnata 3. D. pardalis 4. Padina gymnospora 5. P. tetrastomatica 6. Padina sp. 7. Pacockiella variegata 22. H. renschii 23. H. tuna 24. Halimeda sp. 25. Microdictyon montagnei 26. Neomeris van bosseae 27. Udotea indica 28. U. orientalis 29. U. flabellum f. longifolia 30. U. flabellum f. flabellum 31. U. glauscens 32. Valonia macrophysa 8. Sargassum aquifolium 9. S. Duplicatum 10. S. Polycystum 11. Sargassum sp. 12. Turbinaria ornata var. ornata 13. T. Ornara var. serrata Rhodophyta 1. Acanthophora muscoides 2. A. Cf. tribulus 3. Amphiroa sp. 4. Chondrocosccus harvey 5. Endosiphonia clavigera 6. Euchaeuma dendiculatum 7. Galaxavra breniarticulata 8. G. fasciculata 9. G. tenera 10. Gracilaria sp. 11. G. verrucosa 12. Kappaphycus sp. 13. Hypnea cornuta 14. H. pannosa 15. Hypnea sp. 16. Jania adhaerens 17. Laurencia obtusa 18. Laurencia sp. 19. Liagora ceranoides 20. L. mauritiana 21. Liagora sp. 22. Poritiera harvey 23. P. pulvinata 24. Rabdonia cf. africana 25. Sarcodina sp. 26. Trichogloea sp. 74 Annex 2. List of species of large seaweed in the group of Central Islands (Ibo, Sencar, Quirimba and Quilaluia) Macroalgas Cyanophyta 1. Lyngbya mjuscula Chlorophyta 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Acetabularia sp. Anadyomere wrigthii Avrainvillea erecta A. obscura Boergesenia forbesii Boodlea composita Bornetella oligospora Bryopsia spp. Caulerpa cupressoides var. flabellata 10. C. cf. fastigiata 11. C. lentillifera 12. C. occidentalis 13. C. peltata 14. C. racemosa var. clavifera 15. C. racemosa var. turbinata 16. C. racemosa var. uvifera 17. C. scapelliformis 18. C. selago 19. C. sertularioides 20. C. spp. 21. C. taxifolia 22. C. cf. zeyheri 23. Chaetomorpha aerea 24. C. crassa 25. Chaetomorpha? 26. Chamaedoris delphinii 27. Chlorodesmis hildebrandtii 28. Chlorodesmis sp. 29. Cladophora mauritiana 30. C. cf. saviniana 31. C. sibogae 32. Cladophora sp. 33. Codium arabicum? 34. C. dwarkense 35. C. geppi 36. Dictyosphaeria cavernosa 37. D. verluysii 38. Enteromorpha clathrata? 39. E. flexuosa? 40. E. kylini 41. E. ramulosa 42. Enteromorpha sp. 43. Halimeda cilindricea 44. H. discoidea 45. H. gigas 46. H. macroloba 47. H. micronesica? 48. H. milanesica 49. H. opuntia 50. H. renschii 51. Halimeda sp. 52. Microdictyon montagnei 53. Neomeris van bosseae 54. Rhizoclinium grande? 55. Spongocladia vaucheriaerformis 56. Udotea indica 57. U. orientalis 58. U. palmetta 59. U. flabellum f. longifolia 60. U. flabellum f. flabellum 61. U. glauscens 62. Ulva fasciata 63. Ulva lactuca 64. U. pertusa 65. U. pulchra 66. U. reticulata 67. U. rígida 68. Valonia aegagrophila 69. U. fastigiata 70. U. macrophysa 71. Valoriopsis pachynema 72. Ventricaria ventricosa Phaeophyta 1. Chonospora implexa 2. Cistoseira myrica 3. C. trinodis 4. Colpomenia sinuosa 5. Dictyopteris sp. 6. Dictyota adnata 7. D. bartayresii 8. D. cervicornis 9. D. ceylanica 10. D. divaricata 11. D. friabilis 12. D. pardalis 13. Homorphysa triquetra 14. Hydroclathrus clatrathus 15. Hydroclathrus sp. 16. Padina boryana 17. Padina gymnospora 18. Rosenvingea intricata 19. Rosenvingea orientalis 20. Sargassum asperifolium 21. S. aquifolium 22. S. binderi 23. S. duplicatum 24. S. ilicifolium 25. S. swartz 26. Sargassum sp. 27. Turbinaria conoides 28. T. decurrens 29. T. ornata var. ornata 30. T. ornata var. serrata Rhodophyta 1. Acanthophora dendroides 2. A. muscoides 3. A. specifera 4. Acrocistis nana 5. Actinotrichia fragilis 6. Amansia dietrichiana 7. A. glomerata 8. Amphiroa anceps 9. A. beauvoise 10. A. fragilíssima 11. A. cf. tribulus 12. Bostrychia binderi 13. B. radicans? 14. B. tenella 15. Caloglossa cf. leprieuri 16. Caulacanthus ustulatus 17. Catanella opuntia 18. Centroceras clavulatum 19. Ceramium sp. 20. C. compressa 21. C. cf. globulifera 22. Champia spp. 23. Chondria cf. arnata 24. C. dasyphylla 25. C. sedifolia 26. Chondrococcus harvey 27. Dasya sp. 28. Dasyopsis cf. pilosa 29. Dictyurus purpurascens 30. Digenia simplex 31. Endosiphonia clavigera 32. Eucheuma dendiculatum 33. Galaxaura breviarticulata 34. G. fasciculata 35. G. oblonga 36. G. Tenera 37. Gelidiopsis? 38. Gelidiella acerosa 39. G. myrioclada 40. Gelidium micropterum 41. Gracilaria arcuata 42. G. cf. corticata 43. G. crassa 44. G. edulis 45. G. fergusoni 46. G. folifera 47. millardetii 48. G. salicornia 49. G. spp. 50. G. verrucosa 51. Griffthisia rhizophora 52. Kappaphycus striatum 53. K. spp. 54. Halymenia sp. 55. Halimenia venusta 56. Hypnea cornuta 57. H. hamulosa 58. H. musciformis 59. H. cf. nidifica 60. H. cf. nidulans 61. H. pannosa 62. Jania adhaerens 63. Laurencia collumelaris 64. L. complanata 65. L. distichophyla 66. L. cf. divaricata 67. L. elata 68. L. obtusa 69. L. papilosa 70. L. cf. perforata 71. Liagora ceranoides 72. L. cf. divaricata 73. Liagora sp. 74. Muriaella periclados 75. Neurymenia fraxinifolia 76. Poritiera harvey 77. P. pulvinata 78. Pterocladia parva 79. Rabdonia cf. africana 80. Sarcodinia monatagnea 81. Sarconema filiformis 82. Soliera robusta 83. Spiridia filamentosa 84. S. fusiformis 85. Trichogloea sp. 86. Vanvoorstia spectabilis 87. Vidalia fimbriata 88. Wurdemannia miniata 89. Zellera turvallina Annex 3. List of species of seagrass and seaweed in the group of Southern Islands (Mefunvo, Quissiva e Quipaco) Intertidal Flora Cyanophyta 1. Lynbya majuscula Chlorophyta 1. Anadyomere wrightii 2. Avrainvillea arecta 3. A. obscura 4. Boergesenia forbesii 5. Boodlea composita 6. Bornetella oligospora 7. Caulerpa racemosa var. clavifera 8. C. racemosa var. turbinata 9. C. racemosa var. uvifera 10. C. sertularioides 11. Caulerpa sp. 12. Chaetomorpha crassa 13. Chamaedoris delphinii 14. Chlodophora fascicularis 15. C. mauritiana 16. C. cf. saviniana 17. C. sibogae 18. Cladophora sp. 19. Codium dwarkense 20. Dictyosphaeria cavernosa 21. D. verluysii 22. Enteromorpha kylinii 23. Halimeda cilindracea 24. H. discoidea 25. H. macroloba 26. H. opuntia 27. H. tuna 28. Microdictyon montagnii 29. Neomeris van bosseae 30. Spongocladia vaucheriaerformis 31. Ulva fasciata 32. U. lactuca 33. V. palmetta 34. V. pertusa 35. Udotea orientalis 36. U. pulchra 37. U. reticulata 38. U. rigida 39. Valonia aegagrophila 40. U. fastigiata 41. V. macrophysa 42. Valoniopsis pachynema Phaephyta 1. Cistoseira myrica 2. C. trinodis 3. Dictyopteris delicatula 4. Dictyota adnata 5. D. bartayresii 6. D. cervicornis 7. D. ceylanica 8. D. divaricata 9. D. friabilis 10. D. pardalis 11. Homorphysa triqueta 12. Hydroclathrus clatrathus 13. Padina boryana 14. P. gymnospora 15. Padina sp. 16. Sargassum aquifolium 17. S. asperifolium 18. S. Binderi 19. S. duplicatum 20. S. swartz 21. Sargassum sp. 22. Spatoglossum asperum 23. Turbinaria conoides 24. T. ornata var. ornata Rhodophyta 1. Acanthophora 2. A. muscoides 3. A. specifera 4. Acrocistis nana 5. Actinotrichia fragilis 6. Amansia dietrichiana 7. A. glomerata 8. Ampiroa anceps 9. A. beauvoise 10. A. fragilissima 11. Bostrychia binderi 12. B. tenella 13. Caulacanthus ustulatus 14. Centrocerus clavulatum 15. Ceramium sp. 16. Champia cf. indica 17. C. cf. globulifera 18. Champia sp. 19. Chondria cf. armata 20. C. dasyphyla 21. C. sedifolia 22. Chondria sp. 23. Dasyopsis cf. pilosa 24. Digenia simplex 25. Endosiphonia clavigera 26. Eucheuma dendiculatum 27. Gelidiella acerosa 28. G. myrioclada 29. G. crassa 30. G. edulis 31. G. fasciculata 32. G. fergusoni 33. G. folifera 34. G. millardeti 35. G. salicornia 36. Gracilaria sp. 37. Kappaphycus sp. 38. Halymenia venusta 39. Hypnea cornuta 40. H. hamulosa 41. H. musciformis 42. H.cf. nidifica 43. H. Cf. nidulans 44. H. panosa 45. Jania adhaerens 46. Laurencia columellaris 47. L. complanata 48. L. distichophyla 49. L. optusa 50. L. papillosa 51. L. poiti 52. Laurencia sp. 53. Liagora ceranoides 54. Poritiera harvey 55. P. Pulvinata 56. Pterocladia parva 57. Sarconema filiformis 58. Soliera robusta 59. Vanvoorstia spectabilis 60. Wurdemannia miniata Subtidal Flora Seaweed Cyanophyta Lyngbya majuscula Chlorophyta a) b) c) d) e) f) g) h) i) j) k) l) m) n) o) p) q) r) Acetabularia sp. Anadyomere wrightii Avrainvillea erecta A. obscura Bornetella oligospora Bryopsis sp. Caulerpa sp. C. cupressoides var. flabellata C. lannuginosa C. peltata C. scapelliformis C. serrulata C. sertularioides C. taxifolia Chaetomorpha crassa Chamaedoris delphinii Chlorodesmis sp. Codium dwarkense s) C. geppi t) Codium sp. u) Dictyosphaeria cavernosa v) D. verluysii w) Halimeda cilindrica x) H. discoidea y) H. gigas z) H. macroloba aa) H. milanesica bb) H. renschii cc) Halimeda sp. dd) Neomeris van bosseae ee) Udotea flabellum f. flabellum ff) U. flabellum f. longifolia gg) U. glauscens hh) U. orientalis ii) Ventricaria ventricosa Phaeophyta 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Chonospora implexa Cladosiphon occidentale Dictyopteris delicatula Dictyota adnata D. ciliolata D. divaricata D. pardalis Hydroclathrus clatrathus Padina boryana 10. P. gymnospora 11. Pocockiella variegata 12. Rosenvingea intricata 13. Sargassum aquifolium 14. S. duplicatum 15. S. latifolium 16. S. swartz 17. Sargassum sp. 18. Spatoglossum asperum 19. Turbinaria decurrens 20. T.ornata var. ornata Rodophyta 1. Actinotrichia fragilis 2. Amphiroa anceps 3. A. fragilissima 4. Chondrococcus harvey 5. Galaxaura breviarticulata 6. G. oblongata 7. G. tenera 8. Haliptylon subulata 9. Halymenia venusta 10. Hypnea cornuta 11. Jania adhaerens 12. Laurencia columellaris 13. Liagora tenera Liagora sp. Annex 4. List of bird species of the Quirimbas National Park (Wilson 2009) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 Latin name Accipiter badius Bubo africanus Caprimulgus pectoralis Centropus burchellii Cisticola chiniana Coturnix coturnix Francolinus sephaena Melierax metabates Merops hirundineus Stactolaema leucotis Streptopelia semitorquata Treron calva Milvus aegyptus Accipiter tachiro Urocolius indicus Egretta ardesiaca Acrocephalus palustris Buteo vulpinus Delichon urbica Hippolais icterina Hirundo rustica Lanius collurio Merops apiaster Merops persicus Motacilla flava Muscicapa striata Oriolus oriolus Phylloscopus trochilus Riparia riparia Sylvia borin Erythrocercus livingstonei Prinia subflava Acrocephalus gracilirostris Andropadus importunus Ardea cinerea Ardea goliath Ardea melanocephala Ardea purpurea Ardeola ralloides Bostrychia hagedash Butorides striatus Cercomela familiaris English name Shikra Spotted Eagle Owl Fiery-necked Nightjar Burchell’s Coucal Rattling Cisticola Common Quail Crested Francolin Dark-chanting Goshawk Swallow-tailed Bee-eater White-eared Barbet Red-eyed Dove African Green-Pigeon Yellowbilled Kite African Goshawk Red-faced Mousebird Black Heron Marsh Warbler Steppe Buzzard Common House Martin Icterine Warbler Barn Swallow Red-backed Shrike European Bee-eater Blue-cheeked Bee-eater Yellow Wagtail Spotted Flycatcher Eurasian Golden Oriole Willow Warbler Bank Swallow Garden Warbler Livingstone’s Flycatcher Tawny-flanked Prinia Lesser Swamp-Warbler Sombre Greenbul Grey Heron Goliath Heron Black-headed Heron Purple Heron Squacco Heron Hadeda Ibis Green-backed Heron Familiar Chat 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 Cercotrichas quadrivirgata Chlorocichla flaviventris Ciconia episcopus Cisticola juncidis Cossypha natalensis Dicrurus adsimilis Dicrurus ludwigii Dryoscopus cubla Egretta alba Egretta garzetta Egretta intermedia Fregata minor Laniarius aethiopicus Malaconotus blanchoti Melaenornis pammelaina Morus capensis Motacilla aguimp Nectarinia talatala Nilaus afer Parus niger Phalacrocorax africanus Phalacrocorax lucidus Platysteira peltata Prionops plumatus Prionops retzii Pycnonotus tricolor Scopus umbretta Sylvietta whytii Tchagra australis Tchagra senegala Telophorus sulfureopectus Telophorus zeylonus Turdoides jardineii Bubulcus ibis Calonectris diomedea Dromas ardeola Oceanites oceanicus Petrodroma macroptera Phaethon lepturus Puffinus lherminieri Stercorarius longicaudus Stercorarius parasiticus Stercorarius pomarinus Sula dactylatra Daption capense Thalassarche carteri Bearded Scrub-Robin Yellow-bellied Greenbul Woolly-necked Stork Zitting Cisticola Red-capped Robin-Chat Forktailed Drongo Squaretailed Drongo Black-backed Puffback Great-white Egret Little Egret Yellow-billed Egret Greater Frigatebird Tropical Boubou Grey-headed Bush-Shrike Southern Black Flycatcher Cape Gannet African Pied Wagtail White-bellied Sunbird Brubru Southern Black Tit Reed Cormorant White-breasted Cormorant Black-throated Wattle-eye White Helmet-shrike Redbilled Helmet-shrike Dark-capped Bulbul Hammerkop Redfaced Crombec Brown-crowned Tchagra Black-crowned Tchagra Orange-breasted Bush-Shrike Gorgeous Bush-Shrike Arrowmarked Babbler Cattle Egret Cory's Shearwater Crab Plover Wilson's Storm-petrel Great-winged Petrel White-tailed Tropicbird Audubon's Shearwater Long-tailed Jaeger Parasitic Jaeger Pomarine Jaeger Masked Booby Pintado Petrel Indian Yellow-nosed Albatross 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 Thalassarche cauta Strix woodfordii Actophilornis africanus Amaurornis flavirostris Apaloderma narina Apus affinis Aviceda cuculoides Burhinus capensis Burhinus vermiculatus Bycanistes bucinator Chrysococcyx caprius Chrysococcyx klaas Coracias caudate Corvus albicollis Corvus albus Corythaixoides concolor Eremopterix leucotis Falco biarmicus Falco chicquera Francolinus afer Francolinus coqui Gallinula chloropus Gallirex porphyreolophus Glaucidium capense Haliaeetus vocifer Hirundo abyssinica Hirundo fuligula Hirundo smithii Hydroprogne caspia Indicator indicator Kaupifalco monogrammicus Lophaetus occipitalis Merops pusillus Merops superciliosus Micronisus gabar Otus senegalensis Phoeniculus purpureus Pogoniulus bilineatus Poicephalus cryptoxanthus Polyboroides typus Porphyrio porphyrio Rhinopomastus cyanomelas Sterna sandvicensis Streptopelia capicola Streptopelia senegalensis Terathopius ecaudatus Shy Albatross African Wood Owl African Jacana Black Crake Narina Trogon Little Swift Cuckoo Hawk Spotted Thick-knee Water Thick-knee Trumpeter Hornbill Diderick Cuckoo Klaas’s Cuckoo Lilac-breasted Roller White-necked Raven Pied Crow Grey Go-away-bird Chestnut-backed Sparrowlark Lanner Falcon Rednecked Falcon Rednecked Francolin Coqui Francolin Common Moorhen Purplecrested Turaco African Barred Owlet African Fish Eagle Lesser Striped Swallow Rock Martin Wire-tailed Swallow Caspian Tern Greater Honeyguide Lizard Buzzard Longcreasted Eagle Little-Bee-eater Madagascar Bee-eater Gabar Goshawk African Scops Owl Green Wood-Hoopoe Yellow-rumped Tinkerbird Brownheaded Parrot African Harrier-Hawk Purple Swamphen Common Scimitarbill Sandwich Tern Cape Turtle-Dove Laughing Dove Bateleur 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 Thripias namaquus Tockus alboterminatus Turtur chalcospilos Tyto alba Upupa africana Colius striatus Passer domesticus Puffinus pacificus Aquila wahlbergi Cisticola galactotes Hirundo albigularis Mirafra sabota Tricholaema leucomelas Actitis hypoleucos Apus apus Aquila nipalensis Aquila pomarina Arenaria interpres Calidris alba Calidris ferruginea Calidris minuta Caprimulgus europaeus Charadrius hiaticula Charadrius leschenaultii Charadrius mongolus Chlidonias hybridus Chlidonias leucopterus Ciconia ciconia Circus aeruginosus Circus macrourus Circus pygargus Coracias garrulus Cuculus canorus Falco amurensis Falco concolor Falco naumanni Falco subbuteo Falco vespertinus Hieraaetus pennatus Limosa lapponica Limosa limosa Milvus migrans Numenius arquata Numenius phaeopus Pandion haliaetus Pernis apivorus Bearded Woodpecker Crowned Hornbill Emerald-spotted Wood-Dove Barn Owl African Hoopoe Speckled Mousebird House Sparrow Wedge-tailed Shearwater Wahlberg's Eagle Rufous-winged Cisticola Whitethroated Swallow Sabota Lark Acacia Pied Barbet Common Sandpiper Common Swift Steppe Eagle Lesser Spotted Eagle Ruddy Turnstone Sanderling Curlew Sandpiper Little Stint European Nightjar Common Ringed Plover Greater Sand Plover Mongolian Sand Plover Whiskered Tern White-winged Tern White Stork Western Marsh-Harrier Pallid Harrier Montagu's Harrier European Roller Common Cuckoo Amur Falcon Sooty Falcon Lesser Kestrel Eurasian Hobby Red-footed Falcon Booted Eagle Bar-tailed Godwit Black-tailed Godwit Black Kite Eurasian Curlew Common Whimbrel Osprey Honey Buzzard 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 Philomachus pugnax Pluvialis squatarola Porzana porzana Sterna hirundo Tringa glareola Tringa nebularia Tringa stagnatilis Xenus cinereus Diodema exultans Fregata ariel Acrocephalus schoenobaenus Bucorvus leadbeateri Campethera cailliautii Cypsiurus parvus Schoutedenapus myoptilus Polmaetus belicosus Egretta gularis Calidris canutus Calidris ruficollis Haematopus ostralegus Larus fuscus Bulweria fallaz Fregetta tropica Phaethon rubricauda Puffinius carneipes Sula sula Egretta dimorpha Heliolais erythroptera Trochocercus cyanomelas Accipiter melanoleucus Accipiter minullus Acrocephalus arundinaceus Alcedo cristata Alcedo semitorquata Alopochen aegyptiacus Amadina fasciata Amandava subflava Amblyospiza albifrons Anaplectes rubriceps Anas erythrorhyncha Anas hottentota Anas sparsa Anastomus lamelligerus Anous tenuirostris Anthoscopus caroli Anthreptes collaris Ruff Grey Plover Spotted Crake Common Tern Wood Sandpiper Common Greenshank Marsh Sandpiper Terek Sandpiper Wandering Albatross Lesser Figatebird Sedge Warbler Southern Ground-hornbill Green-backed Woodpecker Palm Swift Scarce Swift Martial Eagle Western Reef Heron Red Knot Red-necked Stint Eurasian Oystercatcher Lesser Black-backed Gull Jouanin's Petrel Black-bellied Storm-petrel Red-tailed Tropicbird Flesh-footed Shearwater Red-footed Booby Dimorphic Egret Red-winged Warbler Blue-mantled Crested Flycatcher Black Sparrowhawk Little Sparrowhawk Great Reed Warbler Malachite Kingfisher Half-collared Kingfisher Egyptian Goose Cut-throat Finch Orange-breasted Waxbill Thick-billed Weaver Red-headed Weaver Red-billed Teal Hottentot Teal African Black Duck African Openbill Lesser Noddy Grey Penduline-Tit Collared Sunbird 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 Anthreptes longuemarei Anthreptes neglectus Anthreptes reichenowi Anthus cinnamomeus Anthus lineiventris Apalis flavida Apus barbatus Apus caffer Aquila rapax Ardeola ralloides Ardeola rufiventris Batis fratrum Batis soror Bias musicus Bradornis pallidus Bradypterus baboecala Bubo lacteus Buteo augur Calamonastes stierlingi Camaroptera brachyura Campephaga flava Campethera abingoni Campethera scriptoricauda Caprimulgus fossii Caprimulgus tristigma Centropus grillii Cercotrichas leucophrys Ceryle rudis Ceuthmochares australis Chalcomitra amethystina Charadrius marginatus Charadrius pallidus Charadrius pecuarius Charadrius tricollaris Chrysococcyx cupreus Cichladusa arquata Ciconia abdimii Cinnyricinclus leucogaster Cinnyris manoensis Circaetus cinerascens Circaetus cinereus Circaetus fasciolatus Circaetus pectoralis Circus ranivorus Cisticola aberrans Cisticola brachypterus Western Violet-backed Sunbird Ulunguru violet-backed Sunbird Plain-backed Sunbird African Pipit Striped Pipit Yellow-breasted Apalis Black Swift White-rumped Swift Tawny Eagle Madagascar Pond Heron Rufous-bellied Heron Woodward's Batis Pale Batis Black-and-white Flycatcher Pale Flycatcher Little Rush-Warbler Verreaux's Eagle-Owl Augur Buzzard Stierling's Wren-Warbler Green-backed Camaroptera Black Cuckooshrike Golden-tailed Woodpecker Speckle-throated Woodpecker Square-tailed Nightjar Freckled Nightjar Black Coucal White-browed Scrub-Robin Pied Kingfisher Green Malkoha Amethyst Sunbird White-fronted Plover Chestnut-banded Plover Kittlitz’s Plover Three-banded Plover African Emerald Cuckoo Collared Palm Thrush Abdim's Stork Violet-backed Starling Miombo Double-collared Sunbird Western Banded Snake-eagle Brown Snake-Eagle Southern Banded Snake-eagle Black-chested Snake-Eagle African Marsh-Harrier Lazy Cisticola Short-winged Cisticola 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 Cisticola fulvicapillus Cisticola natalensis Clamator glandarius Coracias spatulata Coracina caesia Coracina pectoralis Cossypha heuglini Coturnix adansonii Coturnix delegorguei Creatophora cinerea Crecopsis egregia Crex crex Cuculus gularis Cuculus poliocephalus Cuculus rochii Cuculus solitarius Cursorius temminckii Cyanomitra olivacea Dendrocygna bicolor Dendrocygna viduata Dendropicos fuscescens Elanus caeruleus Emberiza cabanisi Emberiza capensis(ss vincenti) Emberiza flaviventris Emberiza tahapisi Ephippiorhynchus senegalensis Estrilda astrild Euplectes albonotatus Euplectes axillaris Euplectes capensis Euplectes hordeaceus Euplectes macrourus Euplectes nigroventris Euplectes orix Eurystomus glaucurus Falco cuvierii Falco dickinsoni Falco peregrinus Falco t. rufescens Fulica cristata Gallinula angulata Glareola pratincola Glaucidium perlatum Guttera pucherani Gypohierax angolensis Neddicky Croaking Cisticola Great Spotted Cuckoo Racket-tailed Roller Grey Cuckoo-shrike White-breasted Cuckooshrike White-browed Robin-Chat Blue Quail Harlequin Quail Wattled Starling African Crake Corncrake African Cuckoo Lesser Cuckoo Madagascar Cuckoo Red-chested Cuckoo Temminck's Courser Eastern Olive Sunbird Fulvous Whistling-Duck White-faced Whistling-Duck Cardinal Woodpecker Black-shouldered Kite Cabanis's Bunting Cape Bunting Goldenbreasted Bunting Cinnamon-breasted Bunting Saddle-billed Stork Common Waxbill White-winged Widowbird Fan-tailed Widowbird Yellow Bishop Black-winged Bishop Yellow-mantled Widowbird Zanzibar Red Bishop Southern Red Bishop Broad-billed Roller African Hobby Dicknson’s Kestrel Peregrine Falcon Common Kestrel Red-knobbed Coot Lesser Moorhen Collared Pratincole Pearl-spotted Owlet Crested Guineafowl Palm-nut Vulture 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 Halcyon albiventris Halcyon chelicuti Halcyon leucocephala Halcyon senegalensis Halcyon senegaloides Hieraaetus ayresii Hieraaetus spilogaster Himantopus himantopus Hirundo senegalensis Hyliota flavigaster Hypargos niveoguttatus Indicator minor Indicator variegatus Ispidina picta Ixobrychus minutus Ixobrychus sturmi Lagonosticta rhodopareia Lagonosticta senegala Lamprotornis corruscus Lanius minor Larus cirrocephalus Leptoptilos crumeniferus Lissotis melanogaster Lonchura cucullata Lonchura fringilloides Lonchura nigriceps Lybius melanopterus Lybius torquatus Macheiramphus alcinus Macrodipteryx vexillarius Macronyx croceus Mandingoa nitidula Megaceryle maxima Merops boehmi Merops nubicus Mirafra rufocinnamomea Muscicapa caerulescens Mycteria ibis Myioparus plumbeus Myrmecocichla arnotti Neafrapus boehmi Necrosyrtes monachus Nectarinia bifasciata Nectarinia senegalensis Nectarinia venusta Nectarinia veroxii Brown-hooded Kingfisher Striped Kingfisher Grey-headed Kingfisher Woodland Kingfisher Mangrove Kingfisher Ayres' Hawk-Eagle African Hawk-Eagle Black-winged Stilt Mosque Swallow Yellow-bellied Hyliota Red-throated Twinspot Lesser Honeyguide Scaly-throated Honeyguide African Pygmy-Kingfisher Little Bittern Dwarf Bittern Jameson’s Firefinch Red-billed Firefinch Black-bellied Starling Lesser Grey Shrike Grey-headed Gull Marabou Stork Black-bellied Bustard Bronze Mannikin Magpie Mannikin Red-backed Mannikin Brown - breasted Barbet Black-collared Barbet Bat Hawk Pennant-winged Nightjar Yellow-throated Longclaw Green Twinspot Giant Kingfisher Bohm's Bee-eater Northern Carmine Bee-eater Flappet Lark Ashy Flycatcher Yellow-billed Stork Grey Tit-Flycatcher Arnott's Chat Bohm's Spinetail Hooded Vulture Purple-banded Sunbird Scarlet-chested Sunbird Variable Sunbird Grey Sunbird 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 Nettapus auritus Nicator gularis Numida meleagris Nycticorax nycticorax Oena capensis Oenanthe oenanthe Onychognathus morio Oriolus auratus Oriolus larvatus Oxylophus jacobinus Oxylophus levaillantii Pachycoccyx audeberti Passer diffusus Pelecanus Onocrotalus Pelecanus rufescens Petronia superciliaris Phedina borbonica Phyllastrephus fischeri Phyllastrephus terrestris Pitta angolensis Platalea alba Plectropterus gambensis Plegadis falcinellus Ploceus bicolor Ploceus cucullatus Ploceus intermedius Ploceus ocularis Ploceus subaureus Ploceus xanthops Ploceus xanthopterus Pogoniulus chrysoconus Pogoniulus simplex Poicephalus suahelicus Porphyrio alleni Porzana pusilla Prionops scopifrons Psalidoprocne orientalis Ptilopsus granti Pyrenestes minor Pytilia afra Pytilia melba Quelea erythrops Quelea quelea Rallus caerulescens Rhinoptilus chalcopterus Riparia cincta African Pygmy-goose Eastern Nicator Helmeted Guineafowl Black-crowned Night-heron Namaqua Dove Northern Wheatear Red-winged Starling African Golden Oriole Blackheaded Oriole Jacobin Cuckoo Levaillant's Cuckoo Thick-billed Cuckoo Southern Grey-headed Sparrow Great white pelican Pink-backed Pelican Yellow-throated Petronia Mascarene Martin Fischer's Greenbul Terrestrial Brownbul African Pitta African Spoonbill Spur-winged Goose Glossy Ibis Dark-backed Weaver Village Weaver Lesser Masked-Weaver Spectacled Weaver Yellow Weaver Golden Weaver Southern Brown-throated Weaver Yellow-fronted Tinkerbird Green Tinkerbird Grey-headed Parrot Allen's Gallinule Baillon's Crake Chestnut-fronted Helmet-Shrike Eastern Saw-wing Southern White-faced Scops-Owl Lesser Seedcracker Orange-winged Pytilia Green-winged Pytilia Red-headed Quelea Red-billed Quelea African Rail Bronze-winged Courser Banded Martin 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 Riparia paludicola Rostratula benghalensis Rynchops flavirostris Sagittarius serpentarius Sarkidiornis melanotos Sarothrura elegans Serinus mozambicus Serinus reichardi Serinus sulphuratus Smithornis capensis Stephanoaetus coronatus Sterna albifrons Sterna bengalensis Sterna bergii Sterna fuscata Sterna nilotica Sterna saundersi Streptopelia decipiens Tachymarptis aequatorialis Tauraco livingstonii Telacanthura ussheri Telophorus nigrifrons Terpsiphone viridis Thalassornis leuconotus Thamnolaea cinnamomeiventris Threskiornis aethiopicus Tockus nasutus Tockus pallidirostris Torgos tracheliotus Turdus libonyanus Turnix sylvatica Uraeginthus angolensis Vidua chalybeata Vidua macroura Vidua obtusa Vidua paradisaea Zosterops senegalensis Plain Martin Greater Painted Snipe African Skimmer Secretary-bird Comb Duck Buff-spotted Flufftail Yellow-fronted Canary Reichard's Seed-eater Brimstone Canary African Broadbill African Crowned Eagle Little Tern Lesser-crested Tern Swift Tern Sooty Tern Gull-billed Tern Saunders Tern African Mourning Dove Mottled Swift Livingstone's Turaco Mottled Spinetail Black-fronted Bush-Shrike African Paradise-Flycatcher White-backed Duck Mocking Cliff-Chat African Sacred Ibis African Grey Hornbill Pale-billed Hornbill Lappet-faced Vulture Kurrichane Thrush Kurrichane Buttonquail Blue Waxbill Village Indigobird Pin-tailed Whydah Broad-tailed Paradise-Whydah Eastern Paradise-Whydah African Yellow White-eye