Proceedings of SSIG Conference draft 24 Mar 05

Transcription

Fifth Annual
Sahelo-Saharan Interest Group
Meeting
Hotel Kanta, Souss, Tunisia
21-24 April, 2005
Addax (Addax nasomaculatus) Bou Hedma National Park
Sponsored in part by the Foreign Ministry of Tunisia, and the
Direction Générale des Forêts (DGF)
Host liaison: Simon Wakefield
Report compiled and edited by:
Steve Monfort, [email protected]
Terrie Correll, [email protected]
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SSIG Vision ........................................................................................................................1
Background on SSIG ................................................................................................................1
Meeting Participants.................................................................................................................1
Meeting Objectives ...................................................................................................................2
Day 1: Project Reporting Session...........................................................................................3
Report On the Workshop Organized In Douz , 18 & 19 April, 2004,
Roseline Beudels ........................................................................................................3
One-year Main Conclusions on SSIG Meeting, Souss, 2004,
Arnaud Greth...............................................................................................................3
SSIG/DFPP Survey of the Termit Massif and Tin Toumma (Niger),
February- March 2004—Preliminary Field Report
John Newby, Tim Wacher, Bill Houston, Ed Spevak,
Moussa Salaou Barmou, Abdou Malaam Issa ............................................................4
Update on the Initiatives of the European Endangered Species Programme
for Scimitar-Horned Oryx
Tania Gilbert & Tim Woodfine......................................................................................9
Population Status of Swayne’s Hartebeest in Ethiopia,
Befekadu Refera .......................................................................................................10
Status of Addra and Mhorr Gazelles (Gazella dama ruficolis and G. d. mhorr)
within the AZA Species Survival Plan (SSP),
Edward Spevak .........................................................................................................16
Status of Scimitar-horned Oryx in Senegal,
Mame Balla Gueye....................................................................................................20
Day 2: Project Report Session (continued), Review of Projects/
Assignments/New Business ..................................................................................................22
Update on Sahelo-Saharan Wildlife in Morocco Since the Agadir SSIG Meeting
Abdellah El Mastour ..................................................................................................22
Coordinating Requests for Animals for Reintroduction—‘The St. Louis Meeting’
Terrie Correll .............................................................................................................23
i
Reintroduction & Meta-Population of Addax & Oryx in Tunisia
Tim Woodfine & Heiner Engel....................................................................................24
Establishment of Termit Biosphere Reserve: Phase 1 (2005-2007) ......................................25
Status of Wild Population of Cuvier’s Gazelle (Gazella cuvieri) in Tunisia.
Preliminary Results,
Teresa Abáigar, Ghazi Ellouze, Khaled Zahzah,
Ricardo García-González & Saïd Nouira. ..................................................................28
Taxonomy of Dorcas Gazelle (Gazella dorcas) subspecies
Teresa Abáigar..........................................................................................................30
Genetic Determination Of Dorcas Gazelle Sub-Species and Reintroduction of
Dorcas Gazelle in Senegal
Teresa Abáigar..........................................................................................................36
Integrated livestock and wildlife management in Namibia
Laurie Marker ............................................................................................................41
Day 3: Review of Projects/Assignments, New Business ....................................................75
Recommendations for a Formal Legal & Membership Structure ...........................................75
Review of Agadir Meeting .....................................................................................................77
NORTH AFRICA (Morocco, Algeria & Tunisia)......................................................................77
The Current Situation of the SSA in Algeria A letter from Amina Fellous...............................78
WESTERN, CENTRAL AND EASTERN AFRICA ....................................................................80
FUTURE ACTIONS ..............................................................................................................81
Participants of the 5th SSIG meeting, April 21-23, 2004, Souss,
Tunisia (contact information) .....................................................................................83
ii
The SSIG Vision
Saving desert wildlife and the habitats they require for survival
The Sahelo-Saharan Interest Group (SSIG) works to maintain living, healthy
deserts that sustain both the wildlife and people who rely on these ecosystems
for their livelihood and survival.
Background on SSIG
Since 1998, SSIG has evolved into a network of individuals and organizations
committed to conserving Sahelo-Saharan wildlife and the habitats they require to
survive. SSIG seeks to maintain institutional independence to ensure its flexibility and
responsiveness to emerging conservation opportunities and issues. The group’s vision
is to ensure that 1) species exist in numbers that are self-supporting, and are distributed
among sites across their historical range; 2) habitats are effectively conserved and
managed to permit ecological processes to function naturally; and 3) adequate
incentives are sought to ensure support for the conservation of arid lands wildlife from
all stakeholders.
Meeting Participants
Front row: Befekadu Refera, Laurie Marker, Koen De Smet, Steve Monfort, Hans Peter Mueller.
Second row: Teresa Abáigar, Renata Molcanova, Arnaud Greth, Alexandra Dixon, Abdellah El
Mastour, Terrie Correll, Abdelhamid Karem. Back row: Khaled Zahzah, Roseline Beudels, Bill
Houston, Tim Woodfine, Ed Spevak, Simon Wakefield, Mame Balla Gueye, Heiner Engel, Amen
Allah Jaiem
1
Meeting Objectives
1. Revisit agenda items and task assignments derived from the 2003 Agadir meeting,
including:
Ÿ Developing improved mechanisms for among-group communication,
Ÿ Website development,
Ÿ Restatement/clarification of SSIG mission/vision,
Ÿ Defining membership,
Ÿ Defining a role for SSIG within CMS,
Ÿ Developing logo/letterhead,
Ÿ Identifying, reviewing and endorsing projects,
Ÿ Soliciting new members,
Ÿ Acquiring animals for projects/reintroductions. Additionally, we will revisit the
idea of formalizing SSIG through the creation of an independent, registered
NGO. These objectives will be achieved through group discussions, working
groups, and plenary sessions.
2. Review progress of ongoing projects (i.e., those discussed at Agadir, as well as new
projects and/or developments).
3. Discuss and define proposed projects, action steps and timelines for projects to be
implemented in 2004-2005.
2
Day 1: Project Reporting Session
Report On the Workshop Organized In Douz , 18 & 19 April, 2004,
Roseline Beudels
“Develop a medium term strategy for the redeployment of Sahelo-Saharan Antelopes in Tunisia”.
The Douz workshop was organized at the invitation of the Direction Générale des Forêts (DGF) and the
Convention on Migratory Species (CMS).
The objectives of the workshop were:
• To build up a consensus and to get a commitment from central and regional authorities on a long
term vision of reintroduction of those species in the wild when the conditions will allow it.
•
To come up with a clear plan for the management and reshuffling of animals within Tunisia,
particularly in view of solving the Bou Hedma NP bottleneck and agree on a management policy
for all 6 PA that have or will receive oryx and addax in semi-captive conditions.
All the regional authorities responsible for the 6 southern protected areas were present (chefs
d’arrondissement), representing the Bou Hedma, Sidi Toui, Dghoumes, Oued Dekouk, Djebil and
Senghar protected areas.
Outcomes:
• The most important outcome of the meeting was to reach a clear consensus on a common vision
to have free roaming populations of Addax and Oryx in the wild in Tunisia within 5-10 years.
• Another important outcome of the meeting was to get an agreement on the immediate need of in
situ conservation for Gazella leptoceros and other desert wildlife in the PA of the Great Oriental
Erg.
• To manage the semi captive populations of addax and oryx throughout Tunisia as
metapopulations, with several nuclei of distinct lineages, and movements between the different
nuclei at regular intervals (on the model of Wakefield and Princee, 2003).
• Marwell zoo (studbook keeper for Oryx dammah) and Hanover zoo (studbook keeper for Addax
nasomaculatus) received a mandate from the DGF Tunis to produce clear recommendations as
to what must be done to ensure that the semi-captive populations in Tunisia are managed in the
best possible way, in order to provide good candidates for reintroduction in the wild when the
conditions are met.
• A more detailed report will be produced for DGF and CMS, and will be circulated to all SSIG
members. For further details see also report by Tim Woodfine and Heiner Engel.
One-year Main Conclusions on SSIG Meeting, Souss, 2004,
Arnaud Greth, SSA CMS/FFEM Project Regional Coordinator
The main conclusions of the first year of the SSA CMS/FFEM project were presented, as well as the
redefined objectives and activities. An active partnership with SSIG was suggested, mainly focused on
Niger (establishment and management of Termit Protected Area) and Tunisia (contribution to the
reintroduction of oryx and addax into the wild). This partnership would allow cofunding of activities,
enhance opportunities for fund-raising, develop complementary skills, extend the scope of the project
(from regional level to field project), and, above all, ensure sustainability to field activities.
3
To set up this partnership, technically and financially, a long-term commitment from SSIG is requested. It
is now time for action!
SSIG/DFPP Survey of the Termit Massif and Tin Toumma (Niger),
February- March 2004—Preliminary Field Report
John Newby, Tim Wacher, Bill Houston, Ed Spevak (SSIG)
Moussa Salaou Barmou, Abdou Malaam Issa (DFPP)
Acknowledgements
SSIG wishes to thank Director of DFPP, Mr. Ali Harouna, and his staff in Niamey for the invitation to carry
out the survey and support throughout. SSIG is also grateful to Mr. John Davison, DCM of the US
Embassy in Niger, for hosting a very well attended reception to mark the SSIG survey in Niamey and Mr.
Chaibou Mamane, Secretary of State for the Environment, who took time to discuss the conservation
status of Termit at a post survey meeting. Thanks too to staff and representatives of SOS Faune de Niger
for hosting a convivial dinner for the SSIG team.
Funding for the SSIG/DFPP survey of Termit and Tin Toumma was provided by Cincinnati Zoo, Disney's
Animal Kingdom and Botanical Gardens, Hanover Zoo, the Living Deserts, Saint Louis Zoological Park,
the Smithsonian Institution, and Zoological Society of London.
Introduction
The SSIG survey of Termit and Tin Toumma in February- March 2004 aimed to extend the growing body
of information about Sahelo-Saharan wildlife at this important site. A series of previous surveys of the
region (DFPP/WWF, June 2001; SSIG, March 2002; IRD/MNHN/SZP, November 2002; CMS/FFEM/ASS
with SOS Faune de Niger, November 2003) had all confirmed presence of a remnant addax population in
the Tin Toumma dune system and the unique importance of Termit to Saharan wildlife.
This survey aimed to maintain and extend interest in the Termit area, by: engaging local government
interest, coordinating closely with international conservation interests, conducting training and capacity
building for local Nigerien counterparts participating in the survey, improving our understanding of the
numbers and extent of the local human population living in the Termit area, and defining the conservation
status of key species of rare Sahelo-Saharan wildlife more closely.
Specific Objectives
Three prime objectives were identified for the present survey.
1. to carry out the first systematic survey of some 10,000 km2 of addax habitat in the Tin Toumma region
lying to the immediate east of the Termit massif;
2. to survey a selection of mountain wadis and watersheds to assess the conservation status of relict
dama gazelle, cheetah and Barbary sheep populations;
3. to provide practical, on site training to DFPP scientists in wildlife survey and censusing techniques.
The SSIG Tin Toumma survey 2004 was designed to create the first map of the extent and distribution of
addax activity, and allow possible derivation of a formal population size estimate.
4
Methods
The SSIG team maintained close links with central and local government offices in Niger at all stages of
planning and executing the survey. Similarly close links and information exchange was maintained
throughout during the planning stage with SSIG colleagues representing other international conservation
efforts in the region (CMS/FFEM/ONCF/SOS Faune de Niger).
In the field our Nigerien colleagues (representing CMS and CMS/FFEM/ASS projects in Niger)
participated throughout the survey, taking part in all phases of data collection, recovery and storage in the
field. This survey did not attempt to conduct a socio-economic assessment of wildlife conservation from
the perspective of the local human populations around Termit, though the SSIG acknowledges this as a
crucial component of any future conservation action to protect Sahelo-Saharan wildlife in the area.
Protocols for environmental and wildlife observation recording were developed from previous SSIG
survey work and methods (Monfort et al. 2001, Wacher et al. 2003, Lamarque & Stahl 2003). The Tin
Toumma survey component was conducted by navigating a prepared series of six 120km parallel
transects across the Tin Toumma sands (each taking a full day to complete). Sample observation way
points for standardized recording of environmental conditions at 5km intervals along all transects were
also prepared in advance, again following protocols developed from previous work of SSIG. Transect
positioning and alignment were organized to maximize mapping efficiency in the light of existing
knowledge of addax distribution and previous experience traveling through the Tin Toumma dune system
(Fig. 1).
Reconnaissance visits to wadis and plateau areas of the mountain massifs were made in vehicles and on
foot between successive transect traverses to the east.
Standard data recording included daily meteorological records, visual growth stage and cover estimates
of key vegetation growth forms and species (Cornulaca monocantha, Stipagrostis vulnerans), location of
human activity, tracks, signs or remains of wildlife species, distance and bearing to wildlife groups when
observed on transects. Locations of all observations and all survey routes were recorded using GPS.
Results
The approximate distribution of major vegetation resources available to addax in Tin Toumma are shown
in Figs.2-3. This suggests that addax could locate green food in approximately 50% of the 8,800km2 study
block.
A distribution map based on counts of addax dung piles (from moving vehicles) for each 5km-sector of
the transects shows addax activity in recent months through a large central zone of the study block (Fig.
4). It was noted that fresh addax tracks were seen at the extreme north-eastern limit of the survey block,
indicating that addax activity beyond the limit of the survey zone can be expected.
Observations were made of 23 addax, seen in five groups; plus an indication of 3 more individuals in two
groups, which were detected from tracks alone, are also shown in Fig.4. Distance and bearing
information to all these sightings indicated that all fell within the pre-selected 500m limit of sample
transect width. Thus the basic observation from the survey is that we found 26 addax in c. 8% of the total
survey zone. A provisional analysis suggests this can be interpreted as evidence for a population of c.
220 with a 95% confidence limit of 93-550 individuals. This is important when reconciling these results
with local experience and opinion (see below).
5
In the Termit Massif only one live dama gazelle was observed in the whole survey, and one Barbary
sheep. Skin samples from 8 Barbary sheep were collected and forwarded for genetic analysis (along with
additional samples collected by SSIG in 2002) to Jorge Cassinello at Unidad de Ecología, Instituto de
Investigación en Recursos Cinegéticos, CSIC-UCLM-CCM, Ronda de Toledo, Spain.
Tracks of at least 3 individual cheetahs were detected at the northern end of Termit, including a singleton
and a pair together (Fig. 5). Burrows and tracks of large Spur-thighed Tortoises were encountered with
unexpected regularity in a series of wadis in all parts of the Termit range.
Discussion
The transect survey of Tin Toumma proved effective in mapping addax distribution and giving an
indication of food resource base. It is noted that local opinion and experience considers that there are not
more than 100 addax in the whole region (Ascani pers. comm.), though this is based on targeted
searching for animals. Importantly the formal result of this systematic survey does not technically differ
from this assessment. But if the population is close to 100, then the survey team was fortunate to
encounter a quarter of them. Regardless of this, in view of local experience, it seems wise to assume that
the actual population size is indeed near the lower end of the wide statistical range indicated from this
very small sample size.
The serious conservation situation for dama gazelles and Barbary sheep at Termit is again reinforced by
the results of the survey, while confirmation of cheetah tracks and the regular observation of other wildlife
(dorcas gazelles, tortoise, hares, bustards) underline the high conservation importance of the whole zone.
The survey also provided an excellent mechanism generating reliable information to establish a basis for
conservation planning, creating a baseline data set against which to assess future trends, and acting as a
platform for practical training and capacity building.
The preliminary results of the survey were publicized through a series of meetings (Director DFPP,
Secretary of State of the Environment) and at larger de-briefing attended by the US Embassy, British
Consul, EU, SOS Faune de Niger, and the local press. Results were also disseminated via quick
production of a preliminary field report (Newby et al. 2004).
References
Lamarque, F., Stahl, P. 2003. Guide méthodologique d'étude et de suivi de la faune du Tamesna. Pp
303-322 in Ankouz, M., Müller-Helmbrecht, A., Beudels-Jamar, R. et De Smet, K. 2003. Proceedings of
the second regional seminar on the conservation and restoration of Sahelo-Saharan Antelopes. Agadir,
Morocco, May 2003. UNEP/CMS Secretariat, Bonn, Germany, 333 pages
Monfort, S. Newby, J.E., Wacher, T., Tubiana, J. and Moksia D. 2001. Sahelo-Saharan Interest Group
(SSIG) Wildlife surveys. Central and western Chad (September-October 2001).
Newby, J. E., Wacher, T. Houston. B., Spevak. E., Barmou, M. S & Issa, A. M. 2004
SSIG/DFPP survey. Tin Toumma and Termit. Preliminary field report (not for publication). FebruaryMarch 2004.
Wacher, T. Newby, J., Monfort, S., Dixon, A. and Houston B. 2003 Sahelo-Saharan Interest Group
(SSIG) Wildlife surveys. Part 2. Central and South-eastern Niger (February-March 2002).
6
17.0
16.9
16.8
16.7
16.6
16.5
16.4
16.3
16.2
16.1
Green - areas of recen t Addax
sightings
Prop osed
Transect & Nav Pts.
16.0
15.9
Supporting Nav. pts
Established Tracks
15.8
Termit Mts.
Dunes & gravel
Gravel drainage pans
15.7
15.6
15.5
11.0
0
11.1
11.2
11.3
11.4
11.5
11.6
11.7
11.8
11.9
12.0
12.1
12.2
12.3
12.4
10
12.5
20
12.6
30
12.7
40
12.8
50
12.9
Fig. 1: Survey planning document for transect survey of Tin Toumma, Feb-Mar 2004
Fig. 2: Distribution of green Cornulaca monocantha, Tin Toumma, Feb-Mar 2004
7
13.0
Fig. 3: Distribution of green Stipagrostis vulnerans, Tin Toumma, Feb-Mar 2004
Fig. 4: Distribution of all Addax, Addax nasomaculatus observations, Tin Toumma, Feb-Mar 2004
Fig. 5: Tracks of a solitary cheetah Acinonyx jubatus, Termit, March 2004
8
Update on the Initiatives of the European Endangered Species Programme for
Scimitar-Horned Oryx
Tania Gilbert & Tim Woodfine, Marwell Preservation Trust
The goals of our work with scimitar-horned oryx at Marwell and via the EEP are to address a series of
issues and undertake initiatives that will improve our ability to make and implement conservation
management decisions. This includes helping to improve global management of captive scimitar-horned
oryx, and to improve our ability to meet reintroduction goals. In this presentation we report updates on
issues and initiatives highlighted in the previous SSIG meeting (Agadir, 2003).
Bovine Spongiform Encephalitis (BSE)
Following cases of BSE in cattle, and a single unconfirmed case in a scimitar-horned oryx, the EAZA
Antelope TAG recommended that animals originating from the UK should be excluded from
reintroduction. Following a literature and data review carried out by Tania Gilbert which demonstrated a
negligible risk, particularly when compared to movements of domestic bovid from Europe to North Africa,
the EAZA Antelope TAG declared that all exotic bovids in UK zoos can be translocated between all EEP
zoos and can now be included in reintroduction programmes.
Global Masterplanning
Last year, we identified a need to review captive management of scimitar-horned oryx, globally. This was
a view shared by our colleagues representing the AZA SSP and an initial masterplanning session was
therefore held at St. Louis Zoo in October 2003. Data from EEP & SSP studbooks have now been
merged as part of the process to evaluate the two main captive breeding programmes. Tania Gilbert
(Marwell) has taken over responsibility for the International Studbook from Alan Rost (Jacksonville).
Consequently, available data from all regions has been merged and the process of data validation is
underway.
Genetics Research
A collaborative research project on the genetics of scimitar-horned oryx has begun between Marwell &
the University of Southampton, UK. The aims of this project are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
To determine levels of genetic diversity within the EEP and SSP populations.
To determine whether genetically distinct founder lineages exist within these populations, and if
so to determine whether any are under or over-represented.
To evaluate inbreeding.
To determine whether scimitar-horned oryx exist elsewhere in the world that are genetically
distinct to the EEP and SSP populations.
To use the knowledge gained to make recommendations for captive breeding of SHO within the
formally managed programmes.
To use the knowledge gained to inform recommendations for reintroductions.
To date, we have received ~100 samples (largely faecal, but some blood and skin) from 9 European zoos
and 1 South African zoo. Additional samples, representing the North American population are being
collected by Omaha Zoo and await analysis. We are also trying to organise the shipment of samples from
oryx of unknown origin from a wildlife reserve in Dubai.
Dr. Arati Iyengar of the University of Southampton reports that DNA extracted from samples received has
been screened using six microsatellite loci. Good genotyping success has been achieved using DNA from
faecal samples (~75%), although every genotype needs repetition up to seven times in order to ensure
9
high levels of accuracy. The entire mitochondrial DNA control region (~1.2Kb) has been sequenced for 31
oryx.
The mean allele numbers and heterozygosity levels are comparable to those reported in the Arabian oryx
(Marshall et al., 1999). The high levels of heterozygosity observed, are encouraging both in terms of
conservation and also in terms of the feasibility of this project. Eleven different haplotypes were detected
amongst the samples with ~2.7% variation. There is good variability in the mitochondrial Dloop region in
the SHO samples screened.
Husbandry Guidelines
We have produced a publication titled “the Biology, Husbandry and Conservation of Scimitar-horned
Oryx” with contributions from several authors. This was primarily designed to meet an obligation to
produce husbandry guidelines for EAZA zoos keeping scimitar-horned oryx. However, we took the
opportunity to carry out a broader review of the species’ biology and conservation in the hope that the
publication will have a wider appeal. As many written references to scimitar-horned oryx are difficult to
find or appear in the grey literature, we included a bibliography of all papers that we are aware of and
hope this will also be a useful resource. The publication is presented as a PDF document on CD and is
available in French and English.
Reintroduction Policy
At the last SSIG meeting, we reported on our reintroduction policy for scimitar-horned oryx from the EEP.
Following the St. Louis meeting, this has now been adopted as a joint policy for EEP and SSP covering
both scimitar-horned oryx & addax.
The aims of the policy are to:
• Ensure that projects supported by the EEP and SSP are biologically, economically and politically
viable.
• Meet our duty of care to zoos donating animals & other resources, the recipient country &
environment, and the animals themselves in terms of their welfare and husbandry conditions
• Provide clear and concise guidelines to zoos, range states and others involved in the process of
reintroduction.
Population Status of Swayne’s Hartebeest in Ethiopia,
Befekadu Refera
Introduction
Ethiopia is one of the few countries in the world, which possess a unique and characteristic fauna with a
high level of endemicity (World Conservation Monitoring Center (WCMC), 1991). Ethiopia is endowed
with extensive and unique environmental conditions ranging from Ras Dejen (4600masl) to Dallol
(100mbsl). This large altitudinal and latitudinal ranges makes Ethiopia an ecologically diverse country and
to home of several unique habitats. 277 Mammalian species are known in Ethiopia of which 31 Mammals
species are Endemic. Swayne’s Hartebeest is one of the 31 endemic mammals of Ethiopia (Figure 1-3).
There are 861 bird species in Ethiopia of which 16 species are endemic (EWNHS, 2001). 201 of species
of reptiles of which 9 species, 63 species of amphibians of which 24 species and 150 species of fish of 4
species are endemic.
10
However, due to man-made and natural resources degradation processes, these wildlife resources have
largely been restricted within a few protected areas of the country. These include 9 National parks, 3
Sanctuaries, 8 Game Reserves and 18 Controlled Hunting Areas. Except few, most of the protected
areas are found only on paper.
Background Information about Swayne's Hartebeest
Alcelaphus buselaphus swayeni (Amharic: Korkay)
The hartebeest was first named by Pallas in 1766. Hartebeests belong to Class Mammalia, Order
Artiodactyla, Family Bovidae, Subfamily Alcelaphinae, Genus Alcelaphus. The hartebeest is described as
probably the strangest looking antelopes as they appear to be part buffalo, part horse, and part antelope.
It is no wonder that its scientific name is derived from the Greek word alke (the elk), elaphos (a deer) and
bous (a cow), aptly reflecting the strange appearance of the Alcelaphinae antelopes.
Earlier Distribution
The hartebeest, Alcelaphus buselaphus, was originally found in grassland throughout the African
continent (Nowak, 1991). It ranged from Morocco to northeastern Tanzania and south of the Congo; and
also from southern Angola to South Africa. Hunting, habitat destruction and foraging competition with
domestic cattle have drastically reduced its range. Now the hartebeest is found only in parts of Botswana,
Namibia, Ethiopia, Tanzania and Kenya.
There are now seven recognized subspecies. Out of the seven subspecies, the Tora hartebeest of the
Sudan and Ethiopia, and Swayne's hartebeest of Ethiopia are endangered because of small and
declining populations. The bubal or northern hartebeest, which ranged north of the Sahara,
slipped unnoticed in the early years of the 1990's.
Figure 1: Swayne's Hartebeest of Mazie Wildlife Area
The horns carried by both sexes, spread into the wide graceful brackets. They are heavier in the males
with more pronounced knobs. Horn shape and growth vary with age, but at maturity the horns generally
diverge widely from the pedicel and the points are usually turned back.
11
Figure 2: Swayne's Hartebeest of Senkele Swayne's Hartebeest Sanctuary
Figure 3: Mazie Swayne's Hartebeest when compare to Senkele
Current Distribution
By the 1960s Swayne's Hartebeest was thought to be extinct in Somalia and remained in only very limited
numbers in Ethiopia (Bolton, 1973). At present Swayne's Hartebeest are found only in four localities in
Ethiopia. Namely, Awash National Park, Senkele Swayne's Hartebeest Sanctuary, Nechisar National
Park and Mazie Wildlife Area.
12
Figure 4: Map of Ethiopia
In May 1974 the Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation organization (EWCO) caught and translocated 210
hartebeest from Senkele. 90 of these animals went to the Awash National Park and 120 to Nechisar.
Unfortunately none of the translocated animals were marked for later identification and detailed
monitoring of the eventual success of the operation was not possible. It appears, however, that only few
of the translocated animals have survived (Stephenson, 1975; Tesfaye Hundessa, 1997).
Current Status
This animal was previously found in both Somalia and Ethiopia, is now restricted only in Ethiopia. The
Status of the animal is classified as “imminent danger of extinction" by IUCN (IUCN, 2002).
Threats
The Swayne's Hartebeest are in greater danger of extinction now than any other time in the past. Its
range in all over four sites in Ethiopia, threatened by further loss of habitat for the sake expansion of
agriculture and livestock overgrazing. Although poaching, illegal hunting and uncontrolled wildfire are the
main threats to the survival of the animal.
Materials and Methods for population Estimation of Swayne’s Hartebeest
Total counts method based on silent detection to estimate the population was applied as it was adopted
by Norton Griffith (1978), Melton (1983) Caughley and Sinclair (1994); Wilson et al., (1996); Birhanu
Gebrie, (2001) for ungulates elsewhere. Such direct observational technique was the most appropriate for
the census of medium sized to very large terrestrial mammals that live in a relatively open habitat on fairly
flat terrain.
13
The counting was carried out using unaided eyes and/or binoculars, from vehicle and/or on foot. The
census was conducted when the Swayne’s hartebeests were most active 8000-1100 hours in the morning
and1600-1800 in the late afternoon. During the counting, detailed observations of the entire herd have
been made to categorize them into their respective age groups and determine group size.
Results
In 2001 around Senkele Swayne’s Hartebeest sanctuary and in 2002-2003, around Awash and Nechisar
National Park as well as around Mazie Wildlife Area ground total counts of wildlife both at wet and dry
seasons were performed. The total count was undertaken by dividing the area in to different counting
Blocks. The size and expanse of each counting block varies according the surrounding natural or artificial
boundaries. The total count of the Swayne's hartebeest of in above mentioned areas result showed that
the maximum number of Swayne's hartebeest counted was 550 during the dry season and the minimum
counted number was 468 during wet season (Table.1).
Place
Senkele
Swayne’s
Hartebeest
Sanctuary
Mazie Wildlife
Area
Nechisar
National Park
Awash National
Park
Total
%
Wet
Dry
Wet
Dry
Wet
Dry
Wet
Dry
Calves
(Unidentified
sex)
Wet
Dry
29
32
49
42
17
22
35
39
22
29
152
164
44
47
93
98
26
22
52
49
27
61
242
277
12
15
18
22
8
11
13
16
10
13
61
77
4
4
7
8
2
4
4
5
3
4
20
25
89
18.7
98
18
167
35.1
170
31.3
53
11.1
59
10.8
104
21.9
109
20.1
62
13.0
107
19.7
475
100
543
100
Adult
Male
Adult
Female
Sub-adult
Male
Sub-adult
Female
Total
Wet
Dry
Table 1: Swayne's Hartebeest Population Census Result of both Wet and Dry Seasons—
2000-2001 (Senkele) and the 2002-2003 Mazie, Awash and Nechisar Wildlife Areas
(Source: Birhanu Gebre, 2001; Befekadu Refera 2002-2003; Nechisar National Park 2002-2003; and Senkele
Swayne's Hartebeest Sanctuary 2002-2003)
Sex Structure
The census result of Swayne's hartebeest of four protected areas showed that there is unequal sex ratio
in the population. The break-down of age structure and sex ratio is given in Table 1. The ratio of Adult
Male to Adult Female was 1:1.9 and 1:7 during wet and dry seasons respectively. Like wise, the ratio of
sub-adult male to sub-adult female was 1:2 during wet season and 1:1.8 during Dry Season. At 95%
confidence interval two-tailed test for both adult and sub adult male and female p-value (0.88 and 0.78)
respectively showed that there is no significant difference between wet and dry seasons.
Age Structure
The age structure showed that the adult male of the total population comprises 18.7% (wet season) and
18.0% (dry season). Adult female comprises 35.1 % of the total population (wet) and 31.3 % (dry
season). Whereas, sub-adult male comprises 11.1 % (wet season) and 10.8% (dry season). Of the total
population, the calves comprise 13.0% (wet season) and 19.7.0% (Dry season) of the total population
(Table 1).
14
Conclusions
In 1891-2, when the Swayne's hartebeest was discovered by Brigadier-General Swayne, Somali land, the
plains were described as “covered with hartebeest, 300-400 to a herd a dozen or so herds in sight at any
time”. This expression seems like a fictitious but it was true. Through time this condition had changed the
species is already extinct in Somali land and Ogaden area of Ethiopia.
Nowadays, Swayne's hartebeest found only in four localities in Ethiopia. In Awash National Park (20-25),
Nechisar National Park (61-77), Senkele Swayne's hartebeest Sanctuary (152-164) and Mazie wildlife
Area (242-277) with a total of 475-543.
From these four areas, the 2002-2003 Swayne's hartebeest census result showed that Mazie holds the
better and viable population. If better care and conservation measures are given, their population number
can rebuild and increase with in a short period of time. This is a good indication for survival of the
Swayne's hartebeest. Hence, Mazie wildlife area can be said "the hope-land" for the critically endangered
Swayne's hartebeest survival in the globe.
However, the attention that was given for the conservation of Swayne's hartebeest is very less. Due to
our ignorance and reluctance if we loose the critically endangered Swayne's hartebeest from the four
localities of Ethiopia, it will be a great tragedy to the globe. Hence it is crucial and timely to take
immediate action to conserve the area from imminent danger of extinction.
References
Bolton, M. (1973). Hartebeest in Ethiopia. Oryx 12:99-108.
Birhanu Gebrie. (2001). Some Patterns of Population Dynamics and Distribution of Swayne's Hartebeest
in Senkele Swayne's Hartebeest Sanctuary. Unpublished M.Sc. thesis, Addis Ababa University. Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia.
Caughley, G. & Sinclair, A.R.E. (1994). Wildlife Ecology and Management. Blackwell Science. London.
Ethiopian wildlife natural History Society (EWNHS), (1996).Important bird Areas of Ethiopia: A first
Inventory. Ethiopian wildlife Natural History Society. Addis Ababa Ethiopia.
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), (2002). 2002 IUCN Red List of Threatened
Animals. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.
Melton, D. A. (1983). Population dynamics of Waterbuck (Kobus ellipsiprymnus) in the Umfolozi Game
Reserve. Afr. J. Ecol. 21:77-91.
Norton-Griffiths, M. (1978). Counting Animals. 2nd ed. Africa Wildlife Leadership, Nairobi, Kenya.
Nowak, R.M. (1991). Walker's Mammals of the World. (5th ed.). Vol.II. The Johns Hopkins University
Press, London.
Stephenson, J.G. (1975). An investigation into with recommendation on the status of Swayne's
Hartebeest in the Shashemene area. EWCO, Addis Ababa. Mimeo.pp.7
Sutherland, W. J. (1996). Ecological Census Technique: A handbook Cambridge University Press, United
Kingdom.
Tesfaye Hundesa (1997). Major causes for the loss of wildlife resource in Ethiopia. Walia, 18: 3-6.
Wilson, D. E., Cole, F. R., Nicholas, J. D., Rudran, R., & Foster, M. S. (1996). Measuring & Monitoring
Biological Biodiversity. Standard methods for mammals. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington.
World Conservation Monitoring Center (WCMC) (1991). Biodiversity Guide to Ethiopia. Cambridge, UK.
15
Status of Addra and Mhorr Gazelles (Gazella dama ruficolis and G. d. mhorr)
within the AZA Species Survival Plan (SSP),
Edward Spevak, Ph.D., Mammal Conservation Program Manager, Cincinnati Zoo and Botanical
Garden and Coordinator Addra and Mhorr Gazelle AZA SSP Programs
Dama gazelles (Gazella dama) once ranged across the entire Sahara and Sahelian region from Morocco
in the north and Senegal in the west to the Sudan in the east. Several subspecies have been described;
currently three subspecies are recognized, G. d. dama, G. d. mhorr, and G. d. ruficolis. All three species
are highly endangered. The mhorr gazelle is extinct in the wild and only exists in captivity and in fenced
reserves and national parks within range states. Both G. d. dama and G. d. ruficolis exist now only in
small isolated populations in the wild. No recent surveys have been undertaken across the range but
estimates of the surviving wild population is around 1000 individuals. With there disappearance in the
wild possibly the only hope for this species survival is in zoos and protected breeding reserves. However,
only the addra (G. d. ruficolis) and mhorr (G. d. mhorr) gazelles exist in captivity and these populations
may not be secure. Both of these species are now managed in North American zoos through the
American Zoo and Aquarium Association’s (AZA) Species Survival Program (SSP).
Addra Gazelle
In North America the addra gazelle has been maintained in zoos since the importation of 22 wild caught
individuals from Chad in 1967. The gazelles bred well in captivity and there are now 154 individuals in
zoos with many more in private hands including ranches. Figure 1 illustrates the managed population
census in zoos.
Figure 1: Census of addra gazelle in the SSP.
This subspecies has been maintained for almost 40 years in zoos however the records maintained by
individual institutions have been very poor, inadequate, or non-existent. In this population only 27.5% of
the parentage and ancestries of the animals is known or in other words the percent of an animal's
genome that is traceable to known Founders. Because of a combination of poor record keeping and
management that was not initially designed to maintain genetic diversity there are currently only eight
founders known to contribute to the current population (Figure 2). A Founder is an individual obtained
from a source population (often the wild) that has no known relationship to any individuals in the derived
population (except for its own descendants). The goal of captive or conservation breeding is to maintain
as much of the genetic diversity found in the founders and hopefully the wild population as possible. In
16
order to do this founder representation should be equalized. Figure 2 also illustrates the inequality of
founder representation in the SSP population.
Figure 2: Founder representation of addra gazelles illustrating the inequality of representation
between lineages.
The genetic health of a population, i.e. its ability to adapt to present or future environmental conditions,
rests upon the maintenance of genetic diversity within it. The level of genetic variation determines the
potential of a population to adapt to changes in environmental conditions. Populations with low genetic
variation are expected to have lower adaptive potentials to cope with environmental changes than
populations with high levels of genetic variation. The environment not only changes over time due to for
example climatic changes but also fluctuates annually, seasonally and even daily. Therefore genetic
variation in a population is important to adapt or be adapted to both short term and long term changes in
the environment
In addition, a loss of genetic diversity can have negative effects on the ability of a population to exist
through even short periods of time by increasing the effects of inbreeding in a population, and decreasing
the populations ability to adapt to different selection pressures, e.g., changing climatic conditions or food
supplies, or the addition of new predators, parasites, competitors, or diseases. The negative effects of
inbreeding include higher mortality, reduced competitive ability, increased susceptibility to disease, lower
fecundity, and more frequent developmental defects.
When gene diversity falls below 90% of that in the founding population, reproduction may be increasingly
compromised by, among other factors, lower birth weights, smaller litter sizes, and greater neonatal
mortality. The current gene diversity of addra gazelle population within the SSP is 81.73%. This
population is descended from 8 founders; however, there are a great many unknown lineages within the
population and additional investigation may allow for the addition of more founders whether actual or
hypothetical. Computer records and modelling using the programs SPARKS (Single Population Animal
Record Keeping System) and PM2000 (both used in managing cooperative breeding programs of the
SSP and the EEP in Europe) estimate that this population could maintain gene diversity above 75% for
52 years and would be expected to maintain only 69.47% after 100 years. Increasing the founder
representation from the under represented lineages and increasing the carrying capacity of the captive
population could extend gene diversity retention. Table 1 describes some of the important genetic
parameters of this population.
17
Addra Gazelle SSP Genetics
Current
Number of Founders
8
Founder Genome Equivalents (FGE)
2.73
Gene Diversity (GD) Retained (%)
81.68
Population Mean Kinship (MK)
0.1835
Mean Inbreeding (F)
0.1426
% Pedigree Known
27.5
Years to 90%
Below
Gene Diversity at 100 years from Present
69.47%
Potential
8?
3.67
86.36
Table 1
Some definitions of terms:
Founder Genome Equivalents (FGE)—The number of wild-caught individuals (founders) that would
produce the same amount of gene diversity as does the population under study. For example in the
addra gazelle though it was started by at least 8 founders the current amount of genetic diversity is
representative of only 2.73 founders due to unequal founder representation, along with possible
inbreeding, and lack of adequate records.
Inbreeding Coefficient (F)—Probability that the two alleles at a genetic locus are identical by descent
from an ancestor common to both parents. The mean inbreeding coefficient of a population will be the
proportional decrease in observed heterozygosity relative to the expected heterozygosity of the founder
population.
Mean Kinship (MK)—The mean kinship coefficient between an animal and all animals (including itself) in
the living, captive-born population. The mean kinship of a population is equal to the proportional loss of
gene diversity of the descendant (captive-born) population relative to the founders and is also the mean
inbreeding coefficient of progeny produced by random mating.
Mhorr Gazelle
The mhorr gazelles in zoos are descended from a small group of two males and ten females gazelles
from the southern Spanish Sahara captured and sent to Almeria in Spain in 1971. In 1981, the Zoological
Society of San Diego imported one male and three female mhorr gazelles from Almeria. The second
importation occurred in 1985 when the Zoological Society of San Diego imported one male and one
female from the Munich Zoo. The first birth of a mhorr gazelle in North America occurred in 1982 at the
San Diego Zoo. The North American population is descended from these six animals representing seven
of the original founders to the captive population. The current population size is 87 distributed among 11
institutions. Figure 3 illustrates the historic and current census of mhorr gazelles in the SSP.
Figure 3: Census of Mhorr Gazelles in the SSP.
18
This subspecies has been maintained for 23 years in North American zoos and compared with addra
gazelles the records maintained by individual institutions have been very good with only one animal
having unknown parentage. In this population 96.6% of the parentage and ancestries of the animals is
known. However, due to management that did not take into account the equalization of founder lineages
the seven founders represented in the SSP are not represented equally (Figure 4).
Figure 3: Founder representation of mhorr gazelles illustrating the inequality of representation
between founders.
The current gene diversity of this population is 63.55%. This population is descended from 6 animals
imported into North America representing 7 of the original wild caught founders brought into captivity.
There are currently no additional founders but there is interest within the program to import individuals of
hopefully underrepresented lineages from the EEP to North America. Currently, however, long-term this
population could be expected to maintain only 46.18% gene diversity after 100 years. Increasing the
founder representation from the under represented lineages and increasing the carrying capacity of the
captive population could extend and possibly increase gene diversity and retention. Table 2 describes
some of the important genetic parameters of this population.
As with most managed populations, pairings of individuals are prioritized to maintain or increase gene
diversity through considerations of mean kinship, avoidance of inbreeding, differences in sire and dam
mean kinships, and the degree of uncertainty within a pedigree. In addition to these genetic criteria, the
SSP also considers other factors such as social group needs, age, health, and reproductive status of
individuals when making pairings and transfers.
Genetics
Current
Number of Founders
7
Founder Genome Equivalents (FGE)
1.37
Gene Diversity (GD) Retained (%)
63.48
Population Mean Kinship (MK)
0.3652
Mean Inbreeding (F)
0.3186
% Pedigree Known
96.6
Years to 90%
Below
Gene Diversity at 100 years from Present
46.18
Table 2
19
Potential
7 (0 additional)
2.26
77.91
Recommendations
As with many endangered species there are still opportunities for conservationists to make a difference in
their survival. For the captive populations of the addra and mhorr gazelles there are several
recommendations that can be implemented to help ensure that they are around for generations to come:
1) Develop a World Herd Strategy for Mhorr gazelles, i.e., combine SSP and EEP databases for
analyses to better determine the overall genetic health of the species and work with other regions to
develop a management strategy. This is currently being done with addax and scimitar-horned oryx.
2) Attempt to clarify unknowns within the Addra database in order to better estimate the genetic diversity
and long-term viability of this population.
3) Expand the number of holding institutions for Addra and Mhorr Gazelles within the SSP. Get more
institutions involved in the conservation of these species.
4) Develop Group/Herd Management Strategies.
5) Identify potential range country captive breeding facilities and additional/potential reintroduction sites.
6) Clarify subspecific/taxonomic designations.
7) Identify additional potential founders (if any) held in Gulf State or Range State collections to increase
levels of genetic variability.
Status of Scimitar-horned Oryx in Senegal,
Mame Balla Gueye
General
■
The process of reintroduction of Sahelo
Saharan antelopes began with the creation of
the Gueumbeul Wildlife Reserve with a surface
area of 720 ha situated at Saint Louis in the
Sahelian zone of the country.
The process of reintroduction
This takes place in to three phases:
1. An acclimatization phase during which the
Figure 1: Scimitar-horned oryx calf
animals stay in an enclosure and are given food
originating from where they were previously and
progressively changing over to local food.
2. A second phase where the animals are released into a larger enclosure but are still fed by
people. In effect, at predetermined times, at the sound of a bell, they come for water and food.
Reintroduction of SSA’s
¡ This started in 1994 an initial nucleus herd of Mhorr gazelles (offered by Spain).
¡ These three groups followed the two phases of the introduction process.
¡ In 2002, there were 22 animals at Gueumbeul.
20
Second subject
¡ These two phases generally took place at the Gueumbeul reserve.
¡ The third phase is that of releasing the animals into the Ferlo wildlife reserve.
Reintroduction of oryx
¡ This started in 1999 with an initial nucleus herd offered by Haibar reserve in Israel.
¡ This initial nucleus herd of eight oryx, of which three were males, was genetically enriched by the
arrival of four other oryx of which two males came from the Bois de Vincennes Zoo in Paris.
Transfer of Animals to Ferlo
¡ It was now necessary to proceed with the transfer of the initial group to the North Ferlo wildlife
reserve.
¡ This covers a surface area of 487,000 ha and was created, amongst other things, to take in
species being raised at Gueumbeul.
¡ Since January, 2003, it has supported a group of eight oryx—six males and five Dama gazelles.
Reality
¡ The transfer was achieved thanks to the technical and financial support of IFAW and Dr. Bill
Clark.
¡ The transfer was successfully made for oryx with a zero mortality rate.
¡ Since their arrival in the Ferlo reserve, the behavior of the oryx has been very good. They have
spread out freely into a core of 600 hectares, completely fenced, and feed themselves there.
¡ Feed is abundant and no supplement is given apart from a vitamin and mineral complex (CMV).
Water is obtained from a lake created for this purpose and replenished by employees.
Conclusions
¡ The reintroduction of oryx to Senegal is a success for the DPN. In effect, this nucleus herd had
three births in February 2004 and two are expected in the next few days. Within five years of
reintroduction starting from only eight animals, 21 live births have been recorded.
Limitations
¡ The main limitation at Ferlo is the crucial lack of water. In effect, the only forage of Katane which
serves as a course of feed for the animals and populations is constantly broken down. The
piping, which dates from 1960, should be entirely replaced. Currently, the provision of water is
made twice a week at Ranerou, located 30 km from Katane.
Prospects
Prospects for Ferlo are numerous and the most important are:
¡ To provide the reserve with a management and development plan.
¡ To develop a permanent supply of running water (replace pipes, dredge the pond, create a
retention lake or drill a motorized well).
¡ To continue the reintroduction process with other species of Sahelo-Saharan antelope.
¡ To increase the existing ostrich population and, above all, extend the enclosure to include shelter
for ostriches and Sulcata tortoises.
¡ To reintroduce other species such as giraffe.
¡ To increase the capabilities of employees in breeding and management techniques for SaheloSaharan species and in animal-capture techniques.
¡ To set up a mobile animal-capture team.
¡ Electrification of the command and guard posts.
21
¡
¡
The acquisition of computers and computerization of animal management.
The acquisition of heavy equipment (tanker truck).
Concerted Action on SSA’s
Thanks to the support of concerted action on the part of the CMS on Sahelo-Saharan antelopes,
certain developments have been made:
¡ The reserve is entirely equipped with road signs.
¡ A large watch tower has been built and monitoring equipment acquired (photography and GPS
devices).
¡ Opening and development of a fire-break lane.
Day 2: Project Report Session (continued),
Review of Projects/Assignments/New Business
Update on Sahelo-Saharan Wildlife in Morocco Since the Agadir SSIG Meeting
Abdellah El Mastour, Haut Commissariat aux Eaux et Forêts et à la Lutte Contre la Désertification
(Morocco)
Creation of two new reserves for Dorcas
Gazelles in:
• Chichaoua
• Ouarzazate
Budget:
•
More than $350,000 for management
of the reserve for Sahelo-Saharan
Antelope.
Partnership:
• Signed many conventions with NGO
and the regional authority about
management of the protected area
where there are SSAs.
• Also signed a convention with NABU (German NGO) and the regional authority of Morocco
(Water and Forest Department, Social Development Agency, Rural Community and NGO)
about a project “Conservation of Saharan Fauna and Flora, and provision of Ecotourism”.
Funding from GEF to produce an Action Plan for the future management of reserves for SS Antelope.
Cooperation between Forest Department, GTZ and Almeria to study genetics of the gazelles in Morocco.
22
Coordinating Requests for Animals for Reintroduction—‘The St. Louis Meeting’
Terrie Correll
Summary of Actions
Population Management
• Create concurrence between EEP & SSP addax & SHO data sets
• Add back surplus individuals of known lineages to data bases
• Clear up unknowns between data bases and develop hypothetical founders and/or pedigrees
within data bases
• Above to be done by Tania Gilbert, Alan Rost, Ed Spevak, Heiner Engel, Klaus Brunsing, Terrie
Correll
Reintroduction
• Develop a reintroduction format (Tim Woodfine)
• Contact Demba for Senegal proposal (Bill Houston)
• Distribute proposal to EEP/SSP coordinators and Tag chairs
• Solicit proposal from Senegal and also offer assistance in development
• Develop SSIG position paper on reintroduction (Ed Spevak)
• Examine possibility of a rapid response survey team within SSIG members (Bill Houston)
• Contact Bill Clark about Mali reintroduction (Bill Houston)
Joint EEP / SSP Policy on Reintroduction
• Participation of SSP & EEP Co-ordinators for Sahelo-Saharan antelope species not represented
at this meeting (Angela Gladston & Steve Shurter)
• Write a version of the policy that is generic for EEP, SSP and all species. To include further
thought on expert and impartial project review (Tim Woodfine & Angela Gladston)
• Addition of AZA & SSP logos on policy document (Steve Monfort)
Training Courses
• Need to communicate with Almeria regarding their participation (Heiner Engel/ Terrie Correll)
• Range state communications (Heiner Engel)
• Organize Trainers & develop course notes by subject (Terrie Correll, Martha Fischer, Tim
Woodfine, Katja von Dörnberg)
Membership
• Contact Steve about membership ideas for current SSIG format (Terrie Correll)
• Produce presentation on implications of different organisational structures for SSIG (Terrie
Correll)
Marketing of Sahelo-Saharan Conservation Activities
• Sessions at EAZA & AZA meetings (Bill Houston & Angela Gladston)
• Article for Wildlife Conservation magazine (Ed Spevak)
• EAZA Newsletter (Tania Gilbert & Heiner Engel)
• AZA Communiqué (Bill Houston)
• SSA poster development (Ed Spevak)
• Addax & SHO sculpture (Ed Spevak)
23
Reintroduction & Meta-Population of Addax & Oryx in Tunisia
Tim Woodfine1 & Heiner Engel2
1
2
Marwell Preservation Trust, UK
Hanover Zoo, Germany
On the 18th & 19th April a meeting convened by CMS at the invitation of DGF and facilitated by FFEM was
held to discuss plans for the future of SS antelope in Tunisia. Key species included addax and scimitarhorned oryx which have already been returned to the country from European zoos. We were invited to
attend as representatives of the European Endangered species Programme (EEP) for addax and oryx,
which are managed by Hanover Zoo and Marwell Preservation Trust respectively.
The DGF set out their vision which is to return addax and oryx to the wild after firstly setting up 3 or 4
breeding nuclei in gazetted national parks under semi-captive conditions. This will involve establishing
founder populations, implementing a meta-population management plan, and finally after genetic and
population targets have been met, releasing animals as part of a true reintroduction programme (Fig. 1).
Hanover Zoo and Marwell have agreed to assist by producing recommendations for the stocking of
fenced national parks with animals representing the genetic lineages of the global captive populations,
and translocations between these areas as part of the overall meta-population plan. Once formal requests
have been received from the DGF, we plan to organise a meeting of both addax and oryx EEPs and
SSPs so that recommendations can made jointly by the European and North American zoo communities.
Implementation of these plans will then be subject to DGF approval and proceed according to their
timetable. However, further discussions will be needed to agree the involvement of the zoo community
and other stakeholders in the process.
Through our presentation at SSIG, we sought to inform the group of these developments and the specific
requests made to Hanover Zoo and Marwell to help fulfil the initial stage of the reintroduction process.
Bou Hedma
Bou Hedma
Oued
Dekouk
Oued
Dekouk
2,000ha
(30)
(0)
Haddej
(40)
(120)
6,000ha
(8)
Senghar
Djebil
Sidi Toui
Dghoumes
(0)
(0)
6,000ha
8,000ha
(30)
(0)
Chott El Jerid
(East of Dghoumes)
Grand Erg Oriental
Figure 1: Strategy for the reintroduction of addax (left) and scimitar-horned oryx (right) in Tunisia
24
Establishment of Termit Biosphere Reserve: Phase 1 (2005-2007)
Draft project concept developed by the Sahelo-Saharan Interest Group (SSIG)
Alexandra Dixon
NARRATIVE
SUMMARY
LONG-TERM GOAL:
Sahelo-Saharan wildlife and its habitats
conserved and managed in ways that are
effective, sustainable, and maximize the
potential for community-based, multiplepurpose land-use.
IMMEDIATE GOAL:
Decline in numbers of critically endangered
species of Sahelo-Saharan wildlife halted and
reversed in Termit, Niger.
PURPOSE:
An innovative and well-managed, protected
area for the conservation and management of
endangered wildlife and their critical habitats in
and around the Termit Massif, Niger, in place
and operational.
OBJECTIVELY VERIFIABLE
INDICATORS
By 2020, populations of Sahelo-Saharan wildlife at key
sites across Africa effectively conserved through
innovative, community-based models catering for the
conservation and management of nomadic wildlife
through a mosaic of different forms of land-use and
natural resource management catering for largely
mobile and nomadic species with needs that differ in
both time and space. Local population mobilized,
organized and empowered to conserve wildlife.
By 2010, populations of addax, dama gazelle, dorcas
gazelle, cheetah, Barbary sheep and Nubian bustard
increase with reference to baseline data established in
2003-2004.
By 2007, a zoned Biosphere Reserve or Wildlife
Conservancy, to prevent the disappearance of
remaining populations of addax, dama gazelle,
cheetah and other key species in and around the
Termit Massif, Niger, designed with strong community
input, legally gazetted by government, and endorsed
by UNESCO’s Man and the Biosphere Programme
(MAB), and managed by a team drawn from
government, non-governmental organizations, and
local communities.
25
MEANS OF
VERIFICATION
IUCN Red Data
List
CMS Bulletins
Official Journal
Management
Plan
UNESCO
Bulletin
ASSUMPTIONS
RISKS
Government support
continues
Foreign hunters
respect conditions
International support
for conservation
Political stability
maintained
Excessive drought
avoided
Local communities
remain supportive
Government remains
supportive
Local NGO interest
remains strong
International interest
and financial
assistance remains
strong
Political stability
maintained
NARRATIVE
SUMMARY
OUTPUTS/RESULTS:
INDICATORS
1. Interim, emergency conservation
programme (2004-2006) to prevent the
further decline in numbers and possible
extinction of endangered species
developed, approved, funded and in
operation.
1.1 By 2004, effective national and international
communications campaigns to address negative
impacts of over-hunting and poaching on Termit’s
wildlife in place and delivering results.
2. Broad-based, protected area Steering
Committee established and holding
regular meetings.
2.1 By 2005, permanent, on-site presence (3-4
rangers plus 2 vehicles) established in the Termit
region and equipped to control illegal off-take of
wildlife.
3.1 By end-2005, beginnings of a network of
Community Scouts and Game Guards trained and
established for surveillance, outreach and
information gathering.
2.1 By 2005, a protected area Steering Committee,
including representatives of key stakeholder
groups, including local communities, government
authorities, local and international nongovernmental organizations, has been established
to discuss, design, approve and legally establish a
zoned, multiple-use conservation area catering for
endangered wildlife and the sustainable use of
natural resources.
3. Applied environmental and socioeconomic research and monitoring
programmes established and delivering
results for use in the conservation,
management and sustainable use of the
Biosphere Reserve and its natural
resources.
3.1 By 2005, on-site capacity and research &
monitoring programme established to provide
baseline data on key environmental and social
factors. Monitoring programmes established to
assess changes over time in relation to use,
management and conservation practices. Options
and alternatives for nature-based, socio-economic
development, including controlled hunting,
assessed.
26
MEANS OF
VERIFICATION
ASSUMPTIONS
RISKS
NARRATIVE
SUMMARY
INDICATORS
MEANS OF
VERIFICATION
4. Park management plan developed,
approved and under implementation.
4.1 By 2005, initial, 3-year protected areas
management plan, including a multiple-use zoning
scheme based on agreed boundaries and landuse, developed and approved by the park Steering
Committee. Plan to include both fixed-base and
mobile functions for management, outreach and
surveillance.
5. Park Headquarters and Conservation
Centre built at a suitable site.
5.1 By 2006, basic Park Headquarters and multipurpose Conservation Centre built and equipped
at a suitable site (e.g. Tasker), together with
ranger posts at 1-2 suitable sites (e.g. Termit
Kaboul, Termit Ouest).
6. Protected area adequately staffed to carry
out key functions.
6.1 By 2007, key protected areas personnel, including
park warden, community game guards, research
and support staff, recruited and in place.
7. Protected area adequately equipped to
carry out key functions.
7.1 By 2007, the protected area is fully equipped
(vehicles, camels, radios, etc.) to carry out its core
functions of management, outreach and policing.
8. Awareness of importance and potential of
wildlife and well-managed natural habitats
amongst local and international target
groups and communities increased.
8.1 By 2006, extension agents recruited and outreach
programme underway amongst local sedentary
and nomadic communities. International
communications efforts underway.
Concept developed by the following on behalf of the Sahelo-Saharan Interest Group (SSIG):
§ John Newby (ERWDA, Abu Dhabi, UAE)
§ Dr. Steve Monfort (CRC, Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC)
§ Dr. Philippe Chardonnet (IGF, Paris)
§ Dr. Roseline Beudels (IRSNB, Bruxelles)
§ Bill Houston (St. Louis Zoo, Missouri, USA)
§ Steve Shurter (The Wilds, Ohio, USA)
§ Alexandra Dixon (Lewa Downs Conservancy, Kenya)
§ Dr. Tim Wacher (ZSL, London)
27
ASSUMPTIONS
RISKS
Contacts and further information:
John Newby ([email protected]) or
Steve Monfort ([email protected]),
August 7, 2003
Status of Wild Population of Cuvier’s Gazelle (Gazella cuvieri) in Tunisia.
Preliminary Results,
Teresa Abáigar, Ghazi Ellouze, Khaled Zahzah, Ricardo García-González & Saïd Nouira.
This work is part of a collaborative research grant funding by the Spanish Agency for International Cooperation (AECI-Foreign Ministry) and the Ministère pour lÉnseignement Supérieur of Tunisia with the
cooperation of Direction Générale des Forêts (Ministère de lÁgriculture).
Formerly, the Cuvier’s gazelle (CG) (Gazella cuvieri Ogilby 1840) was extended in almost all mountainous
areas along Tunisia; at present, the only wild population is located at the Kasserine region (central-west
Tunisia).
Our study was focused in Kasserine region and had as objectives: a) to determine the presence of CG in
this area and b) to monitor CG population at Chaambi National Park to estimate population density and to
know social organization of these species.
Study Area.
Kasserine region is located in the central-western part of Tunisia close to the Algerian border; there, we
found the highest elevation in Tunisia (Djebel Chaambi 1544 m); the forested area is around 158.000 ha,
mostly of Pinus. Others mountainous sites in the region are: Dj. Semmama (1314 m), Dj. Selloum (1373
m) and Dj. Tamesmida (1234 m).
The Chaambi National Park was created in 1980 with the objective to protect the last CG wild population;
it is a fenced area of 6723 ha. Mean rainfall is 250-300 mm and vegetation is dominated by Pinus
halepensis; besides, we found Juniperus sp, Rosmarinus sp, Globularia sp, Stipa tenacissima,
Ampelodesma mauritanica, Helianthemum sp. and some rest of Quercus sp. Big to medium size
mammals are: wild boar, Barbary sheep, jackal and hyena. Similar characteristics are founded in Kefen el
Homra, a surface of 8813 ha belonging to the Dj. Chaambi massif. Dj. Semmama (13500 ha, 350 mm)
show similar characterizes to Dj. Chaambi in the vegetation; the main difference is that here, human
activities (agriculture, livestock and hunting) are noticeable. The same happen in Dj, Selloum (5000 ha
approx.). The Dj. Tamesmida (6503 ha) is also dominated by a Pinus forest and the presence of human
activities is no so remarkable. Finally, Dernaya is an extensive area of 5180 ha located between Djebels
Chaambi and Tamesmida with smooth slopes covered by Pinus halepensis; main activities in this area
are agriculture and livestock.
Methods
• Presence/absence of CG in the study area was determined by the presence of signs of gazelles’
activities (latrines, tracks, resting places and feces) along line transects; survey was carried out by
two people in October 2003.
• In addition, inquiries were distributed by the Direction Générale des Forêts through the
arrondissement (provinces) of Tunisia to determine present/ancient presence of CG in this country
(results not available at this moment).
• Population density of CG in Chaambi N.P. was estimated through 8 line transects survey carried out
in April and May/2003 by one person; for that purpose, Chaambi area was divided into 6 sectors of
similar characteristics of topography, vegetation and altitude.
• Social organization was determine after direct observations of CG groups in Chaambi N.P. and was
carried out in autumn/01, spring & autumn/02 and spring/03 by Ghazi Ellouze.
28
Results
1. Presence/absence of CG
Area
Kms
Dj. Semmama
15.8
Kefen el Homra
5.5
Dj. Tamesmida
6.7
Dernaya 1
5.1
Dernaya 2
6
Khem el Keb Reserve
Dj. Selloum
Presence
+
+
+
20 CG
-
2. Population density estimated CG at Chaambi N.P.
April/03: 0.0131/ha = 1.3 CG/100 ha
May/03: 0.0152/ha = 1.5 CG/100 ha
Other mammals:
Wild boar
April
4
May
4
Barbary sheep
7
11
Jackal
0
2
3. Social organization
•
Number of groups and size. 50% of observation are for isolated CG (males or females) and 50%
were for groups of CG; mean group size range from 1.5 individuals in spring and autumn to 4 in
winter. Group composition varied between season; in spring and autumn the groups included
males, females and sub-adults; in winter the mixed herd are only for adult males and females
whereas only adult females are found in summer.
Conclusions
a) Presence of CG in Kasserine region is noticeable in the protected (Chaambi N.P.) or weak human
influence areas (Kefen ek Homra).
b) Presence of CG seem to be incompatible with human activities (agriculture, livestock, hunt); as they
increase, CG populations decreases (Dj. Tamesmida, Dernaya 1) until extinction (Dernaya 2, Dj.
Selloum, Dj. Semmama).
c) The Djebel Semmama by its dimensions, habitat and localisation should be protected, at least in part,
to allow the natural expansion of CG populations from Dj. Chaambi and Kefen el Homra.
d) The Kchem el Keb Reserve is an important area for CG conservation in Kasserine region; its
population could be used to restore CG in this area.
e) The declaration of a part of Chaambi massif as a full protected area (national park) has revealed as
the most effective way to recover CG; continue monitoring of this species is necessary to secure their
survival.
29
Taxonomy of Dorcas Gazelle (Gazella dorcas) subspecies
Teresa Abaigar
30
31
32
33
34
35
Genetic determination of dorcas gazelle sub-species and reintroduction of dorcas gazelle in Senegal
Teresa Abáigar
36
37
38
39
40
Integrated livestock and wildlife management in Namibia
Laurie Marker
41
42
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
Day 3: Review of Projects/Assignments, New Business
Recommendations for a Formal Legal & Membership Structure
The sub-committee charged with developing membership recommendations for SSIG met in St.
Louis, USA, October 2003. Participants were: Bill Houston, Tim Woodfine, Heiner Engel, Angela
Gladston and Terrie Correll.
The group outlined the following membership options that could be created and run concurrently:
1) Retain the SSIG forum and the associated benefits
2) Form a “specialist group”—facilitate endorsement and limited project work, action plans, influence
conservation planning and policy
3) Current members/institutions wishing to be proactive could form a consortium/NGO.
Considerations in the formation of a formal legal structure were:
1) Inclusive – avoid marginalizing members through policy and membership constraints
2) Project endorsement – needs to be independent and credible (i.e. IUCN specialist group)
3) Run projects and fund raise – need a legally constituted entity (accept liability)
The type of organization formed will dictate its membership and activity levels. Outlined below are the
three organizational structures and their activity levels that were examined by the sub-group.
• Forum: Simple rules, inclusive membership, cover associated costs
• Specialist Group: Membership rules are defined by IUCN
• NGO: Members are donors, otherwise work carried out by employees.
Forum
75
Limits of Mandate
• Information exchange
• Encouragement
• Peer review
Services & Activities
• Membership
• Organize & host meetings
• Publish proceedings
• List-serve
• Website
Resources
• Coordination
• Administration of website & list-serve
• Minimal costs
Requirements
• Mission statement
• Aims of the forum
• Limited rules
Project Management
• Members act independently
• Institutional and individual collaboration
Specialist Group
Limits of Mandate
• Encouragement
• Peer review
• Endorsement
• Limited projects
• Membership
• List-serve
• Website
• Advice & recommendations to members
• Independent endorsement of projects
• ‘Task force’ projects
• Activities limited to conservation planning &
prioritization
• Fund raising for defined activities (education,
task force projects – action plans)
Specialist Group (continued0
Resources
• Chairman / Coordinator
• Steering committee
• Letterheads & logos
• Higher costs
• Treasurer
Requirements
• Aims & objectives
• Adhere to established policies & procedures
Project Management
• Use of the group as an auspices for projects,
provided they fall within the strictly defined remit of
influencing conservation policy, planning &
prioritization
NGO
Limits of Mandate
• Fund raising
• Project initiation & management
• Donor membership
• List-serve
• Website
• Advice & recommendations
• Projects
• Marketing / PR
• Fund raising for projects and overheads
Resources
• Chairman / Coordinator
• Steering committee
• Staff
• Letterheads & logos
• Higher costs
• Registered office
76
• Audited accounts
Requirements
• Aims & objectives
• Voting systems
• Need to establish policies & procedures
• Strategy
Project Management
• Own projects as directed by the mission, strategy
and policies of the organization
ACTION: As a result of the group discussion on this presentation, Steve Monfort, Bill Houston and Terrie
Correll were directed to prepare recommendations for a NGO or NGO-like organization, a base (office) of
operation (USA and Europe) and draft bylaws for review by the group.
Discussion:
♦ Potential Structure
o Forum
o Specialist Group
o Registered NGO
♦ None of the above is mutually exclusive but need tighter organisation for SSIG to proceed. 501c(3)
status requires that the primary sources of funding be considered.
♦
Agreed not to be come a specialist group, SSIG has the credibility already which would be the major
reason for establishing an SG. Lack of concrete identity is however a serious handicap.
♦
Agreed to establish an NGO, with an Executive Board but to keep function as open forum. Founding
members would be listed and put on the Board of Directors.
ACTION: Set up committee to look at issues around establishing NGO and to assess value of Brussels
vs. a location in France. It was agreed however that the first office would be in the USA. (Bill
Houston/Terrie Correll/Steve Monfort/Koen de Smet/Renata Molcanova)
Review of Agadir Meeting
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Website—to be registered as Sahelo-Saharan Interest Group. (Ed Spevak)
Contact with Libyan Authorities – ongoing process, need names from CMS and François
Lamarque. (Koen de Smet)
Representation—possibility of each person being assigned a country to ensure representation by
range states. Last year relied on the listserve to get information out but this time it wasn’t so
effective even though it was sent out in English and French. Not really feasible to pay for a
representative from each range state. Has to be responsible party who makes presentation to
meeting. Need to consider criteria by which to select who will be funded. (Morocco, Tunisia,
Algeria, Libya – Koen de Smet; Niger, Chad, Mali, Egypt, Ethiopia, Mauritania, Senegal – Bill
Houston).
Newsletter—Marie-Odile had agreed to write this but it did not happen. Agreed to drop it for now.
Soemmerings gazelle and wild ass – were to be added to the SSIG list if requested by the range
states to CMS– needed to be verified. (Roseline Beudels)
Eritrea and Djibouti contacts to be established. Martha Fischer from St Louis would provide
names. Heiner Engel volunteered to contact Jens Ove Heckel, IUCN Antelope Specialist Group
member with particular expertise in Eritrea. Name of Head of Eritrean Wildlife Department to be
provided by Tim Woodfine. (Bill Houston, Heiner Engel, Tim Woodfine)
Identification of range state representatives. (François Lamarque – did not happen)
Status of BSE in captive ungulates paper – done. (Tim Woodfine to provide copies)
NORTH AFRICA (Morocco, Algeria & Tunisia)
♦ Tunisia
77
o
o
o
o
o
o
Outlines for a training course had been developed at St Louis.
Martha Fischer to send animal husbandry guidelines. (Bill Houston)
Baseline surveys in southern Tunisia had been postponed to Nov/Dec 2004.
Dorsali Mountain surveys were ongoing. (Teresa Abáigar)
Douz meeting would result in finalisation of plans specifying animal needs etc. (Tim Woodfine)
Letter to DGF from SSIG had not happened but was now pre-empted by Douz meeting.
♦ Algeria
o
o
KS had investigated GEF project proposal. This was being done by a private company and there
was apparently no way to include animal reintroductions, so a letter from SSIG would not be
useful.
Teresa Abáigar had sent a letter offering assistance on creating an inventory but this had never
been answered.
The Current Situation of the SSA in Algeria
A letter from Amina Fellous
First of all I have to apologize, for my level of English, (I am doing my best)
The main decline causes of the SSA in Algeria:
s Poaching activities by the local and foreign hunters,
s More and more disturbance in the natural areas of distribution of the SSA by the new
Petroleum and Mines societies, and by tourist vehicles,
s The maximal use of the few natural areas in the semi arid zones by the extensive
pastoralism, keeping the little vegetation still available for the wild herbivores.
The actual problematic in the monitoring of the SSA:
1. Very few available data’s and in most of the time still no updated yet on the SSA living in our
country. We still have lacks on the knowledge of the numbers, exact distribution, migratory
movements, biology and ecology of most of these ungulates.
2. Very few specialists on wildlife management and precisely on ungulates captive breeding
management (if I can say, they did not exist in our area).
3. The protected areas and game centres did not have good genetic pools of these animals to
start a real work of rehabilitation and restoration of these threatened animals in their natural
habitats.
4. No opportunities to work with specialized organisms or resources persons to share, learn or
keep updated data on that field.
5. Few protected areas started to set up, enclosures in the perspective to release these
animals in their own areas like the:
Ex situ centres:
s N° 01- Reserve de chasse de Tlemcen ( Game reserve of Tlemcen 2.196 ha) for the Barbary
sheep,
s N° 02- Centre cynégétique de zeralda ( Game center of Zeralda) for the Barbary deer,
s N° 03-Reserve de chasse de Djelfa (Game reserve of Djelfa 31.866 ha) for the Barbary sheep
and dorcas gazelle ,
s N° 04- Parc National de Belezma ( National Park of Belezma 26.250 ha) for Cuvier’s gazelle
and Barbary sheep.
In situ centers:
s N° 05-Parc National d’El Kala ( National Park of El Kala 80.000 ha) for the Barbary deer,
s N° 06- Captive breeding center of El Bayadh 8 ha ,for the dorcas and slender horn gazelles.
78
For this moment , we have only the national park of El Kala and the center of Zerald still have
their animals, for the others , they did not get yet (like the national park of Belezma) or their
animals died for different others reasons (bad management, or killed by terrorists……like in
Game reserves of Tlemcen and Djelfa).
These structures from 01 to 05 are all under the authority of the DGF Direction Générale des
forets (General Direction of Forests), the n° 6 is under the authority of the ANN (Agence
Nationale pour la Conservation de la Nature, National Agency for the Conservation of Nature, we
are both under authority of the ministry of agriculture, we have to work together.
The N° 07 is the URZA (Research Unity on Arid Zones ) is under the authority of the ministry of
education, and until now the contact is weak!!!, we know little about what they have, a small zoo
for the local population and they have in captivity slender-horned gazelles (???).
The captive breeding center in El Bayadh (N° 06), started in 2000, is actually keeping 15
animals, 12 dorcas gazelles and 3 slender horn gazelles) , and has the perspective to add an
enclosure of 50 ha , and realize the animal inside it.
We have inside the desertic zone, 3 protected areas:
s In the semi arid zone (Djebel AIssa, National Park (n° 8), recently created but still without an
administrator with an area around 24.400 ha, still contains in a few number, of wild
populations of Barbary sheep and mountain gazelles.
s In the big Sahara the Hoggar and Tassili national parks, are under the authority of the
ministry of culture; both are huge, and until now, they have not started any action plan related
to the reintroduction or captive breeding of their ungulates (dama, dorcas, gazelles, Oryx
dammah and addax).
Priority needs:
For the moment, we are still at the learning stage. The priority is to keep a maximum number of
animals in captivity and learn how to manage them, with the prospect of releasing them in their
natural habitat.
Our priority needs in the monitoring of the SSA in Algeria are:
s
s
s
s
s
In the capacity building for the managers of the protected areas, engineers, animal
technicians and keepers on the survey of wild ungulates
The management of genetic issues (use of studbooks)
Needs, in capture techniques, immobilisation and transport of animals
The management in captive breeding and the use of data bases
Update the distribution of the wild ungulates (mapping and densities)
I am entirely at your service for any comments or questions.
Yours SINCERELY
Amina Fellous
S/D Faune & Flore
Agence Nationale pour la Conservation de la Nature
79
Protected areas keeping ungulates in Algeria
♦ Morocco
o Public awareness programme for gazelles—the funding for the information centre is still pending.
(El Mastour)
o Souss Massa—training in animal handling was ongoing and would be done through the
translocation. (Heiner Engel)
o Natural Strategy. (Heiner Engel to complete end of 2004)
o Dakla survey Heiner Engel spoke to Fabrice Cuzin who needs funding. Original estimate was
raised to $6500 for six weeks’ work. Not done and will not be done without further funds.
o Genetic samples—ongoing. (Teresa Abáigar)
o Delete GEF/KKWRC/ZSL to fund.
o Local awareness—ongoing.
o Cuvier’s survey in south—being accomplished through other projects. (El Mastour)
WESTERN, CENTRAL AND EASTERN AFRICA
♦ Sahel - General Actions
o Husbandry training – outline has been done. (Bill Houston/Terrie Correll)
o Survey training techniques. Training was ongoing as opportunities arose, standardising
techniques. (Tim Wacher/François Lamarque)
o FFEM projects – ongoing. (Arnaud Greth, Roseline Beudels)
80
o Species list. (done by John Newby)
o Genetic clarification of dorcas gazelles – ongoing. (Teresa Abáigar)
o Genetic clarification of dama gazelle – ongoing but samples analysed so far at KKWRC indicate
subspecific differences between Chad/Niger populations and zoo populations. (Tim
Woodfine/Teresa Abáigar).
o John Newby had tried to get genetic samples from UAE but was not successful
♦ Senegal
o Fencing funds - $35K still needed.
o Importation of 2.3 oryx was ongoing discussion and will have identified animals by end of year.
(Ed Spevak)
o Translocation had been done.
♦ Niger
o A further survey of the Termit area had been done and the results were now being written up.
(Tim Wacher/John Newby/Bill Houston/Ed Spevak)
o The Claro report had been translated. (Alexandra Dixon)
o Funding to publish the Chad-Niger reports had been obtained. (Tim Wacher)
♦ Chad
o Roseline Beudels has raised funds for a meeting to discuss possibilities in Chad, needs
assistance with organisation and participation. (Roseline Beudels/John Newby/Steve
Monfort/Alexandra Dixon)
o Meeting to discuss the Chad reintroduction occurred but was re-directed to Niger.
♦ Mali
o Development of survey techniques was ongoing (Tim Wacher/François Lamarque)
♦ Mauritania
o François Lamarque did not get done
FUTURE ACTIONS
♦ Niger
o Vision – we need one!
o Develop a project concept to articulate a plan for Termit/Tin Toumma using addax as flagship
species for a multi-disciplinary initiative. (Steve Monfort/Bill Houston/John Newby/Tim
Wacher/Alexandra Dixon/Arnaud Greth/Ed Spevak/Terrie Correll/Laurie Marker)
o FFEM going to start giving money to DFPP to stimulate the process of gazetting a protected area.
Have €15,000 which could go towards holding a stakeholders meeting in 2004/5.
o Need to initiate discussion with the Tibbou to assess their needs and priorities – FFEM would also
pay for and implement this element. (Arnaud Greth)
o Need a hot season survey. (Bill Houston/Steve Monfort/John Newby/Tim Wacher) St Louis still
has $20,000 for Niger Gadabéji – continue discussions on development. (Arnaud Greth)
♦ Chad
o Continue discussion on development. Meeting must happen this year. (see above, Roseline
Beudels)
♦ Sudan
o ?
81
♦ Egypt
o Need to re-establish contact, Roseline Beudels to get in touch with Sharif Baha al Din.
♦ Ethiopia
o Need survey of dorcas gazelle in north, know very little.
o Ensure that Soemmerings and wild ass have been added to CMS.
♦ Libya
o Tim Wacher had received email regarding possible survey, to follow up on this.
o Alexandra Dixon to contact Luigi Boitani re rumour of Italian gazelle breeding centre.
♦ Tunisia
o Vision was developed at Douz meeting, zoo response to request for animals now needed to be
organised. (Tim Woodfine/Heiner Engel)
o Issue of handling the human social aspects of release programmes, local awareness etc. needed
to be much more actively addressed. Dr. Amen to look into potential for his zoo to take on
production of outreach materials.
o €300,000-500,000 required for fence.
o Surveys in Chambi and Dorsali needed for Cuvier’s Gazelle, survey also needed in Grand Erg.
FFEM could provide funding. (Arnaud Greth/Tim Wacher/Teresa Abáigar)
o Training for parks staff in animal husbandry and survey techniques and regional vets in animal
handling/husbandry also needed.
82
Participants of the 5th SSIG meeting, April 21-23, 2004, Souss, Tunisia (contact
information)
Teresa ABÁIGAR
Estación Experimental de Zonas Aridas
Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas
General Segura 1
04001 Almería
Spain
Phone: 34 950 281045
Fax: 34 950 277100
Abá[email protected]
Gian Lorenzo DÀLTERIO
Studio Veterinario Associato “Ziegler & Malfi”
S.S. Cassia Km 94
Montefiascone (VT)
01027 Italy
Mobile: 0039 3389140835
Fax: 0039 065414510
[email protected]
Koen DE SMET
Afdeling Natuur
Albert II Laan 20, bus 8
B 1000 Brussels
BELGIUM
Phone: 32 2 5537684 Fax 32.2.5537685
[email protected]
Dr. Abdellah el MASTOUR
Haut Commissariat aux
Eaux et Forets et
à la lutte Contre la Désertification
Chef du service des Parcs et Réserves
3, Rue Haroun Errachid
Agdal–Rabat
Morocco
Phone: 212-37-67-11-05; 212-37-69-02-63;
Mobile: 212-62-03-89-34, fax: 212-37-67-27-70
[email protected]
Alexandra DIXON
Overseas Director, LEWA Wildlife Conservancy
2 Clifton gardens
London W9 1DT
United Kingdom
Phone/fax: 44 020 7266 3736
[email protected]
Amen Allah JAIEM
Veterinarian, Friguia Park
Ain Errahma
4010 Bouficha
TUNISIA
Phone: 216-73-252-723; Fax: 216-73-252-715
[email protected]
Heiner ENGEL
Zoo Hannover
Adenaueralee 3
30175 Hannover
Germany
Phone:0049 511 28074-950 Fax: 28074 159
[email protected]
Roseline C.BEUDELS
Conservation Biology Section
Institut Royal des Sciences Naturelles de
Belgique
29 rue Vautier
1000 Bruxelles
BELGIUM
Phone: 32 (0)2 6274354 Fax. 6494825
[email protected]
Arnaud GRETH
CMS/FFEM Project Coordinator
BP 603, Guinfard 1
1264 St. Cergue
SWITZERLAND
Phone: 00.41.22.368.15.08
[email protected]
Terrie CORRELL
Deputy Director, The Living Desert
47-900 Portola Ave.
Palm Desert
California 92260
USA
Phone: 760 346 5694 ext. 288 Fax 340-2064
[email protected]
Ghaiet el Mouna HAJJI
Département de biologie Animale
Faculté des sciences de Tunis
Campus Universitaire, Poste 275
Tunis
TUNISIA
Phone: 00216-71-872-600, Mobile: 98-610-498
[email protected]
83
Edward William (Bill) HOUSTON
Assistant General Curator
Saint Louis Zoo
1 Government Drive
Saint Louis Mo, 63110
USA
Phone: 314 781 0900 (ext 363) Fax 647 7969
[email protected]
Befekadu REFERA
Ethiopian Environmental Protection Authority
(EPA)
Addis Ababa
P.O. Box 12760
ETHIOPIA
Phone: 251-1-464885 (office);
251-1-29-25-31 (residence);
Fax: 251-1-464882
[email protected]
[email protected]
Mame Balla GUEYE
MEPN/DPN
Direction des Parcs Nationaux du Senegal
Parcs Zoologique et Forestier--Hann
B.P. 5135
Dakar-Fann
SENEGAL
Phone: 221 832 2309 Fax: 221 832 23 11
[email protected]
Edward SPEVAK
Mammal Conservation Program Manager
Cincinnati Zoo and Botanical Garden
3400 Vine Street
Cincinnati, OH 45220
USA
Phone: 1 513 475-6170 Fax: 1 513 475-6177
[email protected]
Laurie MARKER
Cheetah Conservation Fund
P.O. Box 1755
Otjiwarango
NAMIBIA
Phone: 264 67306225; Fax: 264 67 306247
[email protected]
Tim WACHER
Conservation Programs
Zoological Society of London
Regent’s Park
London NW1 4RY
UNITED KINGDOM
Phone: 44 207 449 6304;
Fax:
[email protected]
Renata MOLCANOVA
Zoo Park Chomutov
Premyslova 259
430 01 Chomutov
Czech Republic
Phone: +44 23 80558519
[email protected]
Simon WAKEFIELD
Marwell Preservation Trust
Colden Common
Winchester
Hampshire S021 IJH
UNITED KINGDOM
Phone: 44 01962 777986 Fax: 777511
[email protected]
Steve MONFORT
Research Veterinarian
Conservation & Research Center
Smithsonian Institution
1500 Remount Road
Front Royal
Va 22630
USA
Phone: 540 635 6589 Fax 635 6506
[email protected]
Tim WOODFINE
Head, Department of Conservation
& Wildlife Management
Marwell Preservation Trust
Colden Common
Winchester
Hampshire S021 IJH
UNITED KINGDOM
Phone: 44 01962 777986 Fax: 777511
[email protected]
Hans Peter MÜLLER
3 Rue Maarif
10000 Rabat EL Youssoufia
Maroco
Phone: 00212 37 636630 Fax: 636630
[email protected]
84

Proceedings of SSIG Conference draft 24 Mar 05

Transcription

Similar documents

Pre-Natural Resources

To this: Davidsonville Wildlife Sanctuary Wetland Restoration Best

GATORLAND FLORIDA

HARTEBEEST Alcelaphus buselaphus Six races are recognised

^ Sand Creek Wildlife Management Area

RSPB/ Kingsbrook presentation

So, you want to be a wildlife biologist?

Fire-bellied Toads

A Decade of Dune Restoration at the Lanphere Dunes - Cal-IPC

Gardening For Wildlife PDF file