A Management Strategy for the Conservation of Elephants in the Akagera National Park, Rwanda

May 2008 M. Karidozo and G. E. Parker

A Management Strategy for the Conservation of Elephants in the Akagera National Park, Rwanda
Consultants final version May 2008 M. Karidozo and G.E. Parker Email: mazdzambo@yahoo.co.uk guyedwardparker@yahoo.co.uk
Suggested citation: Karidozo, M. and Parker, G.E. (2008): A Management Strategy for the Conservation of Elephants in the Akagera National Park, Rwanda. May 2008. Wildlife Conservation Society, New York.

Table of Contents
List of Figures ................................................................................................................. 4 List of Tables ................................................................................................................... 4 List of Annexes ................................................................................................................ 4 List of Acronyms ............................................................................................................. 4 Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... 5 1.0 Summary .............................................................................................................. 6 1.1 Key considerations........................................................................................... 7 1.2 Objectives of the management strategy ............................................................ 7 2.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................... 8 2.1 The African elephant ....................................................................................... 8 2.2 Threats to the African Elephant........................................................................ 9 2.2.1 Lack of institutional capacity.................................................................... 9 2.2.2 Illegal hunting........................................................................................ 10 2.2.3 Habitat destruction ................................................................................. 10 2.2.4 Human-Elephant Conflict....................................................................... 11 3.0 Rwanda .............................................................................................................. 12 3.1 Protected Areas in Rwanda ............................................................................ 12 3.1.1 The colonial era (late 19 century to 1962)............................................. 13 3.1.2 The post-independence period (1962-1991)............................................ 14 3.1.3 War and post-war period (1991-present)................................................. 14 3.2 Akagera National Park................................................................................... 15 4.0 Elephants in Rwanda .......................................................................................... 16 4.1 Elephants in Akagera National Park............................................................... 17 4.1.1 Elephant population size ........................................................................ 17 4.1.2 Elephant distribution .............................................................................. 18 4.1.3 Population dynamics .............................................................................. 18 4.2 The value of elephants ................................................................................... 18 4.3 Threats to elephants within Akagera National Park ........................................ 19 4.3.1 Lack of legislation.................................................................................. 19 4.3.2 Lack of institutional capacity.................................................................. 19 4.3.3 Lack of information for elephant management ....................................... 19 4.3.4 Human disturbance ................................................................................ 20 4.3.5 Human-Elephant Conflict....................................................................... 20 5.0 A Strategy for Elephant Management .................................................................. 21 5.1 Principles....................................................................................................... 21 5.2 Key considerations......................................................................................... 21 5.3 Specific objectives ......................................................................................... 22 6.0 Conclusions........................................................................................................ 28 7.0 References.......................................................................................................... 30
th

List of Figures:
Figure 1: Protected areas in Rwanda Figure 2: Akagera National Park

List of Tables
Table 1: The elephant population estimate for ANP in 2006

List of Annexes
Annex 1: Institutions involved in conservation in Rwanda

List of Acronyms
AFESG ANP CAR CITES DRC GPS HEC IUCN MIKE NFR NGO ORTPN PA SSC SWOT TOR WCS African Elephant Specialist Group Akagera National Park Central African Republic Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora Democratic Republic of Congo Global Positioning System Human Elephant Conflict International Union for Conservation of Nature Monitoring the Illegal Killing of Elephants Nyungwe Forest Reserve Non-Governmental Organisation Office Rwandais du Tourisme et des Parcs Nationaux Protected Area Species Survival Commission (IUCN) Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats Terms of Reference Wildlife Conservation Society

Acknowledgements
The development of this elephant management strategy stems from the initiatives of the joint Wildlife Conservation Society)/ Office Rwandais du Tourisme et des Parcs Nationaux project Conservation of Elephants in the Akagera National Park. The authors would like to thank the Wildlife Conservation Society for funding this strategy and the participants of the elephant strategy workshop whose efforts provided a framework for this document.

The Goal of this Strategy To enhance the long-term conservation of elephants and their habitats in Akagera National Park, Rwanda.

1.0

Summary

The African elephant is highly adaptable and occupies a range of habitats, from arid areas to tropical forests. There are currently estimated to be 472,269 elephants distributed throughout Southern, Eastern, Central and West Africa (Blanc et al., 2007). At present, two subspecies of African elephants are recognised: the savanna elephant (Loxodonta africana africana) and the forest elephant (Loxodonta africana cyclotis). Elephants play an important ecological role, particularly in maintaining the diversity of fauna and flora and in regenerating their forest environments. The economic value of elephant tourism and elephant products is also of considerable importance (Brown, 1989) As a flagship species the elephant holds significance in the traditions of many African cultures and is recognised as a focus for raising awareness and stimulating conservation action throughout the world. Africas remaining elephants are considered, at a continental level, to be under threat from a range of factors, including habitat loss and fragmentation, human-elephant conflict, illegal hunting for meat and ivory, a lack of management capacity, and negative localised impacts of elephants on their habitats (Blanc et al., 2007). However, the relative importance of these issues varies considerably across the continent. While East African elephant populations are recovering from the poaching of the 1970s and 1980s, human population growth and the concomitant loss and fragmentation of habitats are now the chief threats facing elephants within the region (Blanc et al., 2007). There are high levels of conflict, which coupled with the lack of economic benefits for communities within elephant range, lead to animosity towards elephants and the undermining of conservation efforts. The viability of some populations, including those in Eritrea, Ethiopia and Rwanda is already uncertain (Blanc et al., 2007). The elephant population in Rwanda is among the smallest in eastern Africa and is thus seriously threatened. There is estimated to be less than 100 elephants in the whole country, with the greatest population residing in Akagera National Park. (ANP). Elephants face numerous threats: in addition to illegal killing, elephant habitat is under pressure from resource extraction by communities living at the boundary of protected areas. Other factors challenging elephant conservation in Rwanda include institutional weaknesses resulting from political instability in the recent past, socio-economic challenges, and a lack of capacity of wildlife conservation including limited financial resources and a lack of well equipped and trained field staff. Conflict with rural communities is a serious problem that has caused friction between local people and protected areas. Weak or obsolete legislation and the absence of a national wildlife management policy have posed significant constraints to effective conservation and management of elephants in Rwanda. To meet these challenges, Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) and Office Rwandais du Tourisme et des Parcs Nationaux (ORTPN) established a joint project Conservation of Elephants in the Akagera National Park, Rwanda. In 2006 WCS and ORTPN

commissioned an elephant management workshop in which stakeholders identified key issues in the conservation and management of elephants. The outputs of this workshop form the foundations of this elephant management strategy for ANP, and provide a framework for the development of a national elephant strategy. This document identifies six key considerations for the improvement of elephant conservation and presents clear objectives and activities through which the management of ANPs elephants will be strengthened. 1.1 Key considerations

The following key considerations are addressed by this strategy: 1. The need to strengthen current wildlife policy to address elephant conservation and wildlife conflict issues. 2. The need to improve ORTPNs capacity to conserve elephants. 3. A requirement for information on the elephant population, ecology and habitat use. 4. A reduction in the impact of human-elephant conflict upon communities. 5. The reduction of human-induced threats to elephant populations and their habitats. 6. The need to engender support for elephant conservation among local communities. 1.2 Objectives of the management strategy

In order to address the key considerations identified above, the following specific objectives have been identified: Objective 1. The development of policies and legislation that create an enabling environment for elephant conservation in the ANP. Objective 2. The strengthening of the institutional and human capacity of ORTPN to enable effective elephant conservation. Objective 3. The development of a comprehensive portfolio of elephant research and monitoring which addresses questions fundamental to elephant management. Objective 4. The mitigation of human-elephant conflict in communities bordering ANP. Objective 5. The reduction of human disturbance upon elephant habitat. Objective 6. The engagement of local communities in elephant conservation. Each objective has a clearly stated rationale, and targets which define the desired outputs. A series of pragmatic activities have been identified as a means of achieving each of the conservation objectives. Thus, activities address objectives, which in turn address considerations. These are detailed in Section 5: A Strategy for Elephant Management.

2.0
2.1

Introduction
The African elephant

The African elephant (Loxodonta africana) belongs to the family Elephantideae, in the order Probiscidea, which originally evolved in Africa during the Pleistocene era. African elephants appeared in the fossil records around 750,000 years before present (b.p.), and are believed to have taken their current form around 40,000 years b.p. They are distinguished from other large mammals by having a nose extended into a trunk, large ears, and upper incisor teeth that develop into tusks (Stephenson, 2004). Two subspecies of African elephant are recognised: the savanna elephant (Loxodonta africana africana), and the forest elephant (Loxodonta africana cyclotis). As their names imply, they inhabit different habitats: the savanna elephant is generally found in savanna and woodland environments, whilst the forest elephant occurs in dense tropical forest. The larger savanna elephant (5-7.5 tons, 3-4m at the shoulder) is distributed throughout eastern and southern Africa, and the smaller forest subspecies (2-4 tons, 2-3m at the shoulder; Grzimek, 1975) is found predominantly in the Congo Basin of Central Africa. In West Africa elephants live in both forest and savanna habitats and their taxonomic status remains uncertain (Blanc et al, 2007). Morphologically, the forest elephant has more oval-shaped ears and straighter, downward pointing tusks. There are also differences in the size and shape of the skull and skeleton. In terms of behaviour, forest elephants live in smaller social groups of two to four individuals compared with 4-14 in savanna elephant herds; and forest bulls tend to be solitary whereas the savanna bulls form loose groups. The African elephant once inhabited most of the continent, from the Mediterranean coast to the tip of South Africa. It has adapted to many habitat types, including the moist forests of West Africa, the dense rain forests of the Congo Basin, the woodlands, forests and acaciasavanna grasslands of the Indian Ocean coast, and arid semi-desert zones in countries such as Namibia and Mali. Elephants are generalists and can exploit a large variety of food sources. They have the ability to occupy a diverse range of habitats, from closed-canopy forest to deciduous woodland to bush-grassland. They feed on a variety of plant matter, especially grass, leaves, fruit and bark and can consume up to 5 percent of their body mass in 24 hours (Western & Lindsay 1984). Elephants are not territorial, although they use specific areas during particular times of the year. Their ranging patterns are determined by water availability, which in turn is dictated by rainfall (Leuthold, 1977; Afolayan & Ajayi, 1980; Western & Lindsay, 1984). Adult elephants have a water requirement of about 160 litres per day (Dougall & Sheldrick, 1964), and in regions where water availability is highly seasonal elephant range is restricted to the location of permanent water.

The central social unit in elephant society is the mother and her offspring. Matriarchal family groups often interact with other groups to form clans. Males are driven from these clans when they reach 10-14 years of age to live alone or with other males. The African elephant was among the first recognized flagship species, providing a focus for raising awareness and stimulating action and funding for broader conservation efforts (Leader-Williams & Dublin, 2000). The elephant is also a keystone species which plays a significant role in structuring both plant and animal communities (Dublin, 1995; OwenSmith, 1988; Shoshani, 1993). Elephants are especially important to protected areas because of their role in regulating ecosystem functions through their foraging behaviors (Laws, 1970). Changes to vegetation structure and composition have been attributed to elephants in Lake Manyara National Park and other habitats (Douglas-Hamilton, 1987; Barnes, 1983). While elephant effects on habitat can be beneficial (Nchangi & Plumptre, 2003; Ruggerio & Fay, 1994), they can also be detrimental where elephants exist at high density (Tchamba & Mahamat, 1992; Western & Maitumo, 2004). There are currently estimated to be 472,269 elephants in 37 range states in sub-Saharan Africa (Blanc et al., 2007). The distribution of elephants varies greatly across the continent: from small fragmented populations in West Africa to vast tracts of contiguous range in Central and Southern Africa. Southern Africa accounts for 39% of the African elephants total range, followed by Central Africa (29%), East Africa (26%) and finally West Africa (5%) (Blanc et al, 2007). 2.2 Threats to the African Elephant

In its Red List of Threatened Species (IUCN 2006), the World Conservation Union considers the African elephant to be Vulnerable, meaning it faces "a high risk of extinction in the wild in the medium-term future" (Stephenson, 2005). Human activities have been responsible for the massive decline in elephant range and numbers across Africa in the past century. The main threats facing elephants today are: a lack of institutional capacity for elephant conservation; illegal hunting for ivory and meat; the loss, deterioration and fragmentation of their habitat; and human-elephant conflict (HEC). 2.2.1 Lack of institutional capacity A lack of institutional capacity for elephant conservation and management is common in most elephant range states. This usually stems from a lack of financial resources and trained personnel to carry out elephant management activities. The main limitations include: a lack of technical capacity to carry out law enforcement and conservation activities; the absence of a proactive HEC management strategy; the lack of an enabling legal framework; insufficient or insecure funding sources; and, a lack of information about elephant populations, including distribution, abundance, threats and ecology.

2.2.2 Illegal hunting Ivory has long been a marketable commodity that has been worked and traded for thousands of years: the earliest ivory sculptures date back more than 30,000 years (Conard, 2003). Ivory has been traded from eastern Africa since Roman times, with a further expansion in the trade from AD 1000, leading to an apparent peak in the mid nineteenth century (Hakansson, 2004). Throughout much of the twentieth century the hunting of African elephants for their ivory (both legal and increasingly illegal) continued to decimate populations. Accurate historical data on population levels are difficult to obtain. However, recent estimates suggest there may have been several million African elephants at the start of the twentieth century (MilnerGulland & Beddington, 1993); numbers declined through the 1930s and 1940s and, after severe poaching in the 1970s and 1980s, fewer than 400,000 remained in the early 1990s (Douglas-Hamilton et al., 1995; Said et al.,1995). Elephants were hit particularly hard in the 1980s when an estimated 100,000 individuals were being killed per year and up to 80 percent of herds were lost in some regions (Cobb & Western, 1989; Merz & Hoppe-Dominik, 1991; Alers et al. 1992; WWF, 1997 & 1998). In response to the sharp decline in elephant numbers in Africa many countries imposed their own legislation to stop the importation of raw ivory, and in 1989 the African elephant was placed on Appendix I of CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora). This move prevented international trade in ivory and other elephant products and was imposed in an attempt to cut off supply to the markets. Although populations have stabilized in some parts of southern and eastern Africa, illegal killing of elephants for ivory and meat is still apparent. Recent trade studies have shown that there are still thriving domestic ivory markets in many African elephant range states, including Angola, Cte d'Ivoire, Mozambique and Nigeria, as well as in states such as Egypt, Ethiopia, Senegal and Sudan that have few or no wild elephants (Martin & Stiles, 2000; Courouble et al., 2003; Martin, 2005; Martin & Milliken, 2005; Milliken et al., 2006). Much of the ivory in the domestic markets originates from central Africa, with key source countries including Cameroon, the Central African Republic (CAR) and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). 2.2.3 Habitat destruction Habitat destruction remains a major threat to the survival of elephant populations. In total, elephant range has declined from 7.3 million square kilometres in 1979 to 3.34 million square kilometres today (Blanc et al., 2007). Of the remaining range, at least 80 percent falls outside protected areas (Stevenson, 2005). African elephants have less room to live in than ever before. There is a continuing decline in the extent and quality of their habitat as expanding human populations convert land for agriculture, settlement and development activities (Thouless, 1999). In the grassland and woodland habitats of East and Southern Africa, traditional elephant refuges are becoming increasingly isolated as rangeland is converted to agriculture.

10

In forest habitats the conversion of habitat for plantations for bio-fuels is an increasing problem. Extractive industries such as logging and mining also cause habitat destruction and improve access to remote forests for hunters (Fay & Agnagna, 1991; Wilkie et al., 2001). Many forests in West and Central Africa are in decline (Sayer et al., 1992; Myers et al., 2000). Land-use planning is seen as a long-term solution to the issue of habitat destruction. Creating or preserving habitat corridors linking core populations can alleviate habitat fragmentation (Harris, 1984). However, it is important to understand the ecological processes that influence the movement of species such as the elephant when designing habitat corridors (Johnsingh & Williams, 1999). While potentially alleviating the effects of habitat destruction, land-use planning can be notoriously difficult to implement due to complex patterns of land tenure, access to resources, and the intractable problems associated with the relocation of communities. 2.2.4 Human-Elephant Conflict Conflict between people and elephants today ranks among the main threats to elephant conservation in Africa and represents a real challenge to local, national and regional governments, wildlife managers, conservation and development agencies and local communities (Kangwana 1993). HEC has existed for a long time: elephants may have limited the development of agriculture in equatorial forests for centuries (Barnes, 1996) and damage to crops has been recorded in Africa from the beginning of the Twentieth Century (e.g. Schweitzer, 1922). Increasing human populations and expanding agriculture have increased the potential for conflict between humans and elephants in many regions (Hoare, 1995). Elephants have been compressed into ever-smaller areas and their traditional migration routes have been cut off (Kangwana, 1995). As a result, humans and elephants compete directly for land that is becoming increasingly scarce (Thouless, 1994; Kiiru, 1995; Barnes, 1996). Conflict takes many forms, from direct impacts such as the destruction of property, crop damage and human death (Hoare, 1995), to indirect social costs such as the need to guard crops at night, competition for resources, and restricted local movements due to elephant presence (Parker, 2006). Conflict creates intense animosity between rural communities and the wild animals that threaten their livelihoods (Naughton-Treves, 1997). Such negative interactions have the potential to undermine long-term biodiversity goals, as local people express their anger through encroachment on protected areas, poaching, and excessive resource use (Mehta & Kellert, 1998). To date, most problem elephant management has been applied in a very ad hoc manner (Taylor, 1999). Because there are no clear policies or plans for problem elephant management, wildlife authorities do not usually have adequate financial and human resources to tackle HEC. The monitoring of problem elephants is largely limited to farmers reporting incidents to the wildlife authorities in the hope of eliciting some form of management response. Although incident records are intended for onward submission to a centralised database, for many countries, this does not appear to be consistent.

11

The issue of HEC is so significant that a working group has been established by the IUCN/SSC African Elephant Specialist Group to consider the problem (Hoare, 1995). Currently it is believed that the best means of reducing HEC is through a range of approaches including community-based conflict mitigation, fencing, disturbance shooting, employing a variety of scaring and repelling tactics (Osborn & Parker, 2003). Such interventions should ideally be implemented in conjunction with long-term solutions such as implementing land-use plans that aim to separate agricultural activities and elephant range (Parker et al, 2007).

3.0

Rwanda

Rwanda is a small landlocked country of 26,388km2, bordering Tanzania, Uganda, DRC and Burundi. The terrain is mountainous and well irrigated by a network of rivers and lakes. Although located only two degrees south of the equator, Rwanda's high elevation makes the climate temperate. The landscape is diverse, from closed forest in the west to savanna woodland and grassland in the east. Rwandas human population exceeds 8 million, most of who live in the lower altitude rolling hills of central and eastern Rwanda. The majority of the population engages in small-scale farming. The high population growth rate of over 3% per annum, in a country that is already densely populated (317 people per km2), results in a tremendous pressure on the land and on the environment. 3.1 Protected Areas in Rwanda

Protected areas were first established in Rwanda in 1918 by the colonial government, and by 1933 all remnant montane forest was set aside as protected forest (Weber, 1987). Currently Rwanda has approximately 7% of its land cover under protected areas (Fig. 1.). These include: The Nyungwe Forest Reserve (NFR) (970km2) in the south west, which is the largest remaining lower montane forest in Africa; The Volcanoes National Park (425km2) in the north, which harbours highly endangered primates, including mountain gorillas and golden monkeys; and The Akagera National Park (ANP) (1,081km2) in the east, which is a complex of savanna and wetland that provides habitat for a diverse fauna, including nearly 600 species of birds.

12

Figure 1: Protected areas of Rwanda (Source: Plumptre et al 2001)

Conservation in Rwanda has been heavily influenced by the socio-political landscape of the past century. To fully appreciate the current situation it is important to recognize the key events of the last 100 years. 3.1.1 The colonial era (late 19 century to 1962) During the colonial era both German and Belgian administrations ruled indirectly through the king and hill chiefs. Uncultivated lands were reallocated for agriculture, which resulted in the expansion of cultivation onto marginal land traditionally used for rangeland, long fallow and forest. A rapid conversion of forests and wildlife range to pasture occurred through the 1920s, and in response the Belgian authorities established all remnant forestlands including Akagera and Nyungwe as reserves (Weber & Vedder, 1984). This legislation prohibited clearing for agriculture but recognized community rights to collect dead wood and allowed commercial exploitations of valuables hardwoods to Europeans settlers as well as controlled hunting outside these reserves. There were no mechanisms in place to monitor and regulate
th

13

access to the forest and rangeland and they were used for a wide range of activities including honey collection, woodcutting, and hunting of animals, gold mining, and small-scale agriculture . 3.1.2 The post-independence period (1962-1991) The post-independence period witnessed a trend towards centralization of authority over land and forest resources by the governments. Conservation was not the priority in the years following independence and agriculture policies aimed at increasing cash crop production had a direct impact on all the protected areas. Sections of Nyungwe were cleared for tea plantations (Weber, 1987) and the reserves were significantly reduced in size between 1958 and 1979. The ORTPN was established by decree in 1974 with the following responsibilities: promotion of tourism, protection of nature, scientific research and protection of sites and monuments of historical, archeological and tourist importance and implementation of biodiversity conventions and agreements. In 1988 the Rwandan government adopted a new forestry law (No. 47/1988) which defined the forest reserve as an area for the protection of the flora and fauna, in which no cutting is permitted except in the interest of protected plants. Hunting, fishing, collecting animals, plants or minerals were all prohibited. Scientific studies were allowed only by ministerial permit. ORTPN was given the mandate to enforce conservation regulations in the forest, including illegal mining, hunting and clearing. Today ORTPN is responsible for the management of national parks, special reserves and hunting reserves. Forest guards have the power to arrest, search and issue penalties. In the 1980s a number of international NGOs formed partnerships with ORTPN. The Wildlife Conservation Society is a US-based NGO which saves wildlife and wild lands through careful science, international conservation and education. Since 1988, both WCS and ORTPN have actively engaged in law enforcement, conservation education, ecotourism, professional training, and scientific research (www.wcs.org). 3.1.3 War and post-war period (1991-present) The last decade and a half of conservation in Rwanda was largely influenced by the war and its consequences are still being felt at the national level. War affected conservation within Rwanda in various ways: first conservation institutions were unable to enforce regulations. Second, the internationally funded projects in and around the protected areas were suspended and never resumed after the genocide due to the prevailing political and economic instability. Third, the post-war government priorities were rehabilitation and resettlement rather than conservation. Development agencies returned to Rwanda but drastically revised their priorities in the light of post-war needs. For at least 2-3 years almost all assistance was focused on humanitarian relief and little funding went to conservation programs (Masozera, 2002). In summary, Rwanda has an impressive array of protected areas which are fully protected by law. However, the recent war in Rwanda has limited the resources and expertise and has reduced investment in the Protected Area (PA) infrastructure. Consequently until recently

14

there has been little enforcement and limited research activity ongoing within the protected areas. 3.2 Akagera National Park

The Akagera Region is situated in the northeast of Rwanda between 100 205S and 3025 3050E (Figure 2). The Akagera National Park (ANP) was founded in 1934 and 2 originally covered an area of 2,500 km . In 1957, the contiguous Mutara Hunting Domain 2 was added (Williams & Ntayombya, 1999), bringing the total area to 2,840 km . The ANP has been greatly affected by war over the last 15 years. During the war ANP was occupied by soldiers and the wildlife populations were decimated. Following the genocide of 1994 and the subsequent return of refugees from bordering countries, the resettlement of returning farmers became a national priority. In 1997 two thirds of ANP was degazetted for this purpose and the Park was reduced to one-third of its pre-war size, a total of 1,081 km2. ANP forms part of the Akagera - Lake Mburo ecosystem that includes Ugandas Kikagati Game Reserve, Lake Mburo National Park and the rangeland areas northwards to the Katonga River. To the east, this ecosystem extends across the Akagera River and into Tanzanias Ibanda and Rumanyika Game Reserves. Corridors of relatively unsettled wood and bush land link these areas to the Biharamulo and Burigi Game Reserves farther south. ANP also forms a part of the Lake Victoria regional mosaic of habitats spanning the escarpment and flood plains of the eastern part of Rwanda bordering Tanzania and just touching Uganda. In terms of natural beauty, landscape, scenery and animal life, the ANP was once regarded as one of the best national parks in Africa. Today the Akagera - Lake Mburo ecosystem is entirely fragmented and its wildlife populations are now found only in small, disturbed enclaves. ANP has been occupied by people since the Neolithic period (Birdlife, 2006). The topography of the park is characterized by rolling sandstone hills in the west, cut in places by deep, narrow valleys. The highest point in the park is Mount Mutumba (1,825 m). In the east, flood-plains and swamps predominate. The extensive lakes and swamps of Akagera river valley cover an area of c.100,000 ha. The vegetation of the park is extremely varied and, indeed, has been described as the most heterogeneous savannah ecosystem in the region (Birdlife, 2006). Open savannas are dominated by three typical grasses, Themeda triandra, Hyparrhenia filipendula and Cymbopogon afronardus. In woodland areas Acacia spp. and Combretum spp. predominate, but more than 250 tree species occur within the park. The relatively steep hills of central and southern ANP support a denser tree- and bush-cover. Towards the lake borders to the east, the savannah becomes more heavily wooded, with gallery forest occurring along lake edges. Gallery forest species include Albizia spp., Acacia polyacantha and some Ficus spp. Flood-plain and marsh vegetation occur in the river valley, with marshes dominated by Cyperus papyrus, Cladium and Miscanthidium (Birdlife, 2006).

15

Figure 2: Akagera National Park (Source: Parker 2006)

4.0

Elephants in Rwanda

Rwandas elephant population is small and fragmented while its human population is dense and widely distributed. Historically, elephants occurred at low densities throughout Rwanda albeit in small fragmented patches. In 1950 the territory of Ruanda-Urundi (the Rwanda and Burundi of today) was estimated to have some 800 elephants (Blanc et al., 2002). By 1973 there may have been roughly 300 elephants remaining (Blanc et al., 2002), half of which were found in unforested areas. As human populations grew, HEC reached such a high level that, in 1975, the Rwandese Government commissioned professional hunters and trappers to 16

eliminate all adult elephants and unweaned calves in high profile conflict areas and to translocate as many of the remaining juveniles as possible to the southern sector of the ANP. A total of 126 animals were shot and 30 captured. Of the latter, 26 were translocated to ANP (Haigh et al., 1979; Blanc et al., 2002). Through much of the 1990s, the presence of soldiers, armed rebels and refugees in and around protected areas posed an intermittent threat to elephants and other wildlife. In 1990 Rwanda recognized three elephant populations, distributed between Akagera (about 40) and Nyungwe Forest (about 10), while those in the Parc National des Volcans were not permanent residents (Blanc et al., 2002). Elephants had not been seen in the Parc National des Volcans since the early 1990s but the area has been categorized as known range based on recent sightings in the vicinity of the park. At this time no elephants are believed to remain in the Nyungwe Forest Reserve (Blanc et al., 2002). 4.1 Elephants in Akagera National Park

Elephants in the ANP disappeared in the early 1960s, probably as a result of human activities. They were last sighted in 1961 near Lake Mihindi and the swamps of Akagera. In 1975, the government of Rwanda translocated 22 young elephants to the ANP from Bugesera in the south east of Rwanda. In 1986 the population within the Park was estimated to have grown to 30 elephants. Little was known about elephants during the post-war period. Consequently, an elephant monitoring project was established in 2006 through the joint WCS/ORTPN elephant project Conservation of Elephants in the Akagera National Park. The projects objective was to determine the current population size and distribution of elephants within ANP and to establish survey and monitoring methods for the future (Parker, 2006). The project established a comprehensive elephant monitoring programme using stratified dung surveys designed according to MIKE protocols (Hedges, 2005). ORTPN staff at ANP was trained in dung survey methodology and the first full survey was undertaken in July 2006 (Parker, 2006). 4.1.1 Elephant population size It has been speculated that two groups of elephants totalling 60 individuals currently exist in ANP (Masozera, 2005). Blanc et al., (2007) estimate the current ANP elephant population to be 34. The dung survey carried out in July 2006 estimated the population to be 28, with a lower confidence limit of 17 and an upper confidence limit of 45 (Parker, 2006). However, this estimate applied only to the central lakeside area of the park, as the eastern highland section of the park contained too little dung to generate an accurate estimate, and the western swamp section of the park was inaccessible to ground teams. It is therefore likely that the total elephant population size is greater than this figure. However, this survey represents the first formal survey of ANP in recent times and it establishes a baseline for future surveys (Parker, 2006).

17

4.1.2 Elephant distribution Elephant density is greatest within the central lakeside region of the ANP and appears to be lowest in the eastern highland region. The density of elephants within the swamp region is currently unknown (Parker, 2006). Elephant distribution in the ANP appears to be determined by water availability, as is common in seasonal habitats (Afolayan & Ayaji, 1980; Western & Lindsay, 1984). The lack of elephants in the ANPs highlands during the dry season most probably reflects the scarcity of permanent water sources (Parker, 2006). The vegetation at the lake shore is wooded and more diverse as compared to the highland savanna and this may further explain the elephants higher density at the lakeside. The woodland may additionally provide shade during the heat of the day, another important resource in hot climates. In addition, slope may play a role in the elephant distribution: elephants are heavy mammals and while they are clearly able to traverse the hills of the highlands (P. Buda, pers. comm.), they may choose to remain in the flatter lakeside habitats. In other ecosystems elephants have been observed to avoid slopes (Smith & Kasiki, 2000). 4.1.3 Population dynamics There is currently very little information regarding elephant age and sex ratios within ANP. The poaching of ivory in the 1970s and 1980s considerably affected the structure of elephant population in Rwanda and ANP in particular. Poachers concentrated on the male elephants, which led to substantial change in the sex ratio. The political upheavals of the late 1990s did not help matters as soldiers and unscrupulous foreigners took advantage of the administrative breakdown and exploited the elephant population. It is not yet clear whether the reproductive capacity of the elephant populations has been affected by the population decline. Following severe poaching it is possible that an elephant population may increase rapidly as has been observed in Selous Game Reserve in Tanzania (Baldus, 2005). In good conditions elephant populations can grow by 7 percent per year. However, the opposite may also be true as elephants have a high sensitivity to habitat and climate change. Elephants have a gestation period of 22 months and come into oestrus once per year. With the decline in the male population, breeding opportunities are often missed. Under poor conditions, the growth rate may be reduced to 2% per year. 4.2 The value of elephants

Elephants in ANP play a very important ecological role, particularly in maintaining the diversity of fauna and flora and in regenerating their forest environments. They exert a profound impact on their environment as they push over trees creating clearings and grasslands, dig for salt and disseminate seeds for many plants, creating a patchwork of forest types and habitat that benefits many other species. Such activities influence the age and structure of flora and fauna within their habitats. Elephants are a highly visible component of the ANPs faunal assemblage, serving to attract tourists and provide revenue for park management. The economic value of elephant tourism and elephant products is highly significant (Brown, 1989; Barnes, 1996). Elephants have the potential to generate major financial returns to the ANP and to surrounding communities, and by so doing contribute to maintaining and improving PAs in the region. 18

4.3

Threats to elephants within Akagera National Park

The threats facing elephants within ANP were identified during a workshop on elephant management held in Kigali in December 2006. In many ways these threats reflect those identified at a continental level. Five principal threats were identified as follows: a lack of national legislation concerning elephant management; a lack of institutional capacity within ORTPN; a lack of information on ANPs elephant population; human disturbance within elephant habitats; and conflict with communities outside the ANP. 4.3.1 Lack of legislation Attendees of the 2006 elephant workshop in Kigali identified a lack of legislation as a severe limitation to elephant conservation. Currently the Rwandese Wildlife Act is not finalised and the conservation policy is not implemented. In addition, there is no coordination with bordering countries, e.g. Tanzania, where elephants from ANP may seasonally migrate. 4.3.2 Lack of institutional capacity Institutional weaknesses identified within the ORTPN included a lack of capacity for wildlife conservation and management. The ANP has a limited budget: the main funding for ORTPN comes from tourism which is highly susceptible to fluctuations, and ANP itself is subsidised by tourism revenues from other National Parks within Rwanda. The financial situation at ANP restricts the investment in manpower, vehicles and training. Consequently there are insufficient guards to conduct patrols, and there are no specialised teams to conduct elephant monitoring and community conservation. Elephant management skills need to be developed within ANP and should be made available not only to the park management authorities but also to communities at the edge of ANP upon whom the elephants survival will increasingly depend. Many if not most PAs across Africa face a funding crisis, both in terms of the amount of funds available and how those are used. There is an urgent need to expand and diversify PA financial portfolios, and to ensure that funding reaches the groups and activities essential for biodiversity conservation (Emerton et al, 2005). A diverse range of financing options are available to PAs such as ANP, including payments for carbon and ecosystem services, a wide range of corporate and private donors and tax revenues. A sustainable finance strategy should be developed for ANP which explores these new revenue sources. 4.3.3 Lack of information for elephant management In the last decade a number of studies have investigated land degradation, wildlife ecology and distributions in the ANP. Although these studies have documented decreases in wildlife populations due to the reduction in park size following the war, no studies have specifically examined the impacts upon threatened species such as elephants. There is currently little information available on the elephants of the ANP, effectively hindering conservation efforts. Park management requires ecological information in order to protect the elephant population and develop management and conservation action plans. While there is now a monitoring programme for elephant numbers and distributions there is 19

still no research into social behaviour, population dynamics, migration patterns, habitat use and genetics. 4.3.4 Human disturbance Human disturbance encompasses both habitat destruction and illegal hunting. ANP suffers habitat degradation as a result of high human population density at its borders. From patrol data it is evident communities cut trees and graze their cattle within the Park boundaries, and also are responsible for bush fires. Other activities include bee keeping, hunting and cattle grazing (Parker, 2006). Fragmentation and habitat loss are more widespread in the savannah parts of the park although the wetlands and the forested areas are also showing signs of disturbance. Elephants once moved between Akagera, Ibanda, Burigi and Biharamulo in Tanzania, but their movement has been restricted by refugee settlement on the Tanzanian side (Blanc et al., 2007). Such habitat fragmentation has reduced genetic flow between wildlife populations. A research project has been proposed which will study elephant movements as well as human and elephant induced habitat destruction. This will help identify future corridor areas for natural dispersal and will provide ecological information for land-use planning. There have been 2 recorded cases of illegal elephant hunting: one for bush meat and one for ivory poaching. While this is negligible on a regional scale, ANPs population is small and extremely vulnerable. There are also concerns that illegal hunting occurs in bordering countries and that poor enforcement in Tanzania and Burundi may threaten ANPs elephants once they cross the borders. 4.3.5 Human-Elephant Conflict From the late 1990s the incidence of HEC has negatively influenced the perceptions of elephant conservation, especially amongst rural communities at the Parks boundary. Elephants cause many problems for people, including eating and trampling crops, raiding food stores and damaging village infrastructure and water sources. Elephant presence in or around human settlements also disrupts community life, making transit along roads difficult or preventing children from attending school. In isolated cases where there is direct confrontation, elephants occasionally injure or kill people. However, there have been few published works on HEC around the Akagera as incidents go largely unreported except where human life has been threatened. Communities bear the costs of living with elephants but as yet receive no direct benefits. ORTPN is currently looking into mechanisms for benefit sharing with communities at ANPs boundary. Such economic incentives will be key to increasing tolerance and improving human-elephant relations, as evidenced by projects in Uganda (Archabald & Naughton-Treves, 2001) and elsewhere.

20

5.0

A Strategy for Elephant Management

This strategy has been produced from the outputs of a workshop held in Kigali in December 2006. Participants included a wide spectrum of national stakeholders with an interest in the ANP elephant population, including community leaders, NGOs, safari and tourism associations and Government departments. The workshop was organised by the WCS/ORTPN elephant project and was designed to identify key issues leading to the development of an elephant strategy for ANP. Issues and objectives for elephant management were identified through a combination of focus group exercises and facilitated discussions. At the core of the workshop was a SWOT analysis in which the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats to elephant conservation were identified. From this output the authors identified six key considerations which must be addressed in order to improve elephant conservation within and around ANP. For each consideration a conservation objective is defined. Each objective has a clearly stated rationale, and targets which define the desired outputs. A series of pragmatic activities have been identified as a means of achieving each of the conservation objectives. Thus, activities address objectives, which in turn address considerations. The strategy is designed to be implemented immediately and over the next five years, with a comprehensive review at the end of 2012. The results of management will be evaluated every 12 months and management activities will be adjusted accordingly. 5.1 Principles

In implementing this strategy the following principles should be applied: Management should be precautionary. If there is a possibility of a problem arising, and even though the system may be poorly understood, it is better to carry out a management activity than risk the consequences of a worsening problem. In selecting management options, it is better to select the one that presents the least risk (minimum regret) should the action prove to be inappropriate. Management activities should be process-based and adaptive. They should be designed so that they can be continually adjusted in response to the results of previous activities. Such activities should be incorporated into a strategy that involves continuous monitoring and evaluation of their effects. Management should be feasible, practical, economic and ethically acceptable. 5.2 Key considerations

The following key considerations are addressed by this strategy: 1. The need to strengthen current wildlife policy to address elephant conservation and wildlife conflict issues.

21

2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 5.3

The need to improve ORTPNs capacity to conserve elephants. A requirement for information on the elephant population, ecology and habitat use. A reduction in the impact of human-elephant conflict upon communities. The reduction of human-induced threats to elephant populations and their habitats. The need to engender support for elephant conservation among local communities. Specific objectives

The following specific objectives have been developed to address the above key considerations. For each objective the rationale is described, the targets are defined and a series of pragmatic activities are identified. Objective 1. The development of policies and legislation that create an enabling environment for elephant conservation in the ANP. Rationale A lack of legislation relating to the conservation of elephants was identified by workshop stakeholders. Comprehensive legislation is a pre-requisite for conservation action and is essential for the implementation of this elephant management strategy. It is important to work towards harmonization of legislative and regulatory frameworks, first within the ANP, then within Rwanda, and finally with the countries sharing the same elephant range in order to provide a consistent level of legal protection for elephants and their habitats. Legislation should encompass key elephant management issues such as illegal hunting, HEC and community-based conservation in order to enable a range of management interventions. Target ! A comprehensive and effective legislation that creates an enabling environment for elephant conservation in the ANP by 2012.

Specific activities ! ! ! ! ! ! Develop and implement a national elephant conservation strategy. Amend the Wildlife Act to include specific policies on community-based conservation and human-wildlife conflict. Develop policy enabling the distribution of revenues from ANP to local communities. Maintain commitment to the Monitoring of Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE). Cooperate with neighbouring countries, especially Tanzania and Uganda in developing a coordinated wildlife policy relating to cross boarder law enforcement. Review current international environmental conventions and ratify relevant conventions to create enabling environment for elephant conservation, including the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands; the Lusaka Agreement which provides for crossborder cooperation on illegal trade; and the Convention on Migratory Wild Animal Species.

22

Objective 2. The strengthening of the institutional and human capacity of ORTPN to enable effective elephant conservation. Rationale ANPs institutional weakness stems from a lack of financial resources. Key to the strengthening of capacity is the development of a robust funding strategy. A range of innovative PA financing mechanisms are increasingly used across Africa, including raising funds from new markets (carbon offsets or payments for ecosystem services), finding new donors (large corporations, philanthropists, tax revenue sharing), sharing costs and benefits with local stakeholders (private landholders and local communities), employing new financial tools (business planning), improving wider policy and market conditions (reforming environmentally harmful subsidies and creating positive incentives), and devolving funding and management responsibilities to NGOs, local communities, individuals or businesses (Emerton et al, 2005). These avenues should be explored and an innovative funding strategy developed. In terms of human resources, ORTPN requires sufficient skilled and wellequipped staff to carry out conservation activities. Areas of weakness identified by stakeholders included an insufficient number of field staff for patrols and monitoring, a lack of staff and resources for community conservation, a lack of a specific team working on elephant conservation and insufficient technical capacity of ORTPN staff. There have been improvements to both institutional and technical capacity within the ORTPN over the past decade through training and capacity building. However, there is still a serious need for technical training and this process should be ongoing. Targets ! ! ! Revenues for conservation activities increased through a diverse funding strategy. Number of trained staff increased within ANP. Dedicated elephant and community conservation teams established.

Specific activities ! Develop a strategy for increasing conservation funding, exploring the following options: o Carbon offsets and ecosystem services o New donors and tax revenue sharing o Cost and benefit sharing with local shareholders o Devolution of funding and management responsibility. o Investment in tourism marketing to increase tourism revenues. o Funding for specific conservation activities sourced from external donors. Increase number of trained rangers to carry out patrol and monitoring activities. Increase community conservation departments resources to enable greater interaction with communities. Establish elephant team and train members in elephant monitoring techniques, including dung surveys.

! ! !

23

! !

Train technical staff in data storage, analysis and interpretation, including Distance analysis. Increase number of vehicles available for wildlife monitoring and patrols.

Objective 3. The development of a comprehensive portfolio of elephant research and monitoring which addresses questions fundamental to elephant management. Rationale A baseline of ecological information is fundamental to the effective management of any wildlife species. The lack of information on the ANP elephant population is a severe limitation to elephant conservation. It is important for research to provide information for effective management and research topics should be selected to address key questions and provide information that is currently lacking. The following areas are considered particularly important: monitoring elephant population size, distribution and habitat use, social behaviour and migration patterns. The process of elephant population monitoring commenced in 2006 with the establishment of dung surveys to determine population size and distribution (Parker, 2006). However, this is just one element of a range of research issues identified. A comprehensive programme of research should be developed by the ORTNP in partnership with international conservation organisations. Targets ! ! ! Number, distribution and movement patterns of elephants monitored annually. Anti-poaching incidents and responses monitored and analysed monthly. Advanced research programme initiated.

Specific activities ! ! ! Establish a scientific steering committee to oversee all research activities. Identify and prioritise research activities. Determine activities to be carried out by ORTPN and identify training requirements, including: o Dung surveys every year across ANP using established MIKE methodology o Distance analysis to produce elephant population estimates with confidence intervals every 2 years. o Aerial survey of swamps in conjunction with dung surveys to produce a minimum count of elephants. o Radio-collaring of a small (3-4) sample of elephants within ANP in order to establish habitat use, seasonal movements and transboundary movements. o Mapping and monitoring habitats in which elephants are thought to have impact on vegetation using fixed point photography and tree survey plots. Develop TORs for advanced research topics, including behavioural studies, habitat use, population dynamics and genetics. Tender to conservation NGOs. Establish a 6-monthly review of elephant monitoring and research activities.

! !

24

Objective 4. The mitigation of human-elephant conflict in communities bordering ANP. Rationale The impact of elephants on the livelihoods of people living within elephant range can be severe. Elephants may damage or destroy crops, water supplies, grain stores, fences and people are sometimes injured or killed in defence of their property. Conflict creates anger towards elephants which undermines support for elephant conservation, and has lead to farmers killing elephants or turning a blind eye to poaching in retaliation for the damage they have caused. The nature of conflict and its impact upon people must be understood in order to develop an effective mitigation strategy. Reducing the impact of conflict upon the communities surrounding ANP is essential and mitigation measures must be put in place. Equally, community tolerance to conflict may be increased by offsetting costs with some form of wildlife benefits. Empowerment of communities to carry out control measures is also believed to increase both tolerance and the effectiveness of measures. Effective land-use planning may provide a long-term reduction of conflict. Agricultural improvement is also important appropriate crops can reduce the vulnerability of farmers to elephant conflict (Parker et al, 2007). Targets ! ! HEC monitoring network established. Comprehensive and diverse HEC mitigation strategy implemented.

Specific activities Establish a dedicated HEC committee to oversee the development of a conflict mitigation strategy. Implement a comprehensive conflict reporting programme using the protocol of the AfESG (Parker et al., 2007). Identify the economic and wider impacts of conflict upon local communities. Establish an HEC database, analyse data monthly and feed back information to HEC management. Conduct a complete review of appropriate HEC mitigation methods used across Africa. Establish pilot projects of appropriate HEC mitigation methods in communities worst affected by conflict. Replicate successful pilot projects and train wildlife management authorities and community members in conflict mitigation techniques. Develop and implement land use plans with stakeholders to conserve buffer zones and corridors and to separate wildlife from agriculture. Establish pilot projects that use appropriate and sustainable agricultural practices in elephant range in order to reduce farmer vulnerability to conflict.

25

Objective 5. The reduction of human disturbance upon elephant habitat Rationale Human disturbance has been identified as a major threat to elephant conservation in ANP, including both habitat destruction and illegal hunting. Much habitat destruction stems from illegal activity in the park, including tree cutting and cattle grazing. Such activities will only be curbed through effective law enforcement but until recently there has not been an adequate system to ensure patrols cover the entire park. In addition, it must be recognised that communities require access to natural resources and this may be addressed through a combination of land-use planning, grazing management and creating alternative supplies, such as community woodlots (Barnes et al., 1995). The laws governing access to resources should also be reviewed in light of community resource needs. Suitable elephant habitat may extend outside the ANP and if elephant migration patterns are identified, these should be incorporated into the land-use plan. Illegal hunting remains a rare occurrence but this too threatens the elephant population and must be tackled through effective enforcement. Target ! ! ! Illegal human activities reduced within ANP. Improved access to natural resources for communities. Connectivity between elephant habitat maintained.

Specific activities ! ! ! Ensure total patrol coverage of ANP using the patrol sector system initiated in 2006. Use patrol information to identify areas of high illegal activity. Determine which natural resources are in demand in communities bordering ANP and consider alternatives, for example: o establishing alternative grazing through cooperative grazing management; o improving grazing quality through holistic grazing management; o establishing alternative fuel wood through community woodlots and charcoal; and, o trialling fuel efficient stoves for domestic use to reduce the demand for wood. Identify elephant habitat use and migrations outside ANP through planned GPS collaring of 3-4 elephants, supported by the observations of game scouts and local communities. Incorporate corridors and habitat into land-use plan for ANP and the wider landscape.

! !

26

Objective 6. The engagement of local communities in elephant conservation

Rationale It is increasingly recognised that community support is essential to the success of wildlife conservation, both inside and outside protected areas. Community support can be fostered through the participation of local communities in wildlife management issues, through the provision of benefits derived from wildlife and through raising awareness of the wider benefits of resources. Incorporating local stakeholders as partners in planning and implementation of strategic elephant conservation can help to engender support beyond protected area boundaries particularly if there are economic incentives and direct benefits for participation. Quite clearly, if elephants do have a value to the community there will be an incentive to tolerate their presence and conserve them, as has been demonstrated through the work of community based conservation programmes across Africa. Target ! ! ! Awareness of elephant conservation issues and potential benefits increased among communities. Benefit sharing schemes initiated with select communities. Attitudes towards elephant conservation improved among communities at ANP boundary.

Specific activities Promote community outreach to raise awareness of the purpose of ANP, the various values of elephants (economic value, ecological importance and traditional beliefs) and the potential benefits to communities. Work with community organizations to disseminate information about relevant wildlife legislation to the wider public. Conduct a regional (East African) review of community-based conservation programmes providing benefits for local people. Establish a mechanism for returning a proportion of revenues from elephants to communities. Consult with communities on desired benefits. Promote community based business ventures deriving income from nonconsumptive use of elephants (e.g. ecotourism). Monitor community views and opinions (in target groups) on elephant management and conservation in order to evaluate the impacts of the current and future activities.

27

6.0

Conclusions

It is apparent that the successful management of elephants in the Akagera National Park will contribute significantly to the conservation of East African elephants. However, a series of issues must be addressed in order to improve elephant conservation within ANP. This document identifies six key considerations for the improvement of elephant conservation and presents clear objectives and activities through which the management of ANPs elephants will be strengthened. At a national level there is not adequate legislation within the Wildlife Act to enable effective conservation action. This is something that must be addressed at Ministerial level as a matter of urgency. ORTPNs capacity for elephant management is limited by low funding, a lack of specific expertise and an overall shortage of manpower. A plan for increasing funding both through Park revenues and through a diverse range of external sources must be put in place. Staff training is ongoing, but a dedicated elephant management team should be established as soon as is possible. Currently there is little ecological information regarding the elephant population. The status of the population must be rapidly established. A monitoring programme has been initiated, but this must be built upon with a programme of comprehensive research in partnership with international NGOs. Disturbance from the human population surrounding the park and in neighbouring land presents a severe threat and stems from a local requirement for natural resources from the park. Alternative resources such as fuel wood and grazing must be made available to communities, either through careful management of existing resources or through the establishment of new sources. In tandem with this, enforcement must be improved by increasing personnel and patrol coverage. Local attitudes towards elephants and conservation in general appear hostile. The underlying issues must be addressed in order to gain local support provisions should be made for alternative fuel wood and grazing, while a programme of conflict mitigation and appropriate agriculture should aim to reduce the impact of elephants upon communities. In addition, a community benefit-sharing scheme should be initiated with the aims of providing tangible and appropriate benefits to those communities at the boundary of ANP. A programme of community awareness should also be established, which highlights the benefits of the ANP and its elephants while being sensitive to the problems that communities face. In order to implement this conservation strategy, the ORTPN has recognised the need to work with other elephant range state governments and their relevant natural resource management authorities. It will also need to work with other stakeholders in elephant conservation particularly local communities living side by side with elephants, national and international NGOs, research institutions and key elements of the private sector (especially tourism). ORTPN has identified the need to carry out capacity building in order to empower

28

its staff to manage their own elephant populations for broader biodiversity conservation and sustainable development needs. In writing this Elephant Management Strategy many people and organizations were consulted and their views were taken into account. It is hoped that the adoption of this strategy will enable a more sustainable future for the elephants of ANP, and will provide a framework for the development of a national elephant strategy for Rwanda.

29

7.0

References

Afolayan, T A. & Ajayi, S.S. (1980) The influence of seasonality on the distribution of large mammals in the Yankari Game Reserve, Nigeria. African Journal of Ecology, 18:87-96. Alers, M.P.T, Blom, A., Sikubwabo Kiyengo, C., Masunda, T. & Barnes, R.F.W. 1992. Preliminary assessment of the status of the forest elephant in Zaire. African Journal of Ecology 30: 279-291. Archabald, K. & Naughton-Treves, L. (2001): Tourism revenue-sharing around national parks in western Uganda: early efforts to identify and reward local communities. Environmental Conservation 28: 135-149. Baldus, R.D. 2005. Mineral prospecting in the Selous Game Reserve and its dangers to rhino conservation. Pachyderm 38: 101-105. Barnes, R.F.W. (1983). The elephant problem in Ruaha National Park, Tanzania. Biological Conservation, 26:127-148. Barnes, R.F.W. (1996): The conflict between humans and elephants in the central African forests. Mammal Review 26: 67-80. Barnes, R.F.W., Azika, S., & Asamoah-Boateng, B. (1995) Timber, Cocoa and crop-94 raiding elephants: a preliminary study from southern Ghana. Pachyderm, 19:33-38. Barnes, R.F.W. (1996). The conflict between humans and elephants in the central African forests. Mammal Review, 26(2/3):67-80. BirdLife International 2006 BirdLife's online World Bird Database: the site for bird conservation.. Cambridge, UK: BirdLife International. Available: http://www.birdlife.org (accessed 6/4/2007) Blanc, J.J., Thouless, C.R., Hart, J.A., Dublin, H.T., Douglas-Hamilton, I., Craig, G.C. & Barnes, R.F.W. 2002. African Elephant Status Report 2002: An Update from the African Elephant Database. IUCN, Gland & Cambridge Blanc, J.J. Barnes, R.F.W. Craig, G.C. Dublin, H.T. Thouless, C.R. Douglas-Hamilton, I. & Hart, J.A. 2007. African Elephant Status Report 2007: An Update from the African Elephant Database. IUCN, Gland. Brown, G. 1989 The Economic Value of Elephants. London Environment Economics Centre Paper# 89-12

30

Cobb, S. & Western, D. 1989. The ivory trade and the future of the African elephant. Pachyderm 12: 32-37. Conard, N.J. 2003. Palaeolithic ivory sculp-tures from southwestern Germany and the origins of figurative art. Nature 426: 830-832. Courouble, M., Hurst, F. & Milliken, T. 2003. More Ivory than Elephants: domestic ivory markets in three west African countries. TRAFFIC International, Cambridge, UK. Dougall, H.W., & Sheldrick, D.L.W. (1964) The chemical composition of a day's diet of an elephant. East African Wildlife Journal, 2:51-60. Douglas-Hamilton, I. 1987. African elephants: population trends and their causes. Oryx 21: 11-24. Douglas-Hamilton, I., Michelmore, F. & Inamdar, A. 1992. African Elephant Database. UNEP, Nairobi, Kenya. Eltringham, S.K. & Malpas, R.C. 1980. The decline of elephant numbers in Rwenzori and Kabalega Falls National Parks, Uganda. African Journal of Ecology 18: 73-86. Emerton, L, Bishop, J. and Thomas, L. (2005). Sustainable Financing of Protected Areas: A global view of challenges and options. IUCN, Gland , Switzerland and Cambridge , U.K. Fay, J.M. & Agnagna, M. (1991): A population survey of African elephants Loxodonta africana cyclotis in northern Congo. Afr. J. Ecol. 29: 177-187. Grzimek, B. (1975): Animal Life Encyclopaedia Vol. 12 (III). Van Nostrad Reinhold Co, NY, USA. Haigh, J.C., Parker, I.S.C., Parkinson, D.A. & Archer, A.L. (1979) An elephant extermination. Environmental Conservation, 6(4):305-310. Hakansson, N.T. 2004. The human ecology of world systems in East Africa: the impact of the ivory trade. Human Ecology 32: 561-591. Hedges, S. (2005) Monitoring the Illegal Killing of Elephants. Dung Count Population Survey Standards for the MIKE Programme. Hoare, R. (1995). Options for the control of elephants in conflict with people. Pachyderm 19, 54-63. IUCN 2006. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. Kangwana, K. (1993) Elephant and Maasi: Conflict and Conservation in Amboseli, Kenya. Ph.D. Thesis, Cambridge University. 31

Kangwana, K. 1995. Human-elephant conflict: the challenge ahead. Pachyderm 19: 11-14. Kiiru, W. (1995) The current status of elephant-human conflict in Kenya. Pachyderm, 19:1520. Laws, R.M. (1970) Elephants as agents of habitat change in East Africa. Oikos, 21:1-15. Leader-Williams, N., & Dublin, H. 2000. Charismatic megafauna as flagship species. Pp. 53-81 in A.C. Entwistle and N. Dunstone (eds.), Priorities for the Conservation of Mammalian Biodiversity: Has the Panda Had Its Day? Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. Leuthold, W. (1977) Spatial organisation and strategy of habitat utilisation of elephants in Tsavo National Park, Kenya. Zeitschrift fur Saugetierkunde, 42:358-379. Martin, E. & Stiles, D. 2000. The Ivory Markets of Africa. Save The Elephants, Nairobi, Kenya. Martin, E. & Milliken, T. 2005. No Oasis: the Egyptian ivory trade in 2005. TRAFFIC International, Cambridge, UK. Martin, E. (2005) Northern Sudan ivory market flourishes. Pachyderm 39: 67-76. Masozera, M. (2005): Conservation of elephants in the Akagera National Park, Rwanda. Proposal to US Fish and Wildlife Service. WCS, New York. Masozera, M. (2002) Socioeconomic impact analysis of the conservation of the Nyungwe Forest Reserve, Rwanda, unpublished MSc Thesis, University of Florida, USA. Mehta, J. N. & Kellert, R. (1998): Local attitudes towards community-based conservation policy and programmes in Nepal: a case study in Makalu-Barun Conservation Area. Environmental Conservation 25: 320-333. Merz, G. & Hoppe-Dominik, B. 1991. Distribution and status of the forest elephant in the Ivory Coast, West Africa. Pachyderm 14: 22-24. Milliken, T., Pole, A. & Huongo, A. 2006. No Peace for Elephants: unregulated domestic ivory markets in Angola and Mozambique. TRAFFIC International, Cambridge, UK. Milner-Gulland, E.J. & Beddington, J.R. 1993. The exploitation of elephants for the ivory trade: an historical perspective. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, series B, 252: 29-37. Myers, N., Mittermier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G., da Fonseca, G.A.B & Kent, J. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priortities. Nature 403: 853-858. Naughton-Treves, L. 1997 Farming the forest edge: vulnerable places and people around Kibale National Park, Uganda. Geographical review 57 (1): 27-46.

32

Nchanji, A.C. & Plumptre, A.J. 2003 Seed germination and early seedling establishment of some elephant-dispersed species in Banyang-Mbo Wildlife Sanctuary, south western Cameroon. Journal of Tropical Ecology 19 (3): 229-237. Osborn, F.V. & Parker G.E. 2003 Towards an integrated approach for reducing the conflict between elephants and people: a review of current research. Oryx Vol. 37 (1): 80-84. Parker, G.E. (2006): Conservation of Elephants in the Akagera National Park, Rwanda. Establishing a Monitoring System for Elephants. Consultants Report, December 2006. Wildlife Conservation Society, New York. Parker G.E., Osborn, F.V., Hoare R.E. and Niskanen, L.S. (eds.) (2007): Human-Elephant Conflict Mitigation: A Training Course for Community-Based Approaches in Africa. Participants Manual. Elephant Pepper Development Trust, Livingstone, Zambia and IUCN/SSC AfESG, Nairobi, Kenya. Plumptre, A., Masozera, M. & Vedder, A. 2001. Impact of civil war on the conservation of protected areas in Rwanda. Washington, DC: Biodiversity Support Program. Ruggerio, R.G. & Fay, J.M. 1994 Utilisation of termitarium soils by elephants and its ecological implications. African Journal of Ecology 32 (3): 222-232. Said, M.Y., Chunge, R.N., Craig, G.C., Thouless, C.R., Barnes, R.F.W. & Dublin, H.T. 1995. African Elephant Database 1995. Occasional Paper of the IUCN Species Survival Commission No. 11. IUCN, Gland, Switzerand. Sayer, J.A., Harcourt, C.S. & Collins, N.M. 1992. The Conservation Atlas of Tropical Forests: Africa. Macmillan Publishers, Basingstoke, UK. Schweitzer, A. 1922. On the edge of the Primeval Forest. Adams & Charles Black, London, UK. Smith, R.J. & Kasiki, S. (2000): A spatial analysis of human-elephant conflict in the Tsavo ecosystem, Kenya. AfESG Human-Elephant conflict Task Force report. IUCN SSC African Elephant Specialist Group, Gland, Switzerland. Stephenson, P.J. 2005. African Elephant Update Number 5. WWF, Gland, Switzerland. Stephenson, P.J. 2004. The future for elephants in Africa. Pp 133-136 in N. Burgess, J. D'Amico Hales, E. Underwood, E. Dinerstein, D. Olson, I. Itoua, J. Schipper, T. Ricketts, and K. Newman (eds.), Terrestrial Ecoregions of Africa and Madagascar: A Conservation Assessment. Island Press, Washington DC, USA. Taylor, R., (1999) A review of problem elephant policies and management options in Southern Africa. HEC Task Force, IUCN AfESG, Nairobi. 33

Tchamba, M.N. &Mahamat, H. 1992 Effects of elephant browsing on the vegetation in Kalamoule National Park, Cameroon. Mammalia 56 (4): 533-540. Thouless, C. (1994) Conflict between humans and elephants on private land in northern Kenya. Oryx, 28, 2, p119-127. Thouless, C. (ed.) (1999). Review of African Elephant Conservation Priorities. A working document of the IUCN/SSC African Elephant Specialist Group. Second Edition. IUCN/SSC AfESG, Nairobi, Kenya. Weber, A. W., and Vedder, A. 1984. Forest conservation in Rwanda and Burundi. Swara 7:32-35. Weber, A. W. 1987. Socio-ecological factors in the conservation of afromontane forest reserves. Pages 205-229, in C. Marsh and R. Mittermeier, editors: Primate Conservation in the Tropical Rain Forest. New York: Alan R. Liss, Inc. Western, D. & Lindsay, W.K. (1984) Seasonal herd dynamics of a savanna elephant population. African Journal of Ecology, 22, 229-244. Western, D. & Maitumo, D. 2004 Woodland loss and restoration in a savanna park: a 20 year experiment. African Journal of Ecology 42 (2) 121. Williams, S.D., and P. Ntayombya. 1999. Akagera: An assessment of the biodiversity and conservation needs. Report of the Zoological Society of London MINAGRI. London. Wilkie, D.S., Sidle, J.G., Boundzanga, G.C., Blake, S. & Auzel, P. 2001. Defaunation or deforestation: commercial logging and market hunting in northern Congo. Pp. 375-399 in R. Fimbel, A. Grajal & J.C. Robinson (eds.), The Impacts of Commerical Logging on Wildlife in Tropical Forests. Columbia University Press, New York, USA. WWF 1997. Conserving Africas Elephants: Current Issues and Priorities for Action. WWF, Gland, Switzerland WWF 1998. Elephants in the Balance: Conserving Africas Elephants. WWF, Gland, Switzerland.

34

Annex 1: Institutions involved in conservation in Rwanda Institutions in conservation (An extract from Michel Masozera, 2002)
In Rwanda, conservation is a crosscutting theme; numerous government, non-government agencies and bilateral and multilateral agencies are involved in various ways in protected area management. However, the fragmentations and overlap of agency authorities have resulted in conflicts and obstruction between agencies. Government Institutions The following government institutions are involved in protected area management: Ministry of Land, Human Settlement and Environmental Protection (MINITERE) This ministry has the mandate to formulate and monitor implementation of plans that aim at preservation and protection of natural resources such as wildlife and fauna and to ensure that developmental activities are undertaken in a manner that protects the national environment. This ministry is the implementing agency of National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan. Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Tourism (MINICOM) This ministry has the mandate to oversee the management of national tourist sites, including game parks. It also has the mandate to develop, initiate and administer programs to enhance balanced and sustainable growth of domestic industry including agro-industry, cottage industries, mining, industry and tourism. Ministry of Energy, Water and Natural Resources (MINIRENA) This ministry has the mandate to formulate policies and strategies aimed at achieving appropriate management and utilisation of national resources including water. Ministry of Agriculture, Animal Resources and Forestry (MINAGRI) This Ministry has the mandate to develop and manage ecologically suitable national forestry resource plans that are integrated with other farming activities in the nation. Ministry of Local Government (MINALOC) This Ministry has the mandate to develop policies on government decentralization. Attempts to decentralize decision-making within the government have been taking place over the past year. With this move local government agencies and the local communities are likely to have greater participation in government decision-making process and activities, including those decisions affecting protected area management. Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning (MINIPLAN) This Ministry is responsible for the development of national and sectoral development plans and programmes. Also, it develops, oversees, and coordinates programmes of external cooperation and support. Office Rwandais du Tourisme et Parcs Nationaux (ORTPN) The ORTPN was established by decree in 1974 with the following responsibilities: promotion of tourism, protection of nature, scientific research and protection of sites and monuments of historical, archeological and tourist importance and implementation of biodiversity conventions and agreements. Although a wide range of Ministries are related either directly or indirectly to protected areas management, it is the Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Tourism that is more responsible because it oversees major tourist sites and national parks and protected areas are major tourist centers in Rwanda. There are however, many international organizations involved in the conservation and management of protected areas in Rwanda. These play a major role in policy advocacy, research, institutional support and capacity building.

35