Factors Affecting Conservation of Grevy’s zebra/Equus grevyi/ in Alledeghi-Assebot Proposed National Park, south eastern Ethiopia

doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-2272435/v1

Download PDF

Research Article

Factors Affecting Conservation of Grevy’s zebra/Equus grevyi/ in Alledeghi-Assebot Proposed National Park, south eastern Ethiopia

https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-2272435/v1

This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

This research was carried out in Alledeghi Assebot Proposed National Park, which is located in Afar region in the southeast of Ethiopia. Data were collected from March 2021 to April, 2022 using household survey, key informant interviews, field observation, and walking along transect line. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics and responses rate were compared using chi-square test. 90 % of the participants were men, and 68.7% were illiterate. The average age of the respondent was 30. Habitat degradation (94.7%), disintegrated development (92.4%) and poor law enforcement (90.7%) were the major top three conservation threat for Grevy zebra and their relative threat factor severity index are 0.38, 0.378, and 0.356, respectively. There is highly significant difference among literate and illiterate respondents (𝜒2 =51.84, df=1, p= 0.00 < 0.05). Furthermore, there is significant difference between gender of the respondents (𝜒2 =21.98, df=1, p= 0.001 < 0.05). Close monitoring of Grevy’s zebra population during prolonged droughts need to be carried out by scouts and additional water provision need to be made to ensure continued access to declining water sources and avoid impact of corridor closing due to settlement. The government and other stakeholders should give attention to address the prioritized threats.

Alledeghi-Assebot Proposed National Park

Grevy's zebra

Conservation threats

Due to poaching and several manmade effects on their habitat, wild animals are in jeopardy. The grevy zebra has had the most constrained distribution of any major African mammal (KWS, 2012). In most of their ranges, the Grevy zebra population is deteriorating. The projected threats include the spread of alien species, habitat deterioration, illegal hunting, competition with cattle for scarce resources, and drought ( Tilman et al., 2001;IUCN, 2002;Thomas et al., 2004;Brook et al., 2008;Dunn et al., 2009). On the other hand, other factors like overexploitation, climate change, and the disconnection of corridors might have speed up the rate of extinction (Diamond, 1989; Thomas et al., 2004; Brook et al., 2008; Dunn et al., 2009). As with many widely ranging species, human activities may have a substantial impact on how much space the endangered Grevy's zebra (Equus grevyi) uses. Currently limited information is available on the conservation threatening factors against Grevy zebra in protected areas of Ethiopia in general and Alledeghi Assebot Proposed National Park in particular.

The lack of such facts, which is not specific to Alledeghi - Assebot Proposed National Park, has a substantial impact on the prioritization of conservation strategy and mitigation approaches to address Grevy zebra threats in protected areas. Therefore, the objective of this study was to identify and prioritize the threats to Grevy's zebra conservation in Alledeghi-Assebot Proposed National Park.

The study area description

Alledeghi-Assebot Proposed National Park is located about 280 km away from Addis Ababa in the Ethiopian Rift Valley between latitudes of 8^o 92' and 9^o 48' and longitudes 40^o 25' and 40^o 63' (Fig. 1). Its total area is about 1,832 km² (WCMC, 1991). The prime objective was to "conserve, manage, and promote the wildlife inside it," hence its previous designation of Wildlife Reserve. Alledeghi Assebot Proposed National Park has a semi-arid climatic condition. A sizable alluvial plain dominates the area, while mountains rise along the proposed park towards the eastern border (Kassaye W. and Arega M, 2013). The location was chosen with the hope that some of them would act as migration corridors between Awash Park and the nearby plains, protecting the wildlife population of Awash National Park (Schloeder and Jacobs, 1993). Currently, there are about 13 Kebeles belonging to three Woredas, namely Amibara and Meiso, Haruka in which the Proposed National Park was found. The community surrounding the proposed national Park practice pastoral mode of life. Alledeghi-Assebot Proposed National Park is home to a number of wildlife species. The major wild animals found in the proposed park are Soemmering’s gazelle Gazella soemmeringi, Beisa oryx Oryx gazella, Gerenuk Litocranius walleri, Salt’s dikdik Madoqua saltiana, Golden jackal Canis aureus, Spotted hyena Crucuta crucuta, Aardwolf Proteles cristatus and Ostrich Struthio camelus. The area is not only serves as a habitat for wildlife but also a significant grazing area for the pastoral communities of the Afar and Issa tribe, where the presence of livestock is a sign of the owner's social status and wealth ( Borgerhoff Mulder et al., 2010).

Data Collection

Data were collected from March 2021 to April, 2022 using a household survey; key informant interviews, field observation, and walking along transect line. A household questionnaire survey was first prepared in English and then translated into Afarigna language by native language speaker and well experienced in language translation services. The questionnaire contained both closed and open ended items. The central ideas of the questions are (a) major wild animals they know (b) threats for conservation of Grevy zebra (c) possible way out to tackle conservation challenges of Grevy zebra.

Three kebeles were selected using multi-stage cluster techniques to give near, medium and distant kebeles a chance to partaking. The researcher surveyed 285 households covering accessible, medium distant, far and difficult to access Kebeles. During the preliminary survey, the distance between the respondents' households and the park's was taken into account and was divided into three categories: less than 5 km, 6–10 km, and > 10 km. After stratifying kebeles into three strata based on their distance and accessibility from headquarter of the Proposed National Park, one Kebele was selected using random sampling techniques from each strata and a total of three Kebeles were considered.

Key Informant Interview

Key informant interview was carried out using structured and semi structured questions. Participants for the interview were selected purposively based on their role and duration of stay in the area. Then a total of 12 people were participated in the interview. Furthermore, systematic field observation and recording of information regarding the threat were undertaken by using observation checklists. Management professionals from the study area, private enterprises involved in hunting and tourism (Plain Ertalle control hunting), and kebele managers were among the stakeholders.

Transect Walk

Walking along line-transect method was employed as adopted by Ratti et al., (1983), Brennan and Block (1996) for different mammals and Fanuel (2012) for zebra and other wildlife census. A total of 16 transect lines of varying lengths were established, and they were purposefully placed using GPS in the research area. At least 1500 meters separated adjacent transects. The ends of each transect were not less than 1000 m from the habitat margin, and they were all nearly parallel to one another. Transects were laid north to south direction in order to reduce impact of the sun light. The longest transect is 18 km and the shortest transect is 7 km to the direction where the site is not secure to visit due to ethnic conflicts between Afar and Isa tribe.

Roadside Walk

The Alladeghi-Assebot proposed national park is traversed by the primary highway that links Ethiopia and Djibouti. The roadside walk spanned a distance of between 12–35 kilometers. Data on road kill were collected by driving along the study site at a speed of 20–30 km/h, once a day for 2hr. Road kill locations were recorded using a GPS (Garmin GPS72H). To minimize double counting, the carcass was taken out after being recorded. A desk review was also conducted to strengthen the study's results.

Household Questionnaire Survey

The study used a cross-sectional research design. The technique made it possible to gather information from various respondents all at once (Zheng, 2015). Additionally, it helped in the gathering of data from a varied range of respondents with various traits and demographics (Jarvista, 2003).

The heads of household in the three kebeles were the basic sample units. Household sample sizes were calculated using the Yamane (1967) formula. The formula is expressed as:

n = N/1-N (e) ²

Where:

n – Sample size N – Population size/ sampling frame e – Error of prediction which was 0.05 (95%)

The three kebeles had a total of 996 households (N). Using the formula, the sample size was calculated as 996/ (1 + 996 x 0.0025) = 285. The distribution of the sample size from the selected kebeles was based on their proportional number of households.

Finally, the study household was selected from each selected kebeles by using systematic random sampling and the first household was randomly selected thereafter taking every K^th household until the desired sample size is reached (where K = N/n). Each respondent from each household was selected by lottery method.

Data analysis

Statistical package software SPSS version 26.0 was used to analyze the data. Quantitative data were presented using descriptive statistics such as percentages, frequencies and means. Chi square test was conducted to test the significant association between dependent variable and independent variables.

Mean Score of each Threat Factor (MSTF) and Relative Threat Factor Severity Index (RTFSI) were calculated as indicators of the severity of threat factors to Grevy zebra in the

Proposed National Park. MSTF and RTFSI are computed as follows:

$${MSTF}_{u}=\frac{\sum _{i=1}^{5}{i}_{t}}{n}$$

Where:

MSTF_uis Mean Score for Threat Factor u

n is number of respondents

i is score given by respondent t for threat u

$${RTFSI}_{u}=\frac{{MSTF}_{u}}{k}$$

Where:

RTFSI_u is mean score for a particular threat factor)

k (The maximum possible score, 5).

Relative threat severity index model was used to decide which of the threat factors was more serious for the conservation of Grevy zebra in the study area (Mekbeb, 2019).

Socio-demographic information of respondents

90% of the respondents from the society who completed a structured questionnaire to assess their opinions on Grevy zebra conservation threats were men, and 10% were women. The proportion of male and female respondents differs significantly (𝜒2 = 1.98, df = 1, p = 0.02 > 0.05). Similar to this, 69% of the respondents lack formal education and are illiterate, while the remainder respondents have had formal education and are literate. There is a very big disparity between the responders who are literate and those who are not (𝜒2 = 58.84, df = 1, p = 0.00 < 0.05). Nearly half (41.3 % of the total respondents were within the age bracket of 30–40 indicating that the majority of them are of productive age. There is no discernible variation in the respondents' occupations (𝜒2 = 2.45, df = 1, p = 0.23 > 0.05). Similarly, there is no noticeable variation in the number of years respondents have resided close to the study site ( 2 = 3.78, df = 1, p = 0.43 > 0.05). The average annual income of respondents was approximately 9,537 ETB (Table 1). Respondents in this study area are agro-pastoralists, with goats and sheep being the most common livestock types.

Table 1

Resource ownership of the respondents
Variables	Description	Mean	Standard Deviation
Livestock type	Cows	10.08	9.283
	Goats	12.38	11.083
	Camel	2.06	3.502
income	Annual income of respondents	9537	3621

Grevy'S Zebra Conservation Threats

The major threats and conservation challenges of Grevy's zebra are; habitat degradation (94.7%) disintegrated development (92.4%) and poor law enforcement (90.7%) respectively (Table 2).

Table 2

Response rate of target respondents towards Grevy’s zebra conservation threat
Variables	Response
Variables	Yes	No
Habitat degradation	94.7% (274)	7.6% (11)
Poaching	28% (80)	72% (205)
Drought	82.7% (236)	17.3% (49)
Disease	32.7% (93)	67.3% (192)
Predation	88% (251)	12% (34)
Roadside killing	86.7% (247)	13.3% (38)
Law enforcement	90.7% (258)	9.3% (27)
Disintegrated development	92.4% (270)	5.3% (15)
The values in the bracket indicate the number of the respondents

The top three threats to Grevy’s zebra conservation in the study area were habitat degradation,, disintegrated development practices and poor law enforcement. Habitat degradation is mainly caused by invasive plant species expansion, overgrazing, human-induced fire, and harvesting of grass by local people for different purposes.

Habitat degradation stands as a top conservation threat for Grevy's zebra with 0.36 and 0.296 mean treat factor and relative threat factor severity index (RTFSI), respectively (Table 3).

Table 3

Mean score and severity index threats to Grevy’s zebra conservation in the study area
Threat	Mean score and severity index of threats
	MSTF	RTFSI	Rank
Habitat degradation	1.8	0.38	1st
Disease	0.4	0.08	8th
Drought	1.52	0.304	4th
Poaching	0.68	0.136	7th
Predation	0.72	0.144	6th
Roadside killing	1.28	0.232	5th
Practices of disintegrated development	1.65	0.378	2nd
Law enforcement	1.64	0.356	3rd

There are exotic plant species that are competing to invade over the plain of Alledeghi. These exotic plant species include (Eucalyptus viminal’s, Eucalyptus citriodora, Eucalyptus globules, Eucalyptus saligna, Euclea racemosa, Grevillea robusta, Jacaranda mimosifolia, Jatro phacurcas, Leucaena leucocephala, Schinus molle and Sennadidy mobotrya that cause pressing problem for the Grevy’s zebra and other wildlife found in Alledghi-Assebot Proposed National Park. (Fig. 2 (a, b)) shows community harvesting of grasses and feeding competition between domestic livestock and wildlife in the protected area. There is also a practice of grassland burning to control tick which is also another contributing factor for habitat degradation in the study area (Fig. 2 (c and d)). In 2020 human induced fire was practiced. In a day more than ten thousands of domestic livestock are grazing over plain of Alledeghi (Fig. 2b).

Law enforcement is the other top threat for conservation of Grevy zebra with RTFSI of 0.356 (Table 3). Due to shortage of man power, especially in areas of law enforcement, the protected area is facing a serious problem. Inadequate manpower and luck of fund to enforce the law are the main causes.

Currently, disintegrated development has been initiated around Alledeghi-Assebot Proposed National Park that includes establishing new zonal town and opening new offices within 1 km distance from the Park. Due to expansion of newly established zonal town and kebeles the corridors that wildlife use to drink water is going to be closed. Since the corridors during day time are busy by human activity, the wildlife is forced to use night time to go to water point to drink water. This may expose wildlife to predator attack. There is conflict of interest between the conservation and development initiatives. The Federal government also uses the area for the purpose of military exercise around five times per year. Due to the gun sound pollution most of the wild animals found in the protected area are forced to move long distance. The local communities believe the foot of Grevy zebra is used to heal from epilepsy disease and this will lead to poaching of Grevy zebra.

Table 3. Mean score and severity index threats to Grevy’s zebra conservation in the study area

Table 4. Summary of conservation threats and their causes in Alledeghi-Assebot Proposed National Park

Table 4

Summary of conservation threats and their causes in Alledeghi-Assebot Proposed National Park
Conservation threats	Causes
Habitat degradation	Invasive plant species expansion, overgrazing, human induced fire and harvesting of grass
Illegal hunting/poaching	For medicinal purposes
Drought	Shortage of enough rainfall and climate change
Disease	No regular vaccination of domestic livestock
Predation	Presence of large carnivore like lion and hyena, movement of wild animal at night for water point search
Road side killing	Speedy driving, no speed breaker, no enough sign post, lack of awareness, movements and road crossing
Poor government attention	The government uses the site for military exercising, not enough workforce assigned and budget shortage
Weak law enforcement	Severe shortage of manpower, lack of integration between wildlife stakeholders and limited awareness made for local communities
Practices of Disintegrated development	Investment and settlement

The road side killing (Fig. 3 (a-c)) has become another threat for the conservation of wildlife in Alledeghi Assebot Proposed National Park. The existence of substantial hunting of wildlife by the local community is making poaching one of the major threats for conservation of wild animals in the area (Fig. 3d).

For the conservation of wildlife and the preparation of management plans for protected areas, it is essential to identify threats to conservation areas and their corresponding seriousness. Habitat degradation, poaching, drought, disease, road side killing, poor law enforcement, predation and disintegrated development were identified as a conservation threats for Grevy zebra in Alledeghi-Assebot Proposed National Park. The result gained through key informant interview that is held with community elders, pastoralist and indigenous peoples who have lived in and around the study area support the quantitative data.

Habitat Degradation

In the present study, habitat degradation has taken the top position as conservation threats of Grevy's zebra. Expansion of exotic species, overgrazing, human-caused fire, and local community use of Alledeghi plain grass for various purposes are all significant issues. From day to day, the grassland area from where Grevys zebra feeds shrinks due to the invasion of invasive species (Parthenium hysterophorus, Abutilon figarianum, Prosopis juliflora ) that are the main threats for grassland habitat where Grevy’s zebras feed and spend most of its time. By affecting native species directly and indirectly as well as having an impact on larger scale ecological patterns and processes, nonnative or alien species constitute a serious threat to protected areas, according to Cole and Landres (1996). They also contribute to habitat degradation. Human activities such as overgrazing, deforestation, bush fires, urbanization and agricultural investment are the principle causes of habitat destruction. Our research supports the findings of the Kenyan Grevy's zebra Technical Committee's assessment and ranking of the threats to the species, which places habitat loss and degradation brought on by extremely intensive livestock grazing at the top of the list (Rubenstein, 2010, Low et al. 2009). Our findings also add information on the study result of (Kebede and Moehlman 2008) in the same study site. In Ethiopia, vegetation is purposefully burnt to encourage the growth of green grass for cattle to graze on. Other significant factors contributing to forest fires in lowland areas include the use of fire as a hunting aid, tsetse fly control, and tick population management. Fires are the main method used to clear forest area for agricultural use in the highlands, where there is considerable population increase. Another reason why forest fires start is when people smoke out wild bees in order to collect honey. The ancient practice of using fire to clear land for agriculture and the rapid population development make forest fires more destructive (IFFN, 2001; Goldammer and deRonde, 2004). The direct effect of fire on forest fauna is death. Long-term and far-reaching indirect effects of fires include stress, a loss of habitat, territory, shelter, and food (Vernes, 2000). Both large and small creatures, including coyotes, white-tailed deer, mule deer, elk, bison, black bears, and moose, have died directly from fire (French and French, 1996).

Poor Law Enforcement And Its Impact

The best approach to stop additional biodiversity loss is through law enforcement, which is also required for effective management of PAs as a common good. Galindo (2009) argues that under the basic and optimal levels of management, the patrolling standards that a ranger was expected to cover were 10 km2 and 5 km2, respectively. The present mean coverage in the Alledeghi Assebot protected area is 62.9 km2, which is substantially below the established standard when taking into account the aforesaid patrolling standard. A protected area may take more of the characteristics of an open-access resource due to a breakdown in law enforcement, allowing residents of the surrounding area to gain more from wildlife resources through greater unlawful hunting (Sibanda, 1995). Studies from the past indicate that illicit hunting behavior may change in response to law enforcement initiatives. For instance, increased unlawful hunting has been related to declining animal populations as a result of ineffective law enforcement measures (Ogutu et al., 2011). On the other hand, a reduction in illegal hunting has been connected with better law enforcement measures (Leader-Williams et al., 1990; Jachmann 2008a, 2008b; Martin, 2010). Additionally, it has been observed that poaching operations decline as distance from a protected area boundary and local community profits from animal protection increase (Wilfred and MacColl, 2010; Johannesen, 2006). On the other hand, it has been noted that poaching activities intensify as the density of people inside or close to a protected area increases (Newmark, 2008; Metzger et al., 2010). However, the absence of law enforcement at the study location presents a challenge. Although it should go without saying that settlements, grazing, poaching, and other activities are banned inside the proposed Alledeghi-Assebot National Park, insufficient law enforcement has been seen to stop such behavior in this protected area during the study period. This study adds information to the earlier findings (Wale et al., 2017)

Poaching

The current study witnesses no significant impact of poaching on Grevy's zebra. The present study findings differ from a report published in Kenya, which claimed that the severe reduction of Grevy's zebra population was due to hunting for meat and medical use, the fat being used to treat ailments reported in Sibiloi, El Barta, North Horr, and South Horr (William, 2002). Poaching for bush meat is a serious problem all over Africa and endangers the survival of other wildlife (Brashares et al., 2011; MacKenzie, 2012). Increased unlawful hunting, a type of wildlife crime, frequently and results in species being overexploited to enhance short-term income while putting a natural resource in danger and destroying it for future users (Pires and Moreto, 2011).

Road Side Killing

The impact of vehicles on wildlife along the roadside puts the park's wildlife resources at danger. It has been shown that the construction of roads and other infrastructure has a detrimental effect on wildlife conservation because it isolates populations, kills more species, and destroys their habitats and connectivity (Loss et al., 2014; Dean et al., 2019). Additionally, roads change animal behavior and distribution patterns, cause more habitat disruption, and facilitate the entrance of exotic species (Fahrig and Rytwinski, 2009). Studies conducted in several parts of Ethiopia have supported our findings on how road trafficking affects the survival of numerous animal species (Sillero-Zubiri and Macdonald, 1997; Addisu A, 2008, Kiros et al., 2016 Asefa, A., Mengesha, G., and Aychew, M. 2017).

Disintegrated Development And Its Impact

The current study discovered that integrated development initiatives and wildlife conservation are having major difficulties in the studied region. There will be an increase in demand for natural resources as global population grows and economic expansion expedites. Numerous integrated conservation and development projects (ICDP) across Africa (Kiss, 1990; Hannah, 1992; Wells et al., 1992) had varying levels of success in achieving their respective conservation and development goals. According to Gibson and Marks (1995), a large number of ICDPs in Africa will fall short of their conservation objectives since the incentives provided to communities are public goods and insufficient to alter individual behavior.

Predation

The distribution, abundance, and diversity of species within ecological communities are significantly influenced by predation. Under normal circumstances, successful predation boosts the population of the predator while lowering the number of prey. The abundance of other species may then be indirectly impacted by these effects on the prey population as they may cascade throughout the biological community. Despite the fact that the number of lions has significantly increased, the present study report shows no evidence of Grevy's zebra predation in the proposed Alledeghi-Assebot National Park. Perhaps the abundance of large and medium-sized mammals in the proposed park contributed to slow down Grevy zebra predation.

The results of this study are different from those of a study carried out in Kenya, which showed that predation is a potential factor that could limit the increase of the population of Grevy's zebra within its range, particularly in protected areas (Rubenstein, 2004). The growth of the Grevy's population on Lewa Wildlife Conservancy and in community areas within the larger Samburu landscape is seriously threatened by lions and potentially hyenas (Mwololo, 2006). (King and Malleret-King, 2006)

Conclusion And Recommendation

This study found that the greatest threat to Grevy zebra conservation in Alledeghi-Assebot Proposed National Park was habitat degradation, with its underlying causes of expansion of invasive species, human-caused fire, overgrazing, and the harvesting of grass for various purposes by local communities. Ethnic conflict between the Afar and Isa tribes are another significant threat to conservation in this protected area, in addition to poor law enforcement (caused by resource shortages and the absence or inadequate implementation of enabling regulations). Another urgent issue for the area is the effect of disintegrated development on animal conservation. The findings also showed that the threatening factors had negative, irreversible effects on various Alledeghi grazing plain ecological components.

Habitat restoration through grass re-seeding and planned livestock grazing should be targeted as core habitat restoration areas in Grevy’s zebra range of Alledeghi plain. Close monitoring of Grevy’s zebra population during prolonged droughts need to be carried out by scouts and additional water provision need to be made to ensure continued access to declining water sources and avoid impact of corridor closing due to settlement. Based on the findings of this study, the following recommendations are forwarded;

Acacia oerfota and Prosopis juliflora are the main cause of bush encroachment and environmental disturbance and adversely affecting the plain dwelling animals including Grevy's zebra by shrinking habitat and decrease quantity and quality of edible grass species. Therefore, viable solutions have to be explored and urgently implemented to minimize the expansion of these species.
Disintegrated development practices have become a major threat factor for the conservation of Grevy's zebra in the site. Therefore, there is a need to promote integrated development implementation between different stakeholders working over the Proposed National Park.
Government should use free range areas rather than using protected area for military exercise
Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority should release the budget on time for Alledeghi-Assebot Proposed National Park to enable the betterment conservation and monitoring of Grevy zebra status over site.
Establishment of artificial waterholes and making the established bore wells functional is relevant to secure the survival of the species. In addition, speed break and crossing bridges should be established depending on the behaviour of the animal in selected crossing points on the highway.
There is a need to clear roadside vegetation to allow drivers to see the wildlife when they approach the road.

CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

The authors have no any conflict of interests to declare.

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

The data that support the findings of this study are available from corresponding author upon reasonable request.

FUNDING DECLARATION STATEMENT

None

AUTHORS CONTRIBUTION

Tolera Abirham: The role of Tolera Abirham was collect field data, manage data and prepare draft report.

Afework Bekele (Professor): The role of the Afework Bekele (Professor) as a main Advisor for this paper was guide the whole procedure and producing final report through doing proof reading and grammar correction.

Mesele Yihune (Associate professor): He is a co-advisor for this paper and he was field supervisor while data collection was conducted, correct picture and table that is part of this paper. Moreover, he was also part of this paper through preparing first draft of the report so that professor Afework easily produced final report.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to extend their gratitude to wardens, experts and scouts of the Alledeghi-Assebot Proposed National Park for participating in this study and filling the questionnaires and sharing their experiences.

Asefa, A. (2008). Short Communication Mountain Nyala and Ethiopian wolf mortalities in the Northern side of Bale Mountains National Park, Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Biological Sciences, 7(2).
Asefa, A., Mengesha, G., and Aychew, M. (2017). Direct human-caused wildlife mortalities in Geralle National Park, southern Ethiopia: implications for conservation. SINET: Ethiopian Journal of Science, 40(1), 42–45.
Borgerhoff Mulder, M., Fazzio, I., Irons, W., McElreath, R. L., Bowles, S., Bell, A. and Hazzah, L. (2010). Pastoralism and wealth inequality: revisiting an old question. Current Anthropology 51(1): 35–48.
Brashares, J. S., Golden, C. D., Weinbaum, K. Z., Barrett, C. B. and Okello, G. V. (2011). Economic and geographic drivers of wildlife consumption in rural Africa. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences <bi>108</bi>(34): 13931–13936.
Brennan, LA. and Block, WM. (1996). Line transects estimates of mountain quail density Journal of Wildlife Management 50: 373–377.
Brook, B. W., Sodhi, N. S. and Bradshaw, C. J. (2008). Synergies among extinction drivers under global change. Trends in ecology and evolution 23(8): 453–460.
Cole, D. N. and Landres, P. B. (1996). Threats to wilderness ecosystems: impacts and research needs. Ecological applications 6(1): 168–184.
Dean, W. R. J., Seymour, C. L., Joseph, G. S. and Foord, S. H. (2019).A review of the impacts of roads on wildlife in semi-arid regions. Diversity 11(5): 81.
Diamond, J. (1989). Overview of recent extinctions. In ‘Conservation for the Twenty-first Century’.(Eds D. Western and MC Pearl.) pp. 37–41. Wildlife Conservation International, New York Zoological Society, New York.
Dunn, R. R., Harris, N. C., Colwell, R. K., Koh, L. P. and Sodhi, N. S. (2009). The sixth mass coextinction: are most endangered species parasites and mutualists?. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences <bi>276</bi>(1670): 3037–3045.
Fahrig, Lenore, and Trina Rytwinski. “Effects of Roads on Animal Abundance: An Empirical Review and Synthesis.” Ecology and Society 14, no. 1 (2009). http://www.jstor.org/stable/26268057
French, Marilynn Gibbs; French, Steven P. (1996). Large mammal mortality in the 1988 Yellowstone fires. In: Greenlee, Jason M., ed. The ecological implications of fire in Greater Yellowstone. Proceedings, 2nd biennial conference on the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem; 1993 September 19–21; Yellowstone National Park, WY. Fairfield, WA: International Association of Wild land Fire: 113–115.
Gibson, CC. and Marks, SA. (1995). Transforming rural hunters into conservationists: An assessment of community-based wildlife management programs in Africa. World Development 23:941–957
Goldammer, J. G. and DeRonde, C. (Eds.). (2004). Wild land fire management handbook for sub-Sahara Africa.African Minds.
Hannah, L. J. (1992). African people, African parks: an evaluation of development initiatives as a means of improving protected area conservation in Africa. Conservation International.
Honey – Rosés, J ., López- García, J., Rendón- Salinas, E., Peralta-Higuera, A., And Galindo-Leal, C. (2009). To Pay or Not To Pay? Monitoring Performance and Enforcing Conditionality When Paying For Forest Conservation In Mexico. Environmental Conservation, 36 (2): 120–128. Doi: 10. 1017 / S 0376892909990063
International Forest Fire News (IFFN) (2001).Fire situation in Ethiopia.Accessed on 19/10/2008. http://wwwethiopiafiresituation.htm(will be published in IFFN No. 25, 7-12pp.).
IUCN (2002).Equids: Zebras, Asses and Horses. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge
Jachmann, H. (2008a). Illegal wildlife use and protected area management in Ghana. Biological Conservation 141(7):1906–1918
Jachmann, H. (2008b). Monitoring law-enforcement performance in nine protected areas in Ghana. Biological Conservation 141(1): 89–99.
Jarvista R. (2003). Cross-Sectional Study: Definition, Advantages, Disadvantages and Example. Lesson Transcript. Retrieved from https://study.com/academy/lesson/cross-sectional-study-definition-advantages-disadvantages-example.html
Johannesen, A. B. (2006). Designing integrated conservation and development projects (ICDPs): illegal hunting, wildlife conservation, and the welfare of the local people. Environment and Development Economics 11(2): 247–267.
Kassaye Wami and Arega Mekonnen (2013). Survey Report on Halledeghie Wildlife Reserve Boundary Assessments and Socioeconomic Data Collection for the purpose of re-demarcation. Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority (EWCA), Addis Ababa. Ethiopia. Unpublished.
Kebede F, Bekele A, Moehlman PD, Evangelista PH (2012) Endangered Grevy’s zebra in the Alledeghi Wildlife Reserve, Ethiopia: species distribution modeling for the determination of optimum habitat. Endang Species Res 17:237–244. https://doi.org/10.3354/esr00416
King, J and Malleret-King, D (Eds) (2006). The Ewaso Landscape planning workshop: January 25th-29th 2006. Impala Research Centre, Laikipia Kenya
Kiros, W., Kibrom, F., Raman, P. V., Teferi, M., Solomon, K., & Meheretu, Y. (2016). Vehicle–wild vertebrate collision mortality on the highways of Tigray, Ethiopia, implications for conservation. African Journal of Ecology, 54(4): 442–449.
Kiss A,ed.(1990). Living with Wildlife: Wildlife Resource Management withLocal Participation in Africa. Washington (DC): World Bank. Technical Paper no.130.
KWS.(2012). Conservation and Management Strategy for Grevy’s zebra (Equusgrevyi) in Kenya (2012–2016). 2 ed. Nairobi, Kenya: Kenya Wildlife Service.
Leader-Williams, N., Albon, S. D., and Berry, P. S. M. (1990). Illegal exploitation of black rhinoceros and elephant populations: patterns of decline, law enforcement and patrol effort in Luangwa Valley, Zambia. Journal of applied ecology, 1055–1087.
Loss, S. R., Will, T., and Marra, P. P. (2014). Estimation of bird-vehicle collision mortality on US roads. The Journal of Wildlife Management 78(5): 763–771.
Low, B., Sundaresan, S. R., Fischhoff, I. R., and Rubenstein, D. I. (2009).Partnering with local communities to identify conservation priorities for endangered Grevy’s zebra. Biological Conservation 142(7): 1548–1555.
MacKenzie, C. A. (2012). Trenches like fences make good neighbours: Revenue sharing around Kibale National Park, Uganda. Journal for Nature Conservation 20(2): 92–100.
Martin, E. (2010). Effective law enforcement in Ghana reduces elephant poaching and illegal ivory trade. Pachyderm 48:24–32.
Metzger, K. L., Sinclair, A. R. E., Hilborn, R., Hopcraft, J. G. C., and Mduma, S. A. (2010). Evaluating the protection of wildlife in parks: the case of African buffalo in Serengeti. Biodiversity and Conservation 19(12): 3431–3444.
Moehlman PD, Rubenstein DI and Kebede F (2008) Equus grevyi. In:IUCN Red List of Threatened Species, Version 2009.2. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org
Mwololo M.N. (2006). Lion monitoring report.Unpublished report.Lewa Wildlife Conservancy
Newmark, W. D. (2008). Isolation of African protected areas. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 6(6): 321–328.
Ogutu, J. O., Owen-Smith, N., Piepho, H. P., and Said, M. Y. (2011). Continuing wildlife population declines and range contraction in the Mara region of Kenya during 1977–2009. Journal of Zoology 285(2): 99–109.
Pires, S. F., and Moreto, W. D. (2011). Preventing wildlife crimes: Solutions that can overcome the ‘Tragedy of the Commons’. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research 17(2): 101–123.
Ratti, JT. Smith, LM. Hupp, JW. andLooke, JL. (1983). Line transects estimates of density and the winter mortality of Gray partridge. Journal of Wildlife Management.47: 1088–1096.
Rubenstein, D. I. (2004). Why are Grevy’s zebra numbers not increasing? Potential impacts of interspecific competition and predation. Paper presented at a workshop on “Grevy’s zebra Conservation”, Mpala Research Centre, Kenya, March 22–24, 2004.
Rubenstein, D. I. (2010). Ecology, social behavior, and conservation in zebras. Advances in the Study of Behavior 42: 231–258.
Schloeder, C.A. and Jacobs, M.J.M. (1993). The Awash National Park Management Plan (1993–1997). NYZS and EWCO
Sibanda, B. M. (1995). Wildlife, conservation and the Tonga in Omay.Land use policy 12(1): 69–85.
Sillero-Zubiri, C. and Macdonald, D.W. (1997). The Ethiopian wolf – Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. 123pp.
Thomas, C. D., Cameron, A., Green, R. E., Bakkenes, M., Beaumont, L. J., Collingham, Y. C., and Williams, S. E. (2004). Extinction risk from climate change. Nature 427(6970):145–148.
Tilman, D., Fargione, J., Wolff, B., D'antonio, C., Dobson, A., Howarth, R. … and Swackhamer, D.(2001). Forecasting agriculturally driven global environmental change. Science 292 (5515): 281–284.
Vernes, K. (2000). Immediate effects of fire on survivorship of the northern bettong (Bettongiatropica): an endangered Australian marsupial. Biology Conservation. 96: 305–309.
Wale, M., Kassie, A., Mulualem, G., Tesfahunegny, W., and Assefa, A. (2017). Wildlife threats and their relative severity of eastern Ethiopia protected areas. Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, 2(4): 59–67.
Wells M, Brandon K, Hannah L. (1992). People and Parks:Linking Protected Area Management with Local Communities. Washington (DC):World Bank
Wilfred, P., and MacColl, A. D. (2010). Income sources and their relation to wildlife poaching in Ugalla ecosystem, Western Tanzania. African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology 4(12): 886–896.
William, S.D. (2002). Status and action plan for Grevy’s zebra (Equusgrevyi). In Zebras, Asses and Horses (ed P.D. Moehlman). Pp.11–27. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge.
World conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC) (1991). Biodiversity guide to Ethiopia. A report for the commission of the European Communities, Cambridge.
Yemane, Taro. (1967). Statistics, An Introductory Analysis, 2nd Ed., New York: Harper and Row.
Zheng M. (2015). Conceptualization of Cross-Sectional Mixed Methods Studies in Health Science: A Methodological Review. International Journal of Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methods 3(2): 66–87.

No competing interests reported.

Download PDF

Version 1

posted

You are reading this latest preprint version

Factors Affecting Conservation of Grevy’s zebra/Equus grevyi/ in Alledeghi-Assebot Proposed National Park, south eastern Ethiopia

Status:

Version 1

Abstract

Figures

Introduction

Methods

The study area description

Data Collection

Key Informant Interview

Transect Walk

Roadside Walk

Household Questionnaire Survey

Data analysis

Results

Socio-demographic information of respondents

Grevy'S Zebra Conservation Threats

Discussion

Habitat Degradation

Poor Law Enforcement And Its Impact

Poaching

Road Side Killing

Disintegrated Development And Its Impact

Predation

Conclusion And Recommendation

Declarations

References

Additional Declarations

Status:

Version 1