Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Effects of Landscape Features on the Distribution and Sustainability of Ungulate Hunting in Northern Congo

2011; Wiley; Volume: 25; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01660.x

1523-1739

Miranda H. Mockrin, Robert F. Rockwell, Kent H. Redford, Nicholas S. Keuler,

Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies

Conservation BiologyVolume 25, Issue 3 p. 514-525 Contributed Paper Effects of Landscape Features on the Distribution and Sustainability of Ungulate Hunting in Northern Congo Efectos de las Características del Paisaje sobre la Distribución y Sustentabilidad de la Cacería de Ungulados en el Norte de Congo MIRANDA H. MOCKRIN, MIRANDA H. MOCKRIN Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology, Columbia University, 1200 Amsterdam Avenue MC 5556, New York, NY 10027, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorROBERT F. ROCKWELL, ROBERT F. ROCKWELL Division of Vertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th Street, New York, NY 10024, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorKENT H. REDFORD, KENT H. REDFORD Wildlife Conservation Society, 2300 Southern Boulevard, Bronx, NY 10460, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorNICHOLAS S. KEULER, NICHOLAS S. KEULER Department of Statistics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1300 University Avenue, Madison, WI 53706, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this author MIRANDA H. MOCKRIN, MIRANDA H. MOCKRIN Department of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology, Columbia University, 1200 Amsterdam Avenue MC 5556, New York, NY 10027, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorROBERT F. ROCKWELL, ROBERT F. ROCKWELL Division of Vertebrate Zoology, American Museum of Natural History, Central Park West at 79th Street, New York, NY 10024, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorKENT H. REDFORD, KENT H. REDFORD Wildlife Conservation Society, 2300 Southern Boulevard, Bronx, NY 10460, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorNICHOLAS S. KEULER, NICHOLAS S. KEULER Department of Statistics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1300 University Avenue, Madison, WI 53706, U.S.A.Search for more papers by this author First published: 31 March 2011 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01660.xCitations: 16 Current address: Rocky Mountain Research Station, USDA Forest Service, 2150 Centre Ave Bldg A, Fort Collins, CO 80526, email mmockrin@gmail.com Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Abstracten Abstract: Understanding the spatial dimensions of hunting and prey population dynamics is important in order to estimate the sustainability of hunting in tropical forests. We investigated how hunting offtake of vertebrates differed in mixed forest and monodominant forest (composed of Gilbertiodendron dewevrei) and over different spatial extents within the hunting catchment around the logging town of Kabo, Congo. In 9 months of recall surveys with hunters, we gathered information on over 1500 hunting trips in which ungulates were 65% of the species killed and 82% of harvested biomass. Hunters supplied information on animals killed and the hunting trip, including the area visited (i.e., hunting zone; 11 separate zones within a 506 km2 catchment or commonly hunted area). Over 65% of all animals were killed in monodominant forest, which made up 28% of the hunting catchment, and zones with small amounts of monodominant forest were used most frequently by hunters. Given the large offtakes from monodominant forests, we suggest that animal dispersal may be maintaining high, localized harvests in these areas. We believe hunters preferred to hunt in monodominant forest because the understory was accessible and that areas with small amounts of monodominant forest and large amounts of mixed forest were more productive. The variation in hunting pressure we found between and within hunting zones differs from past examinations of spatial variation in hunting offtake, where entire hunting catchments were considered population sinks and areas with low to no hunting (no-take zones) were outside hunting catchments. Future use of no-take zones to manage hunting should incorporate variability in offtake within hunting catchments. Abstractes Resumen: El entendimiento de las dimensiones espaciales de la cacería y la dinámica de la población presa es importante para estimar la sustentabilidad de la cacería en bosques tropicales. Investigamos como difirió la cacería de vertebrados en bosque mixto y en bosque monodominante (compuesto de Gilbertiodendron dewevrei) y en extensiones espaciales diferentes en la zona de cacería alrededor del pueblo maderero de Kabo, Congo. En 9 meses de entrevistas con cazadores, recolectamos información de más de 1500 viajes de cacería en los que 82% de la biomasa y 65% de las especies cazadas fueron ungulados. Los cazadores proporcionaron información sobre los animales cazados y el viaje de cacería, incluyendo el área visitada (i.e., zona de caza; 11 zonas separadas en el área común de cacería de 506 km2). Más de 65% de los animales fueron cazados en el bosque monodominante, lo que correspondió a 28% de la zona de cacería, y las zonas con superficie pequeña de bosque monodominante fueron utilizadas más frecuentemente por los cazadores. Debido a las capturas en los bosques monodominantes, sugerimos que la dispersión de animales puede estar manteniendo la captura elevada y localizada en estas áreas. Creemos que los cazadores prefirieron cazar en bosque monodominante porque el sotobosque era accesible y que las áreas con superficies pequeñas de bosque monodominante y grandes extensiones de bosque mixto fueron más productivas. La variación en la presión de cacería que encontramos entre y dentro de las zonas de cacería difiere de estudios anteriores de la variación espacial de la captura por cacería, en los que zonas de cacería completas fueron consideradas como vertederos y las áreas donde no se permitía la cacería estaban fuera de las zonas de caza. El uso futuro de zonas sin autorización para la cacería para el manejo de la caza debería incorporar la variabilidad de captura dentro de las zonas de caza. Citing Literature Supporting Information Appendix S1 Filename Description COBI_1660_sm_Supp_Fig1.pdf3.2 MB Supporting info item Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article. Volume25, Issue3June 2011Pages 514-525 RelatedInformation