APPENDIX 5:
A review of the species-, population- and
spatially-driven processes involving
the medium- to large-sized mammals.
FINAL VERSION
CONSERVATION PLANNING IN THE GREATER ADDO NATIONAL PARK
A REVIEW OF THE SPECIES-, POPULATION- AND
SPATIALLY-DRIVEN PROCESSES INVOLVING
THE MEDIUM- TO LARGE-SIZED MAMMALS
A F Boshoff, G I H Kerley, R M Cowling & S L Wilson
Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit
University of Port Elizabeth
P O Box 1600
Port Elizabeth 6000
South Africa
Report No. 34
November 2001
Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, University of Port Elizabeth
Report No. 34, November 2001
CONTENTS
Introduction ..........................................................................................................2
Processes
1. Species-driven processes ........................................................................2
2. Population-driven processes ...................................................................4
3. Spatially-driven processes ......................................................................7
Acknowledgements..............................................................................................7
References ............................................................................................................7
Tables....................................................................................................................9
Annex ...................................................................................................................13
Appendix 5, page 1
Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, University of Port Elizabeth
Report No. 34, November 2001
INTRODUCTION
The Global Environment Facility (GEF) has provided a PDF Block B grant to South
African National Parks to prepare a full proposal to the GEF for the planning and
establishment of a “greater” Addo Elephant National Park. The concept of the
Greater Addo National Park Initiative (GANP) is described in Kerley & Boshoff 1997.
Systematic conservation planning forms an integral and critical component of the
PDF B project.
The conservation planning exercise requires that the main processes that are
mediated by certain of the larger mammals, and other taxa, as well as the processes
in which some of these animals participate, be identified, and, where possible,
spatially depicted.
This report provides data and information related to the above, and should be read in
conjunction with Boshoff et al. (2001).
Taxonomic order and nomenclature (scientific and common names) of mammal
species referred to in this report follow Skinner & Smithers (1990) (Annex).
Processes
A number of processes are specific to the particular mammal species that drive these
processes. For example, brown and spotted hyaenas are critical for mediating the
process of scavenging.
Processes involving the larger mammals, and the population size targets required to
maintain certain processes, were the subject of two workshops involving scientists
from CSIR-Environmentek, the Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit (TERU) and South
African National Parks (SANP). A “processes” workshop was held at TERU on 11
September 2001, and a “targets” workshop was held, at the same venue, on 19
October 2001. Both workshops were preceded by the drafting of expert-compiled
presentations by TERU scientists. It was agreed at the initial client-consultant,
workshop, held in January 2001, that the focus of the faunal processes component
would be on the medium- to large-sized mammals.
Important mammal population processes have been identified according to three
categories:
1. Species-driven processes
Mammal-mediated processes
By maintaining a population of each mammal species that potentially occurs in the
planning domain, species-driven processes will inherently be captured. A number of
species-driven processes were identified by an expert approach, as were the
mammal species that are considered to drive each of these processes (Table 1).
South African National Parks (SANP) scientists were also consulted as part of the
expert approach.
In general, the omnivores and herbivores mediate a larger number of processes than
do the carnivores. In terms of individual species, the African elephant mediates the
largest number of processes (11 out of a possible 19), followed by the bushpig,
warthog and African buffalo (9 out of 19), and black rhinoceros, Cape mountain
zebra, Burchell’s zebra and hippopotamus (8 out of 19). In this basic analysis, the
prominent role of the megaherbivores is noteworthy, and this emphasises the need
Appendix 5, page 2
Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, University of Port Elizabeth
Report No. 34, November 2001
for populations of these species to be included in ecologically viable conservation
areas.
In terms of individual processes, nutrient dispersal is the process that is mediated by
the largest number of species (44 out of a possible 44 species), followed by seed
dispersal (32 out of 44 species) and germination facilitation (31 out of 44 species). In
each case, only a single species mediates the processes of geophagy and river bed
biopedturbation. Predation and biopedturbation through hoof action, each with 20 out
of 44 species, are also prominent species-driven processes. It is emphasised that
predation can have a twofold effect on prey species, namely on their population
dynamics and on their behaviour.
It is not practical and feasible to depict spatially the processes listed in Table 1.
These potentially occur throughout all Mammal Habitat Classes (MHCs) in the GANP
planning domain. Some, e.g. herbivory, will be catered for in the vegetation analysis,
on the assumption that appropriate herbivores are maintained. Some processes, e.g
predation and scavenging, will occur across the GANP landscapes as a function of
the presence of the predators and scavengers. This will reflect both the habitat
requirements of the predators and scavengers, as well as the distribution and
abundance of prey species. Thus, in order for these processes to operate, the entire
suite of predators and scavengers, and their prey, is required.
Biopedturbation of river beds by hippopotamus can be spatially depicted by capturing
the sections of hippopotamus habitat that have been identified. Since these are
focused on rivers this will presumably have been captured during the freshwater
processes analysis.
Bird-mediated processes
In general, the extent and distribution of processes that involve birds are too poorly
understood to be spatially depicted, or meaningfully included, in the conservation
planning analysis in the GANP planning domain. We have, however, identified a
number of processes and can only describe them to a limited extent. It must
therefore be assumed, as agreed at the initial client-consultant workshop held in
January 2001, that these processes will be captured by the vegetation and mammal
planning components.
Pollination
Occurs wherever flowering plants occur, i.e. potentially throughout the
planning domain.
Frugivory/seed dispersal
Occurs wherever there are fruiting plants, i.e. potentially throughout
the planning domain (including the dunefield).
Granivory
Potentially occurs throughout the planning domain.
Herbivory
Occurs wherever suitable plant material is available, i.e. potentially
throughout the planning domain.
Predation
Occurs wherever predatory birds and potential prey occurs, i.e.
potentially throughout the planning domain (from fiscal shrikes to
martial eagles)
Scavenging
Occurs wherever carrion becomes available – this is potentially
throughout the planning domain, but cannot be predicted.
Appendix 5, page 3
Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, University of Port Elizabeth
Report No. 34, November 2001
Reptile, amphibian and invertebrate-mediated processes
These processes are too poorly understood to be able to depict them spatially in the
conservation planning exercise in the GANP planning domain. It must therefore be
assumed that, as agreed at the initial client-consultant workshop, held in January
2001, processes involving these elements of biodiversity will be captured by
“umbrella” surrogates.
Recommendation: The full GEF project should include a component of research into
the role of the various taxa in ecologically important processes.
2. Population-driven processes
This involves demographic, genetic and evolutionary processes, and each relies on
minimum-sized populations of species to maintain them. It was agreed at the initial
client-consultant, workshop held in January 2001, that the focus of the processes
component will be on the medium- to large-sized mammals. In the case of the GANP
analysis, a key assumption regarding the modelling of mammal population processes
is that the mammals can move freely throughout the entire planning domain for the
proposed park. All species of the medium- to large-sized mammals that potentially
occur in the GANP planning domain participate in these three processes.
In terms of population processes, data must be generated to enable planners to
measure the effectiveness of the proposed “greater” Addo Elephant National Park in
achieving predetermined demographic, genetic and evolutionary targets of mediumto large sized mammals that can potentially occur in the park, to inform decisions
regarding acquisition of additional land, where necessary, to achieve these targets,
and to identify species for which targets can only be met through metapopulation
management.
A consideration for determining minimum area requirements for preserving biological
diversity is that of the estimation of minimum viable populations (MVP) for “target”
species (Wilcox 1982, Soulé 1987). The MVP is a set of specifications concerning
the size and structure of the populations comprising a species that is necessary to
provide a margin of safety from extinction. The MVP for a species can be translated
into the minimum area requirements by determining the amount and type of habitat
that will satisfy the MVP. In view of this, it is necessary for realistic estimates of the
spatial requirements/densities of each the selected species in the GANP planning
domain to be obtained.
The issue of what constitutes demographically, genetically and evolutionary viable
populations is perplexing. These concepts are currently the focus of major debates in
conservation biology and no clear “rules” have emerged yet. We have adopted a
pragmatic approach by suggesting respective figures of 50, 200 and 2000
individuals. The value of these figures is that they represent explicit attempts to
address these issues and can be modified as a better understanding develops. The
figures should not be considered to be acceptable management goals for the
conservation management of the global population of each species, but rather as
goals for populations that could be managed as parts of metapopulations.
50 individuals: This is the population size required to achieve confidence that
demographic processes are taking place. Chance demographic events leading to
extinction will be reduced, but the population will be vulnerable to genetic constraints
(Caughley 1994).
200 individuals: This is considered here as the smallest population required to reduce
inbreeding depression and genetic drift (Lacy 1997). This total population,
Appendix 5, page 4
Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, University of Port Elizabeth
Report No. 34, November 2001
approximating an effective population of 50 breeding individuals, will vary
considerably between species, depending on sex ratio, mating strategies,
reproductive output and other life history strategies. However, for most of the species
considered here these data are not available and hence this is, again, a first
approximation that can be modified as species and population specific information
becomes available.
2000 individuals: This is a first approximation for an effective population size of 500
breeding individuals, at which it is hypothesised that evolutionary genetic processes
will operate (Lacy 1997). This value may be too low (Lande 1995) and would vary
between species as a function of both the determining of effective population size as
well as the genetic dynamics (evolutionary) characteristics (e.g. mutation rate,
heterozygosity) of the species in question. Adjustment of these figures will therefore
have to await clarification of our understanding of these dynamics.
Population size targets required to maintain population processes in the GANP
planning domain.
An expert approach culminated in the decision that the baseline population size
target for all larger mammal species within the planning domain (i.e. including the 5
km buffer), and using the “intact” transformation category, is 50 individuals. It was
also decided that a retention population size target of 200 individuals will be used for
special species; these are threatened species, as listed in the South African Red
Data Book for Mammals (Smithers 1986) or species for which special conservation
attention is required. For all other species, the retention population size target will be
zero.
Species for which a population target of 2000 individuals can possibly be met by the
proposed park are identified
Species for which the target of 50 individuals could not be met by the proposed park,
and that would have to be conserved through metapopulation management, are
identified. Note that in the long-term it will be necessary to conduct metapopulation
management on all the species.
In the above analysis, the basis for estimating total potential population sizes of the
larger mammals in the GANP planning domain is a series of Mammal Habitat
Classes that in turn are based on a number of Land Classes that were delineated
through vegetation mapping by experts in the field and from satellite imagery (see
Boshoff et al. 2001). Estimates are provided for two park planning domain scenarios:
1) a slightly modified version of the park boundary proposed by Kerley & Boshoff
(1997), and
2) the planning domain in (2) above but with a buffer of approximately 5 km in the
terrestrial zone.
Estimates for (1) to (2) above are provided for two transformation categories:
(a) “Intact” habitat only.
(b) “Restorable” habitat.
(c) “Intact” and “Restorable” areas, together.
The approach and methods followed in generating potential population numbers for
the scenarios listed above are fully described by Boshoff et al. (2001).
Appendix 5, page 5
Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, University of Port Elizabeth
Report No. 34, November 2001
The estimated potential total population sizes, for each of the planning domain and
transformation scenarios, in relation to the targets mentioned above, are listed in
Table 2, and summarised in Box 1.
Box 1: Summary of the key outcomes in Table 2
Herbivores
The baseline or retention targets are potentially achievable for 21 of the 23 herbivore
species in the “Intact” habitat in the modified Kerley & Boshoff (1997) planning area.
For one species, hippopotamus, the retention target of 200 animals will not be met,
even by the restored full GANP planning domain (i.e. modified Kerley & Boshoff
(1997) area plus a 5 km buffer). The other species, black wildebeest, is marginal
within the GANP domain.
Omnivores/Carnivores
The baseline or retention targets are potentially achievable for only nine of 19
species in “Intact” habitat in the modified Kerley & Boshoff (1997) planning area. If
the “Restorable” habitat is restored, then two of the remaining 10 species (viz.
spotted hyaena and small-spotted cat) will potentially achieve the defined targets.
The baseline or retention targets are potentially achievable for only 11 of 19
omnivore/carnivore species in “Intact” habitat in the modified Kerley & Boshoff (1997)
planning area plus a 5 km buffer. This outcome will not change if the “Restorable”
habitat is restored.
For the remaining two carnivores, namely the Cape clawless otter and the spottednecked otter, potential total population sizes were estimated only for the full planning
domain (i.e. including the 5km buffer). The baseline target for the Cape clawless otter
can potentially be achieved in the modified Kerley & Boshoff (1997) planning area but
this is unlikely to be the case for the spotted-necked otter; the 5 km buffer is required
to meet the baseline target for this species.
Thus, for the carnivores, the retention targets for eight (brown hyaena, cheetah,
leopard, lion, serval, wild dog, honey badger, aardvark) of the 21 species are unlikely
to be achieved, even by the full GANP planning domain (i.e. modified Kerley &
Boshoff (1997) area plus a 5 km buffer), and metapopulation management will have
to be considered for these species.
The species for which potentially viable demographic, genetic and evolutionary
populations could possibly be achieved, by the respective area and transformation
scenarios, can be identified in Table 2.
Discussion
The total estimated abundances for many of the species in Table 2 are not going to
drive the conservation planning process, which will in reality be driven by a few
“umbrella” species.
Species that do not achieve the baseline target (50 individuals) and that could have a
disproportionate influence in determining irreplaceability values for planning units will
have to be treated as special cases in the C-Plan analysis. Given that such species
will mediate, or participate in, certain processes, it is recommended that SANP
should maintain populations in the park, even if this requires an additional investment
of resources.
Appendix 5, page 6
Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, University of Port Elizabeth
Report No. 34, November 2001
The estimates of the potential population sizes of the carnivores could be further
refined, as part of a separate study, by calculating the degree to which their food
requirements can potentially be met by the herbivore populations.
These
calculations, however, will have to take a number of variables into account, e.g.
which species occur in which habitats, seasonality, movements etc.
3. Spatially-driven processes
The following processes were identified through an expert approach:
 Lateral migration
 Altitudinal migration
 Nomadism
 Dispersal
The process workshop concluded that all of these processes would be satisfied by
including the following:
 an appropriate east-west gradient north of the Zuurberg (as drought refuges);
here it is recommended that two 20 000 ha areas be selected, one in the far west
and one in the far east, joined by a 1 km corridor and with both areas falling
within the modified Kerley & Boshoff (1997) planning domain.
 an appropriate upland-lowland gradient,
 the Zuurberg mountains,
 the dunefield habitat,
 selected N-S and E-W riverine corridors.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We express our grateful thanks to the following people for their contributions to our
thinking and to the development of this report:
 Jeanne Nel, Brian van Wilgen, Sarah Davies, Inge Kotze, (CSIR- Environmentek)
 Mike Knight and Guy Castley (South African National Parks)
 Rebecca Sims-Castley (Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, University of Port
Elizabeth)
REFERENCES
Boshoff, A.F., Kerley, G.I.H.K, Cowling, R.M. & Wilson, S.L. 2001. Conservation
planning in the Greater Addo National Park: the potential distributions and
estimated spatial requirements and population sizes of the medium- to largesized mammals. Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit (University of Port
Elizabeth), Report No. 33. 88 pp.
Caughley, G. 1994. Directions in conservation biology. Journal of Animal Ecology
63: 215-244.
Kerley, G.I.H. & Boshoff, A.F. 1997. A proposal for a Greater Addo National Park: a
regional and national conservation and development opportunity. Terrestrial
Ecology Research Unit (University of Port Elizabeth), Report No. 17. 62 pp.
Lacy, R.C. 1997. Importance of genetic variation to the viability of mammalian
populations. Journal of Mammalogy 78: 320-335.
Lande, R. 1995. Mutation and conservation. Conservation Biology 9: 782-791.
Skinner, J.D. & Smithers, R.H.N. 1990. The mammals of the southern African
subregion, University of Pretoria, Pretoria.
Smithers, R.H.N. 1986. South African Red Data Book – Terrestrial mammals. South
African National Scientific Programmes Rep. No. 125.
Appendix 5, page 7
Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, University of Port Elizabeth
Report No. 34, November 2001
Soulé, M. (ed.) 1987. Viable populations for conservation. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Wilcox, B.A. 1982. In situ conservation of genetic resources: determinants of
minimum area requirements. In: J.A. McNeely & K.R. Miller (eds). National
parks, conservation and development – The role of protected areas in
sustaining society, pp. 639-647. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington
DC.
Appendix 5, page 8
Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, University of Port Elizabeth
Report No. 34, November 2001
Table 1: Summary of processes mediated by the medium- to large-sized mammals in the GANP planning domain. (1 = process is present; blank
cell = process absent or poorly developed)
Germination
facilitation
Litter production
River beds
Geophagy
Other processes
1
Total
7
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Spotted hyaena
1
1
Cheetah
1
1
2
Leopard
1
1
1
3
Lion
1
1
1
3
Caracal
1
1
1
3
African wild cat
1
1
2
Small spotted cat
1
1
2
Porcupine
1
1
Hoof action
1
Digging
1
Dust bathing
1
Biopedturbation processes
Wallowing
1
Path opening
Nutrient dispersal
1
Seed dispersal
Vervet monkey
Scavenging
1
Predation
Chacma baboon
Mixed feeding
Browzing
Conc. grazing
Bulk grazing
Herbivory
Grazing lawns
Mammal species
Habitat architecture
processes
Plant form
Transport
processes
Trophic processes
1
Aardwolf
Brown hyaena
1
1
Serval
Bat-eared fox
Wild dog
1
1
6
1
1
7
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
Cape fox
1
1
1
1
1
Black-backed jackal
1
1
1
1
1
7
1
1
1
6
3
1
Appendix 5, page 9
1
6
1
7
Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, University of Port Elizabeth
Report No. 34, November 2001
Cape clawless otter
1
1
2
Spotted-necked otter
1
1
2
Honey badger
1
1
Aardvark
1
1
African elephant
1
Black rhinoceros
1
Cape mountain zebra
1
Burchell’s zebra
1
Bushpig
1
Warthog
Hippopotamus
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
1
1
1
1
6
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Black wildebeest
1
1
1
1
1
1
Red hartebeest
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
1
1
1
9
1
1
1
9
1
1
1
1
8
1
1
7
1
1
6
Blue duiker
1
1
1
1
1
5
Common duiker
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
6
1
1
1
1
5
Springbok
1
Klipspringer
1
Oribi
1
1
Steenbok
1
1
1
1
1
5
Grysbok
1
1
1
1
1
5
1
1
1
1
5
Grey rhebok
African buffalo
1
1
1
1
1
1
9
Kudu
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
Bushbuck
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
1
1
1
1
1
1
7
1
1
1
1
5
1
5
Eland
1
Reedbuck
1
Mountain reedbuck
TOTAL
1
4
7
10
11
20
12
1
1
32
44
1
1
1
1
10
6
9
Appendix 5, page 10
4
6
11
20
1
1
5
31
Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, University of Port Elizabeth
Report No. 34, November 2001
Table 2: Baseline (N=50) and retention (N=200) population target values, as well as estimated potential total population sizes, according to two
park planning area scenarios and two transformation categories; “Intact” and “Restorable”, for the medium- to large-sized mammals. See text for
assumptions and definitions. Values in columns 4-9 from Boshoff et al. (2001).
Species
Chacma baboon
Vervet monkey
Porcupine
Aardwolf
Brown hyaena
Spotted hyaena
Cheetah
Leopard
Lion
Caracal
African wild cat
Small spotted cat
Serval
Bat-eared fox
Wild dog
Cape fox
Black-backed jackal
Cape clawless otter
Spotted-necked otter
Honey badger
Aardvark
African elephant
Black rhinoceros
Cape mtn zebra
Special conservation status
Rare (Smithers 1986)
Rare (Smithers 1986)
Rare (Smithers 1986)
Feline aids free status
Vulnerable (Smithers 1986)
Rare (Smithers 1986)
Rare (Smithers 1986)
Endangered (Smithers 1986)
Vulnerable (Smithers 1986)
Vulnerable (Smithers 1986)
IUCN listed
Vulnerable (Smithers 1986)
Vulnerable (Smithers 1986)
Population
target (no.
animals)
Estimated number of animals
Modified Kerley & Boshoff (1997)
Modified Kerley & Boshoff (1997) area plus a 5
area
km buffer
Intact
Restorable
Total
Intact
Restorable
Total
50
50
50
200
200
50
50
200
200
50
200
200
200
50
200
50
50
3885
60440
15915
356
37
37
3
25
40
85
1696
130
36
3280
35
282
418
1504
28480
6328
134
15
17
3
10
19
36
720
83
18
2137
15
177
176
5388
88920
22242
490
52
55
6
36
58
121
2416
213
54
5416
50
458
594
5477
90504
22957
536
55
56
6
37
60
126
2554
205
49
5291
52
448
619
2233
46297
10250
227
24
28
4
16
30
59
1189
129
28
3472
25
282
287
118
57
7710
136801
33207
763
79
84
10
53
90
184
3743
334
78
8763
77
731
907
200
200
200
200
200
48
45
322
766
851
19
23
141
401
161
67
68
464
1167
1012
70
70
523
1250
1083
31
38
248
677
245
101
108
771
1927
1328
Appendix 5, page 11
Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, University of Port Elizabeth
Burchell’s zebra
Bushpig
Warthog
Hippopotamus
Black wildebeest
Red hartebeest
Blue duiker
Common duiker
Springbok
Klipspringer
Oribi
Steenbok
Grysbok
Grey rhebok
Cape buffalo
Kudu
Bushbuck
Eland
Reedbuck
Mountain reedbuck
Rare (Smithers 1986)
Rare (Smithers 1986)
Vulnerable (Smithers 1986)
Disease free status
Report No. 34, November 2001
50
50
50
200
50
50
200
50
50
50
200
50
50
50
200
50
50
50
50
50
996
3316
1325
27
24
874
24849
14479
1666
3574
702
7967
21964
2122
582
2023
7684
340
103
1528
805
958
820
29
8
460
7824
6843
1022
1293
510
6213
3693
88
414
1120
2965
84
128
423
Appendix 5, page 12
1801
4274
2145
55
32
1334
32673
21322
2689
4867
1213
14181
25657
2210
996
3143
10649
424
231
1951
1724
4845
2206
32
43
1369
36277
21777
2929
4836
1234
13288
28569
2393
1058
3277
11577
470
219
1980
1324
1557
1362
33
21
755
12352
11204
1815
1954
929
9958
6296
106
732
1892
5074
144
241
639
3048
6402
3569
64
64
2124
48628
32981
4744
6790
2162
23246
34865
2499
1789
5169
16652
614
460
2618
Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, University of Port Elizabeth
Report No. 34, November 2001
ANNEX
Scientific and common names of the medium- to large-sized mammals that
potentially occur in the GANP planning domain.
Scientific name
Papio cynocephalus
Cercopithecus aethiops
Hystrix africaeaustralis
Proteles cristatus
Hyaenna brunnea
Crocuta crocuta
Acinonyx jubatus
Panthera pardus
Panthera leo
Felis caracal
Felis lybica
Felis nigripes
Felis serval
Otocyon megalotis
Lycaon pictus
Vulpes chama
Canis mesomelas
Aonyx capensis
Lutra maculicollis
Mellivora capensis
Orycteropus afer
Loxodonta africana
Diceros bicornis
Equus zebra zebra
Equus burchelli
Potamochoerus porcus
Phacochoerus aethiopicus
Hippopotamus amphibius
Connochaetes gnou
Alcelaphus buselaphus
Philantomba monticola
Sylvicapra grimmia
Antidorcas marsupialis
Oreotragus oreotragus
Ourebia ourebi
Raphicerus campestris
Raphicerus melanotis
Pelea capreolus
Syncerus caffer
Tragelaphus strepsiceros
Tragelaphus scriptus
Taurotragus oryx
Redunca arundinum
Redunca fulvorufula
Common name
Chacma baboon
Vervet monkey
Porcupine
Aardwolf
Brown hyaena
Spotted hyaena
Cheetah
Leopard
Lion
Caracal
African wild cat
Small spotted cat
Serval
Bat-eared fox
Wild dog
Cape fox
Black-backed jackal
Cape clawless otter
Spotted-necked otter
Honey badger
Aardvark
African elephant
Black rhinoceros
Cape mountain zebra
Burchell’s zebra/Quagga
Bushpig
Warthog
Hippopotamus
Black wildebeest
Red hartebeest
Blue duiker
Common duiker
Springbok
Klipspringer
Oribi
Steenbok
Grysbok
Grey rhebok
African buffalo
Kudu
Bushbuck
Eland
Reedbuck
Mountain reedbuck
Appendix 5, page 13
Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, University of Port Elizabeth
Report No. 34, November 2001
TERRESTRIAL ECOLOGY RESEARCH UNIT (TERU) REPORT SERIES
*Contract report (confidential)
Geach, B. 1995. Socio-economic and environmental aspects of land-use in the Sundays River
Valley: pastoralism vs conservation/ecotourism. TERU Report 1: 57 pp.
Haschick, S.L. & Kerley, G.I.H. 1995. Land-use and proposed conservation of Valley
Bushveld to the north-east of the Swartkops River. TERU Report 2: 18 pp.
Kerley, G.I.H. 1995. The terrestrial vertebrate fauna of Rein's Nature Reserve: inventories and
management recommendations. TERU Report 3: 19 pp.*
Kerley, G.I.H. 1995. The mammals of Van der Kemp's Kloof. TERU Report 4: 6 pp.*
Simelane, T.S. 1996. A preliminary survey of the traditional natural resources in the Addo
Elephant National Park. TERU Report 5: 12 pp.
Vial, C. 1996. Levels of expectation, requirements and satisfaction of visitors viewing wildlife
at Addo Elephant National Park, South Africa. TERU Report 6: 22 pp.
Kerley, G.I.H & Watson, J.J. 1996. Quail as a renewable resource in the Eastern Cape. TERU
Report 7: 13 pp.
Boshoff, A.F. 1996. Roberts' Birds of Southern Africa : the "Millennium Edition", a synthesis
of opinions on options for a seventh edition. TERU Report 8: 37 pp.*
Boshoff, A.F. 1997. A survey of the birds of the farm " New Bradford" and surrounding areas,
with notes on the medium to large mammal fauna. TERU Report 9: 25 pp.*
Boshoff, A.F & Kerley, G.I.H. 1997. Towards a conservation policy for the Eastern Cape: the
function and management of protected areas. TERU Report 10: 8 pp.
Boshoff, A.F. & Kerley, G.I.H. 1997. A habitat suitability assessment for the introduction of
elephant to the Sante Sana Game Reserve, Graaff-Reinet district. TERU Report 11: 15 pp.*
Kerley, G.I.H. & Boshoff, A.F. 1997. A habitat suitability assessment for the introduction of
black rhinoceros to the Sante Sana Game Reserve, Graaff-Reinet district. TERU Report 12:
16 pp.*
Boshoff, A.F. & Kerley, G.I.H. 1997. Apieskloof Wildlife Area : Habitats, species and landuse options. TERU Report 13: 17 pp.*
Kerley, G.I.H. & Boshoff, A.F. 1997. A habitat suitability assessment for the introduction of
African buffalo to the Sante Sana Game Reserve, Graaff-Reinet district. TERU Report 14:
16 pp.*
Kerley, G.I.H. & Boshoff, A.F. 1997. Proceedings of a strategic planning workshop for Sante
Sana Game Reserve. TERU Report 15: 20 pp.*
Henley, S. 1997. On the proposed reintroduction of serval (Felis serval) into the Great Fish
River Reserve, Eastern Cape. TERU Report 16: 9 pp.
Kerley, GIH & Boshoff, AF. 1997. A proposal for a Greater Addo National Park: a regional
and national conservation and development opportunity. TERU Report 17: 62 pp.
Boshoff, A.F. & Kerley, G.I.H. 1997. Comparison of alternative Eskom 400kv transmission
line routes from Wolwefontein to Grassridge: potential effects on birds and mammals.
TERU Report 18: 14 pp.*
Boshoff, A.F. & Kerley, G.I.H. 1997. Breeding and production options for a founder herd of
African buffalo in the Apieskloof Wildlife Area. TERU Report 19: 16 pp.*
Boshoff, A.F. 1998. The predicted impacts of a proposed regional waste-water disposal
scheme on the avifauna of the upper Blesbokspruit wetland (including the Ramsar site),
Gauteng Province. TERU Report 20: 16 pp.*
Boshoff, A.F., Kerley, G.I.H. & Geach, B. 1998. A biophysical survey, ecotourism
development feasibility study and site assessment for Tamboekiesvlei, Mpofu District,
Eastern Cape Province. TERU Report 21: 64 pp.*
Boshoff, A.F. 1998. The Airports Company South Africa-Endangered Wildlife Trust strategic
partnership: a project plan for a birdstrike hazard reduction programme. TERU Report 22:
48 pp.*
Boshoff, A.F. 1998. The predicted ecological impact of the termination of the water supply to
the Rondebult Bird Sanctuary, Germiston District, Gauteng Province. TERU Report 23: 7
pp.*
Appendix 5, page 14
Terrestrial Ecology Research Unit, University of Port Elizabeth
Report No. 34, November 2001
Boshoff, A.F. & Sigwela, A. 1998. The predicted impacts of the construction and operation of
the proposed Coega harbour on the birds of the Coega Estuary and Jahleel Island. TERU
Report 24: 11 pp.*
Boshoff, A.F. & Kerley, G.I.H. (eds). 1999. Proceedings of a Greater Addo National Park
Stakeholders Workshop: University of Port Elizabeth, 22-23 February 1999. TERU Report
25: 58 pp.
Boshoff, A.F. & Kerley, G.I.H. 1999. Conservation planning in the Cape Floristic Region:
Distribution, conservation status and spatial population requirements of the medium- to
large-sized mammals. TERU Report 26: 141 pp.*
Boshoff, A.F., Cowling, R.M. & Kerley, G.I.H. 2000. The Baviaanskloof Conservation Area:
A conservation and tourism development priority. TERU Report 27: 35 pp.
Henley, S. 2000. The Baviaanskloof Conservation Area: Opportunities for the conservation of
Cape mountain zebra and leopard. TERU Report 28: 14 pp.*
Cowling, R.M. & Heijnis, C.E. 2000. An assessment of the conservation value of potential
World Heritage Sites in the Cape Floral Kingdom. TERU Report 29: 48 pp.
Boshoff, A.F. 2000. The potential impacts of a proposed Eskom powerline, between Poseidon
and Grassridge sub-stations, on the terrestrial fauna (excluding the avifauna). TERU Report
30: 31 pp.*
Boshoff, A.F. 2000. The suitability of the Keurbooms River Mouth as a possible site for the
construction of a small boat harbour at Plettenberg Bay. TERU Report 31: 8 pp.*
Pressey, R.L. & Cowling, R.M. 2001. Systematic conservation planning for the Subtropical
Thicket Ecosystem Planning (STEP) Project: a conceptual and methodological basis. TERU
Report 32: 57 pp.*
Boshoff, A.F., Kerley, G.I.H., Cowling, R.M. & Wilson, S.L. 2001. Conservation planning in
the Greater Addo National Park: The potential distributions, and estimated spatial
requirements and population sizes, of the medium- to large-sized mammals. TERU Report
33: 87 pp.
Appendix 5, page 15