Biodiversity representation in Uganda’s forest IBAs

Pain, Deborah J.; Fishpool, Lincoln; Byaruhanga, Achilles; Arinaitwe, Julius; Balmford, Andrew

doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2005.02.017

Cited by 20 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Though only bird species are considered in IBA qualification criteria, the biological rationale for IBAs includes the intention that they should also contribute to the conservation of other animal and plant taxa (Byaruhanga et al 2001; Fishpool & Evans 2001). Two recent studies attempted to quantify how well IBAs fulfill this wider conservation role in East Africa (Brooks et al 2001; Pain et al 2005). Rather than assessing individual IBAs, both studies examined how well a whole set of IBAs, taken together, represent other taxa, a property that depends as much on the dissimilarity or complementarity between members of the set as on the species richness of individual sites.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More recently, an assessment based on site inventories of a more diverse mix of five taxa was carried out for 13 mainly forest IBAs in Uganda (Pain et al 2005). The researchers used data from a major biodiversity inventory project undertaken by the National Forestry Authority, previous to 2004 the Uganda Forest Department (UFD) (Howard & Davenport 1996; Howard et al 1997, 1998, 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Nationwide Assessment of the Biodiversity Value of Uganda's Important Bird Areas Network

Tushabe

Kalema

Byaruhanga

et al. 2006

Conservation Biology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BirdLife International's Important Bird Areas (IBA) program is the most developed global system for identifying sites of conservation priority There have been few assessments, however, of the conservation value of IBAs for nonavian taxa. We combined past data with extensive new survey results for Uganda's IBAs in the most comprehensive assessment to date of the wider biodiversity value of a tropical country's IBA network. The combined data set included more than 35,000 site x species records for birds, butterflies, and woody plants at 86 Ugandan sites (23,400 km2), including 29 of the country's 30 IBAs, with data on additional taxa for many sites. Uganda's IBAs contained at least 70% of the country's butterfly and woody plant species, 86% of its dragonflies and 97% of its birds. They also included 21 of Uganda's 22 major vegetation types. For butterflies, dragonflies, and some families of plants assessed, species of high conservation concern were w'ell represented (less so for the latter). The IBAs successfully represented wider biodiversity largely because many have distinctive avifaunas and, as shown by high cross-taxon congruence in complementarity, such sites tended to be distinctive for other groups too. Cross-taxon congruence in overall species richness was weaker and mainly associated with differences in site size. When compared with alternative sets of sites selected using complementarity-based, area-based, or random site-selection algorithms, the IBA network was efficient in terms of the number of sites required to represent species but inefficient in terms of total area. This was mainly because IBA selection considers factors other than area, however which probably improves both the cost-effectiveness of the network and the persistence of represented species.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Nationwide Assessment of the Biodiversity Value of Uganda's Important Bird Areas Network

Tushabe

Kalema

Byaruhanga

et al. 2006

Conservation Biology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We considered Protected Areas and Important Bird Areas (IBAs), both of which cover c. 7% of the land surface of Africa. The former, as noted by both Brooks & Matiku (2011) and Rodrigues (2011), carry significant governmental weight despite not necessarily being identified for their conservation value, while the latter (which are of conservation value to other taxa in addition to birds - Pain et al, 2005) have no legal standing, but are identified using objective criteria that include their value for globally threatened species (Fishpool & Evans, 2001). We find that Protected Areas perform poorly at protecting the ranges of Africa's most threatened birds, covering just 13.9% on average, and even where a Protected Area overlaps part of an IBA, the part excluded from the Protected Area has higher value for these species than the protected part.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Minding the protection gap: estimates of species' range sizes and holes in the Protected Area network

Beresford

Buchanan

Donald

et al. 2011

Animal Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Further, while it comprises only 2% of the world's total surface area, Uganda has over 11% and 7% of the world's known bird and mammal species, respectively (EASD 1996). In sum, Uganda harbors some of the greatest biodiversity in Africa, and the majority is located in forested areas (Pain et al 2005). Budongo Forest Reserve, in the western region, is particularly rich in tree biodiversity (Eilu et al 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Natural Resource Use Strategies in a Forest-Adjacent Ugandan Village

Watkins

2009

Hum Ecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study documents natural resource use in a forest-adjacent western Ugandan village, and explains how what superficially appears to be a sustainable scenario is in fact quite unstable. Kibwona village is adjacent to Kasokwa Forest, comprised of a small Central Reserve owned by the National Forest Authority (NFA) and several contiguous community forests. Firewood and water collection is legal. However, empirical observations of women's daily activity budgets and details of resource acquisition show on average, women spent less than 5% of the time collecting natural resources. This is true for resources both in and out of the forest. This may be simply because firewood within household compounds, gardens and woodland-bush areas is abundant, accessible, and closer than the (also close) forest. However, two additional reasons for this behavior may, in fact, hinder long-term sustainability: (1) Many locals also plant eucalyptus trees for firewood, poles, and timber, which, although it is fast growing and makes good firewood, is water-draining and hard on the soils and thus a high cost to subsistence farmers. (2) Fears of harassment by NFA officials when collecting firewood inhibit local people from even entering the forest. Decentralized, collaborative forest management will not happen under oppressive and fear-based relationships, nor can a sustainable firewood supply be based on eucalyptus.

show abstract

Biodiversity representation in Uganda’s forest IBAs

Cited by 20 publications

References 30 publications

A Nationwide Assessment of the Biodiversity Value of Uganda's Important Bird Areas Network

A Nationwide Assessment of the Biodiversity Value of Uganda's Important Bird Areas Network

Minding the protection gap: estimates of species' range sizes and holes in the Protected Area network

Natural Resource Use Strategies in a Forest-Adjacent Ugandan Village

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About