Observations on resource use in Mabira Forest Reserve, Uganda

Baranga, Deborah

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2028.2007.00729.x

Cited by 28 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies have measured human disturbance inside PAs (Barve et al 2005;Bleher et al 2006;Baranga 2007;Olupot et al 2009); however, most focused on ecological conservation by monitoring extraction without linking the drivers of disturbance to the productive practices of local communities. Alternatively, most social studies on conservation management rely on attitudes of local people towards PAs without linking these attitudes to measured illegal resource extraction (Infield 1988;Gillingham & Lee 1999;Mugisha 2002;Gadd 2005;Mbile et al 2005;Kideghesho et al 2007;Hartter & Goldman 2011).…”

Section: Illegal Resource Extraction In Ugandamentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial patterns of illegal resource extraction in Kibale National Park, Uganda

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYConservation policy typically excludes people from national parks and manages encroachment by law enforcement. However, local people continue to extract resources from protected areas by boundary encroachment and poaching. This paper quantifies the patterns of illegal resource extraction from Kibale National Park in Uganda, the demand for Park resources by communities bordering the Park, and examines whether designated resource access agreements reduce illegal extraction. Sections of the Park boundary were examined and human entry trails, wood extraction, livestock grazing, and animal poaching signs were quantified. Levels of illegal extraction were compared with the demand for and admitted illegal access to resources inside the Park, collected in a survey of households located near the Park. Extraction was also compared between villages with and without negotiated resources access agreements. The most wanted and extracted resource from the Park was wood for fuel and construction. Implementation of resource access agreements with local community associations was found to be an effective means of reducing illegal extraction, but only if the association members profited from the agreement.

show abstract

Section: Illegal Resource Extraction In Ugandamentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial patterns of illegal resource extraction in Kibale National Park, Uganda

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is rich in biota harbouring 47% of Uganda's total plant species including 151 species of forest birds, 2 species of diurnal forest primates, 39 species of forest swallow tail and 218 species of butterflies. Many of these are on the list of globally endangered species (Baranga 2007). According to Lung and Schaab (2004), the population density within 2 km of Mabira forest reserve in 2002 was 302 inhabitants/km 2 .…”

Section: -114 -mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to Lung and Schaab (2004), the population density within 2 km of Mabira forest reserve in 2002 was 302 inhabitants/km 2 . Within MFR, there are also 27 villages (Baranga 2007), commonly known as enclaves, where subsistence farming is the primary activity for the 3,506 families within. The most commonly grown crops are maize, cassava, bananas, sugarcane and beans.…”

Section: -114 -mentioning

confidence: 99%

Implication of forest zonation on tree species composition, diversity and structure in Mabira Forest, Uganda

Weldemariam¹,

Jakisa²,

Ahebwe³

2017

Environ. Earth Ecol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study aimed to investigate effectiveness of forest management zoning in conserving biodiversity of Mabira forest reserve. The study sites buffer, production, and strict nature reserve management zones were purposively selected. This was undertaken through investigating woody species diversity, composition and structure. A total of 60 sampling plots with a size of 20 m x10 m were used to collect vegetation data. Variables such as woody plant species identification and counts as well as diameter at breast height (DBH) of trees were done. The result depicted a total of 65 woody species; 39 in buffer, 19 in productions and 37 in strict nature reserve. Of these, only 9 trees species were found common to all zones and their Sorensen similarity coefficient was 0.2213. The population structure of the buffer and strict nature reserve zones was found to be a J -shape pattern, whereas the production zone shown an inverted J-shape pattern. Higher woody species diversity was depicted in the buffer and strict nature zones with (H'=2. 73512) and (H'=2. 68412) respectively, and lower in a production zone (H'=1. 63628). The evenness index value of a buffer zone was (J =0. 746574), strict nature (J= 0.743335) and production (J=0. 555719). The production zone had shown higher IVI values followed by buffer and strict nature reserve zone. The most important woody species identified based on their IVI value were Broussonetia papyrifera (Production), Acalypha neptunica (Buffer), Funtumia Elastica (strict nature reserve). The existing forest management is effective in conserving the biodiversity of the forest reserve. Nevertheless, the production zone was still suffering from exploitation of the surrounding community, hence serve for protecting the remaining management zones from further human interference. Further investigation is also required on the adjacent community perceptions of the forest management zoning.

show abstract

“…Raiding frequency may be influenced by the relative abundance of preferred foods in the gardens or absence of adequate foods in the forest (Tweheyo, 2003;Baranga, 2007). According to Osborn (1998), the timing of crop raids by wild animals is triggered by nutritional stress caused by a decline in the quality and nutritive value of natural forage.…”

Section: Raiding Frequency and Group Size Of Primate Crop Raidersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Forest disturbance and cropping mixtures influence crop raiding by red-tailed monkey and grey-cheeked mangabey around Mabira Forest Reserve, Uganda

Fungo¹

2013

J. Ecol. Nat. Environ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Communities around protected areas frequently complain of wild animals destroying already limited crop fields, with little or no assistance offered by conservation stewards towards the mitigation of crop raiding losses. The aim of this study was to find out whether forest disturbance gradient and crop mixtures influence the level of crop raiding by the red-tailed monkey (Cercopithecus ascanius larvatus) and the grey-cheeked mangebey (Lophocebus ugandae). The study was conducted in sample plots from seven village enclaves surrounding the Mabira Forest Reserve in central Uganda. Crop raiding was highest in the maize-cassava (Zea mays-Manihot esculenta) and least in banana-coffee (Musa sp.-Coffea sp.) cropping mixtures. Crop raiding among disturbance zones was higher in the more disturbed production zone, but did not differ between the low and moderate disturbance zones (nature reserve and recreation buffer). Results show that crop raiding by the two primate species is enhanced by forest disturbance that encourage either very limited or extensive forest disturbance. However, the gravity of crop raiding is also determined by the cropping systems practices by communities around the forest. Planting mixtures of highly susceptible crops such as maize and less susceptible ones such as coffee, as well as following recommended weeding regimes can reduce the level of raiding. Compensation schemes should be disaggregated according to disturbance (or management zones).

show abstract

Observations on resource use in Mabira Forest Reserve, Uganda

Cited by 28 publications

References 0 publications

Spatial patterns of illegal resource extraction in Kibale National Park, Uganda

Spatial patterns of illegal resource extraction in Kibale National Park, Uganda

Implication of forest zonation on tree species composition, diversity and structure in Mabira Forest, Uganda

Forest disturbance and cropping mixtures influence crop raiding by red-tailed monkey and grey-cheeked mangabey around Mabira Forest Reserve, Uganda

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About