Andrew Dunn

Are Central Africa’s Protected Areas Displacing Hundreds of Thousands of Rural Poor?

An ongoing debate over the impacts of protected areas on rural communities in central Africa has become increasingly polarized in recent years, even as definitions of displacement have shifted from outright expulsion to economic dislocation precipitated by lost access to natural resources. Although forcible removal of communities to make way for the creation of National Parks has certainly occurred in the past in some parts of the world, we contend that not a single individual has been physically removed from any of the protected areas created in central Africa over the past decade, despite claims to the contrary of hundreds of thousands of conservation refugees. Furthermore, we recognize that a scarcity of data precludes impartial evaluation of the potential impacts of economic displacement of local communities living adjacent to protected areas, and we call for a concerted effort by conservationists and the social scientists who criticize conservation efforts, in order to measure the effects of protected areas on livelihoods, and to work towards a more socially responsible conservation paradigm.

Remote sensing analysis reveals habitat, dispersal corridors and expanded distribution for the Critically Endangered Cross River gorilla Gorilla gorilla diehli

Habitat loss and fragmentation are among the major threats to wildlife populations in tropical forests. Loss of habitat reduces the carrying capacity of the landscape and fragmentation disrupts biological processes and exposes wildlife populations to the effects of small population size, such as reduction of genetic diversity and increased impact of demographic stochasticity. The Critically Endangered Cross River gorilla Gorilla gorilla diehli is threatened in particular by habitat disturbance because its population is small and it lives in an area where high human population density results in intense exploitation of natural resources. We used remotely-sensed data to assess the extent and distribution of gorilla habitat in the Cross River region and delineated potential dispersal corridors. Our analysis revealed > 8,000 km 2 of tropical forest in the study region, 2,500 km 2 of which is in or adjacent to areas occupied by gorillas. We surveyed 12 areas of forest identified as potential gorilla habitat, 10 of which yielded new records of gorillas. The new records expand the known range of the Cross River gorilla by > 50%, and support genetic analyses that suggest greater connectivity of the population than previously assumed. These findings demonstrate that considerable connected forest habitat remains and that the area could potentially support a much larger gorilla population if anthropogenic pressures such as hunting could be reduced.

Chimpanzee accumulative stone throwing

The study of the archaeological remains of fossil hominins must rely on reconstructions to elucidate the behaviour that may have resulted in particular stone tools and their accumulation. Comparatively, stone tool use among living primates has illuminated behaviours that are also amenable to archaeological examination, permitting direct observations of the behaviour leading to artefacts and their assemblages to be incorporated. Here, we describe newly discovered stone tool-use behaviour and stone accumulation sites in wild chimpanzees reminiscent of human cairns. In addition to data from 17 mid- to long-term chimpanzee research sites, we sampled a further 34 Pan troglodytes communities. We found four populations in West Africa where chimpanzees habitually bang and throw rocks against trees, or toss them into tree cavities, resulting in conspicuous stone accumulations at these sites. This represents the first record of repeated observations of individual chimpanzees exhibiting stone tool use for a purpose other than extractive foraging at what appear to be targeted trees. The ritualized behavioural display and collection of artefacts at particular locations observed in chimpanzee accumulative stone throwing may have implications for the inferences that can be drawn from archaeological stone assemblages and the origins of ritual sites.

Protected Areas in Tropical Africa: Assessing Threats and Conservation Activities

Numerous protected areas (PAs) have been created in Africa to safeguard wildlife and other natural resources. However, significant threats from anthropogenic activities and decline of wildlife populations persist, while conservation efforts in most PAs are still minimal. We assessed the impact level of the most common threats to wildlife within PAs in tropical Africa and the relationship of conservation activities with threat impact level. We collated data on 98 PAs with tropical forest cover from 15 countries across West, Central and East Africa. For this, we assembled information about local threats as well as conservation activities from published and unpublished literature, and questionnaires sent to long-term field workers. We constructed general linear models to test the significance of specific conservation activities in relation to the threat impact level. Subsistence and commercial hunting were identified as the most common direct threats to wildlife and found to be most prevalent in West and Central Africa. Agriculture and logging represented the most common indirect threats, and were most prevalent in West Africa. We found that the long-term presence of conservation activities (such as law enforcement, research and tourism) was associated with lower threat impact levels. Our results highlight deficiencies in the management effectiveness of several PAs across tropical Africa, and conclude that PA management should invest more into conservation activities with long-term duration.

Alternative Routes for a Proposed Nigerian Superhighway to Limit Damage to Rare Ecosystems and Wildlife

The Cross River State Government in Nigeria is proposing to construct a “Cross River Superhighway” that would bisect critical remaining areas of tropical rainforest in south eastern Nigeria. We offer and evaluate two alternative routes to the superhighway that would be less damaging to forests, protected areas, and biological diversity. The first alternative we identified avoids intact forests entirely while seeking to benefit agriculture and existing settlements. The second alternative also avoids intact forests while incorporating existing paved and unpaved roads to limit construction costs. As currently proposed, the superhighway would be 260 km long, would intersect 115 km of intact forests or protected areas, and would cost an estimated ∼US

Response to 'Is the Displacement of People from Parks only 'Purported' or is it Real?' (Schmidt-Soltau 2009)

2.5 billion to construct. Alternative Routes 1 and 2 are only slightly longer (∼290 and ∼353 km, respectively) and have markedly lower estimated construction costs (∼US

The Lion in West Africa Is Critically Endangered

0.92 billion). Furthermore, the alternative routes would have negligible impacts on forests and protected areas and would be better aligned to benefit local communities and agriculture. We argue that alternative routings such as those we examined here could markedly reduce the economic and environmental costs, and potentially increase the socioeconomic benefits, for the proposed Cross River Superhighway.

Lack of conservation effort rapidly increases African great ape extinction risk

The debate concerning the conservation-related displacement of people in Central Africa remains strongly polarised. In an earlier paper (Curran et al. 2009), we made a clear plea for in-depth, multi-disciplinary research to provide factual assessments of the extent of physical and economic displacements which Kai Schmidt-Soltau and colleagues have referred to in a series of papers (Schmidt-Soltau 2003, 2004, 2005a, b, Brockington 2004, Brockington and Igoe 2006, Brockington et al. 2006, Cernea and Schmidt-Soltau 2003a, b, 2006, Schmidt-Soltau and Brockington 2004, 2007). We also stressed the need to fi nd some ‘common ground’ that would allow all of us concerned with this issue to work together in the interests of both biodiversity conservation and human development. The accusation by Schmidt-Soltau (2009) that conservation organisations willfully continue to commit ‘human rights violations’ in Central Africa is, in our view, not true. We do not dispute that there are examples from around the world where conservation projects have not respected peoples’ rights in the past, and we believe that lessons have been learned and that the conservation approach has shifted accordingly. But citing