428 R. Batumike et al.
Fig. 3). All species observed in the market were traded to be consumed as food, but somemay also be used for medicinal or ritual purposes (e.g. the dwarf crocodile and servaline genet; RB, pers. obs., 2018). For 15 species, .50% (and sometimes 100%) of the ven-
dors trading them reported declines (Table 1). Vendors mentioned these species were becoming difficult to find (lower numbers offered for sale in villages or brought in by family members), and that their price at the market had in- creased in previous years. Four species commercialized in Kindu are categorized as threatened on the IUCN Red List (Table 1). All vendors were small-scale retailers (i.e. they had not hunted the animals themselves). They were mostly women aged 30–50 years, from the Kusu or Ngengele ethnic groups. Bushmeat trade was their main livelihood activity.
Discussion
Village-level consumption In the villages around Lomami National Park smaller spe- cies (,10 kg) weremostly used for household consumption whereas larger ones (. 30 kg) were mostly sold to generate income, as has been reported from other areas in DRC (e.g. Kisangani; van Vliet et al., 2015). However, the fact that some large species such as the red river hog were con- sumed at the household level suggests that they are relatively abundant in the study area. Local hunters check their traps often to avoid theft, so large animals are not eaten in house- holds because carcasses were left unattended for an extended period and are rotten. There were no major differences between ethnic groups
in the species important for household consumption, which indicates similar taste preferences. This is at variance with studies elsewhere (e.g. Bioko Island, Equatorial Guinea; Fa et al., 2002). Villagers reported declines of certain species and an in-
creased use of firearms. In the northern Republic of the Congo hunters also mentioned declines in the abundance of most species targeted for bushmeat (Mavah et al., 2018). Increased use of firearms has been reported in numerous locations in Africa, including Kisangani, northern Gabon, Equatorial Guinea and around Dja Biosphere Reserve in Cameroon (Kümpel et al., 2008; van Vliet & Nasi, 2008; van Vliet et al., 2012; Avila et al., 2019). In Kisangani, an in- crease in small diurnal monkeys in the bushmeat market over time was related to increased use of firearms (van Vliet et al., 2012). In our study area the relatively wide- spread use of firearms could explain the numerous primates observed in Kindu market. Increased use of firearms can lead to a decrease in the abundance of small diurnal mon- keys and the local depletion of some species (e.g. in Equa- torial Guinea; Kümpel et al., 2008).
Urban market sales
Species traded in Kindu included nine artiodactyls, six pri- mates, one rodent, one carnivore and one crocodile. Several studies reported mammals to be the most hunted group, with reptiles, birds and amphibians being less important (see Petrozzi et al., 2016 for a review).However, most market surveys focus on bushmeat and may overlook other markets (e.g. of tortoises mostly used for medicine or rituals; Petrozzi et al., 2016). Preliminary observations in the medicinal mar- ket of Kindu indicate that nowildlife is traded there (RB, pers. obs., 2018). We documented a total of 18 species in Kindu. Greater
numbers were reported from Kisangani and Brazzaville in the Republic of the Congo (24 and 35 species, respectively; Mbete et al., 2011; van Vliet et al., 2017). Some authors have argued that with higher anthropogenic pressures, fewer large-bodied animals but a higher number of spe- cies are sold at markets (Cowlishaw et al., 2005;Fa, 2007). Therefore, the lower species diversity observed in Kindu, together with the presence of large-bodied animals and low number of rodents, suggests a moderate anthropogenic pressure in our study area. In Kindu, the species most commonly traded were the
African brush-tailed porcupine, blue and bay duikers, red river hog, red-tailed monkey and the sitatunga. In Basan- kusu, a town in north-western DRC, the red-tailed mon- key and red river hog were two of the four most com- monly traded species (Dupain et al., 2012). In Kisangani and in Brazzaville, the blue and bay duiker and the African brush-tailed porcupine were the most commonly traded species (Mbete et al., 2011; van Vliet et al., 2012). In the Cross-Sanaga region of Nigeria and Cameroon the porcupine was also one of the most commonly traded spe- cies (Macdonald et al., 2012). In Kindu most carcasses were smoked, as has been reported elsewhere (Mbete et al., 2011; Macdonald et al., 2012; van Vliet et al., 2012). The proportion of smoked meat is often interpreted as an indication of the size of the hunting catchment area. However, the high pro- portion of smoked meat in Kindu market could also indi- cate poor transport conditions or lack of facilities to conserve meat, as reported for Kisangani (van Vliet et al., 2012). Overall, our findings suggest that in Kindu smoked bush-
meat is not a luxury product, but rather a common product sold at a low price year-round. This was in accordance with observations made in Kisangani and Bangui (van Vliet et al., 2012; Fargeot et al., 2017). In contrast, in urban Ghana, Gabon and Nigeria bushmeat is a luxury product (Ladele et al., 1996; Starkey, 2004; Cowlishaw et al., 2005). Our study approach has some limitations. Firstly, vendor
recall accuracy may have been limited, as we asked vendors to estimateweekly volumes just after the closed season. Also, vendors reported they sold the same selection of species throughout the year, which we were unable to verify.
Oryx, 2021, 55(3), 421–431 © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605319001017
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164
