The impacts of human activity on mammals in a community forest near the Dja Biosphere Reserve in Cameroon


SOPHI E J ANE TUDGE,STEPHANIE BRITT AIN,FABRICE KEN T ATCHI ME CÉDRI C THIB A UT KAMOGNE TAGNE and J . MARCUS ROWC L IFFE


Abstract Human activity in African tropical rainforests continues to threaten wild mammals. Many rural commu- nities are dependent on hunting, yet there is a widespread lack of baseline data on ecology and the sustainability of hunting. We investigated the impacts of human activity on mammal species composition and distributions within a community forest surrounding a village in the buffer zone of the Dja Biosphere Reserve in south-east Cameroon. We conducted a camera-trap survey in August–November 2017 and detected 24 mammal species, including Critically Endangered western lowland gorilla Gorilla gorilla gorilla, Endangered central African chimpanzee Pan troglodytes troglodytes and Endangered tree pangolin Phataginus tricus- pis. We used occupancy analysis to explore relationships between indicators of human activity (distance to a road and the Reserve), habitat quality (distance to the river and tree cover) and the distributions of species. We found that the local distribution of threatened mammals was not apparently limited by human activity, and proximity to the road did not negatively influence occupancy for any spe- cies. However, most of the Reserve’s large species were not detected, including the African forest elephant Loxodonta cyclotis and the largest ungulates, and the occupancy of two species commonly hunted for wild meat was positively correlated with distance from the village, indicating hunting may be unsustainable. Our results show that the community forest provides habitat for threatened species outside the Reserve and in close proximity to people. However, effective conservation management will require continued monitor- ing and research to determine whether current rates of hunting are sustainable.


SOPHIE JANE TUDGE (Corresponding author, orcid.org/0000-0002-0447-9448,


sophietudge1@hotmail.com) Department of Life Science, Imperial College London, Silwood Park, Buckhurst Road, Ascot, SL5 7PY, UK


STEPHANIE BRITTAIN ( orcid.org/0000-0002-7865-0391) Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK


FABRICE KENTATCHIME Central African Biodiversity Alliance, Yaoundé, Cameroon


CÉDRIC THIBAUT KAMOGNE TAGNE Higher Institute of Environmental Sciences– International Bilingual Academy of Yaoundé Sup, Yaoundé, Cameroon


J. MARCUS ROWCLIFFE ( orcid.org/0000-0002-4286-6887) Institute of Zoology, Zoological Society of London, London, UK


Received 29 October 2020. Revision requested 28 January 2021. Accepted 26 May 2021. First published online 3 February 2022.


Keywords Camera trapping, community forest, conserva- tion, human activity, hunting sustainability, mammals, occupancy analysis, tropical rainforest


Supplementary material for this article is available at doi.org/10.1017/S0030605321000806


Introduction


extinction (Hoffmann et al., 2011). Tropical rainforests are species-rich, globally important ecosystems, but overexploi- tation and habitat loss pose major threats to their biodi- versity (Butchart et al., 2010; Rosa et al., 2016). With the continued rise in the human population and consequent de- mand for forest products, rainforest species are likely to face increasing pressure (Fa et al., 2003; United Nations, 2019). Consequently, wemust ensure their adequate conservation, both within and outside protected areas. Central Africa contains the second largest area of tropical


W


rainforest (Potapov et al., 2012), home to a unique range of biodiversity. In rural communities, subsistence hunting of rainforest mammals for food and commercial hunting for livelihoods remain important (Nasi et al., 2011; Ziegler et al., 2016). Additionally, some of the most threatened mammals have high economic value and are subject to hunting for illegal trade (Wasser et al., 2015; Ingram et al., 2018). The scale of commercial hunting in forests has increased for several reasons, including increased urban demand for wild meat (bushmeat), human population density and access via roads (e.g. Robinson & Bennett, 2004; Ziegler et al., 2016; Fa et al., 2019). Overharvesting of mammals is of concern as it leads to


depletion and to changes in forest structure and ecosystem functioning, such as reduced seedling establishment and tree regeneration (Wang et al., 2007; Rosin & Poulsen, 2016). In turn, a reduction in available protein can result in human malnutrition and food insecurity (Nasi et al., 2011). Despite challenges in measuring the sustainability of offtake, simple sustainability indicators can be useful (Milner-Gulland & Rowcliffe, 2007). For example, hunter selectivity and intrinsic demography make larger species more vulnerable to overharvesting (Peres, 2000; Cowlishaw


This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Oryx, 2022, 56(6), 947–955 © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605321000806


ild mammals are facing an uncertain future as a result of human activity, with c. 20%threatened with


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