The resurgence in African elephant (Loxodonta africana) poaching for ivory and bushmeat threatens the persistence of elephant populations, continent wide. In addressing the scourge, monitoring of illegal killings of elephants plays a key role in effectively directing counter measures. This study evaluated spatiotemporal trends and patterns in elephant poaching. Illegal killing of elephants occurred mostly along major rivers, mainly in late dry season during which period elephants were more vulnerable to illegal exploitation. However, during the wet season, retaliatory killings of "problem elephants" marauding crop fields also took place. Elephant poaching was attributed to socio-economic and ecological drivers such as high poverty levels, weak governance, high demand for elephant ivory, and low social capital. These drivers are likely to apply to other elephant range states as well. We propose that local strategies that empower communities economically, build broad-based law enforcement capacity in stakeholders to counter illegal killing of elephants, and which positively shift the risk/reward ratio for ivory poachers trade, be urgently developed and implemented.

No abstract

No abstract

A common method for determining forage production of rangelands is by clipping and weighing forage from quadrats with predetermined areas. This technique is however time consuming. Other techniques which require less time and labour include amongst others using the disk pasture meter or phytomass derived from the vegetation classification program PHYTOTAB, in conjunction with the Plant Number Scale, which is used to determine vegetation canopy cover. The phytomass determined using PHYTOTAB/Plant Number Scale and the disk pasture meter was compared to the phytomass obtained from the actual clipping and weighing of forage. Tests showed that there were indeed statistically significant differences between the mean phytomass values of the three techniques. Considerable variation was shown in the results of the disk pasture meter readings compared to the other two techniques. The phytomass values obtained using the disk pasture meter were significantly higher than the phytomass determined using both the PHYTOTAB/Plant Number Scale and the clipping and weighing techniques. Results further indicated a significant similarity in the phytomass determined using the PHYTOTAB/Plant Number Scale and the clipping and weighing technique. The results of this pilot study need further investigation.

No abstract