Range use of two coalitions of male cheetahs, in the Thabazimbi district of the Limpopo Province, South Africa
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Range use of two coalitions of male
cheetahs, in the
Thabazimbi district of the Limpopo
Province, South Africa
Kelly Marnewick* & Deon Cilliers
De Wildt Wild Cheetah Project, De Wildt Cheetah and Wildlife Trust, P.O. Box 16, De Wildt, 0251 South Africa
Received 6 July 2005. Accepted 10 April 2006
In the Thabazimbi district, conflict and confusion have existed surrounding the status and
behaviour of cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) on wildlife ranches. A study of these cheetahs was
undertaken to understand the ranging behaviour of cheetahs outside conservation areas.
Five cheetahs were caught using double-door capture cages and fitted with radio collars; a
coalition of two males, two out of a coalition of three males and a lone male. The coalition of
two was tracked for 17 months, the three were tracked for eight months and the lone male’s
radio collar failed days after being released. For the coalition of two the 100% minimum
convex polygon (MCP) method produced a range size of 310 km2 and the 100% MCP for the
coalition of three was 190 km2, neither of these ranges were asymptotic.
Key words: Acinonyx jubatus, cheetah, minimum convex polygon, radio telemetry, range use.
INTRODUCTION the expanded ranges of cheetahs rather than low
The largest part of South Africa’s wild cheetah prey density (Caro 1994). On wildlife ranches,
population occurs outside conservation areas on prey are non-migratory and are maintained at high
privately owned cattle and wildlife ranches. Over densities, this could result in a reduced size in
the past 20 years, there has been a shift from cheetah ranges. However, in the Phinda Resource
cattle to wildlife ranching in the Limpopo Prov- Reserve, cheetahs sought out open areas in the
ince (Van der Waal & Dekker 2000). As a result woodland for hunting, thus the patchiness of the
of this change, most of the ranches have been suitable hunting habitat affected the cheetah
surrounded with game fencing and are being movement patterns (Hunter 1998). This may also
stocked with wildlife for the main purpose of sport be true on ranch lands, as the bush is often
hunting. encroached and open areas constitute a small
Little is known about the cheetah populations portion of the available habitat. It is thus expected
occurring on ranch lands in South Africa. It has
that in a woodland habitat with non-migratory, high
been suggested that cheetahs may fare better
density prey that the cheetah ranges would be
outside conservation areas due to the lack of
affected by the availability of suitable hunting
intra-guild competition (Laurenson 1995). Addi-
habitat. Additionally, the absence of lions
tionally, the prey on wildlife ranches are main-
(Panthera leo ) and spotted hyaenas (Crocuta
tained at high densities (Van der Waal & Dekker
2000) by means of supplementary feeding and crocuta ) could positively influence the survival
water provisioning. However, while ecological rate of cheetah cubs and if the threat of predation
conditions may favour cheetahs outside reserves, is removed then entire community structures may
conflict with landowners frequently occurs (Marker be altered (Durant 2000).
2002; Wilson 2006) which often results in the Range use by cheetahs on ranch lands was
persecution of cheetahs by ranchers. investigated as part of a larger study in an attempt
These factors mean that extrapolations of to understand how cheetahs behave in this
cheetah range use behaviour from studies in environment. Furthermore, an understanding of
conservation areas may be inappropriate. In the cheetah movements will allow for more effective
Serengeti the patchiness of the prey accounted for conflict resolution with the ranchers by providing
*To whom correspondence should be addressed.
accurate information on the habits of cheetahs and
E-mail: wcmp@dewildt.org.za correcting misconceptions.
South African Journal of Wildlife Research 36(2): 147–151 (October 2006)148 South African Journal of Wildlife Research Vol. 36, No. 2, October 2006
Fig. 1. The Thabazimbi district (darkly shaded area) in the Limpopo Province of South Africa. The white circle denotes
the position of the core study area.
MATERIALS AND METHODS The caught cheetahs were immobilized and
The core study area was in the Thabazimbi district fitted with standard VHF telemetry collars (Africa
in the Limpopo Province of South Africa (Fig. 1). Wildlife Tracking, Model: AWT-RCH102, weight
The district has an abundance of fenced commer- 200g). The cheetahs of each coalition were
cial wildlife and cattle ranches, with a mean size of released simultaneously at the site of capture.
2
approximately 18 km (Wilson 2006). The The cheetahs were monitored using an Aquilla
Thabazimbi district lies in the Savanna Biome of Trike microlight aircraft. The data presented here
South Africa and the main vegetation type is Mixed were collected from release until February 2005.
Bushveld (Low & Rebelo 1996). Visuals of the cheetahs were nearly always
A cheetah scent-marking post was identified on obtained and their position recorded on a GPS
the ranch Silent Valley (24°33’27.9”S; 26°39’ fitted to the aircraft. The cheetahs appeared
52.1”E). In order to trap cheetahs, a thorn tree relaxed in the presence of the aircraft and were
boma of approximately 5 m in diameter and 1.5 m observed hunting, on kills, scent marking and
in height was constructed around the scent-marking resting up.
post. The only entrance to the boma was through a
double-door capture cage. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A second capture cage was set on Atherstone The members of the coalitions were always
Collaborative Nature Reserve (24°30’49.1”S; sighted together except for the coalition of two,
26°47’28.2”E). The reserve is managed in a which split up for a period of approximately
similar manner to most wildlife ranches with 100 days. It is not known what caused the split but
hunting and live capture of wildlife taking place and Caro (1994) reported that males in the Serengeti
the reserve is not predator proofed. A goat (Capra only lost contact when pursuing a female in
hircus ) placed in a holding cage next to the trap oestrus. This coalition reunited and has remained
was used as live bait instead of the scent-marking together since.
post. No data from the single male were obtained as
In August 2003 a single male was caught on his collar stopped working within days of being
Atherstone Collaborative Nature Reserve then in fitted. He was caught four months later in a capture
September 2003, a coalition of two male cheetahs cage at a goat kraal and shot by the farmer.
was captured on Silent Valley. In June 2004, two Data were analysed with the Animal Movements
members of a coalition of three males were extension of ArcView (Hooge 1999) software
captured on Atherstone Collaborative Nature package. For the coalition of two, 54 fixes were
Reserve. obtained and the 100% minimum convex polygonMarnewick & Cilliers: Range use of two coalitions of male cheetahs in Limpopo Province 149
Fig. 2. Range use of a coalition of two and a coalition of three male cheetahs in the Thabazimbi district of the Limpopo
Province, determined using the 100% minimum convex polygon method.
(MCP) method (Jenrich & Turner 1969) produced tion of three was overlapped by 73.8% by the
2
a range size of 310 km . For the coalition of three, range of the coalition of two, while the coalition of
12 fixes were obtained and the 100% MCP was three overlapped the range of the coalition of
2
190 km (Fig. 2). two by 46.1%. This overlap did not appear to be
The software package Ranges 6 (Kenward et al. temporal. The two coalitions were only sighted in
2003) was used to determine if the cheetah ranges close proximity to each other on one occasion.
had reached asymptotes and to investigate the Cheetahs have been studied intensively in
overlap of the ranges. Asymptotic ranges were not several large conservation areas: the Serengeti
reached for either of the coalitions (Fig. 3) and ecosystem (e.g. Durant et al. 1988; Caro 1994;
these ranges are expected to increase in size with Durant 1998; Durant 2000), the Kruger National
the addition of more fixes. The range of the coali- Park (e.g. Broomhall et al. 2003; Mills et al. 2004)Marnewick & Cilliers: Range use of two coalitions of male cheetahs in Limpopo Province 151
collar and re-release cheetahs on their property. Anchorage, Alaska.
Thanks especially to Georgina and Jocelyn for HUNTER, L.T.B. 1998. The behavioural ecology of
reintroduced lions and cheetahs in the Phina
continually checking the cages even after catching Resource Reserve, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.
nothing for months! The staff of Atherstone Ph.D. thesis, University of Pretoria, Pretoria.
Collaborative Nature Reserve is thanked for their JENRICH, R.I. & TURNER, F.B. 1969. Measurement of
support, especially Conrad and Boesman, for all non-circular home range. J. Theor. Biol. 22: 227–237.
the many hours helping with setting and checking KENWARD, R.E., SOUTH, A.B. & WALLS, S.S. 2003.
Ranges 6 v1.2: for the analysis of tracking and locat-
of cages. Atherstone are also thanked for providing
ing data. Online manual. Anatrack Ltd., Wareham,
accommodation as well as free use of their landing U.K.
strip and hanger. Maartin Strauss provided help LAURENSON, M.K. 1995. Implications of high offspring
with Ranges 6. Gus Mills and Paul Funston provided mortality for cheetah population dynamics. In: A.R.E.
input throughout the study. Graham Hemson and Sinclair & P. Arcese (Eds), Serengeti II: dynamics,
Harriet Davies-Mostert provided valuable comments management and conservation of an ecosystem (pp.
385–399). The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
on the manuscript. LOW, A.B. & REBELO, A.G. 1996. Vegetation of South
Africa, Lesotho and Swaziland. Department of
REFERENCES Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Pretoria..
BOTHMA J. DU P., VAN ROOYEN, N. & VAN ROOYEN, MARKER, L.L. 2002. Aspects of cheetah Acinonyx
M.W. 2004. Using diet and plant resources to set jubatus biology, ecology and conservation strategies
willide stocking densities in African savannas. Wild. on Namibian farmlands. Ph.D. thesis, University of
Soc. Bul. 32(3): 840–851. Oxford, Oxford
BROOMHALL, L.S., MILLS, M.G.L. & DU TOIT, J.T. MILLS, M.G.L. 1998. Cheetah ecology and behaviour in
2003. Home range and habitat use by cheetahs East and South Africa. In: B.L. Penzhorn (Ed.),
(Acinonyx jubatus) in the Kruger National Park. Cheetahs as game ranch animals: proceedings of a
J. Zool. Lond. 261: 119–128. symposium on cheetahs as game ranch animals,
CARO, T.M. 1994. Cheetahs of the Serengeti Plains: Onderstepoort, 23 and 24 October 1998 (pp. 8–22).
group living in an asocial species. University of Wildlife Group of the South African Veterinary
Chicago Press, Chicago. Association, Onderstepoort.
DURANT, S.M. 1998. Competition refuges and coexis- MILLS, M.G.L., BROOMHALL, L.S. & DU TOIT, J.T.
tence: an example from Serengeti carnivores. 2004. Cheetah Acinonyx jubatus feeding ecology in
J. Anim. Ecol. 67: 370–386. the Kruger National Park and a comparison across
DURANT, S.M. 2000. Living with the enemy: avoidance African savanna habitats: is the cheetah only a
of hyenas and lions by cheetahs in the Serengeti. successful hunter on open grass plains? Wildl. Biol.
Behav. Ecol. 11(6): 624–632. 10: 177–186.
DURANT, S.M. 2000. Predator avoidance, breeding PURCHASE, G.K. & DU TOIT, J.T. 2000. The use of
experience and reproductive success in endangered space and prey by cheetahs in Matusadona National
cheetahs, Acinonyx jubatus. Anim. Behav. 60: 121– Park, Zimbabwe. S. Afr. J. Wildl. Res. 30: 139–144.
130. VAN DER WAAL, C. & DEKKER, B. 2000. Game
DURANT, S.M., CARO, T.M., COLLINS, D.A., ALAWI, ranching in the Northern Province of South Africa.
R.M. & FITZGIBBON, C.D. 1988. Migration patterns S.Afr. J. Wildl. Res. 30(4): 151–156.
of Thompson’s gazelles and cheetahs on the WILSON, K.A. 2006. Status and distribution of cheetah
Serengeti Plains. Afr. J. Ecol. 26: 257–268. outside formal conservation areas in the Thabazimbi
HOOGE, P.N. 1999. Animal movement analysis ArcView District, Limpopo province. M.Sc. dissertation, Uni-
extension. Biological Science Centre, USGS-BRD, versity of Pretoria, Pretoria.
Corresponding editor: M.G.L. MillsYou can also read
