Elephant Database
African Elephant Specialist Group

Uganda, 2002

All Years for Uganda: 201620132007200219981995

2002 Summary Totals for Uganda

Data Category Definite Probable Possible Speculative
Aerial or Ground Total Counts1,690000
Informed Guesses3740210200
Other Guesses000260
Total2,0640210460

No changes between current and previous report.

Uganda : Elephant Estimates

Survey Details2 Number of Elephants Area Map Location
Input ZoneTypeReliab.YearEstimate95% C.L. SourcePFS3 (km²) Lon. Lat.
Bugungu Wildlife ReserveAT3A20020Rwetsiba et al., 20022490 31.6E 1.9N
Bwindi Impenetrable Forest National ParkIG3D200230McNeilage pers. comm., 20032336 29.7E 1.0S
Karuma Wildlife ReserveAT2A20020Rwetsiba et al., 20022415 32.0E 2.0N
Kibale National ParkIG3D1999100 200*Naughton et al., 19992946 30.4E 0.5N
Kidepo Valley National ParkIG3D2000374Aleper pers. comm., 200221,416 33.8E 3.8N
Murchison Falls National ParkAT3A2002692Rwetsiba et al., 200214,064 31.8E 2.2N
Otze ForestOG3E1998200Michelmore pers. comm., 19982200 31.9E 3.7N
Queen Elizabeth Conservation AreaAT2A2002998Rwetsiba et al., 200211,977 30.0E 0.1S
Sango BayOG3E199830Michelmore pers. comm., 19982305 31.7E 0.9S
Semliki National ParkOG3E199830Michelmore pers. comm., 19982195 30.0E 0.8N
Toro (Semliki Valley) Wildlife ReserveIG3D199880Michelmore pers. comm., 19982790 30.4E 1.0N

* Range of informed guess

1Key to Causes of Change (only tracked since 2007): DA: Different Area; DD: Data Degraded; DT: Different Technique; NA: New Analysis; NG: New Guess; NP: New population; PL: Population Lost; RS: Repeat Survey (RS ́ denotes a repeat survey that is not statistically comparable for reasons such as different season); –––: No Change

2Key to Survey Types: AC: Aerial Count, not specified; AS: Aerial Sample Count; AT: Aerial Total Count; DC: Dung Count; EX: Extrapolation from GIS; GD: Genetic Dung Count; GS: Ground Sample Count; GT: Ground Total Count; IG: Informed Guess; IR: Individual Registration; OG: Other Guess. Survey Type is followed by an indicator of survey quality, ranked from 1 to 3 (best to worst). Survey Reliability is keyed A-E (best to worst) as outlined in this table.

3PFS: Priority for Future Surveys, ranked from 1 to 5 (highest to lowest). Based on the precision of estimates and the proportion of national range accounted for by the site in question, PFS is a measure of the importance and urgency for future population surveys. All areas of unassessed range have a priority of 1. See Introduction for details on how the PFS is derived.

IUCNSpecies Survival Commission

All materials on this site are Copyright (C) 1995-2019 IUCN - The International Union for the Conservation of Nature. Use is permitted only under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0).