Data Category | Definite | Probable | Possible | Speculative |
---|---|---|---|---|
Aerial or Ground Total Counts | 13,558 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Aerial or Ground Sample Counts | 276 | 1,028 | 1,028 | 0 |
Dung Counts | 0 | 4,245 | 1,740 | 0 |
Informed Guesses, Undocumented Aerial or Dung Surveys and GIS Extrapolations | 0 | 0 | 3,679 | 924 |
Total | 13,834 | 5,273 | 6,447 | 924 |
No changes between current and previous report.
Survey Details2 | Number of Elephants | Area | Map Location | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Input Zone | Type | Reliab. | Year | Estimate | 95% C.L. | Source | PFS3 | (km²) | Lon. | Lat. |
Aberdare National Park and Forest | IG3 | D | 1990 | 2,500 | Reuling et al., 1992a; Mulama, 1995 | 2 | 2,000 | 36.7E | 0.4S | |
Amboseli National Park | IR1 | A | 1995 | 870 | Moss, 1995 | 3 | 365 | 37.2E | 2.6S | |
Arabuko Sokoke Forest | DC3 | D | 1991 | 78 | 12* | Gesicho, 1991 | 3 | 372 | 39.9E | 3.3S |
Galana Ranch | AT2 | A | 1994 | 46 | 0 | Douglas-Hamilton et al., 1994 | 2 | 6,382 | 39.5E | 2.6S |
Garissa District | AS2 | B | 1988 | 176 | 340 | Grunblatt et al., 1995 | 1 | 43,623 | 40.2E | 0.5S |
Imenti Forest ns | DC3 | D | 1994 | 92 | 279* | Njumbi & Litoroh, 1994 | 4 | 100 | ||
Kilifi District | AS2 | B | 1993 | 34 | 46 | Grunblatt et al., 1995 | 2 | 12,475 | 39.8E | 3.3S |
Kitui District | AS2 | B | 1993 | 830 | 826 | Grunblatt et al., 1995 | 2 | 1,602 | 38.4E | 1.2S |
Lamu District | AS2 | B | 1993 | 264 | 508 | Grunblatt et al., 1995 | 2 | 5,964 | 40.8E | 2.0S |
Loroki Forest | DC3 | D | 1992 | 307 | 265* | Mwangi et al., 1992 | 3 | 596 | 36.8E | 1.1N |
Marsabit National Reserve | AT3 | A | 1993 | 267 | 0 | Litoroh et al., 1994 | 4 | 142 | 38.0E | 2.2N |
Masai Mara Game Reserve | AT3 | A | 1994 | 1,098 | 0 | Dublin & Watkin, 1994 | 3 | 1,530 | 35.1E | 1.5S |
Mau Forest Complex | DC3 | D | 1992 | 250 | 50* | Reuling et al., 1992c | 3 | 1,065 | 35.5E | 0.5S |
Meru National Park and Bisanadi National Reserve | AT3 | A | 1992 | 264 | 0 | Litoroh, 1992 | 3 | 1,348 | 38.3E | 0.1N |
Mt Elgon National Park and Forest | DC3 | D | 1991 | 52 | 68* | Reuling et al., 1992a | 4 | 125 | 34.6E | 1.0N |
Mt Kenya National Park and Forest Reserve | DC2 | C | 1991 | 4,245 | 1,740 | Reuling et al., 1992a | 2 | 1,367 | 37.3E | 0.2S |
Mwea National Reserve | AT3 | A | 1995 | 48 | 0 | Njumbi et al., 1995; Sakwa et al., 1995 | 4 | 42 | 37.6E | 0.8S |
Nasalot NR, South Turkana NR and Kerio Valley | AT3 | A | 1992 | 580 | 0 | Mbugua, 1992 | 2 | 5,050 | 35.6E | 1.5N |
Outside Masai Mara Game Reserve | AT3 | A | 1994 | 387 | 0 | Dublin & Watkin, 1994 | 2 | 1,978 | 35.3E | 1.4S |
Outside Meru National Park ns | IG3 | D | 100 | Njumbi, pers comm. 1995 | 1 | |||||
Remainder of Tsavo | AT2 | A | 1994 | 26 | 0 | Douglas-Hamilton et al., 1994 | 2 | 2,354 | 39.3E | 3.4S |
Rombo | AT2 | A | 1994 | 446 | 0 | Douglas-Hamilton et al., 1994 | 3 | 1,185 | 37.7E | 3.1S |
Samburu and Laikipia | AT2 | A | 1992 | 2,969 | 0 | Thouless, 1992 | 2 | 7,485 | 37.1E | 0.8N |
Shimba Hills National Reserve | DC3 | D | 1992 | 300 | 250* | Reuling et al, 1992b | 3 | 217 | 39.4E | 4.3S |
Taita Area | AT2 | A | 1994 | 287 | 0 | Douglas-Hamilton et al., 1994 | 2 | 5,886 | 38.6E | 3.7S |
Tsavo National Park | AT2 | A | 1994 | 6,270 | 0 | Douglas-Hamilton et al., 1994 | 1 | 20,574 | 38.6E | 3.0S |
* 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.