Burkina Faso, 1995

All Years for Burkina Faso: 2016 — 2013 — 2007 — 2002 — 1998 — 1995

1995 Summary Totals for Burkina Faso

Data Category	Definite	Probable	Possible	Speculative
Aerial or Ground Sample Counts	1,469	583	583	0
Total	1,469	583	583	0

No changes between current and previous report.

Burkina Faso : Elephant Estimates

	Survey Details²			Number of Elephants				Area	Map Location
Input Zone	Type	Reliab.	Year	Estimate	95% C.L.	Source	PFS³	(km²)	Lon.	Lat.
Arli National Park	AS2	B	1992	70	68	Lacroix, 1992; Lamarque, Quest. Reply, 1993; Sebogo, Quest. Reply, 1993	2	1,143	1.5E	11.5N
Deux Bale and Dibon Forest Reserve	AS2	B	1992	185	266	Sebogo, pers. comm., 1994	2	839	2.9W	11.6N
Maro, Tui and Pa Forest Reserve	AS2	B	1992	90	98	Lacroix, 1992; Lamarque, Quest. Reply, 1993	2	1,055	3.6W	11.7N
Nazinga Game Ranch	AS2	B	1993	405	323	Sebogo, pers. comm., 1994	2	758	1.4W	11.2N
Reserve Partielle de Pama	AS2	B	1992	201	194	Lacroix, 1992; Lamarque, Quest. Reply, 1993; Sebogo, Quest. Reply, 1993	1	2,494	.8E	11.4N
Reserve Totale du Singou	AS2	B	1992	770	284	Lacroix, 1992; Lamarque, Quest. Reply, 1993; Sebogo, Quest. Reply, 1993	1	2,062	1.0E	11.7N
W National Park	AS2	B	1992	33	28	Lacroix, 1992; Lamarque, Quest. Reply, 1993; Sebogo, Quest. Reply, 1993	1	2,368	2.2E	11.9N
Zone de Chasse d'Ougarou	AS2	B	1992	298	179	Lacroix, 1992; Lamarque, Quest. Reply, 1993	2	1,181	1.0E	12.0N

* 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.