Congo, 2007

All Years for Congo: 2016 — 2013 — 2007 — 2002 — 1998 — 1995

2007 Summary Totals for Congo

Data Category	Definite	Probable	Possible	Speculative
Direct Sample Counts and Reliable Dung Counts	402	370	370	0
Other Dung Counts	0	16,577	3,338	0
Informed Guesses	0	0	316	729
Totals 2006	402	16,947	4,024	729

Interpretation of Changes in Estimates from Previous Report

Cause of Change	Definite	Probable	Possible	Speculative
New Population	0	0	+429	+729
Different Technique	-29	+3,404	+170	-2,300
Different Area	0	-4,679	-3,146	0
Totals	-29	-1,275	-2,548	-1,571

Area of Range Covered by Each Data Category (km²)

Data Category	Known Range	Possible Range	Total Range
Direct Sample Counts and Reliable Dung Counts	2,592	345	2,937
Other Dung Counts	21,952	0	21,952
Informed Guesses	5,733	121	5,854
Unassessed Range	87,640	17,535	105,176
Totals	117,918	18,001	135,918

Congo : Elephant Estimates

	Cause of	Survey Details²			Number of Elephants				Area	Map Location
Input Zone	Change¹	Type	Reliab.	Year	Estimate	95% C.L.	Source	PFS³	(km²)	Lon.	Lat.
Conkouati National Park	DT	DC2	B	2005	772	370	Vanleeuwe, 2006	2	3,850	11.5E	3.9S
Lac Telé Community Reserve	NP	DC3	D	2004	316	729*	Iyenguet et al., 2007	2	4,400	17.3E	1.1N
Nouabalé-Ndoki National Park	DT	DC2	C	2003	3,032	755	Blake, 2005	2	6,660	16.7E	2.7N
Odzala - Kokoua National Park	DA	DC2	C	2005	13,545	3,252	Wildlife Conservation Society, 2006	2	13,545	14.9E	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.