Elephant Database
African Elephant Specialist Group

Congo, 2007

All Years for Congo: 201620132007200219981995

2007 Summary Totals for Congo

Data Category Definite Probable Possible Speculative
Direct Sample Counts and Reliable Dung Counts4023703700
Other Dung Counts016,5773,3380
Informed Guesses00316729
Totals 200640216,9474,024729

Interpretation of Changes in Estimates from Previous Report

Cause of Change Definite Probable Possible Speculative
New Population00+429+729
Different Technique-29+3,404+170-2,300
Different Area0-4,679-3,1460
Totals-29-1,275-2,548-1,571

Area of Range Covered by Each Data Category (km²)

Data CategoryKnown RangePossible RangeTotal Range
Direct Sample Counts and Reliable Dung Counts2,5923452,937
Other Dung Counts21,952021,952
Informed Guesses5,7331215,854
Unassessed Range87,64017,535105,176
Totals117,91818,001135,918

Congo : Elephant Estimates

Cause ofSurvey Details2 Number of Elephants Area Map Location
Input ZoneChange1TypeReliab.YearEstimate95% C.L. SourcePFS3 (km²) Lon. Lat.
Conkouati National ParkDTDC2B2005772 370Vanleeuwe, 200623,850 11.5E 3.9S
Lac Telé Community ReserveNPDC3D2004316 729*Iyenguet et al., 200724,400 17.3E 1.1N
Nouabalé-Ndoki National ParkDTDC2C20033,032 755Blake, 200526,660 16.7E 2.7N
Odzala - Kokoua National ParkDADC2C200513,545 3,252Wildlife Conservation Society, 2006213,545 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.

IUCNSpecies Survival Commission

All materials on this site are Copyright (C) 1995-2022 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).