Foraging Ecologies of Giraffe and Camels in Northern Kenya: Effects of Habitat Structure and Possibilities for Competition?

Reticulated Giraffe;Camel;Foraging Ecology;Pastoralist;Conservation;Laikipia;Kenya;Natural Resources and Environment

O'Connor, DavidButt, Bilal ;

University of Michigan

关键词: Reticulated Giraffe;    Camel;    Foraging Ecology;    Pastoralist;    Conservation;    Laikipia;    Kenya;    Natural Resources and Environment;   

Others  :  https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/101905/OConnor_SNRE_Thesis_2013.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

瑞士|英语

来源: The Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship

【 摘 要 】

Domestic camels (Camelus dromedarius) have become increasingly popular livestockin arid regions of sub-Saharan Africa. However, little is known about the environmentalimpacts of these animals, and concern has been mounting about possible competitionwith wild native ungulates. Unlike the more traditional pastoralist livestock species,camels are large-bodied, long-necked browsers which increases the potential to overlapwith wild giraffe foraging, especially as the space available for browsing decreases.Giraffe ecology and social dynamics are poorly understood; it is believed that reticulatedgiraffe (Giraffa camelopardalis reticulata) population is in decline, and the effects ofintroducing a new potential competitor could be an added stressor. This study examinesthe foraging ecologies of reticulated giraffe and domestic camels in the Laikipia Districtof Kenya, an area where these two species have not been sympatric until very recently.Both wild giraffe and domestic camel foraging heights and food species werequantified using multi-metric observations. Using repeated two-minute group scans Irecorded feeding height categories and plant food preferences. Transects were used tosample the vegetation in areas in which foraging observations were recorded.The results indicate that domestic camels do not overlap with giraffe in feedingheights. Not only do camels feed below giraffe, the two species also do not overlap inplant food preferences. Giraffes do not exhibit sexual dichotomies in plant foodpreferences. However, giraffes do exhibit sexual dichotomy in foraging heights, withfemales feeding at lower elevations than males. Habitat type has an effect on foragingecologies of both giraffe sexes, but it is most pronounced in males; in contrast, habitat didnot influence camel foraging. Such differences may be driven by local habitat structureand plant densities rather than by differing preferences between camels and giraffe. Inaddition, camel herder husbandry techniques also influence the dynamics of camelforaging by determining where and for how long camels browsed. These results haveimplications for the conservation and management of both species and the widerecosystem if the twin goals of wildlife conservation and livestock production are to beachieved.