4.3 Article

Population trend and distribution of the Vulnerable common hippopotamus Hippopotamus amphibius in the Mara Region of Kenya

Journal

ORYX
Volume 45, Issue 1, Pages 20-27

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0030605310000931

Keywords

Climatic variability; Hippopotamus amphibius; Kenya; land-use change; Masai Mara; population dynamics

Funding

  1. Netherlands Fellowship Programme
  2. University of Groningen, through the Government of Kenya
  3. Frankfurt Zoological Society

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The common hippopotamus Hippopotamus amphibius can significantly influence the dynamics of ecosystems and engender serious conflicts with people but, in Kenya, one of the species strongholds, it has been little studied or monitored. We surveyed the hippopotamus population in the Masai Mara National Reserve and the adjoining pastoral ranches in 2006 using foot counts along 155.3 km of the main rivers. We counted 4,170 hippopotamuses in 171 schools. Comparisons with earlier surveys suggest that this population increased by 169.6% between 1971 and 1980 within the reserve and, although it did not increase within the reserve during 1980-2006, it increased by 359.4% outside the reserve during this period against a background of deteriorating habitat conditions. The overall density in 2006 was 26.9 hippopotamuses km(-1) of river, equivalent to a biomass of 26,677 kg km of river. The ratio of calves to 100 adults was 9:100 inside the reserve, 10:100 outside the reserve and 6:100 along tributaries of the Mara River, implying that the population is either increasing or that its spatial distribution is being compressed because of range contraction. The apparent increase in the hippopotamus population contrasts with marked contemporaneous declines in the populations of most other large mammalian herbivore species in the Reserve. We discuss possible reasons underlying the increase in the hippopotamus population.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available