|
|---|
Warning: Undefined property: stdClass::$Photo1 in /var/www/vhosts/virtualzoo/classifications/display.php on line 584
| Subspecies: | Unknown |
|---|---|
| Est. World Population: | 1956 |
| CITES Status: | NOT LISTED |
| IUCN Status: | Endangered |
| U.S. ESA Status: | NOT LISTED |
| Body Length: | |
| Tail Length: | |
| Shoulder Height: | |
| Weight: | |
| Top Speed: | |
| Jumping Ability: | (Horizontal) |
| Life Span: | in the Wild |
| Life Span: | in Captivity |
| Sexual Maturity: | (Females) |
| Sexual Maturity: | (Males) |
| Litter Size: | |
| Gestation Period: | |
Habitat:
Grevy’s Zebras live in arid and semi-arid grass/shrubland where they can gain access to permanent water (Klingel 1974; Rubenstein 1986; Rowen and Ginsberg 1992; Williams 2002, 2013; Kebede 2013). They are predominantly grazers, although browse can comprise up to 30% of their diet during times of drought or in those areas that have been highly transformed through overgrazing (Kartzinel et al. 2015). Breeding males defend resource territories (water and food being the key resources) of 2–12 km²; the home range size of non-territorial individuals can be as large as 10,000 km² (Williams 2013). They are extremely mobile and individuals have been recorded to move distances of greater than 80 km, with movements determined by the availability of resources; lactating females, for example, can only tolerate one or two days away from water (Klingel 1974; Rubenstein 1986; Rowen and Ginsberg 1992; Williams 2002, 2013). Hence when pastoral livestock monopolize water, Grevy’s Zebras suffer. They often mill around watering points in the late afternoon waiting to drink, thus reducing foraging time. By drinking predictably at night they are prone to predation by lions and in some areas when co-habiting with plains Zebras, they are preferentially attacked (Rubenstein 2010). During the dry season, when they are dependent on permanent water, Grevy’s Zebra may stay nearer to water and tend to be more concentrated. However, in the Alledeghi Wildlife Reserve in Ethiopia, they are more concentrated during the wet season in order to avoid the pastoralists and livestock that move into the area during that season (Kebede et al. 2012).
Between 2010 and 2014 the population of Grevy’s Zebras inhabiting the Mpala, Ol Jogi and Pyramid Conservancies in central Laikipia County, was monitored three times per year. During this period on average the population consisted of: 33% adult males of which 17% were territorial and 16% were bachelors; 40% adult females; 8% juveniles, half males and half females; and 19% infants of which 8% were males, 8% were females and 3% were of undetermined sex (Rubenstein and Brown pers. obs.). Therefore 33% adult males + 40% adult females gives 73% of the population as mature. Given that population projection models show population stability is maintained when the percentage of recruits (juveniles and foals) reach 30% (Rubenstein 2010), the Laikipia Grev’s Zebra population appears to be in relatively good demographic health (between 2004 and 2014). A decade of data on sightings of Grevy's Zebra numbers as well as age and sex class from scouts in the Meibae, Westgate, Sessia, Laisamas, Ngili West and Kalama Conservancies show an that the percentage of recruits (foals and juveniles) has increased from 9% to 22% of the population, with the 2016 Great Grevy's Rally showing a Kenya-wide age structure of 28% recruits. This indicates that this population is approaching sustainability.
Between 2010 and 2014 the population of Grevy’s Zebras inhabiting the Mpala, Ol Jogi and Pyramid Conservancies in central Laikipia County, was monitored three times per year. During this period on average the population consisted of: 33% adult males of which 17% were territorial and 16% were bachelors; 40% adult females; 8% juveniles, half males and half females; and 19% infants of which 8% were males, 8% were females and 3% were of undetermined sex (Rubenstein and Brown pers. obs.). Therefore 33% adult males + 40% adult females gives 73% of the population as mature. Given that population projection models show population stability is maintained when the percentage of recruits (juveniles and foals) reach 30% (Rubenstein 2010), the Laikipia Grev’s Zebra population appears to be in relatively good demographic health (between 2004 and 2014). A decade of data on sightings of Grevy's Zebra numbers as well as age and sex class from scouts in the Meibae, Westgate, Sessia, Laisamas, Ngili West and Kalama Conservancies show an that the percentage of recruits (foals and juveniles) has increased from 9% to 22% of the population, with the 2016 Great Grevy's Rally showing a Kenya-wide age structure of 28% recruits. This indicates that this population is approaching sustainability.
Range:
Grevy's zebra is only found in the Horn of Africa, specifically Ethiopia and Kenya. Grevy's Zebras have undergone substantial reductions in range. Historically, they ranged east of the Rift Valley in Kenya to southwestern Somalia, and in northern Ethiopia from the Alledeghi Plain through the Awash Valley, the Ogaden, and north-east of Lake Turkana in Ethiopia to north of Mt. Kenya and southeast down the Tana River in Kenya (Bauer et al. 1994). Currently, Grevy’s Zebra have a discontinuous range, and are found from the eastern side of the Rift Valley in Kenya to the Tana River. Currently there is a small, isolated population in the Alledeghi Plains northeast of Awash National Park (N.P.) in Ethiopia. From Lake Ch’ew Bahir in southern Ethiopia, the population extends to just north of Mt. Kenya although a few animals are found further southeast along the Tana River. A small introduced population survives in and around Tsavo East N.P. in Kenya.
Grevy's Zebra are considered to be extirpated from Somalia, where the last confirmed sightings date to 1973. There are no confirmed records that the species ever occurred in Eritrea or Djibouti (Bauer et al. 1994, Yalden et al. 1986). Sightings in South Sudan are questionable and need to be verified (Williams 2002, 2013).
Grevy's Zebra are considered to be extirpated from Somalia, where the last confirmed sightings date to 1973. There are no confirmed records that the species ever occurred in Eritrea or Djibouti (Bauer et al. 1994, Yalden et al. 1986). Sightings in South Sudan are questionable and need to be verified (Williams 2002, 2013).
Conservation:
Listed on CITES Appendix I. Grevy's Zebra are legally protected in both Kenya and Ethiopia, although in the latter, official protection has been limited. Changing attitudes of local pastoralist populations towards the species has had dramatic effects on improving the ranging, foraging and drinking capabilities of Grevy’s Zebras. Scout programs in which community members participate in gathering essential data on the ecology and behaviour of their populations not only generates income, it transforms the scouts into Grevy’s Zebra champions which in turn helps change community attitudes and gather essential information when populations are at risk (Low et al. 2009). In addition, in Kenya Grevy’s Zebras have been protected by a hunting ban since 1977. While under the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act No 376 of 1976 (Part II of the First Schedule), Grevy’s Zebra was listed as a ‘Game Animal’ (Williams 2002); there is a chance that they will be up-listed to a legally ‘Protected Animal’ in Kenya.
At present, protected areas form less than 0.5% of the range of Grevy’s Zebra. In Ethiopia, the protected areas are nominal (Alledeghi Wildlife Reserve, Borena Controlled Hunting Area and Chew Bahir/Chalbi Wildlife Reserve). In Kenya, the Buffalo Springs, Samburu, Shaba N.R. complex and the private and community land wildlife conservancies in Isiolo, Samburu and the Laikipia Plateau provide a core and crucial protection of Kenya’s southern population of Grevy’s Zebra (Williams 2002). On the Laikipia Plateau, protection and reduced competition with domestic livestock, have seen Grevy's Zebra numbers increasing since they first expanded into this area in the early 1970s (Williams 2002, 2013). In addition, changing attitudes in Samburu county, the centre of its distribution, has enabled Grevy’s Zebra to share resources more equitably with livestock, thus increasing the proportion of infants and juveniles (Low et al. 2009).
Habitat restoration through grass re-seeding and planned livestock grazing is targeting core habitat areas in Grevy’s Zebra range. Close monitoring of Grevy’s Zebra body condition during prolonged droughts is carried out by scouts and additional water provision made to ensure continued access to declining water sources (http://www.grevysZebratrust.org/water-management.html). In addition, supplementary feeding of Grevy’s Zebra during extreme drought is being piloted in Kenya (Grevy’s Zebra Disease Response Committee, 2013), and appears to have prevented a population decline during the 2011 drought in the conservancies of central Samburu County (Low and Rubenstein pers. obs).
Kenya has completed its second conservation strategy for Grevy’s Zebra (KWS 2012). It has 5 strategic objectives: 1) Coordination and implementation of the conservation and management strategy; 2) Enhancement of stakeholder partnership in Grevy’s Zebra conservation; 3) Enhancement of Grevy’s Zebra conservation and habitat management; 4) Establishment of a program for monitoring and managing Grevy’s Zebra population health; and 5) Enhancement of transboundary Grevy’s Zebra conservation.
In September 2016 a workshop involving Grevy’s zebra biologists, conservationists and the governors of the five counties where Grevy’s zebras live will be convened by Kitili Mbathi, the Director General of the Kenya Wildlife Service, at the Mpala Reseach Center. The workshop will explore options that will move the populations from ‘ sustainable’ to increasing’ and identify actions that the governors can commit to that will help make this happen. Future actions to increase numbers might include: restoration of grasslands, improved water access, addressing high lion predation rates in Meru County, and developing local capacity and supporting citizen science monitoring.
Ethiopia has held two workshops on the status and conservation of the Grevy’s Zebra. Research and community-based conservation is on-going in the Alledeghi Wildlife Reserve. The Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority in collaboration with the IUCN/SSC Equid Specialist Group will be developing a national species action plan in the near future.
At present, protected areas form less than 0.5% of the range of Grevy’s Zebra. In Ethiopia, the protected areas are nominal (Alledeghi Wildlife Reserve, Borena Controlled Hunting Area and Chew Bahir/Chalbi Wildlife Reserve). In Kenya, the Buffalo Springs, Samburu, Shaba N.R. complex and the private and community land wildlife conservancies in Isiolo, Samburu and the Laikipia Plateau provide a core and crucial protection of Kenya’s southern population of Grevy’s Zebra (Williams 2002). On the Laikipia Plateau, protection and reduced competition with domestic livestock, have seen Grevy's Zebra numbers increasing since they first expanded into this area in the early 1970s (Williams 2002, 2013). In addition, changing attitudes in Samburu county, the centre of its distribution, has enabled Grevy’s Zebra to share resources more equitably with livestock, thus increasing the proportion of infants and juveniles (Low et al. 2009).
Habitat restoration through grass re-seeding and planned livestock grazing is targeting core habitat areas in Grevy’s Zebra range. Close monitoring of Grevy’s Zebra body condition during prolonged droughts is carried out by scouts and additional water provision made to ensure continued access to declining water sources (http://www.grevysZebratrust.org/water-management.html). In addition, supplementary feeding of Grevy’s Zebra during extreme drought is being piloted in Kenya (Grevy’s Zebra Disease Response Committee, 2013), and appears to have prevented a population decline during the 2011 drought in the conservancies of central Samburu County (Low and Rubenstein pers. obs).
Kenya has completed its second conservation strategy for Grevy’s Zebra (KWS 2012). It has 5 strategic objectives: 1) Coordination and implementation of the conservation and management strategy; 2) Enhancement of stakeholder partnership in Grevy’s Zebra conservation; 3) Enhancement of Grevy’s Zebra conservation and habitat management; 4) Establishment of a program for monitoring and managing Grevy’s Zebra population health; and 5) Enhancement of transboundary Grevy’s Zebra conservation.
In September 2016 a workshop involving Grevy’s zebra biologists, conservationists and the governors of the five counties where Grevy’s zebras live will be convened by Kitili Mbathi, the Director General of the Kenya Wildlife Service, at the Mpala Reseach Center. The workshop will explore options that will move the populations from ‘ sustainable’ to increasing’ and identify actions that the governors can commit to that will help make this happen. Future actions to increase numbers might include: restoration of grasslands, improved water access, addressing high lion predation rates in Meru County, and developing local capacity and supporting citizen science monitoring.
Ethiopia has held two workshops on the status and conservation of the Grevy’s Zebra. Research and community-based conservation is on-going in the Alledeghi Wildlife Reserve. The Ethiopian Wildlife Conservation Authority in collaboration with the IUCN/SSC Equid Specialist Group will be developing a national species action plan in the near future.




