7 research outputs found
METT (Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool) scores for evaluated protected areas (PAs) in West Africa.
<p>(A) PAs where lions are confirmed present or are potentially still present (A); (B) PAs where lions were considered absent. The letter W represents scores for W-Arly-Pendjari while M indicates those for Mole NP (see text). Management scores range from 0–3, with 3 representing the best management scenario. For example, in the case of ‘Current Budget’ 0 = No PA budget; 1 = inadequate budget which creates serious management constraints; 2 = acceptable budget, but could be further improved to fully achieve effective management; 3 = sufficient budget which fully meets the needs of the PA. See <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0083500#pone.0083500.s002" target="_blank">Table S1</a> for full descriptions of scores.</p
PA management characteristics by lion presence and absence (continuous data).
<p>PA management characteristics by lion presence and absence (continuous data).</p
Populations trends for principal lion prey species in West African protected areas.
<p>(A) Pendjari NP (which forms part of W-Arly-Pendjari); (B) Niokolo-Koba NP; (C) Mole NP. Data sources: Galat et al. <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0083500#pone.0083500-Galat1" target="_blank">[59]</a>, Sinsin et al. <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0083500#pone.0083500-Sinsin1" target="_blank">[60]</a>, Wildlife Division of Ghana <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0083500#pone.0083500-WD1" target="_blank">[61]</a>, Bouché <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0083500#pone.0083500-Bouch4" target="_blank">[62]</a>, Renaud et al. <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0083500#pone.0083500-Renaud1" target="_blank">[63]</a>.</p
Boxplot illustrating median operating budgets (US$/km<sup>2</sup>) for PAs grouped by current lion population status.
<p>Hinges represent the 1st and 3rd quartiles, and whiskers represent the range of the data. Black points represent outliers.</p
Summary of recent survey activities in LCU PAs, permitting the assessment of lion population status.
<p>For more details on the surveys, see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0083500#pone.0083500.s004" target="_blank">Table S3</a>.</p><p><sup>a</sup> Aerial surveys established complete absence of large wild herbivores, strongly indicating PAs unsuitability for lions.</p><p><sup>b</sup> Gashaka-Gumti NP encompasses 6,670 km<sup>2</sup>, however, only ca 1,900 km<sup>2</sup> comprise suitable lion habitat.</p
Lion Conservation Units [18] and surveyed protected areas (PAs) in West Africa.
<p>Number symbols in the map correspond to PA identification numbers in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0083500#pone-0083500-t001" target="_blank">Table 1</a> and <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0083500#pone.0083500.s004" target="_blank">Tables S3</a>/S4, with numbers printed in bold representing PAs with METT assessments.</p
Lion status in West African protected areas within lion range.
<p>Lion status in West African protected areas within lion range.</p