First camera survey in Burkina Faso and Niger reveals human pressures on mammal communities within the largest protected area complex in West Africa

The dearth of ecological data from protected areas at relevant scales challenges conservation practice in West Africa. We conducted the first camera survey for Burkina Faso and Niger to elucidate interactions between resource users and mammals in the largest protected area complex in West Africa (W-Arly-Pendjari, WAP). We differentiated direct (e.g., poaching) and indirect (e.g., domestic animals) human activities to determine their effects on species richness, composition, and behavior. Livestock was the dominant human pressure while gathering was the most prevalent direct human activity. Human pressure did not influence species richness or composition, but reduced mammal activity with greater consequences from indirect activities. We also found distinct differences among guilds in their behavioral responses to human pressures as wild ungulates exhibited the greatest sensitivities to livestock presence. Our findings, that aggregated socioecological data, transition the WAP complex from the singular mandate of nature conservation to a dynamic coupled human-natural ecosystem.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/151966/1/conl12667.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/151966/2/conl12667_am.pd

Implémentation du Field Epidemiology Training Programme Frontline au Burkina Faso, 2016 à 2019: leçons apprises et Défis: Implementation of the Frontline Field Epidemiology Training Programme in Burkina Faso, 2016 to 2019: Lessons Learned and Challenges

Introduction: Dans le contexte de l'agenda de la sécurité mondiale de la santé lancé en 2015. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC Atlanta) a initié le renforcement de capacités des acteurs dans l'épidémiologie de terrain Frontline (FETP). Pour l'implémentation du programme, des réunions, une évaluation de base, le recrutement et formation de mentors, sélection et formation de participants en utilisant l'approche « One Health », travaux de terrain, supervision et interviews de sortie ont été menés. Au Burkina Faso ce programme a commencé en avril 2016. L'objectif de cette étude était de décrire le processus d'implémentation, les défis et les leçons apprises. Méthodes: Une étude transversale rétrospective qualitative à visée descriptive conduite d'avril 2016 à septembre 2019 incluant tous les participants. Des interviews et une revue documentaire avaient été réalisés. Résultats: L'évaluation de base avait montré un besoin dans le renforcement des capacités pour le système de surveillance. Au total 22 mentors formés. Fin décembre 2019, neuf cohortes (100%) formées dont 6 (75%) avec approche « One Health ». Au total 210 participants devraient être formés sans distinction de sexe, ainsi 267 capacités (127%). Sur les 267 formés, 22 femmes (8%). Deux qui n'ont pas achevé la formation (0,7%), un décès (0,3%). Au total 1040 travaux réalisés. Les défis restent le suivi post formation, les mutations des agents formés et la pérennisation. Conclusion: L'implémentation de FETP Frontline au Burkina Faso a été effective et a fait face à plusieurs défis et des leçons apprises ont été tirées. Il est recommandé la poursuite de ces formations pour le renforcement des capacités des acteurs de la surveillance. Introduction: In the context of the global health security agenda launched in 2015, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC Atlanta) initiated capacity building for stakeholders in Frontline Field Epidemiology (FETP). To implement the programme, meetings, a baseline assessment, recruitment and training of mentors, selection and training of participants using the "One Health" approach, fieldwork, supervision and exit interviews were conducted. In Burkina Faso this programme started in April 2016. The objective of this study was to describe the implementation process, challenges and lessons learned. Methods: A retrospective qualitative descriptive cross-sectional study conducted from April 2016 to September 2019 including all participants. Interviews and a literature review were conducted. Results: The baseline assessment showed a need in capacity building for the surveillance system. In total 22 mentors trained. By the end of December 2019, nine cohorts (100%) trained, of which six (75%) with a "One Health" approach. A total of 210 participants should be trained regardless of gender, thus 267 were trained (127%). Of the 267 trained, 22 were women (8%). Two did not complete the training (0.7%), one died (0.3%). A total of 1,040 works were completed. The challenges remain post-training follow-up, transfers of trained agents and sustainability. Conclusion: The implementation of FETP Frontline in Burkina Faso was effective, faced several challenges and lessons were learned. It is recommended that these training sessions be continued in order to strengthen the capacities of surveillance actors

Proportional change in harvest of lions vs. initial average harvest regression models, value of the concordance criterion (CC), Equation, value of R² and P.

<p>The selected model is indicated in bold.</p

Results of the lion count.

<p>Area in km², Number of transects, Transects length in km, Substrate quality, Number of fresh spoors observed, Track density (N/100 km), estimated lion population density (N/100 km²), lion estimate (N), Coefficient of variation (CV) in %, minimum and maximum 95% Confidence Interval (CI) in each stratum of < and > 5 km from water and for the entire W Arly Pendjari Ecosystem. Details per area is given in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0155763#pone.0155763.s002" target="_blank">S2 Table</a>.</p

Embargo on Lion Hunting Trophies from West Africa: An Effective Measure or a Threat to Lion Conservation?

<div><p>The W-Arly-Pendjari (WAP) ecosystem, shared among Benin, Burkina Faso and Niger, represents the last lion stronghold of West Africa. To assess the impact of trophy hunting on lion populations in hunting areas of the WAP, we analyzed trends in harvest rates from 1999 to 2014. We also investigated whether the hunting areas with higher initial hunting intensity experienced steeper declines in lion harvest between 1999 and 2014, and whether lion densities in hunting areas were lower than in national parks. Lion harvest rate remained overall constant in the WAP. At initial hunting intensities below 1.5 lions/1000km², most hunting areas experienced an increase in lion harvest rate, although that increase was of lower magnitude for hunting areas with higher initial hunting intensity. The proportion of hunting areas that experienced a decline in lion harvest rate increased at initial hunting intensities above 1.5 lions/1000km². In 2014, the lion population of the WAP was estimated with a spoor count at 418 (230–648) adults and sub-adult individuals, comparable to the 311 (123–498) individuals estimated in the previous 2012 spoor survey. We found no significant lion spoor density differences between national parks and hunting areas. Hunting areas with higher mean harvest rates did not have lower lion densities. The ratio of large adult males, females and sub-adults was similar between the national parks and the hunting areas. These results suggested that the lion population was not significantly affected by hunting in the WAP. We concluded that a quota of 1 lion/1000km² would be sustainable for the WAP. Based on our results, an import embargo on lion trophies from the WAP would not be justified. It could ruin the incentive of local actors to conserve lions in hunting areas, and lead to a drastic reduction of lion range in West Africa.</p></div

Lion spoor densities (N/100km): (a) at < and > 5 km from water in the WAP (the vertical lines represent the standard error); (b) in national parks and hunting areas of the WAP (the vertical lines represent the standard error).

<p>Lion spoor densities (N/100km): (a) at < and > 5 km from water in the WAP (the vertical lines represent the standard error); (b) in national parks and hunting areas of the WAP (the vertical lines represent the standard error).</p

Trends of the total annual lion quota or harvest rate (number of lions /1000 km²) between the first year of lion hunting and 2014 in the WAP (Benin and Burkina Faso) (see text).

<p>A hunting season ran from December to May. Every season corresponds to a year. By convention the season of a particular year covers the month of December of the previous year. For example the season 1999 covers the months from December 1998 to May 1999. In Burkina Faso, data were available since 1999, just 2 years after the implementation of the concession system launched in 1996–97 season. Therefore we calculated the initial hunting intensity for the 1999–2001 period with one exception: Singou, which received its first quota in 2000 (<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0155763#pone.0155763.s001" target="_blank">S1 table</a>). Benin started the concession system in 2001–02 (data per area are available since this year) but established a moratorium on lion hunting in 2003 and 2004. Therefore the initial hunting intensity was calculated for 2005–2007 except for Djona that started the harvest in 2010 (<a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0155763#pone.0155763.s001" target="_blank">S1 Table</a>).</p

Lion density in 2014 (N/100 km²), vs. the mean of 16 years harvest between 1999 and 2014 (mean number of lions harvested/1000 km²).

<p>Each point represents a hunting area.</p

Annual percentage change in the lion harvest between 1999–2014, vs. initial hunting intensity.

<p>Each point represents a hunting area. A single area (Mékrou) had an annual percentage change of -45% with an initial hunting intensity of 0.6 lion/year. It was considered as an outlier and discarded from the analysis.</p