Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T22:14:36.742Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Behaviour and ecology of the Ethiopian wolf (Canis simensis) in a human-dominated landscape outside protected areas

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2005

Zelealem Tefera Ashenafi
Affiliation:
Zoological Society of London, Regents Park, London NW1 4RY, UK Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7NS, UK Current address: Ethiopian Wolf Conservation Programme, P.O. Box 101426, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. E-mail: kykebero@telecom.net.et
Tim Coulson
Affiliation:
Zoological Society of London, Regents Park, London NW1 4RY, UK Current address: Department of Biological Sciences, Imperial College at Silwood Park, Ascot, Berks, SL5 7PY, UK
Claudio Sillero-Zubiri
Affiliation:
Wildlife Conservation Research Unit, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK
Nigel Leader-Williams
Affiliation:
Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology, University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7NS, UK
Get access

Abstract

The Ethiopian wolf (Canis simensis) is a very rare, endangered, endemic species surviving in isolated mountain pockets in the Ethiopian highlands, with nearly 50% of the global population living outside protected areas. In this paper we compare the ecology and behaviour of an Ethiopian wolf population living in Guassa, a communally managed area in the Central Highlands, with that of the Bale Mountains National Park in the Southern Highlands. Ethiopian wolves live at lower density in Guassa (0.2±0.05/km2) than in the Bale Mountains, but giant molerats (Tachyoryctes macrocephalus), the main prey for Ethiopian wolves in Bale Mountains, do not occur in the Central Highlands. Faecal analysis identified nine prey categories across wet and dry seasons common to both populations. In total, rodents accounted for 88% of prey volume in wolf diets. Home-range size was positively related to pack size (r2=0.85) and there was no difference in mean home-range sizes in both areas. In Guassa, however, wolves spent less time in the presence than in the absence of humans, but wolves spent similar amounts of time in the presence and absence of cattle. These findings suggest wolves can cope with, or adapt to, the presence of livestock and people in communally managed areas.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
2005 The Zoological Society of London

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)