Journal of Threatened Taxa |
www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 March 2021 | 13(3): 17895–17905
ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893
(Print)
https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.6662.13.3.17895-17905
#6662 | Received 10 September 2020 | Final
received 02 November 2020 | Finally accepted 24 February 2021
A rapid assessment of waterbirds and the mangrove status in the Menabe Antimena Protected Area,
Madagascar
Christoph Zöckler
1, Solofo Ndrina Razanamaheninina 2 & Matthias Markolf 3
1 Manfred-Hermsen
Foundation, Goebenstraße 1, 28209 Bremen, Germany.
2 University of Antananarivo, BP
566 Antananarivo, 101, Madagascar.
2,3 Chances for Nature e.V., Brauweg 9a 37073
Göttingen, Germany.
3 German Primate Center (DPZ), Kellnerweg 4, 37077 Göttingen, Germany.
3 University of
Göttingen, Kellnerweg 6, 37077 Göttingen, Germany.
1 christoph.zoeckler@m-h-s.org, 2
rsn@chancesfornature.org,
3 mmarkolf@chancesfornature.org (corresponding author)
Editor: Anonymity requested. Date of publication: 26 March 2021 (online & print)
Citation: Zöckler, C., S.N. Razanamaheninina & M. Markolf
(2021). A rapid assessment of
waterbirds and the mangrove status in the Menabe Antimena Protected Area,
Madagascar. Journal
of Threatened Taxa 13(3): 17895–17905. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.6662.13.3.17895-17905
Copyright: © Zöckler et al. 2021. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License. JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and
distribution of this article in any medium by providing adequate credit to the
author(s) and the source of publication.
Funding: Manfred Hermsen Stiftung; Stiftung Artenschutz; Chances for Nature.
Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.
Author details: Dr. Christoph Zöckler is a free-lance consultant on biodiversity for the Manfred-Hermsen Foundation (MHS), specializing on wetland and water
bird conservation. He is currently coordinating the Spoon-billed Sandpiper Task
Force of the East Asian Australasian Flyway Partnership (EAAFP). His work also
focuses on Arctic migratory Waterbirds and coastal
wetlands such as intertidal mudflats and mangroves. Solofo Ndrina Razanamahenina is a
Master student at the University of Antananarivo studying breeding behavior of
the giant coua. He is also working as project manager
for the NGO Chances for Nature in Menabe,
Madagascar. Dr. Matthias Markolf is as a
scientist at the University of Göttingen and the German Primate Center. His
work focuses on biodiversity conservation and monitoring. He is also Chairman
of the NGO Chances for Nature.
Author contribution: All authors conducted field work.
MM and SNR organized the survey. CZ & MM wrote the manuscript and analyzed
the data.
Acknowledgements: We are very grateful for the
financial support of the Stiftung Artenschutz and the
Manfred-Hermsen-Foundation. We thank Leon Razafimanantsoa,
Rodin Rasoloarison, Dannick
Randriamanantena, Sama Zefania, Remis d’Ampataka and
numerous local guides for sharing information and logistic support during and
ahead of the survey. Roger Safford
provided intimate site knowledge and logistical advice. We thank Aristide Andrianarimisa
and Roger Safford for very helpful comments on earlier versions of this
manuscript. We are grateful as well to
the Direction Regionale de Ministère
de l’Environnement et du Developpement
Durable for the permission of the survey (CAFF/CORE: N°206/19).
Abstract: Mangroves are of great ecological
importance that provide multiple ecosystem services, shelter, and habitat for
many threatened waterbird species. The mangroves of the Menabe
Antimena Protected Area (MANAP) in western Madagascar
are among the most extensive remaining on the island. The remaining dryland forests of the MANAP
have been subjected to immense deforestation in recent years. Although remote sensing studies indicate that
the mangrove forest loss is considerably lower than the dryland forest loss,
little is known about the mangroves’ degradation status. Furthermore, detailed information on bird
diversity and numbers is scattered, and previous surveys focused on northern
parts of the MANAP, recently designated as the Wetlands of the Tsiribihina RAMSAR site.
This study aims to assess bird diversity and abundance, as well as the
status of mangroves in the MANAP. We conducted a rapid survey using direct
observations at three sites along the coastal regions of the MANAP from 24
Sep–2 Oct 2019. We recorded 71 species
of birds in the mangroves and coastal wetlands.
High numbers of individuals were counted for several species. Numbers of the Madagascar Plover Charadrius thoracicus
and the Madagascar Teal Anas bernieri fulfill
criteria for important bird areas at single survey sites and the site is likely
to be of importance for Madagascar Sacred Ibis Threskiornis
bernieri; these three species are all globally
threatened. Mangrove degradation is
still limited, but numerous threats to mangroves are present. Our results highlight the importance of the
mangroves of the MANAP for several endemic bird species in Madagascar. We provide recommendations for conservation
management and future research.
Keywords: Mangrove quality, Madagascar
Heron, Madagascar Plover, Madagascar Sacred Ibis, Madagascar Teal.
Introduction
Mangroves are among the most productive ecosystems on
Earth (Clausen et al. 2010) and of great ecological importance (Carugati et al. 2018).
While supporting high floral and faunal diversity, mangroves also
provide essential products to humans, such as food, fuel, and various
construction materials (Rasolofo 1997; Baba et al.
2013). Additionally, mangroves and its
adjacent mudflats provide essential services to human coastal populations like
water filtration, protection from storms, and coastal erosion (Jones et al.
2016). Finally, mangroves and mudflats
contribute significantly to climate change mitigation via sequestering massive
amounts of CO2 (Sanderman et al.
2018). Despite their ecological
importance, mangroves are subjected to various human pressures, and large areas
of mangroves are converted to agricultural farmland or are overexploited for
marine and forestry products. It is
estimated that more than 35% of the world’s mangroves have been lost since 2000
(Carugati et al. 2018).
Madagascar has approximately 2% of the world’s
mangroves and this represents the second largest extent of mangroves of any
country in the western Indian Ocean (Shapiro et al. 2019). Most of Madagascar’s mangroves are located
along the western coast of the island.
One of the most significant remaining mangrove areas is in the Menabe Antimena Protected Area
(MANAP), covering approximately 13,000ha (Goodman et al. 2018). The MANAP is a protected area under IUCN
category V (harmonious landscape). The
dry forests of the MANAP have been subjected to drastic deforestation in recent
years (Zinner et al. 2014; Hudson et al. 2019), and
protection measures of dry forests are so far mostly ineffective. According to analysis of data on
globalforestwatch.org, more than 65,000ha have been lost since 2001 (Global
Forest Watch 2014; Zinner et al. 2014; Hudson et al.
2019), with annual deforestation rates up to 10%. Compared to dryland forest, mangrove loss in
Madagascar seems to be considerably lower (around 2.4% from 2006 to 2016 in
MANAP; Goodman et al. 2018) based on nationwide GIS analysis of mangrove
dynamics using remote sensing imagery (Jones et al. 2016). The same study, however, indicates that the
loss of mangrove forest within the Tsiribihina Manambolo Delta (which includes similar habitat to the
north, net loss of 12,612ha, 38.4%) from 1990 to 2010 is one of the largest in
Madagascar. Although such GIS-based
studies are of considerable importance to mangrove mapping and conservation,
remote sensing does not fully allow the assessment of mangrove degradation as
it cannot distinguish specifically between naturally open-canopy mangrove areas
and highly degraded areas (Hamilton & Casey 2016; Jones et al. 2016). Field-based surveys to assess threats and
mangrove degradation or quality are, therefore, essential and contribute to a
better understanding of mangrove dynamics and support conservation management
decisions.
The mangroves and mudflats of the MANAP are an
important refuge for numerous species (Goodman et al. 2018), including iconic
and threatened species such as Madagascar Sacred Ibis Threskiornis
bernieri, Madagascar Heron Ardea
humbloti, Madagascar Teal Anas bernieri, and Madagascar Plover Charadrius
thoracicus.
Due to this diversity, parts of the mangroves of the MANAP are also
declared as Important Bird Area (IBA), ‘Wetlands of the Tsiribihina
delta and upper Tsiribihina River’ (WTDUTR) (BirdLife International 2020a), and have recently been
designated as a Ramsar site ‘Mangroves de Tsiribihina’ (MdT) (Image
1). The MANAP includes a second RAMSAR
site, the ‘Wetlands of Bedo’ or ‘Lac Bedo’. The site is
located in the centre of the Menabe
region only a few kilometres from the coastline and
represents an important site for animals, specifically for birds and fish.
In general, reliable data on bird distribution and
abundance are rare for bird species in centralwestern
Madagascar and are often based on patchy observations collected infrequently by
different scientists, tourists or hunters (Young et al. 2014). Therefore, it is of great importance to
regularly update numbers on the diversity and abundance of bird taxa.
Given the ecological importance of mangroves and the
increased human pressure seen in recent years in the MANAP, our study aimed to
quantify waterbird populations, mangrove condition,
and threats to mangrove habitat and waterbird species
within the protected area in order to contribute to future conservation
management.
Materials and Methods
Three distinct coastal wetlands (all consisting of
mangroves and mudflats) were visited and surveyed (see Image 1) within the
MANAP from 24 September–2 October 2019.
The three sites were chosen to
represent approximately the whole range of mangroves in the MANAP. Image
1 depicts bird records during the survey in September 2019. Site 1 Tsangajoly (Baie de Borongeny and Namangoa, lat.
-19.830528, lon. 44.501139) is also part of the MdT Ramsar site and Important
Bird Area WDTUTR. This site has been
surveyed for birds relatively recently (www.Ramsar.org) along with its
designation as a Ramsar site. Surveys in Tsangajoly
were started from the Lodge de la Saline, an abandoned shrimp farm that has
been modified into an ecolodge with fantastic birdwatching opportunities. Given
time constraints and relatively recent data for birds, we only focused on the
southern third of the approximately 47,000 ha area. Site 2, Andrahangy
(lat. -19.971611, lon. 44.466000), is south of
the Tsiribihina delta and does not belong to the Ramsar site MdT. Site 3, Kivalo
(lat. -20.208056, lon. 44.331361), is the most
southern site visited within the MANAP.
Each area was surveyed using either a motorboat (site
1) or local dugout canoes (site 2 & 3).
Observed birds were identified to the species level following Hawkins et
al. (2015) and counted using binoculars.
Several stops were conducted on mudflats or the shoreline to count large
aggregations of waterbirds using a zoom
telescope. Local fishermen were
additionally interviewed for the presence and absence of certain key species
and threats on an ad libitum basis.
Occurrence and abundance of waterbirds
was compared and discussed in relation to relevant Ramsar
criteria. The Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, signed
in Ramsar, Iran, in 1971, provides nine criteria to
use in the assessment and designation of Wetlands of International
Importance. The Ramsar
Criteria relevant to the assessment of the importance of the mangroves of the
MANAP for waterbirds are as follows:
Criterion 2: A wetland should be considered internationally
important if it supports Vulnerable, Endangered, or Critically Endangered
species or threatened ecological communities.
Criterion 4: A wetland should be considered
internationally important if it supports plant and/or animal species at a
critical stage in their life cycles, or provides refuge during adverse
conditions.
Criterion 5: A wetland should be considered
internationally important if it regularly supports 20,000 or more waterbirds.
Criterion 6: A wetland should be considered
internationally important if it regularly supports 1% of the individuals in a
population of one species or subspecies of waterbird.
The Ramsar convention came
into force in Madagascar in 1999. Since
then, Madagascar has designated an area of 2,147,911ha as wetlands of international
importance.
Mangrove quality was assessed using a rapid assessment
tool developed using a freely available custom-made application of the kobo
toolbox (www.kobotoolbox.org). A
detailed description of the method can be found in Zöckler
et al. (2021). In short, the scale
ranges from 1 (low quality) to 6 (high quality). Each level considers different aspects of
mangrove degradation, such as shape, height, diameter at breast height (DBH) of
remaining mangroves as well presence/absence of logging and percentage of light
to floor. Bird occurrences and mangrove
quality data were collected using a custom-made application (Android Open Data
Kit/KoBo APP) using a smartphone. GPS precision was
between 5 and 97 m with a mean of 26m. Maps and images were created using R
version 3.5.3 (R Core Team 2019).
Results
Bird diversity and abundance
We observed 71 species of birds (Annexe,
Table 1). Of these, special attention
was given to waterbirds and globally threatened
species, some of which were found in high numbers at individual sites.
Globally threatened bird species
The survey revealed interesting new data points for
several threatened species.
Specifically, Andrahangy shows profound
structural habitat variation, including lagoons, sandbanks, salt flats, and
mudflats, interspersed into the mangroves.
The area is likely to be very important for the Madagascar Plover Charadrius thoracicus.
Both, the Madagascar Teal and the Madagascar Plover exceed the 1% Ramsar threshold at single sites, Tsangajoly
and Andrahangy (see Table 1). Of the Madagascar Teal (Image 3) 30
individuals were observed at Tsangajoly (Image 4) and
26 Madagascar Plover (Image 5) at Andrahangy. Eight individuals of the Madagascar Heron
were seen at Tsangajoly (Image 6 & 7).
Furthermore, we did not observe the Madagascar Sacred
Ibis Threskiornis berneri
and the Madagascar Fish Eagle Haliaeetus vociferoides in either of the survey areas. Although we could not observe this Ibis
during the survey, interviews with local communities consistently revealed Andrahangy as the location where the Madagascar Sacred Ibis
was most observed recently.
Important waterbird
observations
Although none of the other waterbird
species were observed in numbers over 1% of the flyway population (Wetlands
International 2012) Whimbrel, Grey Plover, and Curlew Sandpiper were recorded
for Madagascar in comparatively large numbers (Safford & Hawkins
2013). Almost 2,000 Whimbrel and 600
Grey Plover were counted at Tsangajoly on 25 and 26
of September. The observation of 130
Bar-tailed Godwits on 25 September in Tsangajoly is
exceptional and noteworthy. In the same
area were large numbers of terns (both Common and Roseate Terns plus a few
Lesser and Greater Crested Terns) of over 3,500 individuals on 26 September. Such high numbers were not observed at the
same site the day before. It might be
possible that these large gatherings coincide with certain tidal cycles and could be easily missed when
surveying at different tides.
In Andrahangy, the most
common waterbird was the Curlew Sandpiper with over
2,200 individuals. A more thorough
survey of additional intermediary sites between the survey areas might yield
much higher counts in numbers potentially significant for the flyway population
beyond the 1% flyway threshold of 4,000 birds.
Mangrove quality
Image 2 shows the results of the three areas surveyed
within the MANAP and the scale of the mangrove quality assessment ranging from
1–6. The average mangrove quality varies
but ranges were still relatively high (Table 2) at all three sites, indicating
an overall good quality of mangroves.
Threats and losses, however, were identified and observed. The area around Tsangajoly
appears least degraded. Some cutting by
local people was observed at several sites, and browsing by cattle and goats on
the edges impacts the mangroves’ quality. In some cases, the mangroves have
been heavily impacted and stunted by persistent browsing by livestock.
As well as being impacted by resource use of local
communities, the mangroves at Tsangajoly were
affected by the establishment of shrimp ponds by the company AQUAMEN; this led
to the elimination of significant areas until shrimp production was abandoned
in 2007 after a virus had infected all shrimps globally. The company created an eco-resort, Lodge de
la Saline, which now offers fantastic birdwatching opportunities. The former shrimp ponds are now managed for waterbirds, and the owners have restored at least some of
the areas where mangroves are recovering.
In Andrahangy and especially
Kivalo, constant pressure from local people for
construction wood and firewood has a visibly higher impact, resulting in a
lower, but still reasonably high by national/global standards, average mangrove
quality scores of 4.3 and 3.8, respectively, compared to 4.5 at Tsangajoly (see Table 1 and Image 2b). Details of the
mangrove degradation assessment in the MANAP can be found in Zöckler et al. (2021).
Discussion
To the best of our knowledge, the mangrove quality
assessment is the most detailed field-based assessment of mangrove quality in
the region to date, and highlights the importance of the MANAP for conservation
of this ecosystem in Madagascar. In the
following, we briefly discuss our results in the light of Red Listed Species
and species that qualify for the >1% Ramsar
threshold at the three sites that were investigated.
Three bird species observed during our survey in the
MANAP are listed as globally threatened and belong to the five (Ardea humbloti, Anas
bernieri, Haliaeetus
vociferoides, Amaurornis
olivieri, Cahradrius
thoracicus) restricted range species of global
conservation concern that qualify the WTDUTR as Important Bird Area (Project Zicoma 2001).
The Madagascar Teal Anas bernieri is endemic to Madagascar and only
distributed along the western coastal stretch of the island. It is assessed as per the IUCN Red List as
globally ‘Endangered’ and with estimated 1,000–1,700 mature individuals (BirdLife International 2016a) possibly the most threatened
species observed. The species is well known
from the MANAP, specifically Lac Bedo, which is also
designated as a Ramsar site. Our survey adds one more occurrence for the
Madagascar Teal in Andrahangy, which is about 2km
away from Lac Bedo.
Young et al. (2014) counted several birds in the salines
of Menabe coastal wetlands and warned about
fragmentation of the population. In
total, we counted 30 birds simultaneously at Tsangajoly
(Lodge de la Saline). As the area is
large and difficult to survey it is likely that more birds are present. Although it is known that the species occurs
in loose groups of up to 40 individuals outside the breeding season, such a
high number of individuals at one place suggests that the ponds of the Lodge de
la Saline represent a crucial refuge for this species. The total amount of birds (32) equals 1.9–3.2
% of the estimated global population. Population size increased north of
the MANAP at Manambolomaty between 1999–2011 (Razanfindrajao et al. 2017).
Madagascar (Black-banded) Plover Charadrius thoracicus
is assessed as ‘Vulnerable’ on the IUCN Red List (BirdLife
International 2020b). The species is
confined to coastal habitats, and in total, we recorded at least 41 individuals
in Andrahangy and Kivalo
sandy mudflats. The total population has
been estimated based on suitable habitat models at around 3,100 (2,700-3,500)
individuals (Long et al. 2008); however, due to continuous habitat loss (Zefania & Skekely 2013), this
number could already be very much lower today.
According to the last IUCN Red List assessment, the 2008 estimate
equates to between 1,800 and 2,300 mature individuals. Our 41 individuals, therefore, exceed the 1%
(1.7–2.3 %) threshold of the global population of this species. Individuals observed seem to prefer sandy
mudflats only. The area visited in Tsangajoly estuary does not contain many of these
habitats. Therefore, it was not
surprising not to find the species here, although it was reported to occur in
2016 (www.Ramsar.org). Safford (1993)
reported aggregations of (12 individuals) in the Tsiribihina
delta as well. In Andrahangy,
we recorded at least 26 different birds, all distributed in the southern
part. Usually, the bird is observed in
groups of 2–10 birds (BirdLife International 2020b),
however, congregations of 26 and 15 respectively seem to be unusual and merit
special attention. More detailed survey
work is necessary and might reveal even higher numbers in the area. The coastal wetlands of the MANAP might be
one of their main strongholds along Madagascar’s western coast (Young et al.
2014).
Another endemic water bird in the area is
the Madagascar Heron Ardea humbloti, listed as globally
‘Endangered’. The species prefers
coastal wetlands but has also been observed inland (Sartain & Hawkins 2013;
BirdLife International 2020b). The total number of mature individuals is
estimated at 1,000 (BirdLife International
2016b). A severe threat to this species
is the replacement of suitable nesting trees around wetlands. Ten individuals have been reported at Lake Kimanaomby within the MANAP (Chechia 2020). In total, we observed eight birds, all in Tsangajoly (Lodge de la Saline) wetlands, which equals 0.8%
of the global population; the true number using the area seems almost certain
to exceed the 1% threshold. The species was also recorded in the Tsiribihina delta by Safford (1993) and in 2016 (Ramsar 2020).
Given the short time frame of the survey, this
underlines the importance of the wetlands of the MANAP, specifically the lakes
and the abandoned shrimp ponds of the Lodge de la Saline, for this species.
The latter applies as well to the Madagascar
Fish-Eagle Haliaeetus vociferoides (CR) and potentially the Madagascar
Sacred Ibis, which are known to exist but could not be recorded during our
survey. The Madagascar Sacred Ibis was one of the species given
special attention in this study. After
consultation with local stakeholders and interviews with local villagers in
preparation of the survey, two sites were specifically chosen for the search of
this species.
Safford (1993) recorded 44 individuals in Tsiribihina delta and Baie de Borongeny accessed via Tsangajoly
(site 1) was listed with 31 birds during the last published Ramsar
designation survey in 2016 (Ramsar 2020). Andrianarimisa & Razafimanjato (2010)
estimated the total population less than 2,000 individuals and listed 10
individuals from four sites within the MANAP.
All interviewed villagers, even in a community at the shoreline of the Baie de Borongeny (site 1),
consistently mentioned Andrahangy as the best place
to see the Madagascar Sacred Ibis. In
general, interviews revealed that the species exists at all three
locations. In Andrahangy,
a fisherman reported a sighting earlier
the same day, however, we were not able to confirm this
observation. Although its presence was
broadly confirmed by local fishermen, not detecting the species during our
survey could be due to its seasonal secretive behaviour,
but also due to relatively low numbers of individuals. Interviews suggest the species is still
present in the surveyed areas, but challenging and irregularly observed. As the species is most vocally active during
the breeding season and roosts in small colonies (Safford & Hawkins 2013),
a future survey should be conducted during the breeding and wet season in
November–April to increase the chance of detecting the species. Interviews with local fishermen did not
reveal any species-specific threats, such as collecting eggs in the area. Egg collection is known to be a major threat
for water birds in the MANAP (PAG Menabe Antimena 2014).
Individual answers, however, might be influenced by the anxiety of the
person interviewed of potential punishment for conducting illegal activity in
the PA. As this species is very
difficult to confuse with any other species (at least when not in flight),
monitoring by community members might be a good solution to conduct surveys
more regularly in the future. Overall, our numbers of waterbirds
(Tsangajoly >7500; Andrahangy
> 2500; Kivalo
~500) is comparable to survey estimates of other IBAs in the Antsalova region further north, specifically the Bemamba and Manambolomaty wetland
complex, where waterbird numbers range 266–4,105
across survey sites (see Razafimanjato et al. 2007;
Table 1).
Recommendations
We recommend several measures to improve waterbird and mangrove conservation in the area. More emphasis should be put on raising
environmental awareness in local communities of the importance of the mangroves
for people and nature. Mangrove
communities should be included in existing training programs to transfer
knowledge of sustainable resource use.
For example, mangrove cutting for firewood is a significant driver of
mangrove degradation and could be decreased by promoting fuel-efficient stove
solutions.
Furthermore, our rapid survey revealed mangrove
degradation details, which cannot be achieved using remote sensing
technologies. This knowledge is
essential for identifying important sites for mangrove restoration as degraded
mangroves can be restored much more easily than those already destroyed. It is, therefore, recommended to extend the
degradation assessment to the remaining wetlands in Menabe.
More survey work is needed for the Andrahangy
and Kivalo areas which currently lie outside existing
Ramsar sites, as they seem to be important for
Madagascar Plover, Madagascar Teal, potentially the Madagascar Sacred Ibis, and
the Curlew Sandpiper, of which more than 2,000 individuals were counted at Andrahangy alone. It
is worth considering an extension of the existing Ramsar
site to include the Andrahangy and Kivalo area into the Ramsar site
network. Both sites contained mangroves
with low levels of degradation.
Community projects have been initiated in Kivalo
and Andrahangy.
Both of them are still running and should be strengthened in the future. Both sites offer excellent opportunities for
community-based tourism, but implementation appeared difficult on site,
however, additional concepts for conservation benefits of local fishermen have
to be developed. The ongoing covid19
crisis shows that community-based tourism should not be the only alternative
income strategy for local communities supporting conservation.
The Lodge de la Saline (previously AQUAMEN) at Tsangajoly, a former shrimp farming company that has been
turned into a private protected area, seems to be a significant site for the
future management of several endemic threatened bird species in the area. Therefore, it is recommended to ensure strong
collaboration with the owners and consider integrating the abandoned shrimp
ponds to waterbird conservation measures.
Table 1. Distribution and abundance of birds recorded
in the mangroves and mudflats of the MANAP during the survey period 24 Sep–2
Oct 2019; water birds exceeding 1% are indicated in bold letters.
|
|
Family |
Species |
Scientific Name |
Tsangajoly |
Andrahangy |
Kivalo |
Total |
|
1 |
Anatidae |
Madagascar Teal |
Anas bernieri |
30 |
2 |
0 |
32 |
|
2 |
Anatidae |
Red-billed
Teal |
Anas erythrorhyncha |
15 |
0 |
0 |
15 |
|
3 |
Anatidae |
White-faced
Whistling-duck |
Dendrocygna viduata |
300 |
0 |
1 |
301 |
|
4 |
Apodidae |
Madagascar
Swift |
Cypsiurus parvus gracilis |
0 |
4 |
0 |
4 |
|
5 |
Caprimulgidae |
Madagascar
Nightjar |
Caprimulgus madagascariensis |
0 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
|
6 |
Burhinidae |
Madagascar
Pratincole* |
Glareola ocularis |
0 |
0 |
6 |
6 |
|
7 |
Charadriidae |
Madagascar
Three-banded Plover* |
Charadrius bifrontatus |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
8 |
Charadriidae |
Common
Ringed Plover |
Charadrius hiaticula |
70 |
26 |
12 |
108 |
|
9 |
Charadriidae |
Greater
Sandplover |
Charadrius leschenaultii |
10 |
45 |
30 |
85 |
|
10 |
Charadriidae |
White-fronted
Plover |
Charadrius marginatus |
1 |
10 |
19 |
30 |
|
11 |
Charadriidae |
Lesser
Sand-Plover |
Charadrius mongolus |
35 |
2 |
0 |
37 |
|
12 |
Charadriidae |
Kittlitz's Plover |
Charadrius pecuarius |
0 |
0 |
12 |
12 |
|
13 |
Charadriidae |
Madagascar Plover |
Charadrius thoracicus |
0 |
26 |
15 |
41 |
|
14 |
Charadriidae |
Pacific
Golden Plover |
Pluvialis fulva |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
15 |
Charadriidae |
Grey
Plover |
Pluvialis squatarola |
600 |
80 |
2 |
682 |
|
16 |
Dromadidae |
Crab-plover |
Dromas ardeola |
0 |
24 |
0 |
24 |
|
17 |
Recurvirostridae |
Black-winged
Stilt |
Himantopus himantopus |
120 |
0 |
2 |
122 |
|
18 |
Scolopacidae |
Common
Sandpiper |
Actitis hypoleucos |
20 |
20 |
40 |
80 |
|
19 |
Scolopacidae |
Ruddy
Turnstone |
Arenaria interpres |
10 |
10 |
12 |
32 |
|
20 |
Scolopacidae |
Sanderling |
Calidris alba |
15 |
8 |
4 |
27 |
|
21 |
Scolopacidae |
Curlew
Sandpiper |
Calidris ferruginea |
170 |
2200 |
300 |
2670 |
|
22 |
Scolopacidae |
Bar-tailed
Godwit |
Limosa lapponica |
130 |
0 |
0 |
130 |
|
23 |
Scolopacidae |
Whimbrel |
Numenius phaeopus |
1900 |
100 |
25 |
2025 |
|
24 |
Scolopacidae |
Common
Greenshank |
Tringa nebularia |
90 |
25 |
0 |
115 |
|
25 |
Scolopacidae |
Terek
Sandpiper |
Xenus cinereus |
158 |
21 |
9 |
188 |
|
26 |
Laridae |
Grey-headed
Gull |
Chroicocephalus cirrocephalus |
2 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
27 |
Sternidae |
Caspian
Tern |
Hydroprogne caspia |
41 |
0 |
0 |
41 |
|
28 |
Sternidae |
Lesser
Crested Tern |
Sterna bengalensis |
102 |
0 |
0 |
102 |
|
29 |
Sternidae |
Greater
Crested Tern |
Sterna bergii |
80 |
0 |
0 |
80 |
|
30 |
Sternidae |
Common
Tern |
Sterna hirundo |
3010 |
0 |
0 |
3010 |
|
31 |
Sternidae |
Roseate
Tern |
Sterna roseata |
436 |
0 |
0 |
436 |
|
32 |
Sternidae |
Saunders's
Tern |
Sternula saunderi |
0 |
1 |
3 |
4 |
|
33 |
Ardeidae |
Great
White Egret |
Ardea alba |
60 |
0 |
0 |
60 |
|
34 |
Ardeidae |
Grey
Heron |
Ardea cinerea |
6 |
1 |
0 |
7 |
|
35 |
Ardeidae |
Madagascar
Heron |
Ardea humbloti |
8 |
0 |
0 |
8 |
|
36 |
Ardeidae |
Purple
Heron |
Ardea purpurea |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
37 |
Ardeidae |
Striated
Heron |
Butorides striata |
8 |
4 |
4 |
16 |
|
38 |
Ardeidae |
Western
Reef-egret |
Egretta garzetta gularis |
25 |
3 |
9 |
37 |
|
39 |
Ardeidae |
Little Egret |
Egretta gazetta dimorpha |
60 |
4 |
5 |
69 |
|
40 |
Ciconiidae |
African
Openbill |
Anastomus lamelligerus |
0 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
|
41 |
Ciconiidae |
Yellow-billed
Stork |
Mycteria ibis |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
42 |
Threskiornithidae |
African
Spoonbill |
Platalea alba |
6 |
0 |
0 |
6 |
|
43 |
Threskiornithidae |
Glossy
Ibis |
Plegadis falcinellus |
0 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
|
44 |
Columbidae |
Madagascar
Turtle-dove |
Nesoenas picturata |
0 |
0 |
+ |
0 |
|
45 |
Columbidae |
Madagascar
Green-pigeon |
Treron australis |
0 |
0 |
7 |
7 |
|
46 |
Columbidae |
Namaqua
Dove |
Oena capensis |
+ |
0 |
0 |
+ |
|
47 |
Alcedinidae |
Madagascar
Kingfisher |
Crythornis madagascariensis |
2 |
7 |
4 |
13 |
|
48 |
Meropidae |
Olive
Bee-eater |
Merops superciliosus |
2 |
7 |
5 |
14 |
|
49 |
Upupidae |
Madagascar
Hoopoe |
Upupa marginata |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
50 |
Cuculidae |
Madagascar
Coucal |
Centropus toulou |
1 |
0 |
8 |
9 |
|
51 |
Cuculidae |
Red-capped
Coua |
Coua ruficeps |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
52 |
Acciptridae |
Black
Kite |
Milvus migrans |
+ |
+ |
0 |
0 |
|
53 |
Acciptridae |
Madagascar
Harrier-hawk |
Poyboroides radiatus |
3 |
2 |
2 |
7 |
|
54 |
Falconidae |
Madagascar
Kestrel |
Falco newtoni |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
55 |
Rallidae |
White-throated
Rail |
Dryolimnas curveri |
1 |
2 |
8+ |
11+ |
|
56 |
Turnicidae |
Madagascar
Buttonquail |
Turnix nigricollis |
4 |
0 |
2 |
6 |
|
57 |
Acrocephalidae |
Madagascar
Swamp-warbler |
Acrocephalus newtoni |
+ |
+ |
0 |
0 |
|
58 |
Cisticolidae |
Common
Jery |
Neomixis tenella |
+ |
+ |
+ |
0 |
|
59 |
Dicruridae |
Crested
Drongo |
Dicrurus forficatus |
+ |
3 |
0 |
3 |
|
60 |
Nectariniidae |
Souimanga Sunbird |
Nectarina souimanga |
0 |
4 |
2 |
6 |
|
61 |
Ploceidae |
Madagascar
Fody |
Foudia madagascariensis |
+ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
62 |
Ploceidae |
Madagascar
Mannikin |
Lepidopygia nana |
+ |
0 |
0 |
+ |
|
63 |
Pycnonotidae |
Madagascar
Bulbul |
Hypsipetes madagascariensis |
0 |
+ |
+ |
0 |
|
64 |
Turdidae |
Madagascar
Magpie-robin |
Copsychus albospecularis |
+ |
0 |
+ |
0 |
|
65 |
Vangidae |
White-headed
Vanga |
Artamella viridis |
1 |
0 |
3 |
4 |
|
66 |
Vangidae |
Sickle-billed
Vanga |
Falculea palliata |
0 |
0 |
5 |
5 |
|
67 |
Vangidae |
Common
Newtonia |
Newtonia brunneicauda |
+ |
1 |
3 |
4 |
|
68 |
Phoenicopteridae |
Lesser
Flamingo |
Phoeniconaias minor |
120 |
0 |
0 |
120 |
|
69 |
Psittacidae |
Grey-headed
Lovebird |
Agapornis canus |
1 |
0 |
20 |
21 |
|
70 |
Psittacidae |
Vasa
Parrot |
Coracopsis sp. |
7 |
94 |
2 |
103 |
|
71 |
Strigidae |
Madagascar
Scops-owl |
Otus rutilus |
1 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
|
*not
in mangroves but brackish water close to Baobab Amoreux/Mangily |
|||||||
Table 2. Average mangrove quality in the MANAP in Sep
2019 (max. range 1–6).
|
|
Site |
Average (range) mangrove quality |
No of mapped mangrove sites |
|
1 |
Tsangajoly |
4.5 (1.5–6.0) |
59 |
|
2 |
Andrahangy |
4.3 (2.0–5.5) |
29 |
|
3 |
Kivalo |
3.8 (1.0–5.0) |
27 |
References
Andrianarimisa, A. & G. Razafimanjato
(2010). Madagascar Sacred Ibis Threskiornis bernieri: current
population status, distribution, and implications for conservation, pp.
120–130. In: Harebottle, D.M., A.J.F.K. Craig, M.D.
Anderson, H. Rakotomanana & M. Muchai (eds). Proceedings of the
12th Pan-African Ornithological Congress, 2008. Cape Town, Animal
Demography Unit.
Baba, S., H.T. Chan & S. Aksornkoae (2013). Useful Products from Mangrove and other Coastal
Plants. ISME Mangrove Educational Book Series No. 3. International Society for
Mangrove Ecosystems (ISME), Okinawa, Japan, and International Tropical Timber
Organization (ITTO), Yokohama, Japan, 99pp.
BirdLife International (2016a). Anas bernieri. The
IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016: e.T22680252A92852755.
Downloaded on 14 October 2020. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-3.RLTS.T22680252A92852755.en
BirdLife International (2016b). Ardea humbloti. The IUCN Red List of Threatened
Species 2016: e.T22697012A93598644. Downloaded on 15 October 2020. https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2016-3.RLTS.T22697012A93598644.en
BirdLife International (2020a). Important Bird Areas factsheet: Wetlands of the Tsiribihina delta and upper Tsiribihina
river. Downloaded from http://www.birdlife.org on 17 March 2020.
BirdLife International (2020b). Species factsheets: Anas bernieri,
Ardea humbloti, Charadrius thoracicus.
Downloaded from http://www.birdlife.org on 01 August 2020.
Carugati, L., B. Gatto, E. Rastelli,
M. Lo Martire, C. Coral, S. Greco & R. Danovaro (2018). Impact of mangrove forests degradation on
biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. Scientific Reports 8, pp 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-31683-0
Chechia, A.M. (2020). Population evaluation of Humblot’s
Heron and Madagascar Fish Eagle at lake Kimanaomby,
in new protected area Menabe Antimena.
Report. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.18055.96165
Clausen, A., H. Rakotondrazafy, H.O. Ralison
& A. Andriamanalina (2010). Mangrove Ecosystems in Western Madagascar: An
Analysis of Vulnerability to Climate Change, WWF Study Report, 24pp.
Global Forest Watch (2014). World Resources Institute. www.globalforestwatch.org.
Accessed on 13 October 2020.
Goodman S.M., M.J. Raherilalao & S. Wohlhauser
(2018). Site 85 Menabe Antimena, pp.
1494–1510. In: The Terrestrial Protected
Areas of Madagascar. Their
History, Description, And Biota. Association Vaharatra,
Antananarivo.
Hamilton, S.E. & D. Casey
(2016). Creation of a high spatio-temporal resolution global database of continuous
mangrove forest cover for the 21st century (CGMFC-21). Global
Ecology and Biogeography 25(6): 729–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12449
Hawkins, F., R. Safford & A.
Skerrett (2015). Birds of Madagascar and the
Indian Ocean Islands. Helm Field Guides, Bloomsbury Publishing, 336pp.
Hudson, M., H. Andrianandrasana,
R. Lewis, R. Gerrie & L. Concannon (2019). Unprecedented Rates of Deforestation in Menabe Antimena: Can We Halt This
Catastrophic Damage?, Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust, 22pp, Downloaded on
15. August 2020.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/5744009-Durrell-2018-Unprecedented-rates-of.html
Jones, T., L. Glass, S. Gandhi, L. Ravaoarinorotsihoarana, A. Carro,
L. Benson, H. Ratsimba, C. Giri,
D. Randriamanatena & G. Cripps (2016). Madagascar’s
mangroves: quantifying nation-wide and ecosystem specific dynamics, and
detailed contemporary mapping of distinct ecosystems. Remote Sensing
8(2): 106. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs8020106
Long, P.R., S. Zefania,
R.H. French-Constant & T. Székely (2008). Estimating the population size of an endangered
shorebird, the Madagascar Plover, using a habitat suitability model. Animal Conservation 11(2): 118–127. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-1795.2008.00157.x
PAG Menabe
Antimena (2014). Plan d’amenagement et de gestion de la
nouvelle Aire Protegee Menabe Antimena. Fanamby, Durrell, Ministere de l’Environnement, de l’Ecologie et des Forets, Centre
National de Formation, d’Etude et de Recherche sur l’ Environnement et Foresterie.
Project Zicoma
(2001). Madagascar, pp. 489–537. In:
Fishpool, L.D.C. & M.I. Evans (eds.). Important Bird Areas in Africa and
Associated Islands: Priority Sites for Conservation. Pisces Publications & BirdLife
International, Newbury & Cambridge, UK, 1129pp..
Razafimanjato, G., T.S. Sam & R. Thorstrom
(2007). Waterbird
monitoring in the Antsalova region, western
Madagascar. Waterbirds 30(3): 441–447. https://doi.org/10.1675/1524-4695(2007)030[0441:WMITAR]2.0.CO;2
Razafindrajao, F., A.J. Bamford, H.G. Young, A. Andrianarimisa,
A.I.B. Aboudou & R.E. Lewis (2017). Reassessing
the conservation outlook for Madagascar’s endemic Anatidae
following the creation of new protected areas. Wildfowl 67: 72–86.
Rasolofo, M.V. (1997). Use of
mangroves by traditional fishermen in Madagascar. Mangroves and Salt Marshes 1: 243–253.
R Core Team (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical
computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL
https://www.R-project.org/.
Safford, R.J. (1993). The Madagascar Teal Anas bernieri:
a preliminary survey from Antsalova to Morondava. Dodo 29: 95–102.
Safford, R.J. & A.F.A. Hawkins
(eds.) (2013). Birds of Africa. Volume VIII.
The Malagasy Region. Helm London, 1024pp.
Sanderman, J., T. Hengl, G. Fiske, K.
Solvik, M.F. Adame, L.
Benson, J.J. Bukoski, P. Carnell, M. Cifuentes-Jara, D. Donato, C. Duncan, E.M. Eid, P. Ermgassen, C.J.E. zu, Lewis, P.I.
Macreadie, L. Glass, S. Gress,
S. Jardine, L. T.G. Jones & E. Landis (2018). A global map of mangrove forest soil carbon at 30 m
spatial resolution. Environmental Research Letters 13(5): 055002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aabe1c
Sartain, A. & A.F.A. Hawkins
(2013). Madagascar Heron Ardea humbloti, pp.
192–194. In: Safford, R.J. & A.F.A Hawkins (eds.). The Birds of Africa.
Vol. VIII: The Malagasy Region, Christopher Helm, London, 192–193pp.
Shapiro, H., D. Randriamanantena, H. Kuechle
& F. Razafindramasy (2019). The Mangroves of Madagascar: Cover, Status and Trends
2000–2018. WWF Germany, Berlin, and WWF Madagascar, Antananarivo, 39pp.
Young, H.G., R.P. Young, R.E.
Lewis, F. Razafindrajao, Abdallah Iahia
Bin Aboudou & J.E. Fa (2014). Patterns of waterbird
diversity in central western Madagascar: where are the priority sites for
conservation? Wildfowl 64: 35–53.
Wetlands International (2012). Waterbird
Population Estimates, 5th edition. Wetlands International,
Wageningen, The Netherlands. https://www.wetlands.org/publications/waterbird-populations-estimates-fifth-edition/
Ramsar (2020). Ramsar
Sites Information Service, Taxonomic lists, Ramsar
site: Mangroves de Tsiribihina,
https://rsis.ramsar.org/ris/2302
Zefania, S. & T. Székely
(2013). Madagascar Plover Charadrius thoracicus, pp.
395–397. In: Safford, R.J. & A.F.A. Hawkins (ed.), The Birds of Africa.
Vol. VIII: The Malagasy Region. Christopher Helm, London.
Zinner, D., C. Wygoda, L. Razafimanantsoa, R.T. Rasoloarison,
H. Andrianandrasana, J.U. Ganzhorn
& F. Torkler (2014). Analysis of
deforestation patterns in the central Menabe,
Madagascar, between 1973 and 2010. Regional
Environmental Change 14: 157–166.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-013-0475-x
Zöckler, C., D. Wodehouse & M. Markolf (2021). A Visual
Assessment Scale for Rapid Evaluation of Mangrove Degradation, Using Examples
from Myanmar and Madagascar. In Mangrove Ecosystem Restoration [Working Title].
IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.95340
Zöckler, C., D. Wodehouse & M. Markolf
(2021). A Visual Assessment Scale for
Rapid Evaluation of Mangrove Degradation, Using Examples from Myanmar and
Madagascar [Online First], IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.95340 Available
from: https://www.intechopen.com/online-first/a-visual-assessment-scale-for-rapid-evaluation-of-mangrove-degradation-using-examples-from-myanmar-a