Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area

West Africa > Liberia > Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area

Français | Português | Español | Bahasa Indonesia | Melayu

Summary

Loading map...

• Western chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes verus) are likely to be present in Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area at low densities.
• The population size is unknown.
• The chimpanzee population trend is unknown.
• This site has a total size of 1351 km².
• Key threats to chimpanzees are hunting, large-scale mining and commercial logging.
• Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area spans three Key Biodiversity Areas: Grand Kru Southwest, -Northwest-, and the -Northeast forest blocks.

Site characteristics

This area preserves the only remaining location in Liberia that preserves an undeveloped corridor connecting the coastal environment with the interior wet evergreen forest (mix of primary and secondary forest and coastal marshes). It contains an important section of the upper Dugbe River watershed and tributaries (Yaza and Sinoe Creeks). The area contains approximately 40 kilometers of Atlantic Ocean coastline, and estuaries. It is known to support important populations of the vulnerable forest elephant Loxodonta africana, zebra duiker Cephalophus zebra, and pygmy hippopotamus Hexaprotodon liberiensis, as well as the endangered Upper Guinea red colobus Piliocolobus badius (Johnson 2015).

Table 1. Basic site information for Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area

Species	Pan troglodytes verus
Area	1,351 km²
Coordinates	Lat: 4.87 , Lon: -8.54
Type of site	Proposed protected area
Habitat types	Subtropical/tropical moist lowland forest, Grassland, Marine coastal/supratidal
Type of governance

Types of sites Governance types Habitat types

Ape status

No information about surveys in this area could be found. Tweh and colleagues (2014) surveyed two line transects in Grand-Kru River Gee Proposed Protected Area, however, they did not find chimpanzee nests or other signs of their presence (Junker unpubl. data). The nationwide chimpanzee abundance model published by Junker et al. (2015) suggests that chimpanzees probably only occur at (very) low densities in this area. Further analysis of the nationwide dataset revealed that Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area was not located in a conservation priority area in terms of chimpanzee density, and mammal and tree diversity (Junker et al. 2015). Interview surveys showed that many villages near Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area do not practice taboos against the killing or eating of chimpanzees (Junker unpubl. data).

Table 2. Ape population estimates reported for Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area

Species	Year	Occurrence	Encounter or vistation rate (nests/km; ind/day)	Density estimate [ind./ km²] (95% CI)	Abundance estimate (95% CI)	Survey area	Sampling method	Analytical framework	Source	Comments	A.P.E.S. database ID
Pan troglodytes verus	2023	Present				Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area	Camera trap		FFI 2023
Pan troglodytes verus	2010-2012					Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area	Other		Junker et al. 2015	Only 2 line transects surveyed, estimate based on a nationwide chimpanzee abundance model. Chimpanzees are likely to be present.

Sampling methods Analytical frameworks

Threats

During the nationwide chimpanzee and large mammal survey, teams surveyed two line transects and recces inside Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area and encountered high amounts of hunting signs. The teams also did not find any large mammal tracks, except of humans Homo sapiens. They also found signs of artisanal mining (Junker unpubl. data). A considerable part of the proposed protected area is covered by Mineral Exploration Licenses (MEL), Mineral Exploration Agreements (MEA), and Mineral Development Agreements (MDA) by various companies (Johnson 2015). It is unclear if/when mining activities will commence in the area. Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area overlapped with illegally issued Private-Use Permits (PUPs) for commercial logging. Private Use Permits were a type of logging licence designed to allow private land owners to cut trees on their property, but which were reportedly subject to misuse by commercial logging companies. After investigations by Global Witness (Global Witness 2013) much public outcry and extensive media coverage, PUPs have now largely been rescinded (Johnson 2015). Additionally, the site also overlaps with a Proposed Forestry Concession (Junker et al. 2015). However, it is not clear if/when logging activities will commence.

Table 3. Threats to apes reported for Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area

Category	Specific threats	Threat level	Description	Year of threat
3 Energy production & mining	3.2.3 Artisanal mining	High (more than 70% of population affected)	Mining for gold and other minerals (Johnson 2015), artisanal mining (Junker unpubl. data). Mining activities recorded on recce transects (Fauna & Flora 2023).	2015-Ongoing (2023)
5 Biological resource use	5.1 Hunting & collecting terrestrial animals	High (more than 70% of population affected)	Nationwide survey teams found many empty cartridges and snares and no large mammal tracks except of humans (Junker unpubl. data). Signs of hunting recorded on recce transects (Fauna & Flora 2023).	2012-Ongoing (2023)
5 Biological resource use	5.3 Logging & wood harvesting	High (more than 70% of population affected)	Area overlapped with Private-Use Permits, which have been withdrawn and with a Proposed Forestry Concession	Ongoing (2015)

Threats

Conservation activities

No conservation activities have been reported for the site.

Table 4. Conservation activities reported for Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area

Category	Specific activity	Description	Implementing organization(s)	Year of activity
5 Protection & restoration	5.5 Demarcate and enforce boundaries of protected areas	Bamford pers. comm. 2024		Ongoing (2024)

Conservation activities

Challenges

Table 5. Challenges reported for Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area

Challenges	Specific challenges	Source	Year(s)
	Not reported
	Unknown

Challenges

Enablers

Table 6. Enablers reported for Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area

Enablers	Specific enablers	Source	Year(s)
1 Site management
2 Resources and capacity
3 Engaged community
4 Institutional support
5 Ecological context
6 Safety and stability

Enablers

Documented behaviours

Table 7. Behaviours documented for Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area

Category	Behavior	Observation type	Prevalence	Observation dates	Source	Habituation	Species	Comment
	Not reported
	Not reported

Behaviours

Exposure to climate change impacts

As part of a study on the exposure of African great ape sites to climate change impacts, Kiribou et al. (2024) extracted climate data and data on projected extreme climate impact events for the site. Climatological characteristics were derived from observation-based climate data provided by the Inter-Sectoral Impact Model Intercomparison Project (ISIMIP, www.isimip.org). Parameters were calculated as the average across each 30-year period. For 1981-2010, the EWEMBI dataset from ISIMIP2a was used. For the two future periods (2021-2050 and 2071-2099) ISIMIP2b climate data based on four CMIP5 global climate models were used. For future projections, two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP) were used. RCP 2.6 is a scenario with strong mitigation measures in which global temperatures would likely rise below 2C. RCP 6.0 is a scenario with medium emissions in which global temperatures would likely rise up to 3C by 2100. For the number of days with heavy precipitation events, the 98th percentile of all precipitation days (>1mm/d) was calculated for the 1979-2013 reference period as a threshold for a heavy precipitation event. Then, for each year, the number of days above that threshold was derived. The figures on temperature and precipitation anomaly show the deviation from the mean temperature and mean precipitation for the 1979-2013 reference period.

The estimated exposure to future extreme climate impact events (crop failure, drought, river flood, wildfire, tropical cyclone, and heatwave) is based on a published dataset by Lange et al. 2020 derived from ISIMIP2b data. The same global climate models and RCPs as described above were used. Within each 30-year period, the number of years with an extreme event and the average proportion of the site affected were calculated (Kiribou et al. 2024).

Table 8. Estimated past and projected climatological characteristics in Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area

Value	1981-2010	2021-2050, RCP 2.6	2021-2050, RCP 6.0	2071-2099, RCP 2.6	2071-2099, RCP 6.0
Mean temperature [C]	25.2	26.2	26.1	26.3	27.4
Annual precipitation [mm]	2752	2739	2852	2771	2827
Max no. consecutive dry days (per year)	15.3	16	14.5	15.8	15.2
No. days with heavy precipitation (per year)	6	11.1	11.6	11.2	13.9

Table 9. Projected exposure of apes to extreme climate impact events in Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area

Type	No. of years with event (2021-2050, RCP 2.6)	% of site exposed (2021-2050, RCP 2.6)	No. of years with event (2021-2050, RCP 6.0)	% of site exposed (2021-2050, RCP 6.0)	No. of years with event (2070-2099, RCP 2.6)	% of site exposed (2070-2099, RCP 2.6)	No. of years with event (2070-2099, RCP 6.0)	% of site exposed (2070-2099, RCP 6.0)
Crop failure	2.5	0.02	1.5	0.02	2.5	0.02	3.5	0.02
Drought	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
Heatwave	11.5	100	10	100	15	100	17	100
River flood	0	0	1.25	1.77	0	0	0	0
Tropical cyclone	0	0	1	0.43	0	0	0	0
Wildfire	30	0.35	30	0.33	29	0.45	28.75	0.34

• 

  Precipitation anomaly in Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area

• 

  Temperature anomaly in Grand Kru-River Gee Proposed Protected Area

References

Fauna & Flora International (2023). Threat assessment of Cestos-Senkwehn and Grand Kru-River Gee proposed protected areas. Conservation Works/USAID.

Global Witness. 2013. Avoiding the Riptide: Liberia must Enforce its Forest Laws to Prevent a New Wave of Illegal and Destructive Logging Contracts. Global Witness.

Johnson S. 2015. Aggregated Biodiversity Offsets: A Roadmap for Liberia’s Mining Sector. Unpublished report by the World Bank Group (WBG) and Program On Forests (PROFOR).

Junker, J., Boesch, C., Freeman, T., Mundry, R., Stephens, C., & Kühl, H. S. (2015). Integrating wildlife conservation with conflicting economic land-use goals in a West African biodiversity hotspot. Basic and Applied Ecology, 16(8), 690-702. doi:10.1016/j.baae.2015.07.002

Tweh, C. G., Lormie, M. M., Kouakou, C. Y., Hillers, A., Kühl, H. S., & Junker, J. (2015). Conservation status of chimpanzees Pan troglodytes verus and other large mammals in Liberia: a nationwide survey. Oryx, 49(4), 710-718. doi:10.1017/s0030605313001191

Wilson, S. T. K., Wang, H., Kabenge, M., & Qi, X. (2017). The mining sector of Liberia: current practices and environmental challenges. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 24(23), 18711-18720. doi:10.1007/s11356-017-9647-4

Kiribou, R., Tehoda, P., Chukwu, O., Bempah, G., Kühl, H. S., Ferreira, J., …, & Heinicke, S. (2024). Exposure of African ape sites to climate change impacts. PLOS Climate, 3(2), e0000345. doi:10.1371/journal.pclm.0000345

Page created by: Andrew Bamford Date: 2024-09-05