Pan Africa NewsThe Newsletter of the Committee for the Careand Conservation of Chimpanzees, and theMahale Wildlife Conservation Society
DECEMBER 2003

VOL. 10, NO. 2

Contents

P.A.N. EDITORIAL STAFF
Chief Editor:
Toshisada Nishida, Kyoto University, Japan
Associate Editors:
Christophe Boesch, Max-Planck Institute, Germany
Jane Goodall, Jane Goodall Institute, USA
Takayoshi Kano, Kyoto Sangyo University, Japan
Tetsuro Matsuzawa, Kyoto University, Japan
William C. McGrew, Miami University, USA
John C. Mitani, University of Michigan, USA
Vernon Reynolds, Oxford University, UK
Yukimaru Sugiyama, Tokai-Gakuen University, Japan
Shigeo Uehara, Kyoto University, Japan
Richard W. Wrangham, Harvard University, USA
Editorial Secretaries:
Koichiro Zamma, Kyoto University, Japan
Noriko Itoh, Kyoto University, Japan
Michio Nakamura, Japan Monkey Centre, Japan
Kazuhiko Hosaka, Kamakura Women’s University, Japan
Michael A. Huffman, Kyoto University, Japan

Instructions to Authors:
Pan Africa News publishes articles, notes, reviews,
forums, news, essays, book reviews, letters to editor,and classified ads (restricted to non-profit organizations)on any aspect of conservation and research regarding
chimpanzees and bilias. Contributors are requested towrite in English and the papers except forums,
reviews and essays should usually be 1,000 words orless. Manuscripts should be submitted by e-mail to:
PAN@jinrui.zool.kyoto-u.ac.jp
Photos and figures, however, should be sent by air
mail to: T. Nishida, Dept. of Zoology, Graduate Schoolof Science, Kyoto University, KitashirakawaOiwakecho, Sakyo, Kyoto, Japan.
Publication of the next issue will be June 2004.
Deadline for manuscripts is the end of April.

<ESSAY>
Losing Ten Pounds to Gain
Knowledge
Frans B. M. de Waal

Living Links, Yerkes Primate Center
Emory University, Atlanta, USA

Last summer, I spent ten days in the Mahale
Mountains National Park. I had been warned thatthe chimpanzees are often up in the mountains in

Printed on recycled paper<ESSAY>
Losing ten pounds to gain knowledge.

By Frans B. M. de Waal 17

Papers from the bonobo workshop 2003

<NOTE>
Introduction: Toward the resumption of bonobo study
and conservation.

By Takeshi Furuichi 20<NOTE>
Field research at Lukuru, Democratic Republic ofCongo.

By Jo Thompson & Mvula Lomba Tshina-tshina 21<NOTE>
Conserving Pan paniscus in the Salonga National Park,
Democratic Republic of Congo.
By Gay E. Reinartz 23<NOTE>Lui Kotal - A new site for field research on bonobos in
the Salonga National Park.
By Gottfried Hohmann & Barbara Fruth 25<NOTE>
Field research at Parc National de la Salonga,
Democratic Republic of Congo.
By Jo Thompson, Tshobo Masunda, Ilonga Djema Willy,& Mvula Lomba Tshina-tshina 27<NOTE>
Confirmation of bonobo population around Lac Tumba.

By Ndunda Mwanza, Mbangi Mulavwa, Ihomi Mola,& Kumugo Yangozene 29<NOTE>
Resumption of bonobo studies at Wamba, the Luo
Reserve for Scientific Research.

By Takeshi Furuichi & Ndunda Mwanza 31

August, far away from Kansyana, the base camp,
and that sometimes they are not seen at all during
this time. But upon arrival in the camp with Dr.
Toshisada Nishida, while we were still unpacking
our bags, it was my luck to hear them hooting in
the distance. Most of the M-group chimpanzees
were coming down the mountain, making theirappearance the very same afternoon, banging thelife out of some poor metal sheds near the camp.
This was my very first sight of wild chimpanzees,
because even though I have visited field sites ofother primates (such as orangutans, muriquis,

17

18

Pan Africa News, 10(2), December, 2003

various macaques, olive baboons, and gibbons),
chimpanzees somehow had escaped me. This israther embarrassing for someone considered anexpert on the species. So, when Dr. Nishidamentioned that he was close to retirement, andthat 2003 would be the perfect year to stop by inTanzania, I did not think twice.
I saw chimps every day, often groups of them,and ran after them up and down the mountain,
losing about 1 pound per day. I am not used to
expend so much energy simply to see my animals. I
observe them in captivity, often in zoos, or conduct
behavioral experiments, such as at the Yerkes
Primate Center. There my chimpanzees live in
outdoor enclosures that obviously prevent much of
the behavior seen in the field. I have no trouble
explaining why captive work is and will always
remain essential for a full understanding of ape
behavior, yet at the same time it is obvious that
only studies in their natural habitat can tell us
what their behavior is for. Questions about socialand cognitive evolution require field data, and here

I was at one of the premier sites with one of thetrue pioneers, who had started out about forty
years ago on this very same spot. My visit taught
me nothing but respect for the persistence and hard
work that goes into collecting scientific information
on wild apes.
I will not go into details of life in the camp,which I soon began to call the Mahale Sheraton
owing to its exorbitant luxury, nor of the food we
ate and warm beer we drank. The main thing wasto get up at 6 AM, eat a quick breakfast, and get
going as soon as it was light. The chimpanzees
needed to be found, and the camp had several
young scientists and many trackers to help withthis. If chimps were silent, retiring types, finding
them in the morning in such a vast stretch of forest
might be impossible, but fortunately these animals
are about the noisiest in the world. Their relianceon vocalizations was in fact what struck me most. I
am familiar with all of the varied calls of thespecies, but had never realized how much the life ofwild chimpanzees is totally built around these.
When you follow an individual such as Alofu, aprime adult male, you see him stand still and listen
to chimpanzees in the distance all the time. You cansee him decide between different courses of action:
reply with his own calls; move towards the sourceof the sounds (sometimes in a great hurry leaving
me struggling through tangled vines), or act as if
what he heard is of no importance. The forest isalive with calls, some nearby some faint in the
distance, and social life is lived to a large degree ina world of vocalizations. This is not true in captivity,
or only to a limited degree, because there the apes
can almost always see each other, and are never far
away.
Several fights broke out. I am used to follow
these scenes in the greatest possible detail noting
who supports whom, the exact aggression intensity
in every dyad, and of course follow-up behavior,such as reconciliation. Forget about this in Mahale:a fight means that you are surrounded by thescreams of invisible chimpanzees, lots of shaking
bushes and trees, and an occasional brief
appearance of a participant out of the undergrowth.
Obviously, field workers become very good at
gaining a fuller picture from bits and pieces of
information, but it undeniably is a process ofreconstruction.
I was excited to recognize and photograph manyof the known cultural patterns of the Mahale
chimpanzees, such as hand-clasp grooming,leaf-clipping, and the riverbed display. The latter
was first described for Ntologi (the legendary
previous alpha male of M-group), who used todislodge large boulders from a dry riverbed during
displays. Alofu, who in his younger years may have

Figure 1 The hand-clasp grooming of M-group is not reallycharacterized a clasp, but rather by two leaning hands.
Photograph by Frans de Waal.

Pan Africa News, 10(2), December, 2003
watched Ntologi, gave similar displays full ofstrength and rhythm. Of special interest to me was
the well-documented hand-clasp grooming (1), since
we know this pattern also from one of our captive
groups (2). McGrew et al. (3) were right to stressthat cultural primatologists should not only look forgroup-specific customs, but also for variation withineach custom. The hand-clasp of M-group isdifferent than ours. When our chimpanzees lift
their arms above their heads during grooming,
their hands firmly clasp, whereas in M-group one
sees no clasping at all, only two “hanging” hands
resulting from a mutual leaning of wrists (Figure 1).
Even though the scientists and trackers
scrupulously avoided any direct interaction withthe chimpanzees, which seems a wise strategy, I
could see how the apes reacted differently to people
they knew compared with the occasional tourists
crossing our path with their guides. Relationships
of mutual trust develop. I remember walking anentire day behind Pinky, a female carrying athree-year-old daughter. The daughter could not sit
still, sometimes rolling on her back on her mother’sback, and kept staring at me. She ended up playing
a game where she would sit in the path untill I got
within a few steps, then race to catch up with mom,jumping onto her, only to drop to the ground again
and wait for the next encounter with the bipedal
ape following her. She must have sensed that I ama chimp friend.
Chimpanzee politics were also to be seen, eventhough I must say that I would never haveunderstood much of it without the backgroundinformation provided by Dr. Nishida. The alphamale, Fanana, had been on safari for two weeks
with an attractive female. During his protracted
absence, the beta male, Alofu, impressed everybody
with his displays. He often had Kalunde by his side.
Kalunde is the oldest male, only about half the sizeof the prime adult males: at the age of about forty,
he has shrunk (Figure 2). As usual in chimpanzees,
these over-the-hill characters are real politicalschemer. Kalunde often groomed Alofu, anddisplayed along with him. Until Fanana returned,
that is. This was the day on which I followed Alofu.
I didn’t know what was the matter with him, but hetraveled up, then down, then up, the mountain, anddid this so many times that our follow became themost protracted physical exercise I have everengaged in. Alofu often touched his own nipples, abehavior I know as self-reassurance in bonobo
males. He must have been totally nervous about
Fanana’s return, and indeed in the days thereafter
there existed obvious tensions due to the fact that
Alofu failed to pant-grunt to Fanana. I don’t know
how this worked itself out, but it was fascinating to

19

Figure 2: Kalunde reminded me of Yeroen at the Arnhem Zoo,and another old male we now have at the Yerkes Primate
Center, who are astute at exploiting the competitive tendencies
among younger, stronger males, carving out very powerful key
positions for themselves. Kalunde is one of the few individuals
who was already alive when chimpanzee research in the
Mahale Mountains started. Photograph by Frans de Waal.

see how Kalunde switched camps. One moment theold male would be grooming Fanana, the next
moment he would be hanging out with Alofu, as if
he was trying to guess which side it would be bestfor him to be on.
I was literally baptized as a field worker while
watching a hunt, standing under a tree in which
several adult males and swollen females weredividing the carcass of a red Colobus monkey. We
learned about the hunt through hooting andscreams of chimpanzees mixed with the shrieks ofmonkeys. Following the laws of gravity, thediarrhea of one of the males during the commotion
caused me to enter a rather smelly phase of mycareer. I am not complaining. It was a thrill for me
to see al of this, having read countless descriptions.
Nothing beats the real experience. All I had to doafterwards was take a “shower” in the Sheraton.

References(1) Nakamura M 2002. Grooming hand-clasp in
Mahale M group chimpanzees: Implications for
culture in social behaviours. In: Behavioural
Diversity in Chimpanzees and Bonobos. Boesch
C, Hohmann G, Marchant LF (eds), Cambridge
University Press: Cambridge. pp 71-83.
(2) de Waal FBM, Seres M 1997. Propagation of
handclasp grooming among captive chimpanzees.
Am J Primatol 43: 339-346.
(3) McGrew WC, Marchant LF, Scott SE, Tutin
CEG 2001. Intergroup differences in social
custom of wild chimpanzees: The grooming
hand-clasp of the Mahale Mountains, Tanzania.
Curr Anthropol 42: 148-153.

20

Pan Africa News, 10(2), December, 2003
Papers from the

BONOBO WORKSHOP2003<NOTE>
Introduction: Toward theResumption of Bonobo Studyand Conservation
Takeshi Furuichi

Wamba Committee for Bonobo Research
Faculty of International Studies, Meiji-Gakuin University

organizations have acquired concessions for
logging in large areas of the bonobo habitat.
Though their activities have also beeninterrupted by the war, now they may resume
logging activities, much earlier than the
researchers or conservationists reestablish
activities for conservation.
The other major issue is the necessity tocoordinate the research. During the war whenbonobo research was not undertaken, enormous
progress was made in the ecological andbehavioral studies of chimpanzees and othergreat apes. Those studies posed new, crucial
questions in relation to bonobos, which havenever been answered. Because bonobos inhabit
the central part of the rain forest in Africa, wecannot neglect bonobos in the global studies on
the evolution of the great apes. As do
chimpanzees or gorillas, bonobos inhabit avariety of habitat: from the dense rain forest to
the patchy vegetation of forest and grassland
savanna. Therefore, we need to makecomparative studies between different study sites
to acquire better knowledge of the ecology andsocial behaviors of bonobos and to makecomparisons between bonobos and other great
apes. Now that many researchers are to resume
study using new methods, it is a great
opportunity to develop methods that can becommonly used at different study sites.
On July 21-23, 2003, we had a workshop in

Because the civil war moved toward ceasefire in
Democratic Republic of Congo, the long awaited
field study on bonobos was resumed in manysites. Some researchers returned to their study
sites where they had been carrying out researchand conservation activities until the war brokeout, and other researchers established new study
sites (Figure 1).
At this new start line for bonobo (bilia) studies,
we are faced with two major issues. One is theconservation issue. During the war, the numberof bonobos in the wild seemed to have greatly
decreased. Soldiers killed and ate them forsurvival, and village people, who fled into theforest to avoid the fighting, had to open new
fields in the primary forest and to hunt bonobos.
Because the war mobilized
people between areas,
people who have thecustom of eating bonobos
moved to areas where
people had been coexistingwithbonoboswhilefollowing
their
traditional taboo against
killing them. Now we needto make a survey on thecurrent distribution ofbonobos and undertake
effective
activities
toprevent their decrease. We
also have to be conscious of
the danger of commercial
logging in the Congo Basin.
Manycompanies
orFigure 1 Study sites of bonobos.

Pan Africa News, 10(2), December, 2003
Inuyama, Japan, entitled “2003 Bonobo
Workshop: Behavior, Ecology and Conservation ofWild Bonobos.” Researchers working at all of theactive study sites, including Salonga National
Park, Luo Reserve (Wamba), Lomako, Lukuru,
and Lake Tumba, came together and had
enthusiastic discussions on 1) comparative
methods for ecological studies, 2) behavioral
diversity and local traditions of bonobos, and 3)
current situation of bonobos and action plan forconservation. A detailed report on this workshop
is available at http://homepage3.nifty.com/bonobo/
workshop. At this website, we carry brief updates
on the current situation of bonobos and theresearch/conservation activities being conductedat each study site.

<NOTE>
Field Research at Lukuru,
Democratic Republic of Congo
Jo Thompson1 and Mvula Lomba Tshina-tshina2

1Lukuru Wildlife Research Project, USA.
2Lukuru Wildlife Research Project,

Democratic Republic of Congo.

In 1992, Jo Thompson initiated fieldwork
studying the bonobos (bilia) of the Lukuru
research site. The Lukuru Project area delineatesthe most southern limit, at latitude 4 degrees
South, of bonobo occupation within the species
geographic distribution. The hilly terrain within
the Lukuru consists of irregular forest andgrassland mosaic habitat increasing in elevationout of the southern periphery of the topographic
Congo Basin. Although it is clear that bonobos
require access to forest, field data from the
Lukuru conclude that bonobos also occupy andutilize a drier and more open habitat (1).
Assisted by her team of local Congolese field
staff and research assistants, observations
confirm that grassland fruits are consumed byresident bonobos. Other completed work includes
initial studies of the vegetation cover, bonobo foodchoices, estimates of the presence, abundance21
and distribution of ground-level plant foods usedby the local bonobos, and regional population
estimates based on repeated night bed censuses
within a defined sample area and encounterswith bonobos (1). Findings to date extend ourknowledge of the adaptability of the bonobo. In
addition, in 1997 the Lukuru Project began tofocus their efforts on the Bososandja bonobo
community. This bonobo community frequents a
series of perennial pools and an observation blind
was erected at the side of the pools to conductdetailed observations.
In order to improve existing local levels andcreate additional avenues of protection for the
local wildlife community, especially the bonobo
and its habitat in 1997-1998, the Lukuru Project
purchased land rights (2) through traditional
adjudicated law. This conservation concession
corresponds to the range of the Bososandja
bonobo community (2). This conservation
concession is called the Bososandja Faunal
Reserve and is managed under civil authority. In
2003 steps began to expand this locally protectedarea and upgrade its protected status to
Community Forest under the auspices of theInstitut Congolais pour la Conservation de la
Nature.
In 1997, the Lukuru Project became involved
with the issue of timber concessions when a
Malaysian prospecting team came to the Lukuru
Project area (3). To encourage responsible
land-use management for the social andenvironmental good of the local community andits' wildlife, Lukuru Project personnel met withthe logging company evaluation team. In 1998,
the logging company abandoned their initiative
for timber harvest in the Lukuru (3). Theintervening years of conflict, insecurity, humandensity fluxes, and internal strife interrupted
managed activities between 1998-2002 across thenation (4). In 2002, the DRC government
reactivated the forestry sector, reformed forestry
policies, and introduced a new forestry code. In
order to proceed in an era of responsible
management, the government forestry sector put
a prohibition on new concession allocations andcanceled previous contracts covering millions ofhectares. Important government efforts began toinstitute legal reforms in the forestry and wildlife

22

Pan Africa News, 10(2), December, 2003

(nature conservation) management sectors, aswell as take steps toward elaboration of aland-use plan for the forestry sector.
In 2003 the Lukuru Project was invited tolaunch a sensitization campaign to inform andeducate logging companies about the biodiversity
within concessions south of the Congo River (5).
In this way biodiversity concerns will be
introduced preceding allocation of a concession.
The forestry sector is concerned about granting
timber concessions in areas environmentally
important for: the location of protected areas andcommunity forests; the location of wildlife
field-research sites; bonobo (bilia) distribution
and sensitive habitats; the maintenance ofimportant wildlife corridors; special assemblagesof biodiversity; and the location of critical bonobo
populations.
Along with the local staff, the Lukuru Projectcontinues to build on our prior work throughout
the greater Lukuru area. To date, most of ourresearch has focused on ecology, distribution,
human issues, and conservation (6,7,8). Our
future work continues to focus on establishing theconservation capacity to protect bonobos;
continuing our research, conservation, andeducation efforts in the region; and strengthening
our relationship with the local people. Lukuru
Project activities will continue with emphasis on
habituating
resident
bonobos,
conducting
regional expeditions to survey for the presence
and abundance of bonobo concentrations, meetingwith local officials to involve them in Lukuru
work, and conducting educational campaign
meetings locally and throughout distant villages
within the Project area. The Lukuru Project willreestablish initiatives to institute an annual
poultry (chickens, ducks, guineas, etc.)
inoculation project in association with thevillages and settlements in proximity with theBososandja Faunal Reserve, sink a tube-well inthe villages of Yasa and Bokomo where we
experience seasonal water shortage and thewomen spend considerable time and effort
transporting daily water supplies for their family
usage, explore ways to improve the diet ofvillagers outside the national park (including
introducing beans and peanuts) (8), andinvestigate a tree planting experiment. Beyond
responding to critical needs, the Lukuru Project

has expanded its mission to include sustainablestrategies for livelihoods, community needs,
improved quality of life through appropriatetechnology projects, and community development
outside Protected Areas but in response to humanneeds for those local people living alongsidebonobos.

References(1) Thompson JAM 1997. The history, taxonomy

and ecology of the bonobo (Pan paniscus) witha first description of a wild population living
in a forest/savanna mosaic habitat. Doctoral
dissertation. University of Oxford: England.
358 p.
(2) Thompson JAM 1998. Conservation of Pan
paniscus at the Southern most Research Site.
Pan Africa News 5: 22-24.
(3) Thompson J 1999. Logging the Lukuru:
Update on the Conservation of Pan paniscus.
Pan Africa News 6:13-15.
(4) Thompson J 2000. Challenges to Conserving
the Bonobo. In: The Apes: Challenges for the
21st Century. Brookfield Zoo: Chicago. p 375.
(5)
Thompson J, Mvula LT 2003. The local
commitment: a conservation concession successstory. In: Bonobo Workshop: Behaviour, Ecology
and Conservation of Wild Bonobos. Thompson J,
Hohmann G, Furuichi T (eds), Inuyama: Japan.
(6) Thompson JAM 2002. Bonobos of the Lukuru
Wildlife Research Project. In: Behavioural
Diversity in Chimpanzees and Bonobos.
Boesch C, Hohmann G, Marchant L (eds),
Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. pp61-70.
(7) Thompson JAM 2001. The status of bonobos
in their southernmost geographic range. In:

All Apes Great and Small Volume One:
African Apes. Galdikas BMF, Briggs N,
Sheeran LK, Shapiro GL, Goodall J (eds),
Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers: New
York. pp 75-81.
(8) Thompson J 2000. Grassroots Conservation in
Democratic Republic of Congo. In: The Apes:
Challenges for the 21st Century. Brookfield
Zoo: Chicago. p 376.

Pan Africa News, 10(2), December, 2003

23

<NOTE>
Conserving Pan paniscus in theSalonga National Park,
Democratic Republic of Congo
Gay E. Reinartz

Zoological Society of Milwaukee, gayr@zoosociety.org

Among the highest conservation priorities for thebonobo (bilia, Pan paniscus) are to determine theextent of the species’ present range, locate major
surviving populations, assess habitat and degreeof population fragmentation, and quantify thelevel of threat. Thus, regional surveys areurgently needed (1, 2), as well as quantitation of
habitat characteristics. The Action Plan for Pan
paniscus (1) identified important potential survey

1

5
2

4

6
3
7

8

プリントしたものを張ってください。

11

9

10

Figure 1 Salonga National Park: ZSM survey sites.

regions. Among these sites is the Salonga
National Park (SNP), Democratic Republic ofCongo. Designated as a World Heritage Site in1984, and covering an area over 36,000 km2 (3),the SNP potentially harbors the largest,
relatively undisturbed, and legally protectedbonobo habitat. At present it is the only federally
protected area for Pan paniscus (1). The park was
created in 1970 to protect the bonobo, but earlyreports indicate that the bonobo’s occurrence may
be rare to non-existent (3). In order to fully
establish a countrywide conservation strategy forthe bonobo, it is critical to understand the
population status of the bonobo in the SNP, i.e.,
whether they exist and to what extent the
population may be self-sustaining.
In October 1997, following recommendations
made by the Action Plan, the Zoological Society of

1 = Etate:
01º03.259S; 020º48.295E
2 = Lotulo:
01º08.815S; 020º48.006E
3 = Ikolo:
01º17.336S; 020º49.221E
4 = Lokofa:
01º41.500S; 020º34.454E
5 = Isanga:
01º13.351S; 021º16.051E
6 = Biondo-Biondo
01º22.915S; 021º38.445E
7 = Bonima:
01º24.210S; 021º07.180E
8 = Kinki:
01º29.728S; 021º46.446E
9 = Yongo:
01º32.104S; 021º48.270E
10 = Beminyo:
02º24.658S; 021º13.607E
11 = Isaka- Bekongo
01º54.790S; 020º51.183E= route= park border

24

Pan Africa News, 10(2), December, 2003

Milwaukee (ZSM), formed a partnership with
Institut Congolais pour la Conservation de la
Nature (ICCN: Ministry of the Environment,
Water, and Forest) and in collaboration with theRoyal Zoological Society of Antwerp, launched an
exploratory mission to the SNP. A research team,led by Ellen Van Krunklesven and Inogwabini
Bila Isia, traveled to the northern sector of
Salonga. The team scouted a small portion of thenortheastern tip of the northern sector andsampled four sites in this region of the park. They
found consistent evidence of bonobos at each site(4). This was the first scientific mission to
document bonobos living in this section of thepark (although guards had reported sightings) (5).
In addition, the team encountered a highfrequency of poaching; e.g., they found 43 hunting
camps in a portion of their small survey. They
witnessed that Salonga existed primarily as apark on paper.
Shortly afterwards, civil war broke out(August 1998) before a larger survey could get
underway. ZSM could not return until October2000 when a second mission took place, this time
to assess the wartime conditions of the park andto continue site evaluations of the bonobo
population (6). The study found that the war had
not ravaged the Salonga as it had in the easternparks of Congo, but conditions for the local
inhabitants had become extreme as river traffic
was halted and commerce was completely
disabled. Bushmeat hunting and fishing had
become the only source of income. Moreover, thepark was understaffed. The existing guards werepoorly paid, unequipped, and untrained, andmost were near or exceeding retirement age.
With fewer than 40 arms for 130 men, the guards
were powerless to deter well-equipped elephantpoachers armed with automatic weapons. The
many river systems that border and traverse theSalonga allowed easy access to hunters.
Continuing immediately after the war, theresearch and conservation objectives of ZSM wereto (a) assess the population status of bonobos in
the Salonga; (b) study the ecological and humanfactors related to bonobo distribution andabundance; and (c) link research to emergency
park support. To date, ZSM-ICCN teams have
surveyed 11 sites (Figure 1) and havesystematically sampled nine of the sites using

line transects to estimate relative bonobo density.
The proportion of forest types and the intensity ofhunting were also analyzed. In addition, we
measured the forest structure characteristics andthe encounter rates of signs (no. signs/km oftransect) of other large mammal species (e.g., footprints, dung, food remains) including humansigns (e.g., snares, paths, camps). ICCN field staff
and park guards were trained and engaged in all
aspects of the work. Bonobo signs were observedin all but two sites explored but at varying
frequencies, and bed site occurrence was not
uniform across all geographic locations studied.
In brief, the bonobo population studied (asindicated solely by the presence of bed sites) had
a patchy distribution determined largely by the
proportion of mixed mature semi-deciduous
forests with a Marantaceae understory. The
density estimated for this forest type wasapproximately 1.5 bed builders/km2, and this was
the most commonly encountered forest type in
our sample (36.8%). Our findings indicated thatbonobo distribution and abundance in Salonga
was negatively affected by human hunting(present and historical). Snares were the mostfrequent human signs encountered. In one
location (with low bonobo density) there were 71
metallic snares over 9 km of transects. We
observed locations close to large humansettlements
and/orpathwaysconnecting
settlements that were nearly devoid of most
mammal species. To estimate the total bonobo
population size for all of SNP further studies
must refine estimates of the proportion of park
covered by preferred forest types and determine
the current and past levels of hunting activity.
From 2000 to the present, the ZSM has
supplemented park guard salaries and delivered
motivational salary increases awarded to the
SNP by the United Nations Foundation and
UNESCO (7). In areas where higher densities ofbonobos have been found, ZSM financially
supports additional guard patrols and 17
supplementary guards to protect these areas. In
December 2003, ZSM provided the financing for
guard training in paramilitary law enforcement.
At a site called Etate (in the northeastern tip ofthe northern sector), ICCN took over a large
poaching camp, and ZSM aided the park
conservateur to convert this camp into a researchPan Africa News, 10(2), December, 2003
and patrol station. Etate is notable for its
resident bonobo population and the frequency ofground beds observed at this site (in contrast toother locations). Etate has been equipped withbuildings, a radio, an outboard motor, andresearch/forestry supplies, and plans areunderway for ZSM to increase infrastructure
support to this site.

References(1) Thompson-Handler N, Malenky R, Reinartz G
1995. Action plan for Pan paniscus: a reporton free ranging populations and proposals fortheir preservation. Zoological Society of
Milwaukee: Milwaukee.
(2) Coxe S, Rosen N, Miller Ps, Seal US 2000.

Bonobo conservation assessment workshop
final report. Conservation Breeding Specialist
Group, SSC/IUCN, Apple Valley: Minnesota.
(3) IUCN/UNEP 1987. The IUCN directory ofAfrotropical protected areas. IUCN, Gland,
Switzerland and Cambridge: UK. pp 918-919.
(4) Van Krunklesven E, Inogwabini BI, Draulans,
D 2000. A survey of bonobos and other large
mammals in the Salonga National park,
Democratic Republic of Congo. Oryx 34:
180-187.
(5) D’Huart JP 1988. Parc National de la Salonga(Equateur, Zaire): conservation et gestion.
Development des collectivites locales. IUCN,
Gland.
(6) Inogwabini BI, Lisalama WW, Mafuta N 2000.

Rapport synthese de la mission du projet
ICCN/ZSM au Parc Nationaal de la Salonga,
2000. Zoological Society of Milwaukee:
Kinshasa.
(7) Internet 2003. Biodiveristy conservation inregions of armed conflict: conserving World
Heritage Sites in the Democratic Republic ofCongo. www.UNESCO.org <http://portal.
unesco.org/culture/en/ev.php@URL_ID=12097&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=20
1.html>25<NOTE>Lui Kotal - A New Site for Field
Research on Bonobos in theSalonga National Park
Gottfried Hohmann1, 2 and Barbara Fruth1, 3

1MPI c/o Coopération Technique Allemande, 21 Rue

Ituri, BP 7555, Kinshasa-Gombe, République
Démocratique du Congo
2Max-Planck-Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology,
D-04103 Leipzig, Germany
3Max-Planck-Institute for Behavioural Physiology,
D-82319 Seewiesen, Germany

The Salonga National Park is the only reserve
within the known range of bonobo (bilia)
distribution that protects both the species and its
natural environment. Surprisingly little is known
about the largest protected site within the
Cuvette Centrale and, compared to other reservesof the Democratic Republic of Congo, the park
never gained much attention as a site forresearch, tourism, or nature conservation. Until
recently, the status of the park was largely
unknown, available maps concerning the park
boundary varied considerably, and it wassuspected that logging and mining was going on
within the park (1). As the first attempt to collectobjective information on the status of Salonga, ananalysis on land cover and land use based onrecent satellite images (2002) was used to map
the large area of 36,000 km2 (2). These remotesensing analyses as well as an extensive
verification from the air and on the groundrevealed no significant signs of humanencroachment. Moreover, the maps show thatnatural vegetation cover does not vanish at theboundary of the park. Finally, reports fromsporadic excursions to different areas suggestthat the park is home for a substantial bonobo
population (3-5). Taken together, Salonga has alarge potential for field research on bonobos andremains a stronghold for the conservation ofmany endangered species and their naturalenvironment.
Following
ouractivities
atLomako(1990-1998), explorations in Salonga started in2000 (5). In February 2002, a research site wasestablished at the fringe of the park, just south of
the Lokoro river (Figure 1). The camp-site, Lui

26

Pan Africa News, 10(2), December, 2003

Kotal (South 02° 45.610', East 20° 22.723'), is 25
km away from the nearest village. A network ofnatural paths and standardized transects(>50km) gives access to a study area of about
50km². Located close to a 225 km2 large, circular
patch of a forest-savanna-mosaic, the study site
offers a variety of habitats. Using geographic andbotanic criteria, six habitat types were identified(6). While the botanical survey is still ongoingcurrent data suggest that the diversity of plants
is likely to be higher than in other natural
habitats like the Lomako forest that is completely
covered by a relatively dense and homogenous
forest vegetation. Correspondingly, the fauna also
appears to be more divers. For example, theprimate fauna comprises two species ofmangabeys (Lophocebus aterrimus, Cercocebus
crysogaster), two of colobus (Procolobus badius,
Colobus angolensis), and four of guenons(Cercopithecus ascanius, C. wolfi, C. neglectus,
Allenopithecus). Signs of elephants, river hogs,
leopards, and five species of duiker are
encountered regularly and indicate relatively
high population densities.
Following the onset of fieldwork in February
2002, a team of Congolese research assistants,
foreign students, and local field assistants areengaged in two long-term projects at Lui-Kotal.
One is funded mainly by the Max-Planck
Institute, and addresses various issues of bonobo
socio-ecology. The other project focuses on the
bio-diversity of plants and is funded by theFederal Ministry of Education and Research.
Both projects are linked to a number of Congolese
institutions: Université de Kinshasa, Institut
Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature,
Institut National de la Recherche Bio-Médical,
Institut Pédagogic National, Institut National
des Etudes et des Recherches Agronomiques.
From May 2002 until April 2003, a
comparative study on feeding ecology of the two
Pan species was conducted. With funding fromThe Leakey Foundation, data collection was
carried out simultaneously on bonobos at Salonga
and on chimpanzees at Gashaka (Nigeria). The
aim of the first phase of this project is to quantify
the availability and use of plant foods by Pan on
the one hand and to investigate the effects ofseasonal variation of food availability on grouping
patterns on the other. During this time, bonobos

were occasionally seen when research teams
monitored phenology transects or bed sites. In
most cases, bonobos avoided visual contact withhumans simply by moving out of sight.
Sometimes, parties stayed at food patches or bed
sites and could be observed for short periods.
From May 2003 onwards efforts were made tofollow bonobos on the ground. Although
habituation is still incomplete, follows for several
hours are now possible and the overall tendency
is that bonobos are more tolerant towards
humans following in closer proximity.
Research at Lui Kotal is still in an early stage
and it will take more time until behaviouralstudies that require close range observations offocal individuals will be possible. However,
because of the habitat's mixed vegetation and anumber of other environmental features that are
rare or absent elsewhere, the site has a large
potential to explore unknown dimensions of the
behavioural diversity of bonobos. The protected

Figure 1 The study site. White patches on the lower
part of the figure indicate open savanna.

Pan Africa News, 10(2), December, 2003
status of the site makes us hope that the bonobo
population will be relatively safe from certain
types of encroachment such as timber
exploitation, road construction, and agriculture.
However, for the following reason, there is anurgent need for constant vigilance: In terms of its
conservation status, bonobos are exceptional
because no other Great Ape species is protectedby a single reserve only. Accordingly, the Salonga
Park serves a unique purpose and the protection
and maintenance of its bio-diversity deserves
highest priority.

References(1) Thompson-Handler N, Malenky R, Reinartz G
1995. Action plan for Pan paniscus. ZoologicalSociety of Milwaukee: Milwaukee.
(2) Huang S, Siegert F, Fruth B, Hohmann G
2003. Assessment of land cover and land use
in the Salonga NP based on satellite imagery.
Presented at the International Symposium on

Sustainable Use and Conservation of
Biological Diversity, 01-04.Dec.2003 Berlin:
Germany.
(3) Kortlandt A 1995. A survey of the geographicalrange, habitats, and conservation of thepygmy chimpanzee (Pan paniscus): an
ecological perspective. Primate Conservation
16: 21-36.
(4) van Krunkelsven E 2001. Density estimationof bonobos (Pan paniscus) in Salonga National
Park, Congo. Biological Conservation 99:
387-391.
(5) Hohmann G, Eriksson J 2001. Rapport derecherche d’une étude-pilote sur les bonobos(Pan paniscus) dans la région de Bolongo.
Technical report to the Institut Congolais pourla Conservation de la Nature (ICCN):
Kinshasa.
(6) Fruth B, Ilumbe G, Lejoly J 2003.
Phytosociology for habitat assessment in thesouthwestern part of Salonga National Park,
DRC. Presented at the workshop on

Behaviour, Ecology and Conservation of Wild
Bonobos, 22-25.Jul.2003 Kyoto University
Primate Research Institute: Inuyama.

27<NOTE>
Field Research at Parc Nationalde la Salonga, Democratic
Republic of Congo
Jo Thompson1, Tshobo Masunda2, Ilonga Djema Willy3,
and Mvula Lomba Tshina-tshina3

1Lukuru Wildlife Research Project, USA.

2Conservateur Principal, Parc National de la Salonga,

Institut Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature,
Democratic Republic of Congo.
3Lukuru Wildlife Research Project,
Democratic Republic of Congo.

In the interest of protecting and studying bonobos(bilia), the Lukuru Project team has coordinatedconservation efforts with the Anga Headquarters
Post park guards of Parc National de la Salonga(PNS) since 1994 and collaborated on joint
fieldwork research within the southern sector of
the park territory since 1997. Prior to the allianceof the Lukuru Project and personnel of theInstitut Congolais pour la Conservation de la
Nature (ICCN), no field work had been conductedwithin the southern sector of the park since a
15-day prospecting mission in October 1969, prior
to establishing this national protected area.
In 1997 the Lukuru Project organized anddelivered the first shipment of basic householdmaterials and supplies to the Anga Headquarters
Post. A mixed Lukuru Project/ICCN teamconducted the first-ever reconnaissance andbonobo/large mammal distribution survey in
PNS-SS during March/April 1998 and collected
data on human activities in PNS-Secteur Sud(SS).
In 2001 ICCN contracted with the Lukuru
Project to restore the administrative library anddevelop a reading, resource, and media room withmulti-system equipment in Kinshasa.
The Lukuru Project has continued to work in
the South Sector of the Park throughout the war(1). This effort required meeting and gaining
official authorization from authorities in both
Kinshasa (government) and Goma (rebel) in 2002.
In 2002 the Lukuru Project distributed two tonsof critical household materials, medicines,
supplies, equipment, government paid salaries,
and conservation education resources to PNS-SS

28

Pan Africa News, 10(2), December, 2003

(1).
In 1994-1995 the Iyalima people, traditional
people living within PNS-SS, invited the Lukuru
Project to work with them in their own lands forconservation and wildlife management. They
hold a special place on the land, a place they haveoccupied since the Bantu first migrated into thisregion. As original forest people, they reside in
the area defined between the eight villages from
Bokumo (the northwestern limit of the Lukuru
Project area) east to Luapa village. Since the1970 gazetting of PNS, they are living their lives
illegally by occupying their ancestral homelands.
In recent years they have experienced attrition as
their youth move to urban areas for jobs andmaterial goods. They currently number about 800.
They have maintained their culture intact withlittle impact from outside influences. They
remain separate even from their closest related
ethnic groups, the Isolu and Ikolmbe. Working
with the Iyalima as partners in conservation, theLukuru Project is sponsoring the integration of
the Iyalima into the park conservation plan.
Since 2002 the Lukuru Project has actively been
involved in a community attitudes assessment
initiative.
In 2002 the Lukuru Project succeeded inclearing the Anga airstrip. This ensures directaccess to Kinshasa for park management. The
Lukuru Project continues to support this work.
In 2003 a Lukuru Project team traveled overland by foot and along the Luilaka River by
pirogue, exploring and mapping the south andeast limits of the PNS-SS park frontier (2). Thiseffort was the first attempt to traverse this region.
We recorded 759 waypoints and 3,247 track logs
(a total of 4,006 locations mapped) (2). This
information was integrated into the ICCN
database, including habitat description, animal
sign, human activity, topography, geography, andphotographs. This is the first time such an effort
has been conducted and is critical for
management planning at the local and national
levels. This work revealed that the existingillustrated borders of the park are incorrect
according to the legal description. In some cases
villages thought to fall within the park
boundaries are actually outside. This has
implications in conflict resolution issues. The
Lukuru team also used the opportunity to

conduct informational meetings and exchanges at
every village, clan settlement, and humanhabitation (2).
In 2003 the Lukuru Project sponsored 11 local
nationals for a training workshop based from the
Lokofa camp in PNS (1). The training wasorganized by ICCN in cooperation with the
IUCN- MIKE (Monitoring the Illegal Killing of
Elephants) program and Wildlife Conservation
Society (WCS). The Lukuru team was trained instandardized
field
inventory
techniques(observation, data collection, taking notes,
identifying and reading animal and human sign,describing habitat and vegetation, and collecting
plant samples), survey sampling methodologies(reconnaissance walks, line transect distancesampling counts), survey design, basic statisticalanalysis, law enforcement monitoring, how to usea Global Positioning System (GPS), and first aid
emergency wilderness medicine. Jo Thompson
taught classes on: Primate Natural History,
Primate of PNS, and Other Wildlife Species of
Scientific and Conservation Interest (2).
Jointly with ICCN, IUCN-MIKE program,and WCS, the Lukuru Project collaborated toclear the airstrip at Monkoto in 2003, the mostcentral park post for both sectors of PNS and thesite whose access is critical to manage the vast
park terrain. Further, the Lukuru Projectprovided Global Positioning System (GPS) units
for the personnel of Anga Post to collect data andmonitor wildlife in the southern park. These data
will also be incorporated into the broader ICCN
database.
There are no longer research facilities at theAnga Post. The last structure collapsed in 1999.
The Lukuru Project is currently working toreconstruct the accommodations for future use byscientists and tourists. In PNS, the Lukuru
Project is actively engaged on the ground inwildlife monitoring (biodiversity surveys andinventory for abundance, distribution, andthreats), capacity building, infrastructure
rehabilitation, contribution to the ICCN
management plan, contribution to surveillance
capacity and ability to secure the park,community integration and relations building
between the people and ICCN throughout theregion, and continued exploration of Parc
National de la Salonga.

Pan Africa News, 10(2), December, 2003
References(1)
Thompson J, Ilonga DW, Tshobo M
2003. The human needs approach to bonobo
conservation. In: Bonobo Workshop: Behaviour,
Ecology and Conservation of Wild Bonobos.
Thompson J, Hohmann G, and Furuichi T (eds),
Inuyama: Japan.
(2) Thompson J 2003. Lukuru Wildlife Research
Project. Rhino Fantôme 2.

<NOTE>
Confirmation of Bonobo
Population around Lac Tumba
Ndunda Mwanza, Mbangi Mulavwa, Ihomi Mola,
and Kumugo Yangozene

Introduction
Bonobos (bilia, Pan paniscus) are reported fromseveral isolated sites, e.g., Lomako, Ikela, Yalosidi,
Salonga, Lukuru, Lilungu, Lui-Kotali, Koko
Lopori, Wamba, and the west side of Lake Tumba.
Among these, the bonobo population living
between Lake Maindombe and Lake Tumba ismost vulnerable.
Though bonobos were found in this area in thepast (1, 2), the current situation of thispopulation is unknown. Therefore, we, as
researchers of the Research Center for Ecology
and Forestry (CREF), carried out expeditions toconfirm their presence. We also wanted to verify
the existence of taboos against killing and eating
bonobos since we were exploring the possibility of
establishing a research site in this area andtrying to encourage people in this area toconserve bonobos.
Two expeditions were organized: one in Marchand another in August-September 2002 withfinancial and materiel support from the Bonobo
Conservation Initiative and the Wamba
Committee for Bonobo Research.
On the first expedition, seven persons,
including researchers and research assistants,

29
formed two teams. We interviewed local people,
mainly chiefs of villages, hunters, intellectuals
and women, and collected materials or
information that showed that bonobos were still
surviving or had recently been killed around thevillage. When we obtained credible information,
we entered the forest with local guides andcollected information that showed the presence ofbonobos.
On the second expedition, four persons formed
two teams. We carried out surveys on the bed site,
footprint, and bonobo trails in the savanna. For
bed sites two days old or newer, feces werecollected and analyzed to determine the fruits
species eaten. We also tried to observe bonobos
directly. We tried to find them when we heard
their vocalization. When we found bonobos, wecounted the number of animals within the groupand recorded the age/sex composition as far as
possible. We also recorded species name and parteaten of the plants that bonobos fed on. The
survey was made for 9 forest blocks, including
Malinda/Mantuna, Eboya/Lwaka, Lokole/Bokupa,
Bobele,Lokele,Itota,
Molungola/Moholo,
Nkamba, and Bosango (Figure 1).

Figure 1 Survey area.

30

Pan Africa News, 10(2), December, 2003

Attitudes of Local People

disappeared.
We found beds of bonobos in 8 of 9 forest
blocks. We counted 294 beds, including 129 new
and 165 old ones. Eboya/Lwaka forest block
seemed to have more bonobos than other forests.
Though we could not decide on the site for future
study, this forest seemed to be most promising.
We directly observed bonobos in 4 of the 9forest blocks. In spite of human pressure, thesebonobos did not flee but observed us. We madedirect observation during 383 minutes and we
counted 54 animals in total. These included: 11
animals in Malinda/Mantuna for 56 and 156 min;13 animals in Eboya/Lwaka for 80 min; 10
animals in Bobele for 73 min; and 20 animals in
Nkamba for 8 min. The bonobos observed in
Nkamba forest might be a fusion of two groups.
In the survey made in 1981, Mbangi and otherresearchers observed one group of 10 bonobos inBobele. Twenty years later the same number ofbonobos was observed in the same forest block.
We suppose that human pressure on bonobos inthis area might be lower than we had predicted.
This might be because local people killed bonobos
for their own use but sold meat very rarely.

During two expeditions, we interviewed 26 local
people. All of them were very familiar with thespecies, but the name “bonobo” was new to 22
persons. The popular name was “elia” (pluralforms were “bilia”), or “mokomboso.” The name“mokomboso” meant both Pan troglodytes andPan paniscus, while “elia” specifically meant Pan
paniscus. This was probably because the
distribution of Pan paniscus is mostly limited in
the area of Mongo ethnic groups and “elia” is aterm of Mongo language, while “mokomboso” is aterm of Lingala, which is a common language of
D.R. Congo. The term “bonobo” has no ethnicroot.
Twenty-four persons admitted that they had
been eating bonobo meat two times a year on
average, and they liked it very much. The tribe
Mpama of Bosango learned about eating bonobo
meat from other ethnic groups like Ntomba, butthey conserved the myth that the bonobo is not
an ordinary animal but a relative of humanbeings. In Bosango, there were several histories
telling that bonobos are like humans in theirmind and behavior. Two persons in Botwali and
Gondola said that bonobos were harmful to thecultivation of sugar cane. This meant thatbonobos were sometimes coming close to villages.
Fresh bones and skin with bonobo hair were
found in Miale, Bosango I, Bosango II and Mokeli
villages, which had been conserved as traditional
medicines.
Thus the human pressure on bonobos wasconsiderably high in the surveyed area, but after
our campaign, local people promised to abandon
this habit.

Current Status of Bonobos and theirHabitatThree biotopes were remarkably distinct in thearea: swamp forests, terra firma forests, andsavannas. Fauna was not abundant. In spite ofhunting activities by traps and shotguns, large
mammals, including wild pigs (Potamochoerus
porcus), sitatungas (Tragelaphus spekei), several
antelopes, rodents and small carnivores, werestill present. However, some species recorded
previously, including elephants (Loxodonta
africana cyclotis), buffalos (Syncerus cafer nanus)and leopards (Panthera pardus), had completely

Conclusions
We confirmed that bonobos were still survivingon the west side of Lake Tumba, but there
remained various kinds of threats from humans.
Immediate and effective actions were required toprotect this vulnerable population of bonobos
from poachers and commercial wood exploitation
by SCIBOIS, an enterprise that was negotiating
for concessions in this area.
Bonobos were usually ranging far fromhuman villages, but in Bosango we had
information that they sometimes visited fields toeat sugar cane. The fact that a similar number ofbonobos were observed in the same forest as 20
years ago showed the existence of equilibrium
between people and bonobos. However, thisequilibrium is very shaky. It is time to startintensive studies in this area and to conduct
conservation programs before the situation gets
worse.

References(1) Nishida T 1972. Preliminary information of
the pygmy chimpanzees (Pan paniscus) of thePan Africa News, 10(2), December, 2003
Congo Basin. Primates 13: 415-425.
(2) Horn AD 1980. Some observations on the
Ecology of the Bonobo Chimpanzee (Panpaniscus, Schwarz 1929) near Lake Tumba,Zaïre. Folia primatol 34: 145–169.

<NOTE>
Resumption of Bonobo Studies
at Wamba, the Luo Reserve for
Scientific ResearchTakeshi Furuichi1 and Ndunda Mwanza2

1Wamba Committee for Bonobo Research
Faculty of International Studies, Meiji-Gakuin University
2Research Center for Ecology and Forestry

Introduction
Due to the civil war, a long-term study onbonobos (bilia) at Wamba, in the northern sectionof the Luo Reserve for Scientific Research, wasinterrupted in 1996. Since that time, we havemade various attempts to resume the study, but
the second civil war of 1998 made it even moredifficult. This was the first long absence of
researchers since Dr. Takayoshi Kano started theresearch work at Wamba in 1973.
In March 2002, the civil war moved towardceasefire, and we asked our local assistants tostart observation of bonobos. They beganfollowing bonobos on an everyday basis andsubsequently reported that the bonobos of ourstudy groups still survived. We made short visits
to Wamba in August 2002 and then successfully
observed bonobos in August 2003. This is a briefreport from this latest expedition.
Our base camp in Wamba was looted during
the 1st civil war in 1996. However, there had
been no fighting during the second civil war from1998, and the current security situation around
Wamba was much better than we expected. Thiswas probably because Wamba was located deepin the territory of the government forces, andthere was nothing to fight for around Wamba,
except for the bonobos in the forest.
During the 2nd civil war, soldiers engaged in31
poaching. One of our local assistants was forcedby soldiers to guide them to the sleeping site ofbonobos, and they shot and ate a sub-adult malecalled Shijimi. Though there was no otherconfirmed poaching, similar poaching by thesoldiers or local people might have occurred
during the war. Bonobos were attractive hunting
prey for soldiers and people coming from otherareas because, unlike people living at Wamba,
many of those people had no taboo against killingbonobos.

Observation of bonobos who survived thewar
We made our first observation of bonobos of theE1 group on August 14, and we could follow them
until August 21, when we concluded the
expedition of this time (Figure 1). Though we had
been giving bonobos artificial food in theprovisioning sites until 1996, we decided to stop
provisioning from the resumption of the study.
Therefore, we had to follow their ranging in thenatural forest. In spite of our long absence, thebonobos of the E1 group did not flee from theobservers, and we could follow them from their
bed site in the morning until they made beds inthe evening. Being very well habituated, they fed,
groomed, played, and slept in front of observers.
We could sometimes approach them as close as 5
meters on the ground.
Though our stay at Wamba was very short, we
could confirm the presence of 12 individuals in
the E1 group. These included 2 adult males, 2
sub-adult males, 4 adult females, 1 juvenile
female, and 3 infants. These 12 members wereranging together by forming a mixed party
throughout our stay. The local assistants reported
that 2 other identified adult females with infants
had been observed until recently, so they might
have been ranging separately during ourobservation. Thus we concluded that the numberof E1 group members was between 12 and 16.
Because the group size was 19 when we finallyleft Wamba in 1996, it may have decreased by 3
to 7 individuals (15 to 35%) during the war. Thisbrought us hope, however, that an adult female
immigrated into the E1 group, and 3 infants wereborn, during our absence. At any rate, we needto confirm the members of the E1 group that

32

Pan Africa News, 10(2), December, 2003

Figure 1 Bonobos of the E1 group.
survived the war by further observation. Also, weneed to confirm the situation of 6 other study
groups. Because those groups were living in themarginal area of the Luo Reserve, there might
have been a greater loss of members during thewar.

be helpful for local people to acknowledge theimportance of the conservation of bonobos andthat they will continue or reinforce their own
tradition of coexistence with bonobos.

Programs for study and conservation
With the support of the National Geographic
Committee for Research and Exploration, we are
now carrying out continuous research on theecology of bonobos. We are recording fruit
production by monthly census on the linetransect and recording ranging rout, feeding
activities, 1-hour party size, and bed group size.
The Congolese researchers of the ResearchCenter are carrying out continuous research on
Ecology and Forestry (CREF): at least 2
researchers are staying at Wamba for the next 2
years. We also began support of thereconstruction of infrastructure in the local
communities. We are repairing bridges on themain road and proving materials for constructionof local schools. We hope that these activities will

Pan Africa News, Vol. 10, No.2
Published in December, 2003
Address:
Editorial Office, Pan Africa News
Department of Zoology
Graduate School of Science
Kyoto University
Sakyo, Kyoto 606-8502
JAPAN
TEL: (+81)75-753-4085
FAX: (+81)75-753-4098
E-mail: PAN@jinrui.zool.kyoto-u.ac.jp