Distribution and conservation status of Congo Peafowl Afropavo congensis in eastern Zaire

Abstract

Between 1993 and 1995 the occurrence and status of Congo Peafowl Afropavo congensis were assessed at 89 sites in eastern Zaire based on interviews with local hunters (114 locations) and forest surveys (24 locations). The survey region covered approximately 125,000 km2 and was bounded by the Lomami River (24° 30′) to the west, the Albertine Rift Highlands (29°) to the east, the Aruwimi River (20° 30′) to the north and the Kahuzi Biega Park (3° S) to the south. Congo Peafowl have been extirpated or were only doubtfully present at 16 of 65 sites where survey coverage was adequate and where the species was reported to have occurred in the past. Occurrence of the species was confirmed or probable at the remaining 49 sites. Congo Peafowl were reported as locally common (> five reported encounters since 1990) at only 12 sites. We observed or heard peafowl at five sites. A single nest was found which contained two eggs. Observations on group size and habitat associations were also made. Congo Peafowl were considered to be seriously threatened at 19 of the 65 sites. Captures in snares set for small mammals and antelope are a major threat to Congo Peafowl throughout most of the survey region. Mining, shifting cultivation and logging leading to habitat loss were significant threats in several locations. Congo Peafowl appear to have disappeared from several sites where human activity was frequent, but habitat loss was not extensive. The mass movements of Rwandan refugees into eastern Zaire, which began in 1994, pose, a threat to Congo Peafowl in a number of areas. Conservation of the Congo Peafowl in eastern Zaire is best assured in the Maiko National Park where the species appears to be locally common. Further surveys within the Congo Peafowl's range in central Zaire, and study of the behaviour and ecological needs of the species are recommended.

Full text

Bird Conservation International (1997) 7:295-316. © BirdLife International 1997
Distribution
and
conservation status
of
Congo Peafowl
Afropavo congensis
in
eastern
Zaire
JOHN A. HART and AGENOGA UPOKI
Summary
Between 1993
and 1995 the
occurrence
and
status
of
Congo Peafowl
Afropavo congensis
were assessed
at 89
sites
in
eastern Zaire based
on
interviews with local hunters
(114
locations)
and
forest surveys
(24
locations).
The
survey region covered approximately
125,000 km
2
and was
bounded
by the
Lomami River (24° 30')
to the
west,
the
Albertine
Rift Highlands
(29
0
) to the
east,
the
Aruwimi River (2
0
N)
to the
north
and the
Kahuzi
Biega Park
(3
0
S)
to the
south. Congo Peafowl have been extirpated
or
were only
doubtfully present
at 16 of
65 sites where survey coverage
was
adequate
and
where
the
species
was
reported
to
have occurred
in the
past. Occurrence
of the
species
was
confirmed
or
probable
at the
remaining 49 sites. Congo Peafowl were reported
as
locally
common
(>
five reported encounters since 1990)
at
only
12
sites.
We
observed
or
heard
peafowl
at
five sites.
A
single nest was found which contained two eggs. Observations
on
group size
and
habitat associations were also made. Congo Peafowl were considered
to
be seriously threatened
at 19 of the 65
sites. Captures
in
snares
set for
small mammals
and antelope
are a
major threat
to
Congo Peafowl throughout most
of the
survey region.
Mining, shifting cultivation
and
logging leading
to
habitat loss were significant threats
in
several locations. Congo Peafowl appear
to
have disappeared from several sites where
human activity was frequent,
but
habitat loss was
not
extensive. The mass movements
of
Rwandan refugees into eastern Zaire, which began
in 1994,
pose,
a
threat
to
Congo
Peafowl
in a
number
of
areas. Conservation
of
the Congo Peafowl
in
eastern Zaire
is
best
assured
in the
Maiko National Park where
the
species appears
to be
locally common.
Further surveys within
the
Congo Peafowl's range
in
central Zaire,
and
study
of the
behaviour
and
ecological needs
of
the species
are
recommended.
Introduction
Despite its remarkable discovery and ornithological importance as the only
African pheasant, the Congo Peafowl Afropavo congensis has remained a
little-known and mysterious bird. Verheyen (1962), summarizing what was
learned of the bird's distribution in the 25 years following its discovery in 1936,
reported occurrences in fewer than 50 locations scattered over an area of about
400,000 km
2
in central and eastern Zaire. Additional locations for the Congo
Peafowl were added in the decades from Zaire's independence to the present,
including several new locations that extended the known global range of the
species (Verschuren 1978, Van Bocxstaele 1985, Thompson 1996, Dupain et
al.
in
press,
J. R. Wilson and M. C. Catsis unpublished 1990). Nevertheless, locations

John
A. Hart and
Agenoga Upoki
296
where the species has been recorded remain remarkably infrequent across
continuous rainforest habitat within the global range.
This lack of knowledge is of concern as a number of areas where the bird was
originally reported have been opened to logging, mining and settlement. With
human population growth exceeding 2.5% annually in Zaire, including the mass
arrival of Rwandan refugees into the region in 1994, the pressure from hunting
and clearing on the remaining forest areas is likely to be large. Is the Congo
Peafowl still holding its own, or is it quietly slipping toward extinction?
Between 1993 and 1995 we conducted a survey to investigate the distribution
and current status of the Congo Peafowl in the eastern portion of its range.
Objectives of this study were: (1) to visit previously known locations for Congo
Peafowl to establish its current occurrence and status; (2) to visit as many new
locations as possible where the Congo Peafowl has not previously been reported,
but where it could be expected based on its known range; (3) to acquire
information on the biology and habitat requirements of the species; and (4) to
establish conservation status and provide recommendations for in situ
conservation of the species.
Survey region
Fieldwork for this survey covered an area of 125,000 km
2
(Fig. 1) and was
conducted over a 30-month period from March 1993 to August 1995. The survey
region, covers over one third of the Congo Peafowl's known range and includes
some of the earliest documented locations for the species' occurrence.
Elevations of the survey region range from about 450 m in the west along the
Zaire River and in the valleys of the lower Lomami, Aruwimi and Lindi rivers,
to about 1400 m in the montane transition zone bordering the Albertine Rift
highlands in the east. Most of the survey region consists of gently undulating
uplands between 500 m and 1000 m elevation. Localized massifs of hills rising
from 100 to 500 m above the surrounding plane occur in the headwaters and
along the divides of many of the major drainage systems.
The survey region's forests have been classified as mixed, moist
semi-evergreen rainforest (White 1983). Primary forests over much of this area
are dominated by Caesalpiniaceous species with monodominant stands of
Gilbertiodendron
dewevrei covering large areas in the watersheds of the Lindi,
Tshopo and Ituri/Aruwimi rivers. Floristic surveys have been conducted at only
a few sites, including Yangambi, west of Kisangani on the Zaire River (Germain
and Evrard 1956), in the Uelle basin, north of Kisangani (Gerard i960), and in
the central Ituri Forest (Hart et
al.
1996). Forests on the region's massifs remain
poorly known. Chapin (1932) provides an account of the forests of the eastern
part of the survey region specifically in relation to its avifauna.
Small-scale shifting cultivation occurs widely throughout the survey area but
this has not resulted in major forest loss in most areas. Several large blocks of
nearly uninhabited forests remain in the Tshopo, Lindi, Maiko and Ituri basins.
Deforestation is most evident in the east, especially along the transition to the
Albertine highlands where intensive shifting cultivation and coffee plantations
have removed large areas of forest in some areas. Large-scale deforestation has

Congo Peafowl in eastern Zaire
297
• J \
1993
-
199S
Congo Peafowl Survey
Figure 1. The 1993-1995 Congo Peafowl survey area in eastern Zaire. Numbered circles
locate survey sites listed in Appendix 1. Survey sites in Maiko National Park are detailed
in Table 3 and shown in Figure 3.
also occurred, locally along the Zaire River and the lower stretches of its major
tributaries the Aruwimi, and Lindi.
Mechanised logging has been restricted to portions of the Lindi, Tshopo and
Aruwimi basins in the western half of the survey area. Although only a small
percentage of the trees are removed, and forest cover remains over most of this
area, the logging operations have created access routes into the forest thus
allowing penetration of previously remote areas by hunters and prospectors.

John
A. Hart
and Agenoga Upoki
298
Gold has been mined widely over eastern Zaire, including the study region,
for over 80 years. Scattered pockets of diamonds have been exploited in
portions of the Lindi, Tshopo and Lower Aruwimi basins over the last 10
years.
Although none of these mining operations is mechanised, larger strikes
can draw several hundred miners and traders. Most mining camps, even
smaller ones, have associated hunters who provision prospectors and traders
with wild meat.
Three major protected forest areas, the Kahuzi-Biega National Park, the Maiko
National Park and the Okapi Wildlife Reserve, covering together almost
29,000 km
2
, are included within the survey area. Hunters and prospectors are
active in many areas within these parks and reserves, although significant
wildlife populations remain (Hart and Hall 1996). Since completion of fieldwork
for this survey, eastern Zaire has been overcome by political upheaval with
establishment of refugee camps in a number of areas including the vicinities of
the Maiko and Kahuzi-Biega National Parks (Hart and Hart 1997).
Methods
Preliminary surveys established that we would not be able to census Congo
Peafowl populations directly by visual or auditory counts. Indirect evidence of
the species, including roosts and dusting sites were also not readily visible or
were easily confused with signs of guineafowl and francolins. We assessed
occurrence of Congo Peafowl by interviews with local hunters. Forest visits were
made at selected sites where interviews indicated that the birds were likely to be
encountered. In this report, the term "survey site" will refer to the forest areas
identified by interview respondents and not necessarily to the location where the
interview was conducted.
Interviews
We divided the survey region into sectors that were defined by geographical
features such as river basins or protected area boundaries, or were determined
by logistical constraints such as accessibility. Survey expeditions into each of
these areas lasted from 2 to 4 weeks. Throughout the survey area, whenever
possible, we requested the authorization of traditional and state authorities in
order to facilitate contact with local hunters who might otherwise be reluctant
to provide us with information. Interviews were conducted in Swahili or
Lingala by both authors and by Alexis Bwanandeke, a ranger from the Maiko
National Park trained by the project, and using a prepared form to guide the
interview. During each interview, informants were asked to describe both
sexes of the Congo Peafowl in order to establish their familiarity with the
species (vernacular names "Itundu", "Litondo" or "Nkowe"). For each
reported direct encounter with Congo Peafowl, the date, and location (as
precisely as possible), sex of bird, if known, and any details of the observation
were requested. Assessment of hunting, mining and deforestation levels and
overall threat to Congo Peafowl were made at each survey site based on
interview information and site visits.

Congo Peafowl in eastern Zaire 299
Forest visits
Where interviews suggested that Congo Peafowl occurred within 3-4 hours
march of our point of access, we accompanied hunters to sites where the bird
had been recently seen, a nest had been found, or where Congo Peafowl had
been recently caught in snares. At each site, forest type and topography were
noted and canopy and understorey were described. At sites where Congo
Peafowl were caught in snares, feathers were collected if available. Position,
behaviour and the number and sexes of birds were recorded for each sighting.
Location and time of day were noted for each call we heard. Congo Peafowl are
reported to respond to hunters' imitations of antelope bleats (Verheyen 1965);
however, we were unable to elicit this response by birds when we attempted this
ourselves.
Transect surveys in the Maiko National Park
Observations of Congo Peafowl, supplemented by information provided by local
guides and porters were recorded during a 3-year (1989-1992) inventory of the
Maiko National Park (Hart and Sikubwabo 1994). The date, location and sex, if
determined, were noted for each encounter of Congo Peafowl along 947 km of
transects and path surveys within the park and adjacent hinterland. Locations of
Congo Peafowl occurrence in the Maiko Park are mapped in 10 x 10 km grid
divisions of the park utilized in the original survey.
Results
Interviews
Interviews were conducted at 114 towns, villages, hunting and mining camps
during the 1993-1995 survey. These interviews provided information regarding
the occurrence of Congo Peafowl at 89 survey sites (Figure 1), with sites in the
Maiko National Park shown in Figure 3.
Complete interview coverage, defined as having at least three informants
provide complete responses to questionnaires, was achieved at 52 interview
locations. Few people refused to be interviewed. Locations where we conducted
fewer than three interviews were generally in small settlements or camps where
there were not enough hunters present to respond to our queries. Appendix 1
provides a complete listing of interview locations, survey sites, occurrence of
Congo Peafowl, and a profile of site conditions.
Occurrence of
Congo
Peafowl
The presence or absence of Congo Peafowl at survey sites was determined with
three levels of certainty (Table 1). A high degree of certainty was achieved at 42
survey sites. A lower probability of occurrence was associated with an additional
30 sites. At 17 sites information to evaluate occurrence was insufficient. Congo
Peafowl have never been observed, and probably have never occurred, at seven
survey sites. Congo Peafowl have probably been extirpated or were only

John A. Hart and Agenoga Upoki
300
Status of the Congo Peafowl
1993-1995
)j Presence Confirmed
Presence Probable
Presence Doubtful
or
Extinct Locally
No Historical Record I
Status Uncertain
A
. 3°
50 100 k
IT
Figure 2. Occurrence of Congo Peafowl in eastern Zaire, 1993-1995. For occurrences in
the Maiko National Park see Table 3 and Figure 3.
doubtfully present at 16 of 65 sites where survey evaluation was adequate and
where they have been reported to have occurred at some time in the past
(Table 2).
Figure 2 maps the occurrence of Congo Peafowl at 84 survey sites outside the
Maiko Park. Table 3 and Figure 3 provide information on the occurrence of
Congo Peafowl within the Maiko Park and its immediate vicinity, including
observations made during the original 1989-1992 exploration of the park.
We classified the Congo Peafowl as locally common at 12 sites where the
species was either observed or reported with a high degree of certainty. Congo

Congo Peafowl
in
eastern Zaire
301
MAIKO NATIONAL PARK
Afropavo congensis Locations
I
I
Survey Area
B
Afropavo
Observation
10 km
Figure
3.
Occurrence
of
Congo Peafowl
in the
Maiko National Park. Grid squares locate
1989-1992 survey area. Letters refer
to
observations described
in
Table
3.
Table 1. Criteria
for
establishing occurrence
of
Congo Peafowl
at
survey sites based
on
interviews
Degree of
certainty Occurrence Criteria
High Absent, never observed
Absent, locally extirpated
Uncommon
Locally common
Low Doubtful
Probable
Very low Evaluation
not
possible
SL
3
informants;
no
historical knowledge
of
Congo
Peafowl
a
3
informants; historical occurrence
of
Congo
Peafowl;
no
reports after 1975
a
3
informants;
<
5
Congo Peafowl reports after 1990;
few informants with direct experience
£
3
informants;
>
10 reports Congo Peafowl after
1980,
>
5
reports after 1990; frequent direct
experience; information
on
food habits
and
behaviour
provided
<
3
informants; historical occurrence
of
Congo
Peafowl;
no
reports after 1985; local conditions
indicate current occurrence
of
Congo Peafowl unlikely
<
3
informants; Congo Peafowl reports after 1985
Inadequate interview response
Peafowl were classified as uncommon at 18 sites. This category combined sites
where populations are likely to have been limited for a variety of reasons,
including availability of suitable habitat and heavy hunting pressure, as well as
sites at the edge of the species's range where the bird may have never been
common. It is not known whether these uncommon occurrences represent small,

John
A.
Hart
and
Agenoga Upoki
Table 2. Occurrence of Congo Peafowl at 1993 -1995 survey sites in eastern Zaire"
302
Occurrence
Absent, never observed
Absent, locally extirpated
Uncommon
Locally common
Doubtful
Probable
Evaluation not possible
Total
a
Includes 84 sites
1
(Figure 2) and 5 s
Table 3. Congo Peafowl occurrence
Location
Ogombo Massif
Obilota, Etabili
Valleys
R. Amagbada
R. Ongeno
R. Amefufuma
R. Demani
Source R.
Akimali
R. Engule
Silisa
Amedue
Mt. Mogogoligo
Loya Patrol Post
W. Angumu
Mandaye Patrol
Post
Map"
A
B,C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
Year
b
1989,1995
1990
1990
1991
1991
1991
1992
1992
1992
1992
1995
1995
1995
1995
Sites
7
5
18
12
11
*9
*7
89
sites in Maiko National Park (Figure
in the Maiko National Park
Observation
3 heard;
2 males seen"
2 females seen
2 heard
3 heard
1 heard
1 heard
3 heard
Male and
female seen
Forest type
Mixed hill forest
Lowland forest
Mixed hill forest
Mixed lowland
forest
Old secondary
forest
Lowland forest
Lowland forest
3)-
Interview report
Widespread and frequent
in hills
Reported in lowland and
hills
Occurs in hills
Occurs in hills
Mixed hill forest
Frequent in hills
Occurs in hills, secondary
forest
Occurs in hills
6 seen in hills
Kaseny, Muwa Abankale
valleys
Lowland forest
1
Letters refer to locations on Map of Maiko National Park (Figure 3).
'
1989 -1992 observations by Hart and Sikubwabo (1994). 1995 observations current survey.
Table 4.
Seen
3
Forest site visits 1993-1995: Congo Peafowl
Dusting
Heard Nest site
112
Snare
capture
4
observations
Observation
by guide
2
No
observation
16
Total
survey sites
24
poorly known resident populations,
or
sporadic dispersal events
by
Congo
Peafowl into areas that
are not
permanently occupied.
Forest surveys: observations
of
Congo
Peafowl
Sightings
of
Congo Peafowl
by the
field teams during
the
original Maiko Park
study (Table
3) and at 24
sites during
the
1993-1995 survey (Table
4)
included

Congo Peafowl in eastern Zaire
303
four observations
of
paired birds and four single birds (two males and two
females). All birds were initially observed on the ground, and in most cases
retreated from observers by running along the ground. One pair was observed
travelling with
a
group
of
Latham's Francolin
Francolinus
lathami. The Congo
Peafowl appeared to be alone in the other observations. Birds were heard to call
soon after dark between 19I100 and 22hoo and once at dawn.
A Congo Peafowl nest was shown to Alexis Bwanandeke by a local hunter in
November 1994. The nest was located on the ground under a fallen tree trunk in
relatively open, mature forest. There were two eggs in the nest when found. The
next day, both male and female were seen near the nest. Alexis was unable to
observe incubation directly.
Single birds and pairs comprised the majority of reported sightings provided
by local hunters who were interviewed (Figure
4).
Observations of larger groups
Heard only
Single Male Single Female
Pair Group
Cnicks. Sax Unspecified
Figure 4. Number of observations and group size of Congo Peafowl made between 1990
and 1995 reported by interviewed informants.

John A. Hart and Agenoga Upoki 304
Table 5. Conservation status and site conditions: 1989-1995 Congo Peafowl survey
Percentage of sites
Status of Congo
Peafowl
Survey
sites"
Hunting pressure Deforestation Artisinal* mining
Low High Minimal Extensive None Minimal Extensive
Minimally
threatened
Seriously
threatened
Probably extirpated
Unknown
Total sites
40
*9
16
17
92
95.0
10.5
12.5
23.5
50.0
5.0
89.5
87.5
75-5
50.0
100.0
89.5
25.0
88.2
82.6
0.0
10.5
75.0
11.8
17.4
17-5
5-3
12.5
23.5
15.2
60.0
42.1
31.2
53.0
50.0
22.5
52.6
56.3
23.5
34.8
" Included are 82 sites in the 1993-1995 survey with known or possible historical occurrence of
Congo Peafowl plus 10, 10 km x
10
km sample blocks in the Maiko Park with occurrence of Congo
Peafowl recorded in 1989-1992 that were not sampled in 1995.
were mostly reported as families (pairs with young). One informant reported
having an adult male, accompanied by three chicks, fly at him when he
encountered them in
v
the forest. The largest group reported contained six birds.
Reported sightings of single cocks far outnumbered single hens. We do not know
whether this reflects actual sex ratios in the wild, higher visibility of males or
possibly inaccurate reporting by informants.
Most of our observations of Congo Peafowl were made in primary forest. One
bird was heard calling from degraded primary forest near a village and several
informants reported seeing birds in old secondary forest. We have no reports of
Congo Peafowl in swamp forest or seasonally inundated areas and none from
younger regenerating agricultural clearings. Nearly half of our observations of
Congo Peafowl were made in hilly areas, including drier ridges. Local hunters
also frequently reported encounters with the Congo Peafowl from this same type
of forest.
We made no direct observations of Congo Peafowl feeding. The crop of one
dead bird examined contained small, unidentified seeds. Informants mentioned
birds attracted to fruiting Musanga
cecropioides
and Margeritaria discoidea.
Site conditions and threats to Congo Peafowl
Table 5 summarizes the relationship between the conservation status of Congo
Peafowl in relation to hunting pressure, deforestation and mining activities at
survey sites, including the locations of Congo Peafowl occurrence recorded
during the original Maiko Park exploration. Congo Peafowl were considered to
be seriously threatened if informants reported declining frequency of contact
with, or disappearance of, the bird from areas where they were previously
known.
Hunting With the exception of remote areas in the Maiko National Park and
the southwestern and central core areas of the Okapi Wildlife Reserve,
subsistence hunting was recorded at all survey sites. Levels of hunting were
considered low where human population was low and there was no hunting

Congo Peafowl in eastern Zaire
305
for commercial markets. Hunting pressure was defined as heavy where hunters
provisioned
a
commercial meat trade, or at survey sites near larger settlements
where many subsistence hunters operated. Low hunting pressure characterized
46 (50%) of 92 sites surveyed within the Congo Peafowl's range in eastern Zaire.
Heavy hunting pressure characterized nearly 88.6%
of
all survey sites where
Congo Peafowl were considered seriously threatened, or probably extirpated.
Most hunters who acknowledged catching Congo Peafowl reported that they
caught them incidentally in snares and traps set for other species (Figure
5).
Wire
or nylon cord snares set along game trails for duikers were the most frequently
cited source of captured Congo Peafowl. Barrier snares consisting of a low drift
fence with openings at which snares are set for small terrestrial mammals were
a second major source of captured peafowl. Only two informants reported killing
i.;
'.•]'•
\^i
Unspecified
i
Duiker snare
Shotgun land Not reported
Figure 5. Captures and capture methods of Congo Peafowl made between 1985 and 1995
reported by interviewed informants.

John
A. Hart
and Agenoga Upoki
306
Congo Peafowl with shotguns between 1985 and 1995. In general hunters
reported that Congo Peafowl are too small to be worth expending a shell. Males
represented 67.6% of captured birds in reports where the bird's sex was given
(Figure 5).
Deforestation Deforestation was defined as minimal at sites where human
clearings and agriculture were currently absent, or where there were only
small numbers of shifting cultivators and no other source of deforestation.
Sites where deforestation was classified as extensive included larger
settlements with major clearings, heavily exploited logging concessions and
sites where population density was estimated at more than three persons per
square kilometre.
Overall, deforestation levels were low throughout the survey area. Nearly
83%
of survey sites were characterized as having minimal deforestation.
Extensive deforestation characterized only two of 19 sites where Congo
Peafowl were considered seriously threatened. Extensive deforestation on the
other hand, characterized 12 of 16 sites where Congo Peafowl had been locally
extirpated.
Mining Some level of artisanal mining was recorded at 85% of all survey sites
in the region. Mining activity was classified as minimal at most sites (seasonal
activity only with camps < 50 people), including 60% of sites where Congo
Peafowl were considered minimally threatened. Ten of 19 sites where Congo
Peafowl were classified as seriously threatened had extensive mining activity in
the area, including multiple camps with year-round activity and camps with
more than 50 people. Similar frequencies of larger scale mining were recorded
at sites where Congo Peafowl were reported as extirpated.
Discussion
Distribution and abundance of
Congo
Peafowl
This survey confirmed the continued presence of Congo Peafowl within 13 of
20 of the 50 km x 50 km survey blocks in the eastern Zaire where the
occurrence of Congo Peafowl was first reported 30 to 60 years ago (Verheyen
1962).
New locations for Congo Peafowl have been added, including a
significant extension of the known range in the northeast, into the Ituri Forest.
The easternmost report from the Ituri Forest is Epulu, where the bird is
known by the local name of Nkowe, and a female was captured in a hunting
net by pygmies in 1985 or 1986.
Throughout its large range, the Congo Peafowl appears to have a patchy
distribution consisting of local areas of occurrence separated by adjacent areas
where the bird is not known to occur. Whether the Congo Peafowl is
permanently absent from these areas is uncertain, since the species is elusive and
easily escapes detection (Chapin 1937).
The Congo Peafowl does not appear to be abundant anywhere within its
range. Our sighting rate of Congo Peafowl during the 1989-1992 Maiko Park

Congo Peafowl
in
eastern
Zaire 307
survey was less than one bird per 250 km of transect (four sightings), with a
total of eight encounters, visual and auditory, recorded in 15 months in the
forest. In the 1995 survey of the Maiko Park, where the species was the object
of search, two encounters in 2 weeks of fieldwork were recorded. Dupain et
al. (in press) reported 12 sightings of Congo Peafowl over a 21-month period
(1994-1996) in Equateur province in the north-western portion of the species'
range. Local hunters contacted by our survey were unanimous in reporting
that encounters with Congo Peafowl were infrequent. Several hunters in the
area north of the Maiko Park, where the species is widespread and locally
common, reported that they would be lucky to catch as many as five Congo
Peafowl in their lifetimes.
It is not clear why the Congo Peafowl should have such a sparse distribution.
The species does not appear to have a specialized diet. Thompson (1996) reports
Congo Peafowl attracted to a large, unidentified fruit in the
Kasai.
Other published
records of fruits eaten by Congo Peafowl include widespread tree species common
in forests throughout the region (Urban et
al.
1986). Snow (1978) suggested that
competition with Black Guineafowl Agelastes niger might limit the current
distribution of Congo Peafowl. However, the ranges of these species are not
mutually exclusive, as Snow suggested. We observed both Black Guineafowl and
Plumed Guineafowl
Guttera
plumifera,
as well as Latham's Francolin, in the same
forest sites where Congo Peafowl were observed or reported captured. Lovel (1975)
commented on the Congo Peafowl's susceptibility
to
diseases in captivity. Whether
wild populations of Congo Peafowl are limited by disease outbreaks is not known.
Chapin (1937) speculated that the Congo Peafowl may have been originally more
widespread and that the species' current restricted range reflects the impact of
overhunting. While the Congo Peafowl is clearly vulnerable to heavy hunting
pressure, this factor alone does not satisfactorily explain why it should not be
common over large areas of the Ituri Bassin which includes some of the historically
last and least settled forest in Central Africa (Vansina 1991). In contrast, Congo
Peafowl occur, or have occurred recently, at a number of sites where human
occupation has long been established.
x
Our survey results suggest that, although Congo Peafowl can be found in a
variety of upland forest types, populations are often associated with areas of low
hills or ridges between watersheds. The forested slopes in these areas often contain
shallow soils supporting a dry type of forest with an open understorey. The type
location for the Congo Peafowl was given as the upper Lukenie River (Chapin
1936).
Although the exact location is not known, the area is primarily a drier forest
type and not far from the savanna edge, a fact that did not escape Chapin (1937)
who remarked that this location was unusual for a species dependent on
rainforests. Cordier (1949) remarked on the association of Congo Peafowl with
drier sites within forest in the Opala area, south of Kisangani. More recently,
Thompson (1996) reported Congo Peafowl as locally common in the southern
savanna ecotone in the Lukuru area, between the Sankuru and Lukenie rivers.
These observations suggest that the Congo Peafowl's favoured habitat may be a
relatively dry forest and that the apparently relict distribution of the species may
reflect the limited availability of these dry forest types today. Although forest cover
is thought to have been reduced by climatic aridity during the Quaternary

John
A. Hart
and Agenoga Upoki
308
(Hamilton 1992), floristic composition of forest areas was probably altered as well
(Hart
et
al.
1996).
It
is
possible that drier forest
types,
and the Congo Peafowl, were
more common or widespread in the past.
Conservation status
Important populations of Congo Peafowl were recorded in the Lindi, Aruwimi,
Tshopo and Maiko basins and in the northern sector of the Maiko National Park.
Congo Peafowl appear to be uncommon in the Okapi Wildlife Reserve and the
Kahuzi-Biega National Park, the only other protected areas in eastern Zaire
where the species occurs. The Okapi Wildlife Reserve lies at the eastern limit of
the Congo Peafowl's range. Elevations in the Kahuzi-Biega National Park
frequently surpass
1200
m, which appears to be the altitudinal limit of the
species. Forest between the Lomami and Zaire rivers, south of Opala, may
contain significant concentrations of Congo Peafowl, but our information from
this area remains limited. Further fieldwork is needed in the western and
southern parts of the Congo Peafowl's known range where recent reports
(Dupain et
al.
in press, Thompson 1996) indicate that significant populations exist
in areas where the species was previously unrecorded.
Congo Peafowl populations remain vulnerable throughout the survey region.
Uncontrolled hunting is a major threat to the species. Subsistence hunting is a
central feature of rural economies throughout eastern Zaire. Hunting for
commercial markets is likely to increase as new areas are opened to logging and
mining and as human populations move from the Rift Highlands into the lightly
inhabited lowland forest frontiers to the west (Hart and Hall 1996). Congo
Peafowl have declined, and in some cases have probably disappeared, in the
Lubutu, Ubundu and Walikale areas and at a number of sites in the lower
Aruwimi Valley, north of Kisangani. Based on survey results, Congo Peafowl
are now either extirpated or only doubtfully present in seven of the twenty,
50 km x 50 km quadrats within the survey region that were mapped by Verheyen
(1962) as historically containing Congo Peafowl.
The conservation of Congo Peafowl will be best assured in protected areas
where hunting can be limited or banned. With appropriate support, the Maiko
National Park represents a significant potential for in situ conservation of Congo
Peafowl. The occurrence of Congo Peafowl and the potential for in situ
conservation of the species in the Salonga National Park should also be
evaluated.
Acknowledgements
The Institut Zairois pour la Conservation de la Nature (IZCN) authorized our operations
in the Maiko National Park and encouraged this survey.
Fieldwork for the survey was supported by the Wildlife Conservation Society.
Additional financial contributions by BirdLife International, Richard Olsen, Rotterdam
Zoo,
Mr and Mrs Robert Williams, Michael Klat, Charles Sevelle, San Antonio Zoo-
logical Society and San Antonio Association of Animal Keepers are gratefully
acknowledged.

Appendix
x.
Eastern
Interview location
Zaire Congo Peafowl
Interview
Map
quality
Survey:
1993-1995
Informant
response
Site
visit Observation
SITE CONDITIONS
Hunting Deforestation Mining
Afropavo
status
Potential
threat Observer
Bobate
Zambeke
Bomai
Banalia
Badzamani
Route Panga
Betekulu
Panga
(km 147)
Babise
(km 102)
Bandume
(km 81)
Bornili
Bafwagbe
(km 220)
Bafwabogbo
(km 180)
Bavandjegule
(km 43)
Bafwabenze
(km 47)
Bembele
Bangbita
Yekeke
Bafwakololo
Bafwasagba
(km 28)
Bakarai
Bsua
(km 23)
Avakubi
Bombei (Piste Bangina)
Osua
Bafwamiti
Epulu
Basiri
Rive Gauche Lenda
Teturi
Biasiko
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
9
10
11
12
13
13
H
14
M
M
14
15
16
16
17
17
18
19
20
21
22
2^
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
3
lb
lb
lb
o
lb
3
lb
2b
3
la
2b
3
2a
,'ib
' 3
2C
3
3
3
3
3
2C
3
3
3
2b
lb
2C
0
0
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
2
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
o
1
1
o
1
o
1
o
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
AB
UA,AB,JH
UA,AB,JH
UA,ABJH
UA,ABJH
UA,AB,JH
JH
JH
JH
JH
9
I
I
3'
TO
N

Appendix
i
cont.
Interview location
Pont Ngayu
MotoMoto
Mangurudjipa
Njiapanda
Piste Lindi
-
Etaito
Piste Lindi
—
Etaito
Oninga
Mihira
Lutunguru
Busakiera
Begbendo (km 168)
Route Ituri, km 147
Balambi (km 192)
Basale (km 197)
Bafwabola (km 208)
Bafwametinda
(km 229)
Route Ituri, km 215
Bafwambela (km 186)
Bavoi (km 193)
Route Ituri, km 232
Route Opienge
(km 0-50)
Bakiliso (km 39)
Route Ituri, km 217
Haute Lengui
Anderekoko (km 70)
Babagulu (km 50)
Mapendo (km 61)
CENCA 21 (km 68)
Route Opienge, km 81
Map
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
37
38
39
40
4
1
42
43
44
44
45
45
46
47
48
49
Interview
quality
1
2
2
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
1
1
2
Informant
response
0
0
ib,ia
ia,ib
3
3
3
la
3
ib
2b
ib
la
3
3
3
la
3
3
ib
ia,ib
3
3
2b
3
3
3
3
3
Site
visit
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
Observation
0
0
3a
0
2C
ib
3b,ia,ib
2a,ia,ib
SITE
CONDITIONS
Hunting Deforestation Mining
3
1
3
3
1
1
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
0
2
2
0
0
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
0
2
1
1
M
2
2
2
1
1
0
2
0
1
0
1
1
1
Afropavo
J
r
status
7
0
-1
-1
3
2
3
7
3
0
7
-1
1
3
3
2
-1
2
2
—1
7
3
3
4
4
4
2
3
3
Potential
threat
2
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
Observer
JH
JH
JH
JH
JH
JH
AB
AB
AB
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
AB
AB
AB
UA,AB
UA,AB
ABJH
ABJH
ABJH
ABJH
ABJH
ABJH
ABJH
AB
AB
AB
3
a.
§
M

Angasende
49 2
Bafwaluza
49 1
Kokodia (Piste
Bangina)
50 1
Banguruwi
(km 78)
51 1
Opienge
(km 110)
52 2
Bandene
(km 120)
53 2
Entre Opienge
et
R.
Lindi
53 2
Babomongo
(km 130)
54 1
Entre Balobe
et
R.
Lindi
55 1
Bafwaboli
(km 122)
56 2
Babokabi
(km 45)
57 2
Mangongo
58 2
Badumbe
(km 37)
59 2
Makaldo
60 2
Basekamadoka
(km 42)
61 2
Entre Opienge
et
Balobe
62 1
Balobei
63 2
Wanie Rukula
64 2
Ubundu
65 2
Changada
66 2
Peneluta
67 1
Bolemba
68 1
Egwamayala
68 1
Oso
69 1
Bitule
70 1
Lubutu environs
71 1
Osokali
72 1
Walikali
73 1
Tulukwa
74 2
Itebero
75 1
Utu
76 2
3
lb
2C
ib
ib
3
3
3
3
la
3
3
3
3
3
3
'
3
o
ib
ib
ib
2C
3
la
ib
ib,ia
ib
ib,ia
2C
2a
2b
3
3
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
1
o
o
2
1
o
1
1
2
0
o
o
o
o
1
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
O
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
1
0
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
O
0
o
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
2
1
1
3
3
3
2
-1
3
3
3
2
-1
3
4
3
4
4
2
4
o
o
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
AB,UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
U5

Appendix 1
cont.
Interview location
Isangi - Est
Kahuzi-Biega
P.N. Kahuzi-Biega
P.N. Kahuzi-Biega
Opala
Lohumonoko
Elengealale
Riv. Tutucite
Baduka-chakada
Post Patrouille
Mandaye
Post Patrouille Loya
west Angumu
Ogombo Massif
Mogogoligo Massif
Map
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
Maiko
Maiko
Maiko
Maiko
Maiko
Interview
quality
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
Informant
response
2C
3
2C
ib
3
3
2C
ia,ib
3
3
3
3
3
Site
visit
1
1
1
1
2
Observation
0
0
0
0
2C
SITE CONDITIONS
Hunting Deforestation Mining
3
1
1
3
2
2
2
3
0
l
1
0
1
2
0
1
2
1
1
1
2
0
1
0
0
0
l
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
1
Afropavo
status
2
3
2
0
3
3
?
7
2
2
3
3
2
Potential
threat
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
Observer
JH,UA
JH,UA
JH,UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
UA
AB
AB
AB
AB
AB
3
EC
£1
K>
3
a.
3
.§<
0
~.

Appendix 1 cont.
Code definitions:
Category
Column
Code
Explanation
I
Interview
Field visit
Site assessment
Interview location
Map
Interview quality
Informant response
Site visit
Observation
Hunting
Deforestation
Mining
1
2
o
la
ib
2a
2b
2C
3
1
2
O
la
ib
2a
2b
2C
3a
3b
3c
i
2
3
4
o
l
2
O
1
2
Settlement location, and /or nearest kilometre post along road
Survey site (Figure i) referred to in the interview or location of forest visit
Fewer than 3 informants or incomplete responses
At least 3 informants, detailed response
No knowledge
No report of occurrence after 1970, probable local extinction
Distant occurrences, no local population
Last observations 1970-1980
Last observations 1980-1990
Second-hand reports after 1990
First-hand reports after 1990
Reduced: brief excursion; one location
Extensive: two or more locations
No observation related to
Afropavo
Site of 1993-1995 observation by informant
Site where
Afropavo
captured
Call heard
Scratching/dusting site
Feathers collected
Dead specimen seen
Seen alive
Nest site
No or infrequent hunting
Regular hunting,
Afropavo
captured occasionally
Heavy hunting pressure,
Afropavo
not targeted
Afropavo
targeted
No deforestation
Minimal: small-scale clearings only
Extensive: frequent large clearings
Not present
Artisan mining infrequent or ephemeral, small scale
Artisan mining extensive, permanent activity, many sites, some large
N

Appendix i
cont.
Code definitions:
Category
Status
Column
Afropavo
status
Potential threat
Observer
Code
-l
0
1
2
3
4
?
i
2
UA
AB
JH
Explanation
Absent, extirpated
Absent, no historical record
Presence doubtful
Presence probable
Uncommon to rare and localised, occurrence possibly irregular
Frequently observed at several locations
Evaluation not possible
Afropavo
minimally threatened
Afropavo
seriously threatened
Upoki Agenoga
Alexis Bwanandeke
John Hart
o.
3
s.
3
a.
>«•
^§
3
d
"it

Congo Peafowl in eastern Zaire 315
We should like to acknowledge the contributions in the field of A. Bwanandeke. C.
Sikubwabo and J. Dupain generously provided details on observations of Congo Peafowl.
R. Van Bocxstaele contributed bibliographical material. T. Hart, D. Bruning and C.
Sheppard reviewed early drafts of this paper.
References
Chapin, J. (1932) Birds of the Belgian Congo, Part 1.
Bull.
Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. 65.
Chapin, J. (1936) A new peacock-like bird from the Belgian Congo. Rev.
Zool.
Bot.
Afr. 29
(1):
1-6.
Chapin, J. (1937) In pursuit of the Congo Peacock. Nat. Hist. 40: 725-732, 777-778.
Cordier, C. (1949) Further adventures of Charles Cordier. Animal
Kingdom
52: 2-9, 28-29.
Dupain, J., Van Krunkelsven, E., and Van Elsacker, L. (in press) Recent observations of
the Congo Peacock
Afropavo congensis
in the Equateur Province, Zaire. Ostrich.
Gerard, P. (i960) Etude ecologique de
la
foret dense a Gilbertiodendron dewevrei dans la region
de
VUele.
Serie scientifique No. 87. Publications de l'lnstitut National pour l'Etude
Agronomique du Congo (I.N.E.A.C.)
Germain, R. and Evrard, C. (1956) Etude ecologique et phytosociologique de la foret a
Brachystegia laurentii. Serie scientifique No. 67. Institut National pour l'Etude
Agronomique du Congo Beige (I.N.E.A.C).
Hamilton, A. C. (1992) History of forests and climate. Pp. 17-25 in J. A. Sayer, C. S.
Harcourt and N. M. Collins, eds.
The conservation atlas
of tropical
forests,
Africa.
London:
Macmillan.
Hart, J. and Hall,
J.
(1996) Status of eastern Zaire's forest parks and reserves.
Conserv.
Biol.
10:
316-327.
Hart, J. and Sikubwabo, C. (1994) Exploration of
the
Maiko National Park of Zaire: 1989-1992.
Bronx, New York: Wildlife Conservation Society (Working Paper N0.2).
Hart, T. and Hart J. (1997) Conservation and civil conflict: two perspectives from central
Africa.
Conserv.
Biol.
11: 1-8.
Hart, T., Hart, J., Dechamps, R., Fournier, M. and Ataholo, M. (1996) Changes in forest
composition over the last 4,000 years in the Ituri basin, Zaire. Pp 545-563 in L. J. G. van
der Maesen et
ah,
eds.
The biodiversity
of
African
plants.
Amsterdam: Kluwer.
Lovel, T. W. I (1975) The present status of the Congo peacock. /.
V(orld Pheasant
Assoc.
1:
48-57.
Snow, D. W., ed. (1978) An
atlas
of
speciation
in
African non-passerine
birds.
London: British
Museum (Natural History). ' '
Thompson, J. (1996) New information about the presence of the Congo Peafowl. World
Pheasant Assoc. News. 50: 3-8.
Urban, E., Fry, C. and Keith, S. (1986)
The birds
of
Africa,
Vol. 1. London: Academic Press.
Van Bocxstaele, R. (1985) The Congo Peafowl
(Afropavo congensis
Chapin), including some
new facts concerning the history of the bird in nature and the captive breeding program
at Antwerp Zoo. Pp. 171-193 in C. Kruyfhooft, ed.
Zoom op
zoo:
Antwerp zoo focusing on
arts and
sciences.
Antwerp, Belgium: Royal Zoological Society of Antwerp.
Vansina, J. (1991) Paths in the rainforests: toward a history of political tradition in equatorial
Africa.
Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Verheyen, W. (1962). Quelques donnees concernant le dimorphisme sexuel, et la
distribution geographique d'Afropavo congensis Chapin, ainsi qu'un essai de
bibliographie generate. Pp 7-16 in W. Verheyen, ed. Monographic du paon congolais
Afropavo congensis
Chapin 1936.
Bull.
Soc.
Roy.
Zool.
d'Anvers 26.
Verheyen, W. (1965)
Der kongopfau
(Afropavo congensis
Chapin
1936).
Stuttgart, Germany:
Kosmos Verlag.

John A. Hart and Agenoga Upoki 316
Verschuren, J. (1978) Observations ornithologiques dans les pares nationaux du Zaire,
1968-1974.
Gerfaut
68: 3-24.
White, F. (1983) The vegetation of Africa: a descriptive memoir to accompany the
UNESCO/AETFAT/UNSO vegetation map of Africa. Paris, France: UNESCO.
JOHN A. HART
Wildlife Conservation Society, 2300 Southern
Blvd.,
Bronx, NY 10460 U.S.A.
AGENOGA UPOKI
Faculte des Sciences, Universite de Kisangani, Kisangani, Zaire.