|Aerial or Ground Total Counts||20,691||0||0||0|
|Direct Sample Counts and Reliable Dung Counts||236,376||22,442||22,442||0|
|Data Category||Known Range||Possible Range||Total Range|
|Aerial or Ground Total Counts||40,364||7||40,371|
|Direct Sample Counts and Reliable Dung Counts||365,518||31,038||396,556|
|Country||Definite||Probable||Possible||Speculative||Range Area (km²)||% of Regional Range||% of Range Assessed||IQI1||PFS2|
This subregion has the largest elephant population, with almost 53% of the continental DEFINITES + PROBABLES. Almost all of these are derived from systematic surveys. A large decline in the DEFINITE category of over 46,000 is due to a number of estimates being degraded (mainly from Zimbabwe) and changes in area (mainly from Botswana). A number of new populations were assessed in Mozambique, Zambia, and South Africa, and a number of Repeat Surveys were undertaken. Major gaps in updated data exist in Angola and Zimbabwe.
The 2011 PIKE level for Southern Africa was 0.5, indicating that the poaching surge is now impacting even previously secure populations in this subregion. Of particular concern are MIKE sites in Mozambique, Zambia and Zimbabwe. In Namibia, poaching is increasing in the Caprivi, but so far not impacting Etosha National Park, or Kruger National Park in South Africa. Again, carcass ratios from recent surveys across the subregion indicate a worrying situation.
While PIKE levels in South Africa remain low, South Africa was identified by the ETIS cluster analysis as a country of concern with regard to large-scale ivory movements. Mozambique is also identified in the analysis as a country of concern, mainly due to its unregulated domestic ivory market and its role as a transit state for ivory flowing to Tanzania and directly off the continent. Angola is the only range State in the subregion that has never submitted a single elephant product seizure to ETIS.
A number of transfrontier conservation areas are in place across Southern Africa. The recent Kavango Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation Area (KAZA TFCA) was launched in 2012 and provides a framework for conserving this very important area of elephant range. National plans or strategies for elephant management are in place in some range States: Botswana (2003); Namibia (2007); and Zambia (2003).Human-elephant conflict continues to constitute a long-term threat to elephant conservation. Two countries now have national human-wildlife conflict strategies: Namibia (2009) and Mozambique (2010).
1 IQI: Information Quality Index: This index quantifies overall data quality at the regional level based on the precision of estimates and the proportion of assessed elephant range (i.e. range for which estimates are available). The IQI ranges from zero (no reliable information) to one (perfect information).
2 PFS: Priority for Future Surveys, ranked from 1 to 5 (highest to lowest). Based on the precision of estimates and the proportion of national range accounted for by the site in question, PFS is a measure of the importance and urgency for future population surveys. All areas of unassessed range have a priority of 1. See Introduction for details on how the PFS is derived.
Note that totals for the Definite, Probable, and Possible categories are derived by pooling the variances of individual estimates, as described at http://www.elephantdatabase.org/reliability. As a result, totals do not necessarily match the simple sum of the entries within a given category.