feedback
Jump to Mountain Zebra: In detail
iTranslate page

Mountain Zebra

Equus zebra

Abstract

Mountain Zebra Equus zebra has most recently been assessed for The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species in 2018. Equus zebra is listed as Vulnerable under criteria A3bcd.


Amendment version

The Red list Assessmenti

Last assessed

25 April 2018

Scope of assessment

Global

Population trend

Increasing

Number of mature individuals

34,979

Population in detail

Habitat and ecology

Savanna, Shrubland, Grassland

Habitat and ecology in detail

Geographic range

+−
Leaflet | Powered by Esri | Esri, HERE, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS

  • Extant (resident)

IUCN 2019. Equus zebra. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2022-2
Geographic range in detail

Taxonomy

Kingdom

Animalia

Phylum

Chordata

Class

Mammalia

Order

Perissodactyla

Family

Equidae

Genus

Equus

Scientific name

Equus zebra

Authority

Linnaeus, 1758

Synonyms

Common names

English

Mountain Zebra, Hartmann's Mountain Zebra

French

Zèbre de Hartmann, Zèbre de montagne de Hartmann

Spanish; Castilian

Cebra de Hartmann

Infra-specific taxa assessed

Equus zebra ssp. hartmannae

Equus zebra ssp. zebra

Taxonomic sources

Identification Information

Taxonomic notes

Two allopatric subspecies of Mountain Zebra have traditionally been recognized, the nominate race E. z. zebra (Cape Mountain Zebra) and E. z. hartmannae (Hartmann's Mountain Zebra). Groves and Ryder (2000) proposed that the two be treated as distinct species, and Groves and Bell (2004) presented morphological evidence for separating the two subspecies as distinct species based on the diagnosability criterion of the phylogenetic species concept. Recent genetic analyses indicate that the two populations have a high incidence of mitochondrial haplotype sharing; the hypothesis that Cape and Hartmann's Mountain Zebra mitochondrial lineages were reciprocally monophyletic was not supported (Moodley and Hartley 2005). However, the presence of private alleles at nuclear loci rendered the two subspecies genetically distinct evolutionary significant units. We continue to recognize Mountain Zebra as a single species comprising two subspecies.

Assessment Information

IUCN Red List Category and Criteria

Vulnerable A3bcd

ver 3.1

Date assessed

25 April 2018

Year published

2019

Year last seen

Previously published Red List assessments

Regional assessments

    Assessor(s)

    Gosling, L.M., Muntifering, J., Kolberg, H., Uiseb, K. & King, S.R.B.

    Reviewer(s)

    Moehlman, P.D. & Kerley, G.

    Contributor(s)

    Novellie, P. & Covarr, H.

    Facilitator(s) / Compiler(s)

    Partner(s) / Institution(s)

    Authority / Authorities

    IUCN SSC Equid Specialist Group (horses, asses and zebras)

    Justification

    The global population of Mountain Zebra (Equus zebra) is estimated at 34,979 mature individuals (based on 55% to 75% mature). The majority of these are the subspecies Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra (E. z. hartmannae; about 33,265 mature individuals), with much fewer of the Cape Mountain Zebra subspecies (E. z. zebra; at least 1,714 mature individuals). The Cape Mountain Zebra has recovered from a nadir of 80 individuals in the 1950s with a steady population growth rate of 8-10% over the past three generations, leading to this subspecies recently being listed as Least Concern (Hrabar et al. 2015). While Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra is currently numerous, it has also recovered from a severe population reduction in the 1980s due to the effects of drought. The likelihood of increased drought frequency under climate projections, including the present four year drought, led to this subspecies recently being listed as VU A3bcd (Gosling et al. 2018).

    As about 95% of the global population of Mountain Zebra consists of the Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra subspecies, the listing of the species as a whole should follow the Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra listing: VU A3bcd, due to the probability of a future population reduction of at least 30% when further severe droughts occur.

    Geographic Range

    Native

    Extant (resident)

    Angola; Namibia; South Africa (Western Cape, Eastern Cape Province)

    Extant & Introduced (resident)

    South Africa (Northern Cape Province, Free State)

    Number of locations

    Upper elevation limit

    2,000 metres

    Lower elevation limit

    0 metres

    Estimated area of occupancy (AOO) (km²)

    307727

    Continuing decline in area of occupancy (AOO)

    No

    Extreme fluctuations in area of occupancy (AOO)

    No

    Estimated extent of occurrence (EOO) (km²)

    779598

    Continuing decline in extent of occurrence (EOO)

    No

    Extreme fluctuations in extent of occurrence (EOO)

    No

    Continuing decline in number of locations

    No

    Extreme fluctuations in the number of locations

    No

    Range Description

    The Mountain Zebra (Equus zebra) is currently found in South Africa, Namibia, and Angola. The Cape Mountain Zebra (E. z. zebra) is endemic to the Cape Floristic Region of South Africa, while Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra (Equus zebra hartmannae) is found mainly in Namibia, with small populations in Angola and South Africa. It is postulated that in historical times the two subspecies were separated by an area devoid of mountainous habitat, the Knersvlakte, which separates the Kamiesberg in the north from the Roggeveldberge in the south (Novellie et al. 2002). However there are no historical (pre-1920) records of Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra south of the Orange River (Skead 2011).

    Cape Mountain Zebra's historical distribution extended throughout the great escarpment range in the Cape, south of the Orange River, including the Cape Fold Belt Mountains (the southern parts of the current eastern Western Cape Province), and the southern extent of the Northern Cape province. Thus, although once widely distributed throughout the mountainous regions of the Cape, over-hunting and agricultural expansion reduced the population to fewer than 80 individuals located in just five areas of the former Cape province by the 1950s (Millar 1970). Only three remnant subpopulations from the former natural distribution survived: Mountain Zebra National Park, Kammanassie and Gamkaberg Nature Reserves (Smith et al. 2008).

    The current distribution of Cape Mountain Zebra is limited to (at least) 75 fenced and isolated subpopulations spread throughout the former range. Subpopulations have been reintroduced to, amongst others, Karoo, Addo Elephant, Bontebok, Tankwa Karoo and Camdeboo national parks, De Hoop Nature Reserve, Commando Drift Nature Reserve, Baviaanskloof Wilderness Area and Tsolwana Nature Reserve (Hrabar and Kerley 2015). Two of these reserve populations (Commando Drift and Tsolwana) are possibly extralimital, as there are no historical records of the species east of the Great Fish River (Skead 2007). The subpopulation at Gariep Dam Nature Reserve in the Free State Province is significantly extra-limital (Boshoff and Kerley 2013) and not included in this assessment. Novellie et al. (2002) regarded the West Coast National Park as being within the historical range but there is some doubt about this given that it is on the coast and 70 km from the closest historically-recorded subpopulation in Picketburg (Skead 2011). The issue of whether to include West Coast National Park to be within the subspecies’ range has not been resolved. The subpopulation at Oorlogskloof Nature Reserve in the Northern Cape lies in a historical range of Cape Mountain Zebra.

    Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra primarily occupy the escarpment region of western Namibia that runs north-south along the entire length of the country and which form the boundary between an arid coastal plain (which includes the Namib Desert in the south and the Skeleton Coast in the north) and a wetter inland plateau. The current range of Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra differs from the historical range in Namibia, partly because of the widespread establishment of artificial water sources which allow this water-dependent sub-species to occupy habitat that was previously unsuitable (Novellie et al. 2002).

    Published accounts of Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra distribution (Joubert 1973, Penzhorn 2013) refer to four subpopulations: (1) from Kunene Region southwards to the Ugab River and eastward to the Outjo District; (2) the Erongo Mountains; (3) the escarpment from the Swakop River southwards to the Naukluft Mountains and eastward along the Kuiseb and Gaub drainages into the Khomas Hochland; and (4) the Fish River canyon and Huns Mountains near the Orange River in the south.  There is some evidence for these distinctions in the distribution map in Novellie et al. (2002). However current information suggests that the three northern ‘subpopulations’ are essentially continuous. This may be due to significant population expansion or from under-sampling in some areas (especially where there are low levels of commercial farm questionnaire returns). The extent to which the Hunsberg/Fish River sub-population in the south is separated needs further investigation.

    At the southern end of its distribution Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra extends into northern South Africa and are found in three conservation areas: Richtersveld and Augrabies National Parks and Goegap Provincial Nature Reserve (Novellie et al. 2002). They have also been introduced outside of their natural distribution range in the Western Cape, Eastern Cape, North West and Free State provinces. At its northern end, the sub-species distribution extends into southern Angola and 263 were estimated in the Iona National Park in a 2003 survey (Kolberg and Kilian 2003).

    Population

    Current population trend

    Increasing

    Number of mature individuals

    34,979

    Population severely fragmented

    No

    Continuing decline of mature individuals

    No

    Extreme fluctuations

    No

    No. of subpopulations

    79

    Continuing decline in subpopulations

    No

    Extreme fluctuations in subpopulations

    No

    All individuals in one subpopulation

    No

    No. of individuals in largest subpopulation

    5149

    Description

    Mountain zebras were once widespread and numerous. In the 20th century both subspecies underwent dramatic declines, but subsequently populations have increased. See the subspecies Red List Assessments for more details on populations.

    SOUTH AFRICA
    Hunting and habitat loss to agriculture reduced the Cape Mountain Zebra to just 80 individuals remaining in three relict populations in the 1950s (Bigalke 1952, Millar 1970). In 1998, the number of Cape Mountain Zebras had increased to about 1,200 individuals, with the largest population (reintroduced in the Karoo National Park), estimated to number 250 (Novellie et al. 2002). From 1985 to 1995 the annual rate of increase was reported as 8.6 % (Novellie et al. 1996), 9.6 % between 1995 and 1998 (Novellie et al. 2002), 8.33 % between 2002 and 2009 (Hrabar and Kerley 2013) and 9.16% between 2009-2015 (Hrabar and Kerley 2015). However, estimating annual growth rate trends is challenging because most subpopulations are actively managed (maintained at sustainable stocking levels) and animals are often removed or augmented, which masks true growth rate.

    Currently (2014/15), there are estimated to be between 1,714 and 3,247 mature individuals of Cape Mountain Zebra (using a 55% and 75% mature population structure respectively). In formally protected areas alone, there are an observed 1,714–2,338 mature individuals. A survey of animals on both formally protected and private properties found that the total population has grown to over 4,790 animals in 75 subpopulations (Hrabar and Kerley 2015). Fifty six populations (1,487 individuals) are on privately owned land and 19 are on formally protected areas (3,304 individuals). The majority of the population (69%) remains on formally protected land and the proportion on privately-owned land (31%) has not risen since 2009, despite the increase in subpopulation number. The MZNP and Karoo NP subpopulations continue to make up a significant proportion of the population, namely 25% and 18%, respectively.

    The total formally protected population of Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra in 2004 was 80 individuals, increasing to 277 in Goegap Nature Reserve (M. Smit unpubl. data 2015) and Augrabies Falls National Park (Bissett et al., 2016), plus an unknown number of animals in Richtersveld National Park. It is estimated that there are currently at least 570 Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra on private land in the Northern Cape (M. Smit, unpubl. Data, 2009-2013; A. Taylor, unpubl. data, 2014). A preliminary analysis to determine which private subpopulations can be considered wild, revealed that 64–95% of individuals on private land are eligible for inclusion in the assessment (N = 21 properties, A. Taylor, unpubl. data), which means 364-542 privately owned Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra are eligible for inclusion in this assessment. Private subpopulations are inferred to be increasing along with the expansion of the wildlife ranching industry. Overall the total mature and wild population size of Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra in South Africa, based on available data, is at least 592–724 (based on 75% mature).

    There are therefore a total of 2,306-3,971 mature Mountain Zebra in South Africa, with an increasing population. However about 30% of Cape Mountain Zebra, and 25% of Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra are located on private land, and the Mountain Zebras on protected areas are isolated.

    NAMIBIA
    In 1998, the Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra population was estimated to number about 25,000, or approximately 8,300 mature individuals (Novellie et al. 2002) in Namibia. Limited data in 2008 indicated that populations were increasing on communal lands in the north-western part of the country (G. Stuart-Hill pers. comm. 2008): from 2000 to 2006 numbers increased from 6 to 27 individuals observed per 100 km of road surveyed. Nearly a decade of above-average rainfall was likely driving this increase. The national total of Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra in Namibia is currently estimated at 44,712 with an average density of 0.45 per km² (Gosling et al. 2018), although there has been a decline . This is certainly an underestimate because inadequate sampling precludes proper estimation of the numbers on private farms and freehold conservancies. Using the criterion of physiological maturity, rather than that of behavioral breeding status, the total number of mature individuals in Namibia is 32,416 mature individuals (72.5 % of 44,712). It should be noted that there has been a massive decline in zebras over the last 2-3 years due to the current drought (J. Muntifering Pers comm. 2018).

    ANGOLA
    A recent survey conducted by the Ministry of Environment and Tourism of Namibia in Iona National Park (Kolberg and Killian 2003) found an estimated subpopulation size of 263, or 191 mature Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra.

    GLOBAL POPULATION
    Based on recent survey data, global population size of Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra is about 33,265 (191 mature individuals in Angola, 592-724 in South Africa, and 32,416 in Namibia), with at least 1,714 Cape Mountain Zebra (in South Africa), resulting in a total global population of 34,979 mature Mountain Zebra.

    Habitat and Ecology

    System

    Habitat type

    Savanna, Shrubland, Grassland

    Generation length (years)

    11 years

    Congregatory

    Congregatory (year-round)

    Movement patterns

    Full Migrant

    Continuing decline in area, extent and/or quality of habitat

    No

    Habitat and Ecology

    Mountain Zebra inhabit rugged, broken mountainous and escarpment areas up to around 2,000 m with a rich diversity of grass species and perennial water sources. Mountain zebra are specialist grazers and browse only when forced to do so (Penzhorn 2013). Like most equids they are bulk, roughage feeders and so need to consume large daily quantities. They show seasonal movements with some individuals moving between summer and winter ranges and others staying in the same area. At the start of the annual summer rains, usually in November or December, mountain zebra sometimes move in large numbers to lower altitude green flushes (e.g., Joubert 1972). A physiological study suggest that their digestive efficiency and water requirements are similar to those of horses (Joubert and Louw 1976). Grobler (1983) showed that Cape Mountain Zebra are specialist grazers that select only a subset of the grass species available and that they prefer to feed at higher levels in the sward, sometimes selecting seed heads. Penzhorn (1982) reported that Cape Mountain Zebra make use of dwarf shrub foliage in the winter months but this was not seen by Grobler in the Mountain Zebra National Park. There are no studies of Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra comparable to those on Cape Mountain Zebra. Gosling (pers ob) observed Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra browsing the leaves of Catophractes alexandri in Etosha NP even though grass was available nearby.

    The typical social structure of Mountain Zebra is one of small harems comprising an adult stallion and one to three mares and their dependent foals and juvenile offspring; non-breeding groups consist primarily of bachelors, but sometimes include young fillies (Penzhorn 2013).

    Movements between spatially separate ranges in different seasons have been recorded in some areas in Namibia, and in others seasonal movements without a clear separation of seasonal ranges have been seen. The fact that some animals move long distances to separate ranges under particular ecological circumstances means that Mountain Zebra should be regarded as a migratory species. Due to fences and other restrictions animals are not always free to migrate, however.

    See the subspecies Red List assessments for more details on Habitats and Ecology.

    Classification scheme

    HabitatsSeasonSuitabilityMajor importance
    2. Savanna2.1. Savanna - DryResidentSuitableYes
    3. Shrubland3.5. Shrubland - Subtropical/Tropical DryResidentSuitableNo
    4. Grassland4.4. Grassland - TemperateResidentSuitableYes

    Threats

    Residential & commercial development

    • Housing & urban areas

    Agriculture & aquaculture

    • Annual & perennial non-timber crops
    • Livestock farming & ranching

    Biological resource use

    • Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals

    Climate change & severe weather

    • Droughts

    Threats

    Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra remains at risk of catastrophic decline under future droughts, as experienced in the early 1980s. The effects of drought and extreme weather on small populations has been documented for Przewalski's horses (Equus ferus przewalskii) in Mongolia (Kaczensky et al. 2011), and is currently affecting Grevy's Zebra (E. grevyi) in Kenya (B. Low-MacKaye, pers. comm. 2017). Increasingly sophisticated farming could further disrupt movements through fencing or by preventing access to surface water (Novellie et al. 2002).

    The greatest current threat to Cape Mountain Zebra is further loss of genetic diversity through inbreeding, caused by small subpopulation sizes and/or small property sizes. New subpopulations have been created through translocation of animals, with all but one of these subpopulations originating from Mountain Zebra National Park (MZNP); the exception being De Hoop Nature Reserve, which consists of individuals from MZNP and Kammanassie Nature Reserve. Two thirds of the entire genotype is therefore located in just two populations (Kammanassie and Gamkaberg Nature Reserve (Moodley and Harley 2005)), while the remaining third comprises MZNP and reintroduced populations. Currently, the South African population of Cape Mountain Zebra is highly fragmented into a large number of small subpopulations yet little metapopulation management is practiced. Founder groups are often small (50% of subpopulations have had a founder population smaller than the recommended 14 animals, Hrabar and Kerley 2015), and genetic exchange between subpopulations is poor (73% of privately-owned subpopulations have only ever had a single introduction event, Hrabar and Kerley 2015), thereby increasing the risk of inbreeding and genetic drift. Vulnerability to disease also increases due to inbreeding. The subpopulations at both Bontebok National Park and Gariep Dam Nature Reserve, which have been shown to be inbred and lack genetic diversity, have both had an outbreak of sarcoid tumours (53% and 22% of the subpopulations, respectively), indicating a general immune system breakdown (Sasidharan 2006, Sasidharan et al. 2011). Development of a metapopulation management plan (and adoption of such plan into provincial and national conservation policy) which incorporates “resource mobilization strategies” (how human and financial resources will be utilized for successful implementation of the plan) is essential in ensuring the long-term survival of Cape Mountain Zebra.

    Cape Mountain Zebra were once extensively hunted for their skins, because they competed with livestock for grazing, and allegedly because they broke fences (Penzhorn 1988). Today, however, the greatest threat to the Cape subspecies may stem from the risk of hybridization with Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra and Plains Zebra (Dalton et al. 2017). Hybridisation risk also exists for Hartmann’s Mountain zebra: possible hybridisation between mountain zebra and plains zebra (E. quagga burchelli) have been reported for some years in the Otjovasandu area of Etsoha NP where the two species overlap. Recent analysis of faecal DNA (Pauline Kamath pers. comm.) using microsatellite markers in samples of 21 of each species from Otjovasandu supports both hybridization and introgression. However, we do not know it this is part of a normal hybrid zone or if it is an artifact, perhaps caused by the boundary fence artificially keeping the two species in closer contact throughout the year than would be the case if mountain zebra were free to move westward. Hybridisation is also reported between the HMZ and donkeys in Angola (P. vaz Pinto unpubl. data).

    In Namibia, there is commercial trade in Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra skins. Populations need to be carefully monitored so that harvesting does not adversely affect population viability. However, economical incentives provided through sustainable hunting also help improve prospects of coexistence with cattle farmers who occupy much of the range. Hartmann's Mountain Zebra are reportedly being harvested at a rate of about 2,000-3,000 per year, which may exceed their rate of population growth (e.g., Cape Mountain Zebra in Gamka Mountain Nature Reserve increase at about 5% per year; Watson et al. 2005).

    A poorly understood, but emerging, threat is that of reintroduced large predators into areas containing subpopulations of Cape Mountain Zebra. This includes Lion (Addo Elephant, Mountain Zebra and Karoo national parks) and Cheetah (MZNP, some private reserves). Data indicate that Cape Mountain Zebra were preferred prey for Lion in Karoo National Park (C. Tambling unpubl. data), and anecdotal evidence suggests that cheetah suppressed population growth in at least one privately-owned population. Further research is needed to assess the extent and implications of this threat.

    Classification scheme

    ThreatsTimingStressesScopeSeverityInvasive speciesVirus
    1. Residential & commercial development1.1. Housing & urban areasOngoing
    1. Ecosystem stresses1.1. Ecosystem conversion
    1.2. Ecosystem degradation
    2. Agriculture & aquaculture2.1. Annual & perennial non-timber crops2.1.4. Scale Unknown/UnrecordedOngoing
    1. Ecosystem stresses1.1. Ecosystem conversion
    1.2. Ecosystem degradation
    2.3. Livestock farming & ranching2.3.1. Nomadic grazingOngoing
    1. Ecosystem stresses1.1. Ecosystem conversion
    1.2. Ecosystem degradation
    2.3.2. Small-holder grazing, ranching or farmingOngoing
    1. Ecosystem stresses1.1. Ecosystem conversion
    1.2. Ecosystem degradation
    5. Biological resource use5.1. Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals5.1.3. Persecution/controlOngoing
    2. Species Stresses2.1. Species mortality
    11. Climate change & severe weather11.2. DroughtsOngoing
    1. Ecosystem stresses1.1. Ecosystem conversion
    1.2. Ecosystem degradation
    2. Species Stresses2.1. Species mortality
    2.3. Indirect species effects2.3.1. Hybridisation
    2.3.2. Competition
    2.3.5. Inbreeding
    2.3.7. Reduced reproductive success
    2.3.8. Other
    		Majority (50-90%)Rapid Declines

    Use and Trade

    Wearing apparel, accessories

    Local: ✘
    National: ✔
    International: ✔

    Handicrafts, jewellery, etc.

    Local: ✔
    National: ✘
    International: ✘

    Food - human

    Local: ✔
    National: ✘
    International: ✘

    Use and Trade

    Consumptive utilization of Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra in Namibia is allowed through appropriate regulations and a permit system. Permits issued by the Ministry of Environment and Tourism are required for any form of consumptive use in Namibia. The permit system aims to ensure that Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra utilization is sustainable and has no detrimental effect on the long-term survival of the species. ‘Shoot and sell’, trophy hunting and ‘keep and sell’ (live capture) are the different forms of Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra utilization currently permitted in Namibia. The number of Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra shot as trophies was 1,820 in 2008 and 1,064 in 2009 (van Schalkwyk et al. 2010). The mean number of Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra harvested per annum in Namibia (2008–2012) was 3,538 (Shapi 2014), which is not predicted to impact population growth negatively. The number of Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra killed illegally is not known however 6.2% of freehold farms reported losses over one recent year due to poaching (Lindsey 2011). No export of live animals from Namibia is allowed.

    Cape Mountain Zebra are mostly traded as live animals on game auctions. The overall aim of harvesting on formally protected areas at present is population management but also to increase the national metapopulation. Overall, the offtake number is lower than the rate of population increase. No hunting takes place in any provincial or national parks where the species occurs, although translocations are used as a tool to manage subpopulation sizes. Illegal translocations and poaching occurs on a limited scale. Some poaching for bushmeat occurs in at least one subpopulation (Camdeboo National Park). Cases of Cape Mountain Zebra being hunted and sold or exported as Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra have also been reported. The CITES hunting quota is zero and thus there is no international trade.

    Conservation Actions

    In-place research and monitoring

    • Action Recovery Plan : No
    • Systematic monitoring scheme : Yes

    In-place land/water protection

    • Conservation sites identified : Yes, over part of range
    • Percentage of population protected by PAs : 11-20
    • Area based regional management plan : No
    • Occurs in at least one protected area : Yes
    • Invasive species control or prevention : Not Applicable

    In-place species management

    • Harvest management plan : Yes
    • Successfully reintroduced or introduced benignly : Yes
    • Subject to ex-situ conservation : Yes

    In-place education

    • Subject to recent education and awareness programmes : Yes
    • Included in international legislation : Yes
    • Subject to any international management / trade controls : Yes

    Conservation Actions

    Formally protected areas, and areas of good habitat (Lea et al. 206), are crucial for the conservation of Mountain Zebra, particularly in South Africa. Since Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra need to move flexibly over very large distances in response to spatial and temporal variation in rainfall and primary production, very large areas that are connected and support suitable habitat are needed if viable populations are to survive.

    For details on specific conservation actions needed for the two subspecies see their Red List accounts. In summary, crucial actions needed for Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra include better surveys of population numbers, a regional perspective to land use planning, research on zebra ecology, hybridization and human-zebra relationships. For Cape Mountain Zebra key conservation actions are development and implementation of a metapopulation management strategy and a biodiversity management plan (also see Novellie et al. 2017).

    Conservation actions classification scheme

    Conservation Actions NeededNotes
    1. Land/water protection1.1. Site/area protection
    1.2. Resource & habitat protection
    2. Land/water management2.1. Site/area management
    3. Species management3.1. Species management3.1.1. Harvest management
    3.1.2. Trade management
    6. Livelihood, economic & other incentives6.3. Market forces
    6.4. Conservation payments

    Research classification scheme

    Research NeededNotes
    1. Research1.1. Taxonomy
    1.2. Population size, distribution & trends
    1.3. Life history & ecology
    1.4. Harvest, use & livelihoods
    1.5. ThreatsThe severity of genetic threats need to be evaluated: for example, the extent of hybridisation with Hartmann’s Mountain Zebra and Plains Zebra; and the extent and consequences of inbreeding, including an improved understanding of how it relates to the Sarcoid virus
    2. Conservation Planning2.1. Species Action/Recovery Plan
    3. Monitoring3.1. Population trends

    Bibliography

    Bigalke, R. 1952. Early history of the Cape mountain zebra (Equus zebra zebra, Linn.). African Wildlife 6: 143–153.

    Bissett, C., Ferreira, S., Bezuidenhout, H., Daemane, E., Smit, I., van Rooyen, F., du Plessis, N. and Moolman, L. 2016. Augrabies Falls National Park herbivore off-take recommendations 2016: An integrated approach combining local knowledge with data derived from animal census, herbivore models, vegetation field monitoring and satellite imagery. Scientific Services, South African National Parks.

    Boshoff AF, Kerley GIH. 2013. Historical incidence of the larger mammals in the Free State Province (South Africa) and Lesotho. Centre for African Conservation Ecology, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth.

    Chadwick, P. and Watson, L. H. 2007. Management of Cape mountain zebra in the Kammanassie Nature Reserve, South Africa. South African Journal of Wildlife Research 37: 31-39.

    Crawford-Cabral, J. and Verissimo, L.N. 2005. The Ungulate Fauna of Angola. Instituto de Investifacao Cientifica Tropical, Lisboa.

    Dalton, D. L., Zimmermann, D., Mnisi, C., Taplin, M., Novellie, P., Hrabar, H., and Kotzé, A. 2017. Hiding in Plain Sight: Evidence of Hybridization between Cape Mountain Zebra (Equus zebra zebra) and Plains Zebra (Equus quagga burchelli). African Journal of Wildlife Research 47: 59-64.

    Gosling, M., Muntifering, J., Kolberg, H., Uiseb, K., and King, S.R.B. 2018. Equus zebra ssp. hartmannae. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2018 (in press).

    Grobler, J.H. 1983. Feeding habits of the Cape Mountain Zebra Equus zebra zebra Linn. 1758. Koedoe 26: 159-168.

    Groves, C.P. and Bell, C.H. 2004. New investigations on the taxonomy of the zebras genus Equus, subgenus Hippotigris. Mammalian Biology 69: 182-196.

    Groves, C.P. and Ryder, O.A. 2000. Systematics and phylogeny of the horse. In: A.T. Bowling & A. Ruvinsky (eds), The Genetics of the Horse, pp. 1-24. CABI Publishing, Oxford, UK and New York, USA.

    Hrabar , H. and Kerley, G. I. H. 2013. Conservation goals for the Cape mountain zebra Equus zebra zebra—security in numbers? Oryx 47: 403–409.

    Hrabar, H., Birss, C., Peinke, D., King, S., Novellie, P., Kerley, G. and Child, M. 2015. A Conservation Assessment of Equus zebra ssp. zebra. In: M.F. Child, E. Do Linh San, D. Raimondo, H. Davies-Mostert and L. Roxburgh (eds), The Red List of Mammals of South Africa, Swaziland and Lesotho, South African National Biodiversity Institute and Endangered Wildlife Trust, South Africa.

    Hrabar H, Kerley GIH. 2015. Cape Mountain Zebra 2014/15 Status Report. Report 63. Centre for African Conservation Ecology, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth, South Africa.

    IUCN. 2019. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2019-1. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. (Accessed: 21 March 2019).

    IUCN. 2019. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2019-3. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. (Accessed: 10 December 2019).

    Joubert, E. 1972. Activity patterns shown by Hartmann zebra Equus zebra hartmannae in South West Africa with reference to climatic factors. Madoqua 7: 309-331.

    Joubert, E. 1973. Habitat preference, distribution and status of the Hartmann zebra Equus zebra hartmannae in South West Africa. Madoqua 7: 5-15.

    Joubert, E. and Louw, G.N. 1976. Preliminary observations on the digestive and renal efficiency of Hartmann's zebra Equus zebra hartmannae . Madoqua 10: 119–121.

    Kaczensky, P., Ganbaatar, O., Altansukh, N., Enkhsaikhan, N., Stauffer, C. and Walzer, C. 2011. The danger of having all your eggs in one basket – winter crash of the Przewalski’s Horses in the Mongolian Gobi. PLoS ONE 6(12).

    Kolberg, H. and Kilian, V. 2003. Survey of Iona National Park, Angola. Unpublished report. Ministry of Environment and Tourism: Windhoek, Namibia.

    Langenhorst, T. 2016. International Studbook for Hartmann's Mountain Zebra 2016. Marwell Wildlife.

    Lea, J. M., Kerley, G. I., Hrabar, H., Barry, T. J., & Shultz, S. 2016. Recognition and management of ecological refugees: A case study of the Cape mountain zebra. Biological Conservation 203: 207-215.

    Lindsey, P. 2011. An analysis of game meat production and wildlife-based land uses on freehold land in Namibia: links with food security. A TRAFFIC East/Southern Africa Report.

    Lloyd, P. H. 2002. Cape mountain zebra conservation success: an historical perspective. In: B. L. Penzhorn (ed.), Proceedings of a Symposium on Relocation of Large African Mammals, pp. 39-41. Onderstepoort, South Africa.

    Millar, J. C. G. 1970. Census of Cape mountain zebras: part I. African Wildlife 24: 17-25.

    Moodley, Y. and Harley, E. H. 2005. Population structuring in mountain zebras (Equus zebra): the molecular consequences of divergent demographic histories. Conservation Genetics 6: 953–968.

    Novellie, P. A., Millar, P. S. and Lloyd, P. H. 1996. The use of VORTEX simulations models in a long-term programme of re-introduction of an endangered large mammal, the Cape mountain zebra (Equus zebra zebra). Acta Oecologica 17: 657-671.

    Novellie, P., Birss, C., Cowell, C., Kerley, G. I., Peinke, D., Pfab, M., Selier, J. and Zimmermann, D. 2017. Adaptive Governance of Cape Mountain Zebra, Can It Work? . African Journal of Wildlife Research 47: 79-91.

    Novellie, P., Lindeque, M. Lindeque, P., Lloyd, P. and Koen, J. 2002. Status and Action Plan for the Mountain Zebra (Equus zebra). In: P. D. Moehlman (ed.), Equids: Zebras, Asses and Horses. A Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan, pp. 28-42. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.

    Pacifici, M., Santini, L., Di Marco, M., Baisero, D., Francucci, L., Grottolo Marasini, G., Visconti, P. and Rondinini, C. 2013. Generation length for mammals. Nature Conservation 5: 87–94.

    Penzhorn, B. 2013. Equus zebra Mountain Zebra. In: J. Kingdon & M. Hoffmann (ed.), Mammals of Africa, Volume V: Carnivores, Pangolins, Equids and Rhinoceroses, pp. 438-443. Bloomsbury Publishing, London, UK.

    Penzhorn, B. In press. Equus zebra. In: J. S. Kingdon and M. Hoffmann (eds), The Mammals of Africa, Academic Press, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

    Penzhorn, B.L. 1982. Habitat selection by Cape mountain zebras in the Mountain Zebra National Park. South African Journal of Wildlife Research 12: 48-54.

    Penzhorn, B. L. 1988. Equus zebra. Mammalian Species 314: 1-7.

    Sasidharan SP. 2006. Sarcoid tumours in Cape mountain zebra (Equus zebra zebra) populations in South Africa: a review of associated epidemiology, virology and genetics. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa 61: 11-18.

    Sasidharan, S. P., A. Ludwig, C. Harper, Y. Moodley, H. J. Bertschinger, and A. J. Guthrie. 2011. Comparative genetics of sarcoid tumour-affected and non-affected mountain zebra (Equus zebra) populations. South African Journal of Wildlife Research 41: 36-49.

    Schalkwyk, D. L.V., McMillin, K.W., Witthuhn, R.C. and Hoffman, L.C. 2010. The Contribution of Wildlife to Sustainable Natural Resource Utilization in Namibia: A Review. Sustainability 2(11): 3479-3499.

    Shapi, J.N. 2014. A review of Hartmann’s mountain zebra utilization in Namibia. Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Windhoek, Namibia.

    Skead, C.J. 2007. Historical Incidence of the Larger Land Mammals in the broader Eastern Cape, Second Edition.In: Boshoff AF, Kerley GIH, Lloyd PH (ed.), Port Elizabeth: Centre for African Conservation Ecology, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University.

    Skead, C.J. 2011. Historical incidence of the larger land mammals in the broader Western and Northern Cape provinces.In: Boshoff A.F., Kerley G.I.H, Lloyd P. (ed.), Centre for African Conservation Ecology, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth.

    Smith, R.K., Marais A., Chadwick, P., Lloyd, P.H. and Hill, R.A. 2008. Monitoring and management of the endangered Cape mountain zebra i>Equus zebra zebra in the Western Cape, South Africa. African Journal of Ecology 46: 207–213.

    Watson, L. H. , Odendaal, H. E., Barry, T. J. and Pietersen, J. 2005. Population viability of Cape mountain zebra in Gamka Mountain Nature Reserve, South Africa: the influence of habitat and fire. Biological Conservation 122: 173-180.

    External Data

    Images and External Links

    iNaturalist.org observations

    Search sites for species

    GooglePicSearchCalPhotosFishBaseNatureServe ExplorerGBIF - Global Biodiversity Information Facility Encyclopedia of LifeCatalogue of Life (Species2000)

    CITES Legislation from Species+

    Data Source

    The information below is from the Species+ website.

    Studies and Actions from Conservation Evidence

    Data Source

    The information below is from the Conservation Evidence website.

    Search terms: "Equus zebra", "Equidae"

    Amendment

    This amended version of the 2018 assessment was created to update the distribution map for this species.

    My Account

    Log in

    You must log in to access advanced IUCN Red List functionality. Please enter your e-mail address and password below.

    Forgot your password?
    or
    By registering/signing up through either Facebook, Google or Twitter account, you are hereby acknowledging that you have read, and also accept the Privacy policy
    Register for an account

    To save searches and access a historical view of information you have downloaded you are required to register for an account.

    Register now

    原文

    翻訳を改善する