APPENDIX 2 (BACKGROUND OF THE SURVEY AND ITINERARY).

Appendix 2.1. Background of the survey and the contents of this report.

Time schedule of planning. The two team leaders started their planning 1 May 1993, four and a half months before departure. Initial preparations comprised identification of a field crew, formulation of a fieldwork programme, contacts to relevant collaborating parties, purchasing equipment and - not the least - seeking economic support for the project. The planning phase was hectic and difficult, due to little time available and other duties, lack of good maps until late in the summer and much uncertainty as to whether it was possible to gain access to the Uluguru North F.R. (access had been prohibited for foreigners for some years). Furthermore the initial purpose of the trip was changed during the planning phase following discussions with RSPB and access to new information.

Birds (Section 5). Before our survey the Uluguru South F.R. (by far the largest in the Ulugurus) was very little known biologically. For birds the only visit to the eastern slopes were some collecting activities of Loveridge at Nyingwa and Nyange in the 1920ies (see Appendix 5.1 and Figure 1.3). Some visits had also been paid to the Tchenzema and Bunduki areas on the western slopes. Stuart and Jensen (1985) recommended that new ornithological surveys should focus on the southeastern section of the Ulugurus. The initial purpose of the trip from ZMUC was to combine (1) a study of the unknown eastern slopes of the Uluguru South F.R. with (2) training of "new" Danish students and ornithologists in fieldwork techniques (to involve them in fieldwork in the tropics, especially in Tanzania) and (3) further testing of methods to be used for quantifying the avifauna of the Eastern Arc (for a large-scale study with the aim of explaining biogeographical patterns and pointing out conservation priorities).

However, following discussions during the summer with RSPB (running the Uluguru Slopes Planning Project) who had funds for a standardised survey of the two endemic bird species but also was interested in a standardised description of the avifauna, a compromise was reached between ZMUC and RSPB. The plans of testing various methods was skipped. A contract was signed with RSPB early September, including the following obligations:

• As far as is practicable, to survey population status or distribution within the Uluguru Mountains of the two endemic bird species (Loveridge's Sunbird and Uluguru Bush Shrike). (This should be done primarily using standardised and repeatable methods).

• As far as is practicable, to determine the bird assemblage of the mountain forests using standardised and repeatable methods, and to determine the conservation significance of these forests.
• To ensure the participation of Tanzanian scientists/foresters in the survey work.
• To work towards the production of an overall assessment of the biodiversity conservation significance of the Uluguru Mountain forests.
• To give recommendations for any further work considered necessary to build on the achievements of the project.

Standardised methods were applied to describe the avifauna along three gradients - two on the very unknown eastern slopes of the Uluguru South F.R. and - for comparison - one in the better known Uluguru North F.R. Additional localities were visited by JF, who brought a car, for improving the overview (Tchenzema, Kimboza, Bunduki, Morningside and - in the autumn 1994 Kigurunyembe). This has provided a solid description of the general avifauna, including the density of the endemic Near-threatened species Nectarinia loveridgei. As much time as possible was used to search for rare species ("general birdwatching") and to survey the entire gradient. However, in a rugged and difficult terrain with a tight time schedule we often felt that time was limited for locating the most scarce birds (with "general birdwatching") like some of the threatened species. These species are not detected by standardised methods but rather by extensive surveying. Three of the Threatened species were located, including the endemic Malaconotus alius, and in combination with earlier data, literature studies and own experience from earlier fieldwork in the Eastern Arc we have been able to preliminary assess the geographical distribution of Threatened species in the Ulugurus.

The reason for choosing the altitudes 1345 m, 1520 m, 1720 m, 1920 m and 2145 m for camp sites is that standardized mistnetting were carried out in the same altitudes in the Udzungwas 1991-92 by LAH and JOS. Potential campsites had first been found on the 1:50.000 maps. Using the same altitudes in the Ulugurus during the present survey, a basis has been provided for a later comparison between the Uluguru and the Udzungwa Mountains.

A review of earlier ornithological survey work and an assessment of the value of Kimboza Forest for altitudinal migrants from the montane forests has been included to facilitate an overall assessment of the Ulugurus and to facilitate planning of coming surveys. A number of ecological details on birds which are not of direct importance for conservation matters have been included in order to leave a relatively complete published description of our findings. In Appendix 5.3 we comment on the completeness of the ornithological survey and also on our experience with the methods used. Though this report may not be the right forum for the latter we decided to include it since there is much interest among ornithologists for developing a standard manual for surveys of tropical forests. For the planning of such a manual (and for planners of new surveys in the Eastern Arc and elsewhere) we believe that it is useful if notes are left in an easily accessible way from all surveys on experiences and ideas of methods and ways of presenting data.

The contract with RSPB included fieldwork only on birds. However, there was much interest from the Botanical and Zoological Museum of Copenhagen in forming a multi-disciplinary team (to obtain data for the Eastern Arc Biodiversity Programme and to train and involve students and Tanzanian foresters) so the participation of botanists was ensured from the earliest phase of the planning and later people working with millipeds and mammals agreed to participate.

Botany (Section 8). A larger database exists of botanical plots from many Tanzanian forests. These data are of species composition and vegetatiori*structure. However, many areas in the Ulugurus had not been studied before, including the eastern slopes of the Uluguru South F.R. There was therefore much interest in obtaining data from these areas. At each of the 12 mistnetting stations in the Uluguru mountain forests (Kimhandu, Lanzi and Tegetero areas) a 25x25 m plot was assessed for woody species with a stem diameter (dbh) of more than 3 cm. All plots were placed adjacent to the mistnetting sites. A further three plots were assessed in the lowland Kimboza Forest during the survey. To obtain knowledge on the use of plants by local villagers, ethnobotanical data were collected.

It was not possible to identify all plant specimens collected at Kimhandu and Lanzi within the time available for producing the botany chapter because of other duties and since some of the specimens have to be compared with material from other herbariums. Preliminary data are listed in this report to give some idea about the vegetation at the study sites and the character of the data. Full species lists and further structural data will be published in papers planned by JCL and PH. The results of the botanical plots at Tegetero and results of the ethnobotanical research are published in a separate report (Mabula et al. 1994). The results of three plots assessed in Kimboza Forest by JCL in November will be published later. An updated assessment of the biodiversity value of the Uluguru forests in terms of plants is presented in Section 8. It was, however, not possible to go into an assessment of percentages of endemism within the time available for producing the botany chapter.

Mammals and millipeds (Sections 6 and 7). Initially the field team comprised only ornithologists and botanists. In August 1993 we succeeded in making a final arrangement with LLS and JNK who were planning to do fieldwork in the Udzungwas in September 1993 that they should spend three of their weeks in Tanzania in the Ulugurus in October, collecting information on millipeds and mammals. The collection of field data were mostly for their own thesis subjects (millipede and Tree Hyrax ecology and taxonomy) but they agreed on producing an account for this report on millipeds and mammals. For mammals field data are presented of hunting pressure (interviews and own observations) together with a list of field observations of mammals made during this survey. An up-dated species list for the Ulugurus and an assessment of the biodiversity value is also presented. For millipeds an updated species list is presented for the Ulugurus, supplemented with an updated assessment of biodiversity value of the Ulugurus for selected invertebrate groups.

Tanzanian participation. Following discussions at University of Dar es Salaam in July 1993 with participation of Drs. Jon Fjeldså (Zoological Museum of Copenhagen), Ib Friis and Jon Lovett (Botanical Museum of Copenhagen) and representatives from University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania Forestry Research Institute, Institute of Resource Assessment and the Tanzania Commission for Science and Technology it was decided that on this survey foresters from the Tanzania Forestry Research Institute (TAFORI) should participate to learn more about standardised botanical fieldwork and biodiversity projects. Later we ensured the participation of SIM from the Regional Forest Office in Morogoro and of JK from WildLife Conservation Society of Tanzania (WCST). In October 1993 the foresters agreed to collect information on local villagers' use of woody forest plants.

Conservation of biodiversity (Section 9). No up-to-date assessment of the biodiversity value of the Ulugurus existed. Brief overviews of endemism in certain groups for which information was relatively easily accessible was therefore included. Due to lack of time (and information) it has, however, not been possible to standardise the presentation between groups and to go into a strict comparison with other mountains (except for bird species of special conservation importance).

Conservation of other values in the Ulugurus and the problems the forests and the surrounding human population face (Section 9). A short and easy-read account has been included (Section 9) on problems for the conservation of the Uluguru forests in order to put the information on biodiversity into a wider perspective. We hope that this information, based on the literature and observations from our survey, will be of help to those who wish to get a quick overview of problems in the mountains. Visiting such an area for the first time it is useful with an entry to the literature. The last part of Section 9 lists proposals for conservation actions, based on the findings of our own fieldwork and information from the literature.