**4. Case study 2: The African wild dog**

The African wild dog is a highly endangered carnivore (IUCN 2006) that has showed significant declines in population numbers over the last century, especially during the last 35-45 years (Woodroffe et al., 1997). Like much of Africa, the agricultural and economic development of South Africa led to the local extinction or extirpation of large predators in all but the most uninhabitable areas (e.g., Kruger National Park and north-east KwaZulu-Natal). Apart from rainforest areas and deserts, African wild dogs (herein called wild dogs) were historically distributed throughout much of sub-Saharan Africa (Fanshawe et al., 1991; Monod, 1928; Schaller, 1972). Now, however, they have been extirpated from most of their range, being confined to a few areas in southern Africa where human population density remains low. According to Fanshawe et al. (1997), there is about 3,000-5,500 wild dogs left in 600-1,000 packs, more than half of which are found in southern Africa. Unfortunately, most of these populations are too small to be considered viable in the long-term. For instance, it is commonly accepted that the only viable population of wild dogs in South Africa occurs in Kruger National Park (Fanshawe et al., 1991).

The principal threats to wild dogs are pressures resulting from human activities and infectious diseases. Both of these are mediated by habitat fragmentation, which increases contact between wild dogs, humans and domestic dogs. Wild dogs are intensely social animals, spending almost all of their time in close association with one other. Hunting in packs, each member achieves a higher foraging success than it would if it hunted alone (Creel & Creel, 1995). Packs may be as small as a pair, or number as many as 49 adults, yearlings and pups. Studies have shown that wild dogs live at very low densities, and are rare even when they live in large well-protected habitats where prey may be abundant, making these animals unusually susceptible to the loss and fragmentation of natural habitats (Woodroffe & Ginsberg, 1997). Growing human populations have caused wild-dog habitat to become increasingly fragmented or discontinuous, as large tracts of land have been taken over for livestock grazing and cultivation. In addition, wild dogs have been persecuted and their prey has been depleted. Like other large- and mediumbodied size mammalian carnivore species, wild dogs do kill livestock under some circumstances, and have therefore been shot, snared and poisoned in most livestock areas. Overall, the combination of all these factors has resulted in wild dog populations to become increasingly isolated in fragments of habitats with low human population densities.

Species reintroduction is a tool for conservation and wildlife management (Griffith et al., 1989) that may sometimes offer the only chance of survival for highly endangered or threatened species (Hayward et al., 2007a, 2007b). In the interest of improving the current status of the African wild dog, efforts are underway to reintroduce wild-dog packs into several parks and reserves of South Africa, including Mkhuze Game Reserve (IUCN Wild Dog Advisory Group, 2005; Lindsey et al., 2004; Lines, 2006; Mills et al., 1998; Wells & Richmond, 1995). Mkhuze Game Reserve (~ 360 km2) was established in 1912 and forms part of iSimangaliso Wetland Park (World Heritage Site formerly called the Greater St. Lucia Wetland Park) which is approximately 3,320 km2. Regardless of its small size, Mkhuze Game Reserve supports a very diverse mammalian community that includes four of the five big-game animals expected to occur in the area: leopard (*Panthera pardus*), African elephant (*Loxodonta africana*), black rhinoceros (*Diceros bicornis*), and buffalo (*Syncerus caffer*). Wild dogs were present in Mkhuze Game Reserve until the 1930s. In this game reserve, the reintroduction of wild dogs began in 2005 as part of the Priority Species Monitoring Project. In 2004, thirteen wild dogs originating from two other South African conservation areas (Marakele National Park and Madikwe Game Reserve) were placed together in two adjoining bomas in Mkhuze Game Reserve with the purpose of bonding all the animals into one pack. Boma construction was fundamental to ensure animals were exposed to electrified fencing (Mkhuze Game Reserve is surrounded by electric fencing), habituated to game vehicles, allowed to settle, become accustomed to radiocollars and other conspecifics within a new social group, and finally ensure that territorial bonds were relaxed so they remained at the release location (Hayward et al., 2007a, 2007b).

Although a variety of methods are used to assess the success of a species reintroduction program, a common recommended first step in most of these methods is to demonstrate that the species is adapting well to its new habitat during the establishment phase of the reintroduction (Hayward et al., 2007a, 2007b). Researchers generally accomplish this first step by examining habitat selection and home-range patterns, as the reestablishment of species in areas where they formerly occurred is often influenced by the suitability of habitats at proposed release sites (IUCN, 1998; Wolf et al., 1998*).* Without high quality habitats that provide adequate food, water and suitable places to forage and breed, reintroduction programmes have a low chance of success (Griffith et al., 1989; Hayward et al., 2007a, 2007b).

The main objective of this study was to examine how telemetry data can be used to quantify habitat selection and home-range patterns of a wild-dog pack during the establishment phase of a reintroduction program. We also expected that a better knowledge of the home range and habitat-selection patterns of reintroduced animals will help identify what resources and habitats are essential for the survival of wild dogs in small reserves or parks such as Mkhuze Game Reserve.
