Skip to main content
. 2013 Sep 12;3(11):3804–3823. doi: 10.1002/ece3.747

Table 1.

Summary of changes in forest fragments in Kampala area for the period from 1990 to 2010

Number of transects Number of plots Forest size (ha) Forest status Population density Level of protection Mean gap fraction Forest location Ownership




Forest name Forest code Location 1990 2010 1990 2010 1990 2010 1990 2010 2010
Mpanga a 0°13′N, 32°18′E 5 5 50 48 476 438 1 1 2.25 Strict 0.68 Inland Government
Kituza b 0°16′N, 32°47′E 5 5 48 49 110 110 1 1 0.00 Strict 0.55 Inland Government
Zika c 0°07′N, 32°31′E 3 3 25 23 13 13 1 1 8.00 Strict 0.75 Shoreline Government
Kibale d 0°07′N, 32°32′E 4 4 27 31 42 38 2 2 0.75 Weak 0.79 Shoreline Church
Kisubi Technical e 0°07′N, 32°32′E 4 4 20 18 16 10 2 2 3.50 Weak 0.76 Shoreline Church
Gogonya f 0°07′N, 32°32′E 4 4 21 21 15 11 2 3 4.00 Weak 0.72 Shoreline Church
Kisubi Girls g 0°07′N, 32°32′E 5 5 47 18 15 13 3 3 0.25 Weak 0.83 Shoreline Church
Wamala h 0°09′N, 32°31′E 6 6 31 30 19 19 2 2 2.25 Weak 0.63 Riverine Individual
Nzuki i 0°09′N, 32°33′E 5 5 20 17 10 10 2 2 1.25 Strict 0.70 Shoreline Individual
Bunamwaya j 0°15′N, 32°33′E 7 7 26 23 9 9 3 2 33.75 Strict 0.76 Hill top Individual
Katwe k 0°11′N, 32°27′E 4 4 42 18 11 5 2 2 9.00 Strict 0.83 Hill top Sacred
Kisubi paddock l 0°07′N, 32°32′E 1 0 3 SE 3.50 Shoreline Church
Kisubi hospital m 0°07′N, 32°32′E 2 0 3 PF 4.25 Shoreline Church
Kanywa n 0°07′N, 32°32′E 9 0 2 SE 27.00 Shoreline Individual
Nabinonya o 0°07′N, 32°32′E 8 0 3 T 3.70 Shoreline Individual
Nalugala p 0°09′N, 32°33′E 16 0 2 SE 28.00 Shoreline Individual
Namulanda q 0°09′N, 32°33′E 12 0 4 SE 1.50 Shoreline Individual
Nganjo A r 0°10′N, 32°33′E 4 0 4 SE 1.50 Shoreline Individual
Nganjo B s 0°10′N, 32°33′E 4 0 3 SE 7.25 Shoreline Individual
Nganjo C t 0°10′N, 32°33′E 4 0 2 SE 8.50 Shoreline Individual
Seguku u 0°14′N, 32°33′E 13 0 4 SE 17.50 Riverine Individual
Mawanyi v 0°10′N, 32°33′E 12 0 2 HG 89.50 Riverine Individual

Forest areas and extent are based on LANDSAT image from 27 February 1989 and aerial photography from 2010. Level of protection was based on whether or not there were full time foot patrols by a forest guard. Gap fraction is only available for forests in the 2010 survey. Forest status: 1, fairly intact; 2, disturbed; 3, degraded; 4, highly degraded. SE, lost to settlement; T, lost to tourism development; PF, lost plantation forestry; and HG, lost to home gardens.