Intl. J. of Mol. Evol. and Biodivers. 2014, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1-8
2
attention has been given for zootherapeu-tic research.
The systematic investigation of medicinal animals has
been started only in the past few decades and an
awareness of the variety and importance of
non-botanical remedies (of animal and mineral origin)
is emerging. In spite of the recent surge in
publications about zootherapeutics, the subject is still
far from being well covered, and even more distant
from being exhausted (Uniyal et al., 2006).
The importance of animal parts in the history of
pharmacology in general has been studied since the
beginning of the 20
th
century. In Ethiopia, the use of
traditional medicine has a long history and most of the
rural people are well acquainted with the practice
(Wabe et al., 2011). However, little information has
been recorded by few authors (Yirga et al., 2011). Like
other animals, medicinal animal population share the
threats caused by habitat alteration or loss (Anyinam,
1995). Besides, a given species of medicinal animals
could be exploited for another purpose such as for
food, cloth or ornament (Robinson and Bennett, 2000;
2002; Bennett et al., 2002). These different forms of
direct uses of medicinal animals operate together with
various indirect impacts such as climate change which
have caused the decline or extinction of species in the
past years. Hence, it is a timely endeavour to
investigate, document and analyze traditional
knowledge on medicinal wildanimals and associated
knowledge drivers, so that sound medicinal
wildanimals utilization and management practices can
be maintained. Moreover, it provides the opportunity
for recognition, promotion, management and
protection of indigenous knowledge of a community
on medicinal wildanimals as vital part of a nation’s
heritage, besides calling policy makers, natural
resource managers, stake holders and cultural
practitioners for conservation actions. The current
study also investigates the impact of zootherapy on
the conservation of threatened wild animals’ species in
the area and the risk of zoonotic disease transmission
during remedial preparation and administration.
1 Survey Methods
1.1 Study area
Amaro Woreda is located in the Southern Nations and
Nationalities and People Regional State of Ethiopia. It
is one of the three Woredas under the Segene
Surrounding People Zonal Administration, situated
105 km south of Dilla. It lies in the coordinates
between 5°50'20"N and 37°54'20"E. Thirty rural
kebelse and one urban kebele are situated within the
woreda boundary and bordered in the east and north
by Oromia regional state, in the south by Burji
Woreda, in the west by Derashe Woreda, Konso
Woreda, Lake Chamo and Nechsar National park. The
woreda covers an area of 170980 km
2
and contain
three types of Ethiopian ecological zones (30% Dega,
38% Woynadega and 32 % Kola).
According to the 2004 National Population and House
Census, the population size of the woreda was 133,
445 (49% male and 51% female), among these 6.2%
are urban dwellers and 93.8% live in rural areas.
Large segment of the people living in the area live
primarily on agriculture including animal rearing and
cultivation. Coffee, teff, chat and other root crops are
the major agricultural products of the area.
1.2 Preliminary survey
Preliminary survey were conducted in January, 2013
to contact the woreda’s concerned officials to brief
them about the objective of the research and mobilize
the target group of the research to develop trust and
friend
ship
approach
for
the
successful
implementation of the study. Sample size was
determined based on the size of the target population.
1.3 Data collection
Data were collected through semi-structured interview
from March-January 2014 in 15 kebeles (Martin,
1995). Selection of months for data collection is based
on suitability; most of the farmers have spare time for
non-agricultural activities. From each Kebele 6
traditional medicine practitioners were selected for
interview. Surveys were conducted through
semi-structured questionnaires and in cases where the
respondents
were
uncomfortable
with
the
questionnaires, discussion and informal interviews
were employed, and in the process, information on
different zootherapeutic uses were noted and
documented (Alexiades, 1996; Huntington, 2000).
Participants were interviewed in isolation from others
in the community to satisfy the requirement of
statistical independence (Hoffman and Gallaher,
