|
|
The predator-safe livestock guide An introduction to protecting livestock and deterring predators
Cheetah Conservation Botswana, Gabarone 60 pp |
|
|
|
|
|
Human Wildlife Toolkit - Meeting report |
|
|
|
|
Gusset M, Swarner MJ, Mponwanek L, Keletiele K, McNutt JW. 2009. Human–wildlife conflict in northern Botswana: livestock predation by Endangered African wild dog Lycaon pictus and other carnivores. Oryx 43, 67-72. |
|
We conducted a questionnaire survey among 77 cattle posts and farms to investigate human-carnivore conflicts in northern Botswana, with a particular focus on Endangered African wild dog Lycaon pictus, persecuted throughout their shrinking range in sub-Saharan Africa for allegedly predating livestock. Predator attacks on livestock (n=938 conflict reports) represent an economic concern for livestock owners, particularly alleged predation by black-backed jackal Canis mesomelas, which were blamed for 77% of all reported livestock losses. The presence of two known resident packs of wild dogs did not result in corresponding conflict reports with livestock owners, as wild dogs accounted for only 2% of reported predator attacks and largely subsisted on wild prey. Nevertheless, most of these wild dogs were killed in the months following this survey. Reported conflicts involving the two largest predator species (lion Panthera leo and spotted hyaena Crocuta crocuta) declined with increasing distance from protected areas. Leaving livestock unattended during the day seems to facilitate predation but kraaling livestock at night reduces predation. Compensation payments for livestock losses did not demonstrably change livestock owners' willingness to coexist with predators. Our results corroborate studies from elsewhere that simple improvements in livestock husbandry practices would help mitigate human-carnivore conflicts. |
|
Gusset_et_al_2009_Human-wildlife_conflict_in_nothern_Botswana.pdf |
|
Lagendijk DDG, Gusset M. 2008. Human–Carnivore Coexistence on Communal Land Bordering the Greater Kruger Area, South Africa. Environm. Manage. 42, 971-976. |
|
The aim of this study was to assess the potential for coexistence between rural people (living adjacent to a protected area) and predators (from the same area) ranging onto communal land. Ninety members of local communities bordering Manyeleti Game Reserve, which is contiguous with Kruger National Park, South Africa were interviewed. Respondents expressed diverging attitudes toward predators, which were more favorable among participants with higher education. Negative views were particularly due to fear of human and livestock losses, especially to lions, Panthera leo. Lions were thought to be the most abundant predator both within and outside the reserve. Lions were also the best known predator and were most often held responsible for killing livestock. Despite these livestock losses and a lack of conservation education, most participants voiced favorable opinions about large carnivore conservation, as predators were considered an integral part of the respondents' natural heritage. Thanks to this cultural tolerance and also because of a largely accepted management policy regarding predator control, large carnivores and people can coexist in the vicinity of Kruger National Park. |
|
Lagendijk_&_Gusset_2008_Human-carnivore_coexistence_on_communal_land_in_South_Africa.pdf |
| Lamarque F, Anderson J, Fergusson R, Lagrage M, Osei-Owusu Y, Bakker L. 2009. Human-wildlife conflict in Africa. Rome. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; Report nr 157, 112 pp. |
| This review focuses on Africa, where human-wildlife conflict is particularly prevalent, even in countries with a higher average annual income. Crocodiles still kill people in the Lake Nasser area in Egypt and within towns in Mozambique; leopards still kill sheep within 100 km of Cape Town, South Africa, and lions kill cattle around the outskirts of Nairobi, Kenya. In terms of the scale of their impact on humans, it is the smaller animals, occurring in vast numbers, that have the greatest impact. The red locust has been responsible for famines across vast swathes of Africa for centuries. Annual losses of cereals caused by the red-billed quelea have been estimated at US$22 million (Bruggers and Elliott, 1989). In Gabon, the number of overall complaints about grasscutters far surpasses those relating to any other animal species, including the elephant (Lahm, 1996). However, the larger herbivores (elephants, buffalo and hippopotamus), large mammalian carnivores (lions, leopards, cheetahs, spotted hyenas and wild dogs), and crocodiles are traditionally seen as the animals representing the greatest threat to humans and responsible for the majority of human-wildlife conflicts. This may be due to the fact that local communities often regard the large wild animals as government property, as was the case under previous colonial legislation, and therefore feel prohibited from dealing with the problem themselves (WWF SARPO, 2005). The impact of the activities of large mammals on farmers and their livelihoods is enormous and even traumatic when people are killed. These incidents are often newsworthy, and generally attract the attention of political representatives who demand action from governments. Baboons can cause significant damage to timber forest plantations and are also considered a pest, notably in Southern Africa. For these reasons this survey deals with larger herbivores and carnivores, particularly animals that have been investigated in FAO studies, i.e. elephants, lions, baboons and crocodiles. |
| MacIennan SD, Groom RJ, MacDonald DW, Frank LG. 2009. Evaluation of a compensation scheme to bring about pastoralist tolerance of lions. Biolocical Conservation 142:2419-27. |
|
Lions (Panthera leo) are in decline throughout most of their range due to human persecution, largely provoked by depredation on livestock, and there is debate as to the usefulness of financial instruments to mitigate this conflict. Intending to reduce local lion-killing, the Mbirikani Predator Compensation Fund compensates members of Mbirikani Group Ranch for livestock depredation at a flat rate (close to average market value), after the kill has been verified and with penalties imposed for poor husbandry. Despite penalizing claimants, 55% of claims arose because livestock were lost in the bush. Between 1st April 2003 and 31st December 2006, 754 cattle, 80 donkeys and 1844 sheep/goats were killed (2.31% of the total livestock herd each year). Forty-three percent of kills were ascribed to spotted hyaenas (Crocuta crocuta); leopards (Panthera pardus) and cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) were blamed for 37% of cases, lions 7%, jackals (Canis mesomelas) 7% and buffalo (Syncerus caffer) and elephants (Loxodonta africana) together 6%. Significantly more attacks took place during months of lower rainfall but the rate of attacks was not related to the density of livestock on the ranch, or the ratio of wild herbivores to domestic stock. There was no correlation between local market prices and the number of claims per month. Despite compensation, at least one lion per year was killed in 2004, 2005 and 2006. We describe some features of large carnivore depredation in the study area and suggest that regional recovery of the lion population may require compensation on a wider scale. |
|
Maclennan_et_al_2009_Compensation_scheme_for_lion_damage.pdf |
| Marker LL, Dickman AJ, MacDonald DW. 2005. Perceived effectiveness of livestock-guarding dogs placed on Namibian farms. Rangeland Ecology and Management 58, 329-336. |
| Evaluations of 117 livestock-guarding dogs placed on Namibian farms between January 1994 and November 2001 were conducted as part of a study aimed at reducing livestock depredation rates on both commercial and communal farmland. The perceptions of livestock farmers were evaluated in terms of their satisfaction with the guarding dogs, the level of care given to the dogs, and the attentiveness, trustworthiness, and protectiveness of the dogs. Guarding dogs were very successful in terms of reducing livestock losses, with 73% of responding farmers reporting a large decline in losses since acquisition of a guarding dog, and the same percentage seeing an economic benefit to having the dog. Farmer satisfaction with the dogs was high, with 93% of farmers willing to recommend the program, and the care given to the dogs was also good. The dogs exhibited high levels of protectiveness and attentiveness, although trustworthiness was relatively low. The level of care provided by farmers was lower for older dogs than for younger dogs, and older dogs appeared to be less trustworthy than young dogs. There were no obvious differences in effectiveness between the sexes, or between dogs placed on communal farms and those on commercial ranches. The majority of dogs exhibited behavioral problems at some stage, particularly chasing game, staying at home, and harassing livestock, but corrective training solved 61% of the reported problems. We conclude that with the correct training and care, livestock-guarding dogs can be an effective method of livestock protection on Namibian farmlands. |
|
Marker_et_al_2005_Effectiveness_of_live-stock_guarding_dogs_in_Namibia.pdf |
| Marker LL, Dickman AJ, MacDonald DW. 2005. Survivorship and causes of mortality of livestock-guarding dogs on Namibian ranches. Rangeland Ecology and Management 58, 337-343. |
| This paper reports upon the survivorship of 143 livestock-guarding dogs placed on Namibian rangeland between January 1994 and January 2002 as part of a study of techniques that could be used to reduce stock losses on commercial ranches and communal farms. During the study period, 61 (42.7%) of the dogs placed were removed from working situations. Deaths accounted for 49 (80.3%) of removals, while the remaining 12 (19.7%) were transfers out of the program. Causes of death varied by both farm type and age group. The most common cause of death for working dogs, especially young ones, was accidental, which accounted for 22 reported deaths, while culling of the dog by the owner was the reason for 12 working dog deaths, all of which occurred on commercial ranches. The mean survival time as a working dog was estimated as 4.16 (±0.40) years for males, 4.65 (±0.45) years for females, and 4.31 (±0.31) years for all dogs placed. Survival distributions differed slightly (P=0.049) between farm types, with adult mortality less common on communal farms than on commercial ranches. There was no significant difference (P=0.612) between the sexes regarding survival distributions. With good care of the dogs and sufficient information provided to farmers, guarding dogs can act as an effective and economically beneficial method of livestock protection, with implications for range management both in Namibia and elsewhere. |
|
Marker_et_al_2005_Mortality_of_livestock-guarding_dogs_in_Namibia.pdf |
| Marker L, Dickman A, Schumann M. 2005. Using Livestock guarding dogs as a conflict resolution strategy on namibian farms. Carnovore Damage Prevetion News, January 2005, 28-32. |
| Overall, our research has shown that the placement of livestock guarding dogs on Namibian farms can have a very positive effect for local farmers, in terms of reducing stock losses and having an economically beneficial impact. Although studies have indicated that cheetah removals have dropped in the study area over the time that guarding dogs were placed, it is hard to measure the extent to which these changes were due to conflict resolution measures such as dog placement, and how much was due to other factors, such as education, or changes in cheetah population size. Nevertheless, numerous other studies have demonstrated a link between levels of stock depredation and the removal of those predators blamed, so the placement of these dogs on Namibian farms may well have had a positive effect in terms of reducing cheetah removal rates. Despite the inevitable problems encountered with any conflict resolution measure, this study has shown that the use of livestock guarding dogs can be an effective tool for both communal and commercial farmers in Namibia and could have important implications in many similar situations elsewhere. |
|
Marker_et_al_2005_Using_Livestock_Guarding_Dogs_to_reduce_conflicts_on_Namibian_Farms.pdf |
| Ogada MO, Woodroffe R, Oguge NO, Frank LG. 2003. Limiting depredation by African carnivores: the role of livestock husbandry. Conservation Biology 17,1521-1530. |
| Most large carnivores species are in global decline. Conflict with local people, particularly over depredation on livestock, is a major cause of this decline, affecting both nominally protected populations and those outside protected areas. For this reason, techniques that can resolve conflicts between large carnivores and livestock farmers may make important contributions to conservation. We monitored rates of livestock depredation by lions (Panthera leo), leopards (Panthera pardus), cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus), and spotted hyenas (Crocuta crocuta), and retributive killing of these species by farmers in livestock-producing areas of Laikipia District, Kenya. Farmers killed more lions, leopards and spotted hyenas where these predators killed more livestock. Livestock husbandry had a clear effect on rates of depredation and hence on the number of predator killed. Cattle, sheep, and goats experienced the lowest predation rates when attentively herded by day and enclosed in traditional corrals (bomas) by night. Construction of the boma, the presence of watchdogs, and high levels of human activity around the boma were all associated with lower losses to predators. Although most of this work was carried out on commercial ranches, local Maasai and Samburu pastoralists have practiced nearly identical forms of husbandry for generations. Our study shows that traditional, low-tech husbandry approaches can make an important contribution to the conservation of large carnivores. |
|
Ogada_et_al_2003_Limiting_depredation_by_African_carnivores.pdf |
| Sartini B. 1994. Update on livestock guarding dog project. CCF News 3, 5-7. |
| Livestock-guarding dogs provide a method of non-lethal predator control which protects farmers' livelihood while also conserving the predator species. These dogs can be a viable solution to reducing the conflict between farmers and predators in Namibia. In January 1994, the Cheetah Conservation Fund and the Livestock Guarding Dog Project, collaborated to begin a pilot project on the farmlands of Namibia. Four Anatolian shepherds, a traditional livestock guarding dog breed from Turkey, where placed with separate flocks of goats and sheep on a working commercial livestock farm. During the two-week stay, they gave lectures and talked with farmers about incorporating dogs into farm management practices. They also oversaw the initial introduction of the Anatolian shepherds on the farm. |
|
Schiess-Meier M, Ramsauer M, Gabanapelo T, König B. 2007. Livestock predation - insight from problem animal control registers in Botwsana. J Wildl Manage 71(4):1267-74. |
|
Problem Animal Control Registers, where farmers report livestock losses due to predators as a prerequisite for financial compensation, allow quantifying the human-predator conflict. We analyzed such registers from the Kweneng District of Botswana to assess the impact of native predators on livestock over 3 years. Leopards (Panthera pardus), lions (Panthera leo), wild dogs (Lycaon pictus), brown hyenas (Hyaena brunnea), and cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) altogether claimed 2,272 head of livestock. During 2002, the year with the highest impact, the number of animals reported depredated (954) represented 0.34% of the livestock in the district. Leopards and lions caused 64% of the losses. Leopard livestock predation mainly affected calves and was consistent over the district and over time. In contrast, lion predation concentrated on adult cattle, was characterized by local hot spots close to reserve borders, decreased with increasing distance to a reserve, and increased during 2002, an unusually dry year. Interviews with 60 farmers and herders within 30 km of Khutse and Central Kalahari Game Reserves revealed an annual loss of 2.2% of their livestock to predators. Here, small farms (max. 100 domestic animals) suffered relatively higher losses than large, commercial farms, not only due to predation (small farms: 11.7%; large farms: 1.0%) but also from other causes (small: 12.6%; large: 2.8%), even though herders on large farms guarded 5 times more livestock per person than those on small farms. To reduce livestock predation in most of the district where lions are absent, we recommend maternity corrals for pregnant females and calves to better protect vulnerable calves during day and night. In areas close to a reserve where lions roam, herders' incentives to keep all livestock protected in a corral at night have to be enhanced because, according to the registers, only 3 predation cases were reported to have happened inside a corral. |
|
Schiess-Meier_et_al_2007_Livestock_predation_in_Botswana.pdf |