Evaluating the effectiveness of fortified livestock enclosures as a human-carnivore conflict mitigation tool in Tanzania's Ruaha landscape

IF 2.8 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION Conservation Science and Practice Pub Date : 2025-01-10 DOI:10.1111/csp2.13299
Ana Grau, Jonathan Salerno, Tom Hilton, Asanterabi Lowasa, Alayne Cotterill, Amy J. Dickman
{"title":"Evaluating the effectiveness of fortified livestock enclosures as a human-carnivore conflict mitigation tool in Tanzania's Ruaha landscape","authors":"Ana Grau,&nbsp;Jonathan Salerno,&nbsp;Tom Hilton,&nbsp;Asanterabi Lowasa,&nbsp;Alayne Cotterill,&nbsp;Amy J. Dickman","doi":"10.1111/csp2.13299","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Conflict with humans, particularly over livestock predation, poses a severe and continuing threat to the conservation of large carnivores, particularly in reserve-adjacent and unprotected areas. Such conflict also inflicts substantial costs on people living alongside large carnivores. Though conflict is complex, attacks upon livestock are one of the factors that drive immediate hostility toward carnivores, inflict economic damage upon livestock-keepers, and can lead to retaliatory and preventative carnivore killing. Many conflict mitigation and livestock protection approaches exist, but it is crucial to examine their effectiveness. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of fortified livestock enclosures in reducing predation of livestock in an area surrounding Ruaha National Park in southern Tanzania. These fortified enclosures are built with chain-link fences and are aimed to replace the traditional enclosures built with acacia thorn branches. We implemented a before-after-control-impact (BACI) design to test the short-term impacts of the fortified enclosure intervention. We then conducted a cost–benefit analysis (CBA) based on costs of construction of fortified enclosures and benefits accruing as prevented livestock depredation. Finally, we tested the hypothesis that fortified enclosures would diminish in effectiveness over time as carnivores become habituated, the fortification deteriorates due to lack of maintenance, and/or predation risk would increase. For the long-term analysis, we used monthly data from 758 livestock-keeping households from 2010 to 2016. Across both short- and long-term analyses, fortified enclosures were effective at reducing the odds of experiencing predation of livestock by carnivores by 94% and 60%, respectively. Based on mean predation rates (c. 0.10 livestock month) and observed reductions, the benefit/cost ratios over 5 years of construction of a fortified enclosure with metal or wooden poles are 3.36 and 7.89, respectively, when subsidized. Our study contributes actionable evidence on the impact of an intervention to inform conservation strategies supporting human–carnivore coexistence.</p>","PeriodicalId":51337,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Science and Practice","volume":"7 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/csp2.13299","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Science and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/csp2.13299","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Conflict with humans, particularly over livestock predation, poses a severe and continuing threat to the conservation of large carnivores, particularly in reserve-adjacent and unprotected areas. Such conflict also inflicts substantial costs on people living alongside large carnivores. Though conflict is complex, attacks upon livestock are one of the factors that drive immediate hostility toward carnivores, inflict economic damage upon livestock-keepers, and can lead to retaliatory and preventative carnivore killing. Many conflict mitigation and livestock protection approaches exist, but it is crucial to examine their effectiveness. In this study, we evaluated the effectiveness of fortified livestock enclosures in reducing predation of livestock in an area surrounding Ruaha National Park in southern Tanzania. These fortified enclosures are built with chain-link fences and are aimed to replace the traditional enclosures built with acacia thorn branches. We implemented a before-after-control-impact (BACI) design to test the short-term impacts of the fortified enclosure intervention. We then conducted a cost–benefit analysis (CBA) based on costs of construction of fortified enclosures and benefits accruing as prevented livestock depredation. Finally, we tested the hypothesis that fortified enclosures would diminish in effectiveness over time as carnivores become habituated, the fortification deteriorates due to lack of maintenance, and/or predation risk would increase. For the long-term analysis, we used monthly data from 758 livestock-keeping households from 2010 to 2016. Across both short- and long-term analyses, fortified enclosures were effective at reducing the odds of experiencing predation of livestock by carnivores by 94% and 60%, respectively. Based on mean predation rates (c. 0.10 livestock month) and observed reductions, the benefit/cost ratios over 5 years of construction of a fortified enclosure with metal or wooden poles are 3.36 and 7.89, respectively, when subsidized. Our study contributes actionable evidence on the impact of an intervention to inform conservation strategies supporting human–carnivore coexistence.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估强化牲畜圈舍作为坦桑尼亚鲁阿哈地貌人与食肉动物冲突缓解工具的有效性
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Conservation Science and Practice
Conservation Science and Practice BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
6.50%
发文量
240
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Correction to “Exposure, sensitivity, or adaptive capacity? Reviewing assessments that use only two of three elements of climate change vulnerability” C2C—conflict to coexistence: A global approach to manage human–wildlife conflict for coexistence Short-term impacts of selective logging on forest elephants Translating eDNA data into conservation action: Partnerships to support imperiled amphibians in coastal California wetlands
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1