大型食肉动物重新引入后出现的人类-食肉动物冲突凸显了提高基线的必要性

IF 0.9 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 Agricultural and Biological Sciences African Journal of Wildlife Research Pub Date : 2021-10-27 DOI:10.3957/056.051.0136
Natalia M. Banasiak, M. Hayward, G. Kerley
{"title":"大型食肉动物重新引入后出现的人类-食肉动物冲突凸显了提高基线的必要性","authors":"Natalia M. Banasiak, M. Hayward, G. Kerley","doi":"10.3957/056.051.0136","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Human–wildlife conflicts may be unintended consequences of conservation successes and rewilding, and could be exacerbated where baselines around biodiversity have shifted. Mediating conflict is a conservation priority both due to its socio-economic impacts and due to consequences that negative perceptions of wildlife have for conservation outcomes. We document locally novel emergent conflict following reintroductions of large carnivores to fenced reserves in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. Interviews with managers of 13 reserves (reintroduction sites) and adjacent properties show that reintroduced carnivores escaped from eight reserves (61.5%) and were recorded on 25 neighbouring properties (36.7%). Since large carnivore reintroductions to the Eastern Cape Province began in 1996, 75 associated conflict events were reported to the authors. This conflict was not evenly distributed, spatially or economically. Effective, evidence-based mitigation strategies are needed to ensure the continued success of conservation actions. Neighbours and policymakers should be primed for such lifted baselines where predator numbers and/or densities reflect what was historically observed. These conflicts should be anticipated and included in the early planning phases of reintroduction adaptive management processes. Conflict mitigation strategies for reintroductions should include lifting baselines to manage perceptions around recovering wildlife populations or face the prospects of re-extirpation associated with conflict-motivated retaliation.","PeriodicalId":54306,"journal":{"name":"African Journal of Wildlife Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Emerging Human–Carnivore Conflict Following Large Carnivore Reintroductions Highlights the Need to Lift Baselines\",\"authors\":\"Natalia M. Banasiak, M. Hayward, G. Kerley\",\"doi\":\"10.3957/056.051.0136\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Human–wildlife conflicts may be unintended consequences of conservation successes and rewilding, and could be exacerbated where baselines around biodiversity have shifted. Mediating conflict is a conservation priority both due to its socio-economic impacts and due to consequences that negative perceptions of wildlife have for conservation outcomes. We document locally novel emergent conflict following reintroductions of large carnivores to fenced reserves in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. Interviews with managers of 13 reserves (reintroduction sites) and adjacent properties show that reintroduced carnivores escaped from eight reserves (61.5%) and were recorded on 25 neighbouring properties (36.7%). Since large carnivore reintroductions to the Eastern Cape Province began in 1996, 75 associated conflict events were reported to the authors. This conflict was not evenly distributed, spatially or economically. Effective, evidence-based mitigation strategies are needed to ensure the continued success of conservation actions. Neighbours and policymakers should be primed for such lifted baselines where predator numbers and/or densities reflect what was historically observed. These conflicts should be anticipated and included in the early planning phases of reintroduction adaptive management processes. Conflict mitigation strategies for reintroductions should include lifting baselines to manage perceptions around recovering wildlife populations or face the prospects of re-extirpation associated with conflict-motivated retaliation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54306,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"African Journal of Wildlife Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"African Journal of Wildlife Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3957/056.051.0136\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Agricultural and Biological Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Journal of Wildlife Research","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3957/056.051.0136","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

人类与野生动物之间的冲突可能是保护成功和重建的意外后果,并且在生物多样性基线发生变化的情况下可能会加剧。调解冲突是保护的优先事项,这既是因为冲突的社会经济影响,也是因为对野生动物的负面看法对保护结果的影响。我们记录了南非东开普省围栏保护区重新引入大型食肉动物后当地新出现的冲突。对13个保护区(重新引入点)和邻近地区的管理人员的采访显示,重新引入的食肉动物从8个保护区逃脱(61.5%),并在25个邻近地区记录(36.7%)。自1996年开始向东开普省重新引入大型食肉动物以来,向作者报告了75起相关冲突事件。这场冲突在空间或经济上分布不均。需要有效的、基于证据的缓解策略,以确保保护行动的持续成功。邻居和政策制定者应该为这样一个提升的基线做好准备,即捕食者的数量和/或密度反映了历史上观察到的情况。应预见到这些冲突,并将其纳入重新引入适应性管理过程的早期规划阶段。重新引入的冲突缓解战略应包括取消基线,以管理对恢复野生动物种群的看法,或面临与出于冲突的报复有关的重新灭绝的前景。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Emerging Human–Carnivore Conflict Following Large Carnivore Reintroductions Highlights the Need to Lift Baselines
Human–wildlife conflicts may be unintended consequences of conservation successes and rewilding, and could be exacerbated where baselines around biodiversity have shifted. Mediating conflict is a conservation priority both due to its socio-economic impacts and due to consequences that negative perceptions of wildlife have for conservation outcomes. We document locally novel emergent conflict following reintroductions of large carnivores to fenced reserves in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. Interviews with managers of 13 reserves (reintroduction sites) and adjacent properties show that reintroduced carnivores escaped from eight reserves (61.5%) and were recorded on 25 neighbouring properties (36.7%). Since large carnivore reintroductions to the Eastern Cape Province began in 1996, 75 associated conflict events were reported to the authors. This conflict was not evenly distributed, spatially or economically. Effective, evidence-based mitigation strategies are needed to ensure the continued success of conservation actions. Neighbours and policymakers should be primed for such lifted baselines where predator numbers and/or densities reflect what was historically observed. These conflicts should be anticipated and included in the early planning phases of reintroduction adaptive management processes. Conflict mitigation strategies for reintroductions should include lifting baselines to manage perceptions around recovering wildlife populations or face the prospects of re-extirpation associated with conflict-motivated retaliation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
期刊介绍: The African Journal of Wildlife Research is an ISI ranked, leading peer reviewed scientific publication in wildlife research in Africa, Arabia and Madagascar, with a broad base covering scientific, applied, managerial, methodological and sociological issues related to wildlife research. The journal publishes original full-length scientific papers, short communications, book reviews as well as reviews on science-based research invited by the editor-in-chief. This research journal and has been published annually since 1971. Until 2014 (Volume 44) the journal was known as the South African Journal of Wildlife Research and from 2015 (volume 45) the name changed to African Journal of Wildlife Research. The journal reaches a wide readership, including both local and foreign wildlife managers, academics and wildlife owners, and libraries local and abroad. It is an important reference for anyone interested in the management and sustainable utilisation of natural resources.
期刊最新文献
Survival of Young Black and White Rhinoceroses in Relation to Rainfall Potential Climatic Suitability Distribution Model for Wild Boar (Sus scrofa) in South Africa Leopard Density in a Farming Landscape of the Western Cape, South Africa Oxpecker Host-Selection in the Salambala Conservancy, Northeastern Namibia Melanistic Large-Spotted Genets (Genetta maculata) in South Africa
×
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