Academic literature on the topic 'Human-wildlife conflicts'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Human-wildlife conflicts.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Human-wildlife conflicts"
1
Redpath, Stephen Mark, Saloni Bhatia, and Juliette Young. "Tilting at wildlife: reconsidering human–wildlife conflict." Oryx 49, no. 2 (November 11, 2014): 222–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0030605314000799.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractConflicts between people over wildlife are widespread and damaging to both the wildlife and people involved. Such issues are often termed human–wildlife conflicts. We argue that this term is misleading and may exacerbate the problems and hinder resolution. A review of 100 recent articles on human–wildlife conflicts reveals that 97 were between conservation and other human activities, particularly those associated with livelihoods. We suggest that we should distinguish between human–wildlife impacts and human–human conflicts and be explicit about the different interests involved in conflict. Those representing conservation interests should not only seek technical solutions to deal with the impacts but also consider their role and objectives, and focus on strategies likely to deliver long-term solutions for the benefit of biodiversity and the people involved.
2
Peterson, M. Nils, Markus J. Peterson, Tarla Rai Peterson, and Kirsten Leong. "Why transforming biodiversity conservation conflict is essential and how to begin." Pacific Conservation Biology 19, no. 2 (2013): 94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/pc130094.
Full textAbstract:
Conserving biodiversity requires productive management of conflict. Currently, wildlife are often portrayed as conscious human antagonists, which must be fought. We suggest using the ‘comic corrective’ to experiment with ways to reframe human–human conflicts over wildlife management and wildlife damage. This requires a deep commitment to change, often made more palatable through humour. This effort to fight the use of the term human–wildlife conflict should not be interpreted as a call to reject human–human conflict as a useful conservation tool. Conservationists, who value wildlife, often misleadingly suggest that conservation can sidestep irreducible value differences and political processes that see proponents of different views as antagonists. Because democracies cannot function without dissent, we suggest that conservation biologists should embrace stakeholder conflicts over wildlife conservation as a way to improve decision making. In particular, we should challenge the view that wildlife are willfully antagonistic to people while recognizing conflict among humans over how biodiversity conservation should occur.
3
Rifaie, Farid, Eko Sulistyadi, and Yuli Sulistya Fitriana. "A review of patterns and geographical distribution of human-wildlife conflicts in Indonesia." Berkala Penelitian Hayati 27, no. 1 (November 10, 2021): 41–50. http://dx.doi.org/10.23869/bphjbr.27.1.20217.
Full textAbstract:
The unprecedented growth of human-dominated landscapes has led to population decline and the extinction of many animal species. A major paradigm shift that perceived wildlife as problem animals into threatened species that need protection triggered human-wildlife conflict studies. Although human-wildlife conflict incidences can be found globally, they have unique characteristics in each region of the world. However, little is known about the characteristics of human-wildlife conflicts in Southeast Asia, particularly Indonesia. There is a need for a comprehensive insight into human-wildlife conflict studies in Indonesia to understand past advancements and propose future priorities. This study examined the literature that provides the overall view of the human-wildlife conflict patterns in the country. The results showed that there was a comparatively small number of studies because this field was a relatively new subject in Indonesia. Furthermore, there were big gaps regarding animal species and the geographic distribution of study sites. A total of 35 species belonging to eight taxonomic groups experienced conflicts with humans. However, the studies heavily focused on three groups of animals and certain areas of the country. The predominant conflict sites were secondary forest, agroforestry, and farmlands. The conflicts in these areas unveiled the significance of local beliefs and social norms for formulating mitigation strategies.
4
Turyahabwe, Remigio, Joyfred Asaba, Andrew Mulabbi, and Makoba Gudoyi Paul. "Sustainable Human-Wildlife Conflict Management Strategies Around Busitema Central Forest Reserve, Eastern Uganda." East African Journal of Forestry and Agroforestry 3, no. 1 (October 4, 2021): 62–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.37284/eajfa.3.1.423.
Full textAbstract:
The study aimed at establishing sustainable Human-wildlife co-existence strategies to help settle the conflicts existing between humans and wildlife living around Busitema Central Forest Reserve. To achieve this, we first examined the nature of the existing conflicts which helped us to come up with conflict-specific co-existence strategies. We used questionnaires, interviews and focused group discussions, where the information obtained was confirmed by field observations. The data was then analysed using simple descriptive statistics like percentages, means and standard deviations. Results indicated that primates (baboons and monkeys) dominated the conflicting list of wildlife with humans followed by rodents while carnivores were the least reported. Crop raiding (100%), livestock and poultry predation (36%) were the most dominant conflicts reported posed to man while habitat destruction (40%) and road accidents (26%) were the biggest conflict man has posed on wildlife. Equitable compensation (10±0.0) and community involvement in conservation (8±1.4) dominated the sustainable Human-Wildlife co-existence strategies suggested by local communities. It was concluded that, involvement of local communities in wildlife conservation should be prioritized and areas surrounding the protected forest area should be planted with crops such as tea and trees such as eucalyptus (woodlots) that are not affected by wildlife but rather are enhancers of wildlife habitats
5
C., Rosell, and F. Llimona. "Human–wildlife interactions." Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 35, no. 2 (December 2012): 219–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.32800/abc.2012.35.0219.
Full textAbstract:
219Animal Biodiversity and Conservation 35.2 (2012)© 2012 Museu de Ciències Naturals de BarcelonaISSN: 1578–665XRosell, C. & Llimona, F., 2012. Human–wildlife interactions. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation, 35.2: 219–220. The nature of wildlife management throughout the world is changing. The increase in the world’s human population has been accompanied by a rapid expansion of agricultural and urban areas and infrastructures, especially road and railway networks. Worldwide, wildlife habitats are being transformed and fragmented by human activities, and the behavior of several species has changed as a result of human activities. Some species have adapted easily to urban or peri–urban habitats and take advantage of the new resources available. These data provide the context for why human–wildlife interactions are increasing. At the 30th International Union of Game Biologists Congress held in Barcelona in early September 2011, in addition to two plenary presentations, 52 authors from 12 different countries and three continents presented 15 papers in the Interactions of Humans and Wildlife Session, three of which are included in this volume. To some extent, all the papers reflected the inherent difficulty in solving the complex problems caused either by rapidly increasing species that begin to inhabit urban and agricultural areas in numbers not seen previously (e.g. coyo-tes, Canis latrans, inhabiting big cities; wild boar, Sus scrofa, across western Europe; wood pigeons, Columba palumbus, in France), or species whose populations are threatened by human activities (e.g., Eurasian Lynx, Lynx lynx, in the Czech Republic). Some papers addressed the contentious issue of predator control (e.g., gamebirds in Great Britain), while others presented data regarding how human activities influenced animal behavior (e.g., pink footed geese, Anser brachyrhynchus; and red deer, Cervus elaphus, in Germany). The papers presented at the congress show how human activities affect the distributions and dynamics of wildlife populations and also change the behavior of some species. Wildlife causes social and economic con-flicts by damaging agricultural and forest resources, bringing about traffic collisions, and creating problems for residents in urban areas; while many are increasingly distant from nature and may not accept the presence of wildlife others may actively encourage the presence of wild animals. The first paper in this volume, by Cahill et al. (2012), analyzes the management challenges of the increasing abundance of wild boar in the peri–urban area of Barcelona. This conflict has arisen in other large cities in Europe and elsewhere. The presence of the species causes problems for many residents, to such an extent that it is considered a pest in these areas. Wild boar habituation has not only been facilitated by population expansion, but also by the attitudes of some citizens who encourage their presence by direct feeding. This leads to wild boar behavior modification and also promotes an increase in the fertility rate of habituated females, which are significantly heavier than non–habituated females. Public attitudes regarding the species and harvesting methods (at present most specimens are removed by live capture and subsequently sacrificed) are highlighted as one of the key factors in the management of the conflict. The second paper provides an example of how the distribution of irrigated croplands influences wild boar roadkills in NW Spain (Colino–Rabanal et al., 2012). By modeling the spatial distribution of wild boar collisions with vehicles and using generalized additive models based on GIS, the authors show that the number of roadkills is higher in maize croplands than in forested areas. This factor is the main explanatory variable in the model. The paper provides an excellent example of how the synergies of diverse human elements in the landscape (maize croplands and roads in this case) affect the location and dimensions of these types of conflicts. The third and final paper, by Belotti et al. (2012), addresses the effects of tourism on Eurasian lynx movements and prey usage at Šumava National Park in the Czech Republic. The monitoring of 5 GPS–collared lynxes and analyses of data regarding habitat features suggests that human disturbance (proximity of roads and tourist trails) can modify the presence of lynxes during the day close to the site where they have hidden a prey item, such as an ungulate, that can provide them with food for several days. In such cases, adequate management of tourism development must involve a commitment to species conservation. The analyses and understanding of all these phenomena and the design of successful wildlife management strategies and techniques used to mitigate the conflicts require a good knowledge base that considers informa-tion both about wildlife and human attitudes. The papers presented stress the importance of spatial analyses of the interactions and their relationship with landscape features and the location of human activities. Species distribution and abundance are related to important habitat variables such as provision of shelter, food, comfor-table spaces, and an appropriate climate. Therefore, it is essential to analyze these data adequately to predict where conflicts are most likely to arise and to design successful mitigation strategies. The second key factor for adequate management of human–wildlife interactions is to monitor system change. An analysis of the variety of data on population dynamics, hunting, wildlife collisions, and wildlife presence in urban areas would provide a basis for adaptive management. In this respect, in the plenary session, Steve Redpath mentioned the importance of the wildlife biologist’s attitude when interpreting and drawing conclusions from recorded data and stressed the importance of conducting clear, relevant, and transparent science for participants involved in the management decision process, which often involves a high number of stakeholders. All of the papers addressing the problems associated with human wildlife interactions were characterized by a common theme. Regardless of the specific nature of the problem, the public was generally divided on how the problem should be addressed. A particularly sensitive theme was that of population control methods, especially when conflicts are located in peri–urban areas. Several presenters acknowledged that public participation was necessary if a solution was to be reached. Some suggested, as have other authors (Heydon et al., 2010), that a legislative framework may be needed to reconcile human and wildlife interests. However, each problem that was presented appeared to involve multiple stakeholders with different opinions. Solving these kinds of problems is not trivial. Social factors strongly influence perceptions of human–wildlife conflicts but the methods used to mitigate these conflicts often take into account technical aspects but not people’s attitudes. A new, more innovative and interdisciplinary approach to mitigation is needed to allow us 'to move from conflict towards coexistence' (Dickman, 2010). Other authors also mentioned the importance of planning interventions that optimize the participation of experts, policy makers, and affected communities and include the explicit, systematic, and participatory evaluation of the costs and benefits of alternative interventions (Treves et al., 2009). One technique that has been used to solve problems like these is termed Structured Decision Making (SDM). This technique was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. As described by Runge et al. (2009), the process is 'a formal application of common sense for situations too complex for the informal use of common sense', and provides a rational framework and techniques to aid in prescriptive decision making. Fundamentally, the process entails defining a problem, deciding upon the objectives, considering the alternative actions and the consequences for each, using the available science to develop a model (the plan), and then making the decision how to implement (Runge et al., 2009). Although complex, SDM uses a facilitator to guide stakeholders through the process to reach a mutually agreed–upon plan of action. It is clear that human–wildlife interactions are inherently complex because many stakeholders are usually involved. A rational approach that incorporates all interested parties would seem to be a productive way of solving these kinds of problems
6
Edouard Telamanu Bafwanga, Didier Tshikung Kambol Mosses, Gilbert Malemba Nsakila, Patient Pyana Pati, and Grégoire Kasongo Aseke. "Problematic of human-wildlife conflicts in Kongo central province in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (Africa)." World Journal of Advanced Research and Reviews 13, no. 3 (March 30, 2022): 393–400. http://dx.doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2022.13.3.0241.
Full textAbstract:
A study on the issue of Human-Wildlife Conflicts (HWC) was carried out from January 1, 2018 to June 30, 2020 in the province of Kongo Central. It consisted of: (1) Identifying the causes of Human-Wildlife Conflicts in the province, (2) Determining the social impacts generated by Human-Wildlife Conflicts and (3) Identifying the prevention and mitigation measures applied to resolve the problems of Human-Wildlife Conflicts in the province. Semi-structured surveys were carried out on the basis of an interview guide among the populations of 8 territories. The sample size was 384 households per territory chosen by the simple random sampling technique. The results showed that the competition of humans and wildlife for spaces was the leading cause of Human-Wildlife Conflicts in Kongo Central province to have been cited in 41.16% of the responses of the respondents. The loss of agricultural or pastoral production cited in 27.81% of the respondents' responses would be identified as the most significant socio-economic impact that the populations would suffer. Lethal control would be the preferred measure to prevent conflict in Kongo Central province with 30.44% of citations. Finally, community awareness and compensation by the State in the event of damage would be the measures proposed in 34.93% and 23.57% respectively of the responses of the populations.
7
Hewitt, David G. "Resolving Human–Wildlife Conflicts: The Science of Wildlife Damage Management." Journal of Wildlife Management 68, no. 1 (January 2004): 218–21. http://dx.doi.org/10.2193/0022-541x(2004)068[0218:br]2.0.co;2.
Full text
8
Mukeka, Joseph M., Joseph O. Ogutu, Erustus Kanga, and Eivin Roskaft. "Characteristics of Human-Wildlife Conflicts in Kenya: Examples of Tsavo and Maasai Mara Regions." Environment and Natural Resources Research 8, no. 3 (September 26, 2018): 148. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/enrr.v8n3p148.
Full textAbstract:
Human-wildlife conflict (HWC) is a widespread and persistent challenge to conservation. However, relatively few studies have thus far examined long-term monitoring data to quantify how the type, and severity of HWC varies across species, seasons, years and ecosystems. Here, we examine human-wildlife conflicts in Tsavo and Maasai Mara, two premier wildlife conservation areas in Kenya. Using Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) data (2001-2016), we show that both the type and severity of conflicts vary among species such that the African elephant (Loxodonta africana), is the leading conflict species in both the Tsavo (64.3%, n= 30664) and Mara (47.0%, n=12487) ecosystems. The next four most notorious conflict animals, in decreasing order, are nonhuman primates (Tsavo 11.4%, n=3502; Mara 11.8%, n=1473), African buffalo (Syncerus caffer, Tsavo 5.5%, n=1676; Mara 11.3%, n=1410), lion (Panthera leo,Tsavo 3.6%, n=1107; Mara 3.3%, n=416) and spotted hyena (Crocuta crocuta, Tsavo 2.4%, n=744; Mara 5.8%, n=729). We group the observed conflict incidences (n= 43,151) into four major conflict types, including crop raiding, the most common conflict type, followed by human and livestock attacks and property damage. The severity of conflicts also varies markedly seasonally and inter-annually. Crop raiding peaks in May-July, during and at the end of the wet season when crops are maturing but is lowest in November during the late dry season and beginning of the early rains. Attacks on humans and livestock increased more than other conflict types in both Tsavo (from 2001) and Mara (from 2013). Relatively fewer people in Mara (7.2%, n=901) than in Tsavo (38.2%, n = 11714) felt threatened by wildlife, suggesting that the Maasai people are more tolerant of wildlife. Minimizing HWC is tightly linked to successfully resolving the broader conservation challenges, including enhancing ecosystem connectivity, community engagement and conservation benefits to communities.
9
Massei, Giovanna, and Dave Cowan. "Fertility control to mitigate human–wildlife conflicts: a review." Wildlife Research 41, no. 1 (2014): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/wr13141.
Full textAbstract:
As human populations grow, conflicts with wildlife increase. Concurrently, concerns about the welfare, safety and environmental impacts of conventional lethal methods of wildlife management restrict the options available for conflict mitigation. In parallel, there is increasing interest in using fertility control to manage wildlife. The present review aimed at analysing trends in research on fertility control for wildlife, illustrating developments in fertility-control technologies and delivery methods of fertility-control agents, summarising the conclusions of empirical and theoretical studies of fertility control applied at the population level and offering criteria to guide decisions regarding the suitability of fertility control to mitigate human–wildlife conflicts. The review highlighted a growing interest in fertility control for wildlife, underpinned by increasing numbers of scientific studies. Most current practical applications of fertility control for wild mammals use injectable single-dose immunocontraceptive vaccines mainly aimed at sterilising females, although many of these vaccines are not yet commercially available. One oral avian contraceptive, nicarbazin, is commercially available in some countries. Potential new methods of remote contraceptive delivery include bacterial ghosts, virus-like particles and genetically modified transmissible and non-transmissible organisms, although none of these have yet progressed to field testing. In parallel, new species-specific delivery systems have been developed. The results of population-level studies of fertility control indicated that this approach may increase survival and affect social and spatial behaviour of treated animals, although the effects are species- and context-specific. The present studies suggested that a substantial initial effort is generally required to reduce population growth if fertility control is the sole wildlife management method. However, several empirical and field studies have demonstrated that fertility control, particularly of isolated populations, can be successfully used to limit population growth and reduce human–wildlife conflicts. In parallel, there is growing recognition of the possible synergy between fertility control and disease vaccination to optimise the maintenance of herd immunity in the management of wildlife diseases. The review provides a decision tree that can be used to determine whether fertility control should be employed to resolve specific human–wildlife conflicts. These criteria encompass public consultation, considerations about animal welfare and feasibility, evaluation of population responses, costs and sustainability.
10
Linklater, Wayne, Holly Chapman, Andrea Gregor, Rebecca Calder-Flynn, Johan Gouws, Olivia Quigan, Anindita Rustandi, June Brian-Molitaviti, and Yile Ying. "Initiating a conflict with wildlife – the reintroduction and feeding of kākā, Wellington City, New Zealand." Pacific Conservation Biology 24, no. 4 (2018): 360. http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/pc18005.
Full textAbstract:
Wildlife reintroductions to peopled landscapes pose socio-ecological opportunities and risks, and a responsibility to people as well as wildlife. Human–wildlife conflicts can escalate rapidly where anthropogenic foods and feeding cause wildlife to congregate and damage property. Those conflicts polarise attitudes to the wildlife and may cascade into conflicts between people over wildlife. The native parrot, kākā (Nestor meridionalis), was reintroduced to Wellington City in 2002 and we suspect that it initiated a classical human–wildlife conflict cascade. We tested for feeding-induced damage, and different attitude scores amongst neighbours using a postal household survey. We received 313 completed surveys, a 55.9% response rate, across eight suburbs. Minor to severe damage, costing up to NZ$3000 to repair, was reported to trees, buildings, and outdoor furniture. Seventeen respondents reported feeding kākā, mostly fruit and vegetables, but also sugar water, bread, and nuts and seeds, and we received surveys from 33 of their non-feeding neighbours. Feeding significantly increased reports of kākā, and kākā abundance was positively associated with kākā damage. Neighbourhoods closer to Zealandia (the wildlife sanctuary where kākā are fed) and the neighbours of people who fed kākā were statistically more likely to incur property damage than more distant suburbs and residents. Neighbours’ attitudinal scores about kākā and native birds were significantly negatively associated with greater kākā damage. The reintroduction of kākā has initiated a feeding-induced wildlife–human conflict. We discuss what can be learned from the experience with kākā in Wellington City for urban wildlife conservation in the future.
Dissertations / Theses on the topic "Human-wildlife conflicts"
1
Elsner, Regina Marie. "Knowledge, attitudes, and opinions about human-wildlife conflicts held by community leaders in Virginia." Thesis, Virginia Tech, 2008. http://hdl.handle.net/10919/34385.
Full textAbstract:
Using a mail survey, I questioned 490 representatives of local government (i.e., elected officials, administrative officials, animal control officers, and county Cooperative Extension agents) about their understanding of human-wildlife conflicts in their communities, and their receptivity to participating in co-management partnerships with regulatory agencies. Response rates for the mail survey of these four populations ranged from 25.2% to 75.9%. Knowledge of and perceptions about human-wildlife conflicts varied among leader subpopulations, as did their assessment of risks associated with and prioritization of human-wildlife conflicts. Animal control and Extension personnel displayed greater knowledge about wildlife, expressed greater concern about potential risks, and assigned higher priority to human-wildlife conflicts in their community.
Respondents indicated that wildlife complaints are being received from constituents in their community, but questions exist over who is responsible for managing these conflicts. Most respondents indicated a willingness to become involved in conflict resolution, but indicated less willingness for local government to take on a leadership role. Respondents could identify potential partners valuable to resolving human-wildlife conflicts, but they demonstrated uncertainty about the specific roles and responsibilities of these outside agencies (e.g., Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries). Respondents identified important potential impediments (i.e., financial and personnel resources, the need to provide additional training or equipment) that could preclude or reduce their ability to become involved in conflict resolution.
Most respondents viewed community-based co-management approaches as realistic (74%) and attractive (63%) options for local governments to exercise in managing human-wildlife conflicts. Most respondents (74%) believed that co-management offered local governments a direct way to be involved in managing their own conflicts. Respondents believed that staffing and budget shortages would be significant impediments that would limit local governmentâ s participation in co-management agreements.
This study clearly illustrates that human-wildlife conflicts are occurring in Virginia, but overall local governments are not at a point when they are willing or able to consider a proactive approach to managing these conflicts. Until some threshold is met or exceeded, leaders in these communities may not be willing to devote the time or resources necessary to enact proactive approaches. Before that threshold is met, the development and utilization of informational and educational resources can increase local governmentâ s capacity to develop and implement a comprehensive wildlife management plan for Virginia communities in the future.Master of Science
2
Rodríguez, Rocío A. Pozo. "A stepwise approach to understanding and effectively mitigating human-wildlife interactions." Thesis, University of Oxford, 2017. https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:1b3f1379-a04e-45fa-ba85-e24b2d3dee00.
Full textAbstract:
The study of conflicts in conservation (also known as human-wildlife conflicts) is a growing field of research in areas where people and wildlife interact, because of the negative impacts each can have on the other. Addressing conflicts is certainly challenging because of the complexities of considering diverse interests from numerous stakeholders and the specific ecological and socio-economic characteristics of a given study system. No matter how complex the system under study is, the aim is in all cases to find effective and sustainable mitigation strategies for local people, as well as for wildlife conservation and local authorities. In this thesis, I look at two of the preliminary steps required to address conservation conflicts and develop efficient long-lasting management solutions: the gathering of ecological data and the assessment of mitigation strategies in the field. To do this, I use two case studies: crop-foraging by African elephants (Loxodonta africana) in northern Botswana, and selective hunting of the red deer (Cervus elaphus) population on the Isle of Rum in Scotland. In Chapter 2, I built a baseline for the level of conflict in the Okavango Delta Panhandle (Botswana) using temporal trends of crop-foraging by elephants as an index of the level of conflict, and subsequently looked at how this relates to trends in agricultural land allocated in the study area, as well as with trends in human and elephant population size. In Chapter 3, I mapped the distribution of the local population of elephants and assessed its interaction with landscape features and sites where crop-foraging events had been recorded. In both chapters (2 & 3) I found that -in general- the number of elephants was not a determinant of the level of conflict in the study area, but that the spatiotemporal distribution of the species as well as the spatial and temporal scales considered were. In the second half of my thesis, I assessed the effects of two common conflict mitigation methods: the use of deterrents (Chapter 4) and lethal control (Chapter 5). I first evaluated the effectiveness of chilli-briquettes in deterring elephants and secondly, I used a modelling approach to predict the demographic effects of increasing levels of selective hunting in a male red deer population. I found that both mitigation methods showed unexpected results, which would not have been detected had I not tested for them. This thesis highlights the advantages of applying methods that are based on informed decisions in areas of conflict, as well as the value of sharing results in conservation management. My findings contribute towards a better understanding of the negative impacts of human-wildlife interactions, which often lead to conservation conflicts, as well as contributing protocols and methodologies that can be adapted and applied elsewhere.
3
Karlsson, Jens. "Management of wolf and lynx conflicts with human interests /." Uppsala : Dept. of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 2007. http://epsilon.slu.se/200759.pdf.
Full text
4
Gross, Eva [Verfasser], Manfred [Gutachter] Niekisch, and Thomas [Gutachter] Müller. "Comparative analysis of human-wildlife conflicts in Asia and Africa / Eva Gross ; Gutachter: Manfred Niekisch, Thomas Müller." Frankfurt am Main : Universitätsbibliothek Johann Christian Senckenberg, 2018. http://d-nb.info/1160553262/34.
Full text
5
Swan, George Julius Fraser. "Understanding conservation conflicts surrounding predation and game shooting interests." Thesis, University of Exeter, 2017. http://hdl.handle.net/10871/32644.
Full textAbstract:
Many predatory species cause negative impacts on human interests by threatening game, livestock or human safety. These impacts can create conflicts where stakeholders differ over wildlife management and when one party is perceived to exert their interests at the expense of the other. Finding effective methods to mitigate conservation conflicts requires an interdisciplinary perspective that investigates (i) the reality of the apparent impacts, (ii) the efficacy of any methods intended to remedy them and (iii) the perceptions, motivations and objectives of key stakeholders. In this thesis, I investigated a conservation conflict in the U.K. surrounding predators and game management. I did so with specific reference to the common buzzard Buteo buteo, a species that, due to predation of released pheasants Phasianus colchicus, is both subject to illegal persecution and on- going controversy concerning the licenced selective removal of ‘problem individuals’. I first review the literature to assess the ecological evidence that certain ‘problem individuals’ can be both disproportionately responsible in impacts upon human interests and more likely to reoffend. I show that while there is evidence for these animals across many different taxa, the benefits of their removal can sometimes be short-lived. I highlight possible indirect impacts of selective management and identify it as a potential compromise between different stakeholder groups. Next, I evaluate the performance of Bayesian stable isotope mixing models (BSIMMs) in quantifying the diets of wild animals. By comparing indirect and direct observations of buzzard foraging, I demonstrate that, with the correct selection of trophic discrimination factors, stable isotope analyses can provide a reliable picture of dietary composition that mirrors direct observations. I then apply these mixing models to evaluate the ecological basis of selective removal of ‘problem buzzards’. The results suggest that the consumption by buzzards of released pheasants is not limited to release pens where gamekeepers perceive buzzard predation to be a problem. However, I then show that stable isotope analysis of blood sampled from two of the four buzzards caught inside pens indicates frequent consumption of released pheasants, relative to the rest of the buzzard population. These results suggest that, while some pheasant consumption may go undetected, selecting only buzzards inside pens for removal is likely to target ‘problem birds’. I then investigate buzzard foraging and breeding ecology on land managed for pheasant shooting. I find that buzzards nest at higher density in areas with greater abundances of pheasants and rabbits Oryctolagus cuniculus. However, records of provisioning from nest cameras showed that only rabbits were caught in proportion to their abundance and only rabbit provisioning rate was associated with buzzard productivity. I suggest that the positive relationship between buzzard and pheasant abundance, although seemingly unconnected to pheasant predation, might influence how gamekeepers perceive buzzard impact. Next, I conduct semi-structured interviews on the subject of predator control with 20 gamekeepers across the south of England, to explore the underlying beliefs, norms and information sources that motivate their behaviour. From these interviews, I identify a number of separate, but interconnected, motivations that influence predator control including professional norms, potential penalties, and interpretations of what is ‘natural’. The influences of these motivations are discussed in detail and a conceptual model, incorporating the theory of planned behaviour, is developed. Finally, the key contributions of this thesis are drawn together and discussed in their wider context. Taken together, the results of this thesis illustrate how predator management occurs simultaneously within social and ecological contexts that incorporate the individual attributes of both predators and people. The results of this thesis have direct implications for the management of predators, the representation of stakeholder perspectives and the design of conflict mitigation measures.
6
Ångman, Hanna. "I tigerns rike : en landskapsvetenskaplig studie om två underarters populationsförändring och ekologiska värde för landskapet." Thesis, Högskolan Kristianstad, Sektionen för lärande och miljö, 2015. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hkr:diva-15674.
Full textAbstract:
Arbetet är en litteraturstudie och är ett försök att ta reda på två underarter av tigers (Panthera tigris) populationsförändring och anledningen till detta på en tidsskala från 1970 till 2010. De valda underarterna för uppsatsen är sumatratigern och amurtigern. I samband med undersökningen av de två underarternas populationsförändring har fokus lagts på Sumatra och Amurområdet för att kunna få en överblick över de områden där tigrarna återfinns och med den överblicken lättare öppna för att diskutera hållbara bevarandemöjligheter i framtiden. Uppsatsen har i huvudsak diskuterats med stöd av tidigare studier, statistikuppgifter och rapporter i ämnet och därefter har det insamlade materialet analyserats och genomarbetats för att försöka nå fram till nya insikter inom tiger- och landskapsforskningen. Jämförande studier med den svenska vargen används som en utgångspunkt för vad som kan ske om tigern fortsätter att minska eller helt försvinner från sina områden. Trots brister i det statistiska underlaget finns tecken på att fragmenteringen och befolkningstillväxten är viktiga faktorer för sumatratigerns nedgång. Amurtigern visade sig vara mer tålig för både fragmentering och den ökande befolkning i Amurområdet tvärtemot vad tidigare forskning visat, men då båda tigrarnas utbredningsområde har analyserats på liknande sätt trots stora skillnader i förhållande, miljö och storlek så kan detta spela en stor roll i mina resultat jämte tidigare forsknings resultat. Klart är dock att människors allmänna attityd mot rovdjur i deras närområde, så kallade human-wildlife conflicts, komplicerar bevarandefrågan för tigern då skador orsakade av rovdjuren inte ses på med blida ögon och kan vara dyrt att kompensera för.The study is a literature review and seek to find out two subspecies of tiger´s (Panthera tigris) population change and the reasons surrounding this on a time scale from 1970 to 2010. It also includes finding out the landscape and ecological consequences related to this, in order to discuss the sustainable conservation opportunities in the future. The two chosen subspecies for the study is the sumatran tiger and the amurtiger. The method has been mainly supported by previous studies, statistics and reports on the subject, but has allow themselves to be analysed and discussed in search for new fatc that can bring more light over the tigers popoulationchanges and the reserach of the tigerlandscape. Comparative studies with other predators, our Swedish wolf out and foray into the landscape, however, brings us a good picture of what could happen if the tiger continues to decrease or completely disappear from their landscape. Despite declining statistics, there were clear signs that fragmentation and human population growth are important factors to discuss the tiger's decline. The sumatran tiger was shown to be dangerly threatened by deforestation and human population growth in Sumatra, while the amurtiger seemed to be more resistent despite earlier researches has shown. An explanation for this might be the fact that the two subspecies range has been analyzed the same way despite large differences in environment and sieze and this can play a big role in my results that differes from earlier reserach results. It is clear, however, that humans general attitude toward predatos in their local area, so called human-wildlife conflicts, complicates the issue of conservation of the tiger when damage caused by the predators can be fatal and not to easy or affordable to compensate.
7
Rocha, Lara Cristiani. "PERCEPÇÕES E ATITUDES DE MORADORES RURAIS EM RELAÇÃO AO MACACO-PREGO, SAPAJUS NIGRITUS (GOLDFUSS, 1809), NA ÁREA DE INFLUÊNCIA DE UMA USINA HIDRELÉTRICA NO RIO GRANDE DO SUL." Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, 2013. http://repositorio.ufsm.br/handle/1/5306.
Full textAbstract:
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorCrop raiding by wild animals is becoming increasingly common. In recent years, the management company of the Dona Francisca Hydroelectric Power Plant has received complaints from local residents about a supposed increase in the population of capuchin monkeys, which were allegedly causing "losses" to some farming households. It is crucial to understand people´s perceptions and attitudes towards monkeys to clarify the social factors that intensify conflicts, as well as the factors which favor the coexistence between humans and capuchin monkeys in farmlands. To identify human-wildlife conflicts and their possible causes, this study investigated the perceptions and attitudes of rural community residents in Ibarama (in the Brazilian state of Rio Grande do Sul), in the vicinity of the Dona Francisca dam, with respect to capuchin monkeys. The study was carried out through semi-structured interviews with farm owners and the subsequent categorization of their answers. Thirty-one interviews were conducted between September 2010 and January 2012. Most respondents were over 40 years old and had been living in the area since childhood. Most of them stated that monkeys have always existed in that region, and only two respondents associated the "emergence" of monkeys and the building of the dam. Maize is the main crop consumed. A significant portion of the respondents claimed that monkeys cause damage to their property, but most of them could not estimate the extent of their loss. Nevertheless, most of them consider monkeys to be important to nature and believe that the coexistence of humans and monkeys is possible in those areas. Although these losses financially commit some properties, you can see a scenario favorable to the adoption of conservation and educational practices aimed at protecting the capuchin monkey and its habitat.
As invasões de cultivos agrícolas por animais silvestres vêm se tornando cada vez mais comuns. Em anos recentes a empresa gestora da Usina Hidrelétrica Dona Francisca tem recebido queixas de moradores locais sobre um suposto aumento da população de macacos-prego, os quais estariam provocando prejuízos em algumas propriedades rurais. Compreender as concepções e atitudes do ser humano com relação aos macacos é importante para esclarecer os fatores sociais que intensificam os conflitos, bem como os que favorecem a coexistência entre humanos e macacos-prego nessas áreas. O objetivo desse trabalho foi investigar as percepções e as atitudes de moradores das comunidades rurais em Ibarama, RS, no entorno da barragem Dona Francisca, com relação aos macacos-prego, visando à identificação de conflitos e suas possíveis causas. O estudo foi realizado através de entrevista semi-estruturada com o responsável pela propriedade e categorização das respostas a posteriori. Foram realizadas 31 entrevistas, entre setembro de 2010 e janeiro de 2012. A maioria dos entrevistados possui mais de 40 anos e mora no local desde a infância. A maior parte deles afirma que sempre existiram macacos nessa região e apenas dois associaram o "aparecimento" dos macacos à construção da barragem. O milho é o principal cultivo agrícola consumido. Uma parcela significativa dos entrevistados afirma que os macacos causam prejuízo em sua propriedade, mas a maioria desses não soube precisar as perdas. Apesar disso, a grande maioria considera os macacos importantes para a natureza e acredita ser possível a coexistência entre macacos e humanos nessas áreas. Embora esses prejuízos comprometam financeiramente algumas propriedades, é possível observar um cenário favorável à adoção de práticas educativas e conservacionistas que visem à proteção do macaco-prego e de seu hábitat.
8
Tug, Senem. "Conflicts Between Humans And Wolf: A Study In Bozdag, Konya Province, Turkey." Master's thesis, METU, 2005. http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12606655/index.pdf.
Full textAbstract:
Canis lupus is one of the most important but least studied species of Turkish fauna, however, livestock depredation and recently increased number of publications on attacks on humans intensifies human-wildlife conflict. In this study, wolf depredation is studied in Bozdag in the province of Konya where conflicts between wolves and livestock holders are well known.
The study site holds >50,000 sheep and covers 9 villages and a small town. A total of 13 shepherds are interviewed in 2004 and 2005 to reveal husbandry methods and vulnerability of livestock to wolf attacks in Bozdag. Each flock is attended by a shepherd and several livestock guarding dogs (LGDs), and experiences 1.96 wolf attacks per year, on average, independent of flock size. The flocks attended by less LGDs experience less attacks and therefore, the quality of the LGDs &
#8211
not their numbers- are more important. Confining sheep in corrals that are attended by a shepherd and good quality LGDs appears to be the most effective husbandry method to decrease depredation. Human attitude towards wolf is also assessed and the perception of wolf is generally negative
8 out of 11 shepherds are in favour of the eradication of this carnivore. Publicized wolf attacks on humans are compiled from 21 news sources on the internet and records of wolf rabies are sought from various sources. There were five publicized cases of attacks on humans, no verified records of human death between 2000 and 2005. Rabies stands out as the primary reason of wolf attacks, but it requires further research because proper records are missing.
9
Olsson, Linnea. "Human-elephant conflicts : A qualitative case study of farmers’ attitudes toward elephants in Babati, Tanzania." Thesis, Södertörns högskola, Institutionen för naturvetenskap, miljö och teknik, 2014. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-24091.
Full textAbstract:
It is widely recognized that human-wildlife conflicts can reduce farmers’ support for long-term species conservation. The subject of human-elephant conflicts is highly relevant in villages around Babati District in North Central Tanzania because of the closeness to Tarangire National Park. The purpose of this study is therefore to examine local farmers’ attitudes toward elephants and the attitudes’ effects on conservation efforts. Primary data was collected through a qualitative approach of semi-structured interviews with twelve farmers in four villages around Babati, with Wildlife Officer Nashon Macokesha at Babati District Council and with Allan Carlson, Nature Conservation Expert at WWF. A thematic analysis was done to make comparisons between the answers from farmers, Macokesha and Carlson. The Theory of Planned Behavior and the Value-Belief-Norm theory were also used to analyze the underlying factors of the farmers’ attitudes. The results of this study show that around half of the farmers have positive attitudes toward elephants, while the other half think negatively of them. Elephants were identified as the most problematic species and crop-raiding as the most problematic type of human-elephant conflict. The problems that farmers experience do to crop-raiding and other types of human-elephant conflicts include the direct effects of lost livelihood and income and indirect effects like health impacts and security issues. The result also indicates that factors affecting farmers’ attitudes toward elephants include: 1) the proportion of available land affected by elephants, 2) the closeness of farmers’ fields to Tarangire National Park, 3) the lack of compensation, 4) the ability to affect the decision-making concerning the human-elephant conflicts and 5) the information about and knowledge of elephants and their importance. The underlying cause of the human-elephant conflicts is identified to be the spatial overlap of the two species. To prevent human-elephant encounters in the first place, thereby reducing the risk of human-elephants conflicts, better land use planning can be used to avoid settlement and cultivation close to protected areas. Buffer zones can be established around national parks and reserves to reduce the overlap between humans and wildlife. Mitigation through preventive and deterrent methods like lighting fires, making noises, using chili-dung or chili-grease to scare elephants off farmers’ fields can also be used. Another alternative is to switch from growing high-risk crops that elephants prefer to crops like chili or sesame which rarely gets eaten by elephants.Att konflikter mellan människor och djurliv kan minska bönders stöd för artbevarande åtgärder är välkänt bland forskare. Konflikter mellan människor och elefanter är vitt förekommande i byar i Babati-distriktet i norra Tanzania på grund av närheten till nationalparken Tarangire. Syftet med denna studie är därför att undersöka bönders attityder till elefanter och attitydernas effekter för bevarandeåtgärder. Primärdata samlades in genom ett kvalitativt upplägg med semistrukturerade intervjuer med tolv bönder i fyra byar i Babati, med Wildlife Officer Nashon Macokesha på Babati District Council samt med Allan Carlson, naturvårdsexpert på WWF. En tematisk analys utfördes för att jämföra svaren mellan bönderna, Macokesha och Carlson och the Theory of Planned Behavior samt the Value-Belief-Norm theory användes för att analysera de underliggande orsakerna bakom böndernas attityder. Resultatet från denna studie visar att ungefär hälften av bönderna har positiva attityder till elefanter, medan den andra hälften har negativa åsikter om dem. Elefanter identifierades som den mest problematiska arten för bönderna och förstörandet av grödor som den mest problematiska typen av konflikt mellan människor och elefanter. Problemen som bönderna upplever till följd av dessa konflikter inkluderar direkta effekter som förlorad inkomst och försämrade försörjningsmöjligheter, men också indirekta effekter som hälso- och säkerhetsproblem. Faktorer som enligt resultaten i denna studie kan påverka böndernas attityder till elefanter innefattar: 1) andelen tillgänglig mark som påverkas av elefanter, 2) närheten från böndernas mark till nationalparken Tarangire, 3) bristen på kompensation, 4) möjligheten att påverka beslutsprocessen gällande konflikten mellan människor och elefanter samt 5) information och kunskap om elefanter och deras betydelse. Den underliggande orsaken till konflikterna mellan människor och elefanter identifieras vara överlappet i användningsområden mellan de båda arterna. För att förhindra möten mellan människor och elefanter, och därmed minska risken för konflikter, behövs bättre markanvändningsplanering så att bosättning och jordbruk undviks i närheten av skyddade områden. Buffertzoner kan också anläggas runt nationalparker och reservat för att minska överlappet mellan människor och djur. Avskräckande åtgärder, som att tända eldar, göra oväsen, tända chilibriketter eller sätta upp chili-rep, för att hålla elefanter borta från böndernas åkrar kan också användas. Ett annat alternativ är att bönderna byter från att odla högriskgrödor som elefanter föredrar till att odla grödor som chili eller sesam, vilka sällan eller aldrig äts av elefanter.
10
Chandelier, Marie. "Le loup dans la presse française contemporaine : analyse des fonctionnements argumentatifs médiatiques." Thesis, Montpellier 3, 2018. http://www.theses.fr/2018MON30086.
Full textAbstract:
L’augmentation des populations de loups provoque des conflits dus aux interactions de l'espèce avec les activités économiques rurales (pastoralisme et agriculture). Ces conflits impliquent des acteurs issus de l’économie rurale, de la chasse, de l’écologie ou encore de la politique. Le loup a un statut législatif différent qui induit une protection stricte, mais sa gestion fait l'objet de dérogation conduisant à la mise en place de tirs ponctuels sur des animaux. L'espère tend, dans les débats à être considérés comme nuisibles. L’objectif de la thèse est d’identifier l’influence que peut avoir le statut législatif de l’espèce sur les procédés argumentatif utilisés dans les débats, et sur les discours médiatiques consacrés à ces débatsThe thesis focuses on the representation of controversies involving wolves in the french media, at a national and regional level
Books on the topic "Human-wildlife conflicts"
1
Klenke, Reinhard A., Irene Ring, Andreas Kranz, Niels Jepsen, Felix Rauschmayer, and Klaus Henle, eds. Human - Wildlife Conflicts in Europe. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-34789-7.
Full text
2
National Strategy Development Workshop (2007 Paro, Bhutan). Bhutan national human-wildlife conflicts management strategy. Thimphu: Nature Conservation Division, Dept. of Forests, Ministry of Agriculture, Royal Govt. of Bhutan, 2008.
Find full text
3
National Strategy Development Workshop (2007 Paro, Bhutan). Bhutan national human-wildlife conflicts management strategy. Thimphu: Nature Conservation Division, Dept. of Forests, Ministry of Agriculture, Royal Govt. of Bhutan, 2008.
Find full text
4
Resolving human-wildlife conflicts: The science of wildlife damage management. Boca Raton, Fla: Lewis Publishers, 2002.
Find full text
5
National Wildlife Research Center (U.S.). Innovative solutions to human-wildlife conflicts: National Wildlife Research Center accomplishments, 2006. Fort Collins, CO: National Wildlife Research Center, 2007.
Find full text
6
), National Wildlife Research Center (U S. Innovative solutions to human-wildlife conflicts: National Wildlife Research Center accomplishments, 2008. Fort Collins, CO: National Wildlife Research Center, 2009.
Find full text
7
US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. Innovative solutions to human-wildlife conflicts: National Wildlife Research Center Accomplishments 2009. Fort Collins, Colorado: United States Department of Agriculture, 2010.
Find full text
8
), National Wildlife Research Center (U S. Innovative solutions to human-wildlife conflicts: National Wildlife Research Center accomplishments, 2011. Fort Collins, CO: National Wildlife Research Center, 2012.
Find full text
9
National Wildlife Research Center (U.S.). Innovative solutions to human-wildlife conflicts: National Wildlife Research Center accomplishments 2001. Fort Collins, CO: The Center, 2002.
Find full text
10
John, Omiti, and Sirengo Anne N, eds. Policy dimensions in human-wildlife conflicts in Kenya: Evidence from Laikipia and Nyandarua Districts. Nairobi, Kenya: Institute of Policy Analysis and Research, 2005.
Find full textBook chapters on the topic "Human-wildlife conflicts"
1
Poledníková, Kateřina, Andreas Kranz, Lukáš Poledník, and Jaroslav Myšiak. "Otters Causing Conflicts." In Human - Wildlife Conflicts in Europe, 81–106. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-34789-7_5.
Full text
2
Henle, Klaus, Andreas Kranz, Reinhard A. Klenke, and Irene Ring. "Policy Brief." In Human - Wildlife Conflicts in Europe, 1–3. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-34789-7_1.
Full text
3
Suvantola, Leila. "The Golden Eagle Compensation Scheme in Finland as an Example of Incentive Measures." In Human - Wildlife Conflicts in Europe, 201–14. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-34789-7_10.
Full text
4
Kranz, Andreas, Felix Rauschmayer, and Irene Ring. "Module 1: Screening of the Conflict." In Human - Wildlife Conflicts in Europe, 221–30. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-34789-7_11.
Full text
5
Santos-Reis, Margarida, Reinhard Klenke, and Klaus Henle. "Module 2: Wildlife Abundance and Habitat." In Human - Wildlife Conflicts in Europe, 231–40. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-34789-7_12.
Full text
6
Westerberg, Håkan, and Klaus Henle. "Module 3: Diet and Damage Assessment." In Human - Wildlife Conflicts in Europe, 241–49. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-34789-7_13.
Full text
7
Similä, Jukka, Riku Varjopuro, Randi Habighorst, and Irene Ring. "Module 4: Legal and Institutional Framework." In Human - Wildlife Conflicts in Europe, 251–60. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-34789-7_14.
Full text
8
Santos, Rui, Paula Antunes, and Irene Ring. "Module 5: Regional Economics and Policy Analysis." In Human - Wildlife Conflicts in Europe, 261–69. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-34789-7_15.
Full text
9
Kongshøj Wilson, Douglas Clyde. "Module 6: Stakeholder Analysis." In Human - Wildlife Conflicts in Europe, 271–80. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-34789-7_16.
Full text
10
Kranz, Andreas. "Module 7: Ecological Mitigation." In Human - Wildlife Conflicts in Europe, 281–91. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-34789-7_17.
Full textConference papers on the topic "Human-wildlife conflicts"
1
"Examining Human-Wildlife Conflicts in Africa." In International Conference on Biological, Civil and Environmental Engineering. International Institute of Chemical, Biological & Environmental Engineering, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.15242/iicbe.c0314043.
Full text
2
Bharati, Vivek. "A Deep Neural Network Machine Vision Application for Preventing Wildlife-Human Conflicts." In 2021 International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Vision (AIMV). IEEE, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/aimv53313.2021.9671013.
Full text
3
Suju, D. Arul, and Hancy Jose. "FLANN: Fast approximate nearest neighbour search algorithm for elucidating human-wildlife conflicts in forest areas." In 2017 Fourth International Conference on Signal Processing,Communication and Networking (ICSCN). IEEE, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/icscn.2017.8085676.
Full text
4
Surya, T., and S. Chitra Selvi. "A literature review on analysis of cause and impact of human wildlife conflict and the preceding techniques implemented to avoid conflict." In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Smart Technologies and Management for Computing, Communication, Controls, Energy and Materials (ICSTM). IEEE, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/icstm.2017.8089203.
Full textReports on the topic "Human-wildlife conflicts"
1
Washbum, Brian E. Hawks and Owls. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, December 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.32747/2016.7208741.ws.
Full textAbstract:
Hawks and owls can negatively impact a variety of human interests, including important natural resources, livestock and game bird production, human health and safety, and companion animals. Conflicts between raptors and people generally are localized and often site-specific. However, the economic and social impacts to the individuals involved can be severe. Despite the problems they may cause, hawks and owls provide important benefits and environmental services. Raptors are popular with birdwatchers and much of the general public. They also hunt and kill large numbers of rodents, reducing crop damage and other problems. Hawks and owls are classified into four main groups, namely accipiters, buteos, falcons, and owls. All hawks and owls in the United States are federally pro-tected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 USC, 703−711). Hawks and owls typically are protected under state wildlife laws or local ordinances, as well. These laws strictly prohibit the capture, killing, or possession of hawks or owls (or their parts) without a special permit (e.g., Feder-al Depredation Permit), issued by the USFWS. State-issued wildlife damage or depredation permits also may be required.
2
Barzen, Jeb, and Ken Ballinger. Sandhill and Whooping Cranes. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, January 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.32747/2017.7207736.ws.
Full textAbstract:
As sandhill crane populations continue to grow in the United States, so too does crop damage, property damage to homeowners, and the risk of crane collisions with aircraft. Whooping crane populations also continue to grow, but with a global population of about 500 individuals (as of 2017), damage is rare and problems often require different solutions due to the species’ endangered status. The sandhill crane (Grus canadensis), is a long-lived, member of the crane family (Gruidae) and the most numerous of the 15 crane species found worldwide. Over the last 50 years, the species has grown from a rarity─ requiring extensive protection─ to an abundant, widespread species. As their populations have increased, so too have their conflicts with people. Both sandhill and whooping cranes are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) of 1918. This law strictly prohibits the capture, killing, or possession of sandhill and whooping cranes without proper permits. However, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) can issue depredation permits under this act for the shooting of sandhill cranes that causeagricultural damage or threaten human health and safety. No federal permit is required to use non-lethal management methods to reduce damage by sandhill cranes.
3
Banikoi, H., S. Thapa, N. Bhattarai, R. C. Kandel, S. Chaudhary, S. Chaudhary, N. Timalsina, K. Windhorst, M. D. Adhikari, and C. P. Pokheral. Mitigating Human-Wildlife Conflict in Nepal: A Case Study of Fences around Chitwan National Park; ICIMOD Working Paper 2017/14. Kathmandu, Nepal: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.53055/icimod.678.
Full text
4
Banikoi, H., S. Thapa, N. Bhattarai, R. C. Kandel, S. Chaudhary, S. Chaudhary, N. Timalsina, K. Windhorst, M. D. Adhikari, and C. P. Pokheral. Mitigating Human-Wildlife Conflict in Nepal: A Case Study of Fences around Chitwan National Park; ICIMOD Working Paper 2017/14. Kathmandu, Nepal: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.53055/icimod.678.
Full text
5
Dorr, Brian S., Kristi L. Sullivan, Paul D. Curtis, Richard B. Chipman, and Russell D. McCullough. Double-crested Cormorants. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, August 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.32747/2016.7207735.ws.
Full textAbstract:
The history of conflict between double-crested cormorants and human interest in fisheries is long and convoluted. Overall, double-crested cormorants are not major consumers of commercial and sportfish species. However, exceptions have been recorded at specific sites with documented impacts on local fisheries. Double-crested cormorants can have a significant impact on vegetation at breeding sites through normal nesting activities. Their guano is acidic and can change soil chemistry, killing ground vegetation and irreversibly damaging nest trees. Humans should avoid direct contact with excrement from wildlife, including droppings from cormorants. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) has the primary responsibility and authority for managing migratory bird populations in the U.S. This publication will focus on the double-crested cormorant, which is the most numerous and widely dispersed of the species.
6
Innovative Solutions to Human-Wildlife Conflicts: National Wildlife Research Center Accomplishments, 2010. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, April 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.32747/2011.7291310.aphis.
Full textAbstract:
As the research arm of Wildlife Services, a program within the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), NWRC develops methods and information to address human-wildlife conflicts related to agriculture, human health and safety, property damage, invasive species, and threatened and endangered species. The NWRC is the only Federal research facility in the United States devoted entirely to the development of methods for effective wildlife damage management, and it’s research authority comes from the Animal Damage Control Act of 1931. The NWRC’s research priorities are based on nationwide research needs assessments, congressional directives, APHIS Wildlife Services program needs, and stakeholder input. The Center is committed to helping resolve the ever-expanding and changing issues associated with human-wildlife conflict management and remains well positioned to address new issues through proactive efforts and strategic planning activities. NWRC research falls under four principal areas that reflect APHIS’ commitment to “protecting agricultural and natural resources from agricultural animal and plant health threats, zoonotic diseases, invasive species, and wildlife conflicts and diseases”. In addition to the four main research areas, the NWRC maintains support functions related to animal care, administration, information transfer, archives, quality assurance, facility development, and legislative and public affairs.
7
Innovative Solutions to Human-Wildlife Conflicts: National Wildlife Research Center Accomplishments, 2016. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, May 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.32747/2017.7207238.aphis.
Full textAbstract:
The National Wildlife Research Center (NWRC) is the research arm of Wildlife Services, a program within the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). NWRC’s researchers are dedicated to finding biologically sound, practical, and effective solutions for resolving wildlife damage management issues. There are spotlights highlight the breadth and depth of NWRC’s research and support services expertise and its holistic approach to addressing today’s wildlife-related challenges.
8
Innovative Solutions to Human-Wildlife Conflicts: National Wildlife Research Center Accomplishments, 2007. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, January 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.32747/2008.7206794.aphis.
Full textAbstract:
The National Wildlife Research Center (NWRC) is a world leader in providing science-based solutions to complex issues of wildlife damage management. As the research arm of Wildlife Services (WS) program within the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, NWRC work with WS operational staff to provide Federal leadership and expertise to resolve wildlife conflicts related to agriculture, livestock, human health and safety (including wildlife diseases), invasive species, and threatened and endangered species. NWRC is committed to finding nonlethal solutions to reduce wildlife damage to agricultural crops, aquaculture, and natural resources. As part of WS' strategic plan to improve the coexistence of people and wildlife, NWRC has identified four strategic program goals: (1) developing methods, (2) providing wildlife services, (3) valuing and investing in people, and (4) enhancing information and communication. WS is dedicated to helping meet the wildlife damage management needs of the United States by building on NWRC's strengths in these four key areas. This annual research highlights report is structured around these programs goals.
9
Innovative Solutions to Human-Wildlife Conflicts: National Wildlife Research Center Accomplishments, 2014. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, June 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.32747/2015.7206799.aphis.
Full textAbstract:
The National Wildlife Research Center (NWRC) is the research arm of Wildlife Services (WS), a program within the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). NWRC’s researchers are dedicated to finding biologically sound, practical, and effective solutions to resolving wildlife damage management issues. They seek these solutions using a multiyear, multidisciplinary project management system. NWRC identifies and prioritizes projects based on feedback from WS program leaders, managers, and stakeholders concerning their most pressing wildlife damage management needs. During 2014, five research projects reached the end of their 5-year life cycle. At the final project reviews, project leaders and their staff presented and discussed each project’s accomplishments, challenges, and findings.
10
Innovative Solutions to Human-Wildlife Conflicts: National Wildlife Research Center Accomplishments, 2011. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, March 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.32747/2012.7207240.aphis.
Full textAbstract:
The National Wildlife Research Center (NWRC) is the research arm of Wildlife Services, a program within the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). The mission of the NWRC is to apply scientific expertise to resolve human-wildlife conflicts while maintaining the quality of the environment shared with wildlife. NWRC develops methods and information to address human-wildlife conflicts related to: agriculture (crops, livestock, aquaculture, and timber), human health and safety (wildlife disease, aviation), property damage, invasive species, and threatened and endangered species. There four spotlights for 2011 show the depth and breadth of NWRC’s research expertise and its holistic approach to address today’s wildlife-related challenges.