Livestock–Carnivore Coexistence: Moving beyond Preventive Killing
Abstract
:Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Material and Methods
2.1. Study Area
2.2. Data Collection
2.3. Landscape Features
2.4. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Property Profile
3.2. Respondent Profile
3.3. Challenges of Livestock Production
3.4. Livestock Predation by Large Carnivores
3.5. Perceptions and Measures to Mitigate Livestock Predation
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- UN General Assembly. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. 2015. Available online: https://www.refworld.org/docid/57b6e3e44.html (accessed on 10 January 2022).
- Woodroffe, R.; Thirgood, S.; Rabinowitz, A. (Eds.) The impact of human-wildlife conflict on natural systems. In People and Wildlife; Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2005; pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar]
- Ripple, W.J.; Estes, J.A.; Beschta, R.L.; Wilmers, C.C.; Ritchie, E.G.; Hebblewhite, M.; Berger, J.; Elmhagen, B.; Letnic, M.; Nelson, M.P.; et al. Status and ecological effects of the world’s largest carnivores. Science 2014, 343, 1241484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Sillero-Zubiri, C.; Reynolds, J.; Novaro, A. Management and control of wild canids alongside people. In Biology and Conservation of Wild Canids; Macdonald, D.W., Sillero-Zubiri, C., Eds.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2004; pp. 107–122. [Google Scholar]
- Treves, A.; Karanth, K.U. Human-Carnivore Conflict and Perspectives on Carnivore Management Worldwide. Conserv. Biol. 2003, 17, 1491–1499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Inskip, C.; Zimmermann, A. Human-felid conflict: A review of patterns and priorities worldwide. Oryx 2009, 43, 18–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Soto-Shoender, J.R.; Giuliano, W.M. Predation on livestock by large carnivores in the tropical lowlands of Guatemala. Oryx 2011, 45, 561–568. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Palmeira, F.B.L.; Trinca, C.T.; Haddad, C.M. Livestock Predation by Puma (Puma concolor) in the Highlands of a Southeastern Brazilian Atlantic Forest. Environ. Manag. 2015, 56, 903–915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peña-Mondragón, J.L.; Castillo, A.; Hoogesteijn, A.; Martínez-Meyer, E. Livestock predation by jaguars Panthera onca in south-eastern Mexico: The role of local peoples’ practices. Oryx 2017, 51, 254–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Villalva, P.; Palomares, F. Perceptions and livestock predation by felids in extensive cattle ranching areas of two Bolivian ecoregions. Eur. J. Wildl. Res. 2019, 65, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Polisar, J.; Maxit, I.; Scognamillo, D.; Farrell, L.; Sunquist, M.E.; Eisenberg, J.F. Jaguars, pumas, their prey base, and cattle ranching: Ecological interpretations of a management problem. Biol. Conserv. 2003, 109, 297–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cavalcanti, S.M.C.; Gese, E.M. Kill rates and predation patterns of jaguars (Panthera onca) in the southern Pantanal, Brazil. J. Mammal. 2010, 91, 722–736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Woodroffe, R.; Ginsberg, J.R. Edge effects and the extinction of populations inside protected areas. Science 1998, 280, 2126–2128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Quigley, H.; Foster, R.J.; Petracca, L.; Payan, E.; Salom, R.; Harmsen, B.J. Panthera onca (Errata Version Published in 2018). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2017. Available online: https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017-3.RLTS.T15953A50658693.en (accessed on 20 September 2021).
- Nielsen, C.; Thompson, D.; Kelly, M.; Lopez-Gonzalez, C.A. Puma Concolor (Errata Version Published in 2016). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2015. Available online: https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/15953/123791436 (accessed on 20 September 2021).
- WWF. WWF Jaguar Strategy 2020–2030; WWF: Bogotá, Colombia, 2020; pp. 1–91. [Google Scholar]
- de la Torre, J.A.; Camacho, G.; Arroyo-Gerala, P.; Cassaigne, I.; Rivero, M.; Campos-Arceiz, A. A cost-effective approach to mitigate conflict between ranchers and large predators: A case study with jaguars in the Mayan Forest. Biol. Conserv. 2021, 256, 109066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ohrens, O.; Bonacic, C.; Treves, A. Non-lethal defense of livestock against predators: Flashing lights deter puma attacks in Chile. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2019, 17, 32–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Quigley, H.; Hoogesteijn, R.; Hoogesteijn, A.; Foster, R.; Payan, E.; Corrales, D.; Salom-Perez, R.; Urbina, Y. Observations and preliminary testing of jaguar depredation reduction techniques in and between core jaguar populations. Parks 2015, 21, 63–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Villalba, L.; Maffei, L.; Fleytas, M.; Polisar, J. Primeras experiencias de mitigación de conflictos entre ganaderos y grandes felinos en estancias de Paraguay. In Conflictos Entre Felinos y humanos en América Latina; Castaño-Uribe, C., Lasso, C.A., Hoogesteijn, R., Diaz-Pulido, A., Payán, E., Eds.; Fauna Silvestre Neotropical, Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt (IAvH): Bogotá, Colombia, 2016; pp. 227–236. [Google Scholar]
- Hoogesteijn, R.; Hoogesteijn, A. Anti-Predation Strategies for Cattle Ranching in Latin America: A Guide; Panthera. Eckograf Soluções Impressas Ltda.: Campo Grande, Brazil, 2014; pp. 1–64. [Google Scholar]
- Tortato, F.R.; Layme, V.M.G.; Crawshaw, P.G.; Izzo, T.J. The impact of herd composition and foraging area on livestock predation by big cats in the Pantanal of Brazil. Anim. Conserv. 2015, 18, 539–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guerisoli, M.M.; Luengos Vidal, E.; Franchini, M.; Caruso, N.; Casanave, E.B.; Lucherini, M. Characterization of puma-livestock conflicts in rangelands of central Argentina. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2017, 4, 170852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Llanos, R.; Andrade, A.; Travaini, A. Puma and livestock in central Patagonia (Argentina): From ranchers’ perceptions to predator management. Hum. Dimens. Wildl. 2020, 25, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quiroga, V.A.; Noss, A.J.; Paviolo, A.; Boaglio, G.I.; Di Bitetti, M.S. Puma density, habitat use and conflict with humans in the Argentine Chaco. J. Nat. Conserv. 2016, 31, 9–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kusler, A.; Sarnos, R.J.; Volkart, N.S.; Elbroch, M.; Grigione, M. Local perceptions of puma livestock conflict surrounding Torres Del Paine NP, Chile. CATnews 2017, 65, 13–16. [Google Scholar]
- Zorondo-Rodríguez, F.; Moreira-Arce, D.; Boutin, S. Underlying social attitudes towards conservation of threatened carnivores in human-dominated landscapes. Oryx 2020, 54, 351–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Garrote, G. Depredación del jaguar (Panthera onca) sobre el ganado en Los Llanos Orientales de Colombia. Mastozool. Neotrop. 2012, 19, 139–145. [Google Scholar]
- Mora, J.M.; Polisar, J.; Portillo, H.; Castañeda, F. Estado de conservación del jaguar (Panthera onca) en Honduras. In El Jaguar en el Siglo XXI: La Perspectiva Continental; Medellín, R., de la Torre, J.A., Zarza, H., Chávez, C., Ceballos, G., Eds.; Fondo de Cultura Económica: Ciudad de México, México, 2014; pp. 136–166. [Google Scholar]
- Castañeda, F. Datos Preliminares Sobre la Distribución del Jaguar (Panthera onca), el Estado de sus Especies Presa, y el Conflicto Felinos-Ganadería en La Moskitia Hondureña; Wildlife Conservation Society: Tegucigalpa, Honduras, 2009; pp. 1–14. [Google Scholar]
- Zimmermann, A. Jaguars and People: A Range-Wide Analysis of Human-Wildlife Conflict. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Martínez, A.M.; Pacheco, S. Predación de Ganado Vacuno por Panthera onca (Jaguar) en la Zona de Amortiguamiento Sur de la RHBRP; Instituto Nacional de Conservación y Desarrollo Forestal (ICF): Olancho, Honduras, 2018; pp. 1–25. [Google Scholar]
- Holdridge, L.R. Ecología Basada en Zonas de Vida; Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación para la Agricultura (IICA): San José, Costa Rica, 1971. [Google Scholar]
- Navarro-Racines, C.; Monserrate, F.; Llanos-Herrera, L.; Obando, D.; Córdoba, J. Desarrollo de los Escenarios Climáticos de Honduras y Módulo Académico de Capacitación; Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT), Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo (PNUD), Dirección Nacional de Cambio Climático de MiAmbiente: Tegucigalpa, Honduras, 2018; pp. 1–140. [Google Scholar]
- Wilber, S.; Cruz, G.A.; Herlihy, P. Honduran Mosquitia: A Preinvestment Analysis for the Parks in Peril Program; The Nature Conservancy: Arlington, VA, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Sanderson, E.W.; Redford, K.H.; Chetkiewicz, C.B.; Rodrigo, A.; Rabinowitz, A.R.; Robinson, J.G.; Taber, A.B. The Jaguar as a Model. Conserv. Biol. 2002, 16, 58–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Herlihy, P.H.; Tappan, T.A. Recognizing Indigenous Miskitu Territory in Honduras. Geogr. Rev. 2019, 109, 67–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Newing, H.S.; Eagle, C.M.; Puri, R.K.; Watson, C.W. Conducting Research in Conservation: A Social Science Perspective; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Palmeira, F.B.L.; Crawshaw, P.G.; Haddad, C.M.; Ferraz, K.M.; Verdade, L.M. Cattle depredation by puma (Puma concolor) and jaguar (Panthera onca) in central-western Brazil. Biol. Conserv. 2008, 141, 118–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rabinowitz, A.R.; Nottingham, B.G. Ecology and behaviour of the Jaguar (Panthers onca) in Belize, Central America. J. Zool. 1986, 210, 149–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zar, J.H. Biostatistical Analysis; Prentice Hall: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Sillero-Zubiri, C.; Laurenson, M.K. Interactions between carnivores and local communities: Conflict or co-existence? In Carnivore Conservation Symposia; Gittleman, J., Funk, S., Macdonald, D.W., Wayne, R.K., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2001; pp. 282–312. [Google Scholar]
- Scognamillo, D.; Maxit, I.E.; Sunquist, M.; Polisar, J. Coexistence of jaguar (Panthera onca) and puma (Puma concolor) in a mosaic landscape in the Venezuelan llanos. J. Zool. 2003, 259, 269–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- García-Anleau, R.; Ponce-Santizo, G.; Rodas, A.; Cabrera, O.; McNab, R.; Polisar, J.; Lepe, M. Jaguares y productores agropecuarios en la Zona de Amortiguamiento de la Reserva de la Biosfera Maya, Guatemala: Herramientas para mejorar la coexistencia. In Conflictos Entre Felinos y Humanos en América Latina; Castaño-Uribe, C., Lasso, C.A., Hoogesteijn, R., Diaz-Pulido, A., Payán, E., Eds.; Fauna Silvestre Neotropical, Instituto de Investigación de Recursos Biológicos Alexander von Humboldt (IAvH): Bogotá, Colombia, 2016; pp. 139–149. [Google Scholar]
- Jędrzejewski, W.; Puerto, M.F.; Goldberg, J.F.; Hebblewhite, M.; Abarca, M.; Gamarra, G.; Calderón, L.E.; Romero, J.F.; Viloria, Á.L.; Carreño, R.; et al. Density and population structure of the jaguar (Panthera onca) in a protected area of Los Llanos, Venezuela, from 1 year of camera trap monitoring. Mammal Res. 2017, 62, 9–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Díaz-Santos, F.; Díaz-Santos, F.G.; Polisar, J. Impacto del Manejo Silvopastoril Implementado por el Proyecto Darwin en las Estrategias de Vida de las Comunidades Indígenas de la Moskitia de Honduras y Nicaragua, 2017–2020; Informe Técnico Final, Proyecto Darwin—2017/2019; Wildlife Conservation Society e Iniciativa Darwin, WCS Mesoamerica: Bronx, NY, USA, 2020; pp. 1–91. [Google Scholar]
- Díaz-Santos, F.G.; Díaz-Santos, F.; Polisar, J. Tendencia de la Distribución de la Fauna Silvestre a lo Largo del Gradiente de uso Humano en Comunidades Indígenas de la Moskitia de Honduras y Nicaragua, 2017–2020; Informe Técnico Final, Proyecto Darwin—2017/2019; Wildlife Conservation Society e Iniciativa Darwin, WCS Mesoamerica: Bronx, NY, USA, 2020; pp. 1–33. [Google Scholar]
- Herrera-Rosales, H.M.; Díaz-Santos, F.G.; Díaz-Santos, F.; Polisar, J. Efecto del Manejo Silvopastoril a Pequeña Escala en la Comunidad de Aves de la Moskitia de Honduras y Nicaragua.; Informe Técnico Final, Proyecto Darwin—2017/2019; Wildlife Conservation Society e Iniciativa Darwin, WCS Mesoamerica: Bronx, NY, USA, 2020; pp. 1–55. [Google Scholar]
- Zimmermann, A.; Walpole, M.J.; Leader-Williams, N. Cattle ranchers’ attitudes to conflicts with jaguar Panthera onca in the Pantanal of Brazil. Oryx 2005, 39, 406–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bulte, E.H.; Rondeau, D. Research and management viewpoint: Why compensating wildlife damages may be bad for conservation. J. Wildl. Manag. 2005, 69, 14–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marchini, S.; Macdonald, D.W. Can school children influence adults’ behavior toward jaguars? Evidence of intergenerational learning in education for conservation. Ambio 2020, 49, 912–925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Northern Jaguar Project (NJP). Viviendo Con Felinos. Available online: https://www.northernjaguarproject.org/outreach/viviendo-con-felinos/ (accessed on 5 January 2022).
Variable | Range | Value | Analysis |
---|---|---|---|
Forest cover (%) | 31–92 | Continuous | GLM |
Distance to forest cover (m) | 0–237 | Continuous | GLM |
Distance to the center of the community (m) | 532–20,094 | Continuous | GLM |
Property size (ha) | 4–1410 | Continuous | GLM |
Herd size | 6–153 | Continuous | GLM |
Herd size | 6–50 | Categorical | Fisher’s exact test |
51–100 | |||
>100 | |||
Age class | 23–34 | ||
35–49 | Categorical | Fisher’s exact test | |
50–64 | |||
>65 | |||
Schooling | No schooling | Categorical | Fisher’s exact test |
Primary studies | |||
Secondary studies | |||
Superior studies | |||
Time of day | 06:00–17:59 | Categorical | χ2 |
18:00–5:59 | |||
Season | Drought | Categorical | χ2 |
Rain | |||
Type of livestock | Cattle | Categorical | χ2 |
Horses | |||
Pigs | |||
Sheep |
Categories | N | Percentage of Respondents |
---|---|---|
Evidence of predation | ||
Partially consumed body | 9 | 13.24 |
Carnivore tracks | 8 | 11.77 |
Claw marks | 8 | 11.77 |
Drag marks | 8 | 11.77 |
Neck and throat bites | 8 | 11.77 |
Consumption of tongue and heart | 7 | 10.29 |
Carnivore prowling | 6 | 8.82 |
Hiding of prey | 6 | 8.82 |
Skull fractures | 4 | 5.88 |
Signs of struggle | 3 | 4.40 |
Stress sounds | 1 | 1.47 |
Total | 68 | 100.00 |
Predation sites | ||
Forest edges | 19 | 55.88 |
Grazing paddocks | 7 | 20.59 |
Riverbanks | 5 | 14.71 |
Forests | 2 | 5.88 |
Near human facilities | 1 | 2.94 |
Total | 34 | 100.00 |
Model Type | K1 | AICc 2 | ΔAICc 3 | w4 | Variables in Model |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Landscape + human influence | 3 | 55.97 | 0.00 | 0.29 | Euclidian distance to forest cover + Euclidian distance to the center of the community |
Landscape + human influence | 4 | 56.44 | 0.47 | 0.23 | Forest cover + Euclidian distance to forest cover + Euclidian distance to the center of the community |
Landscape + human influence | 3 | 57.21 | 1.24 | 0.16 | Forest cover + Euclidian distance to the center of the community |
Landscape + human influence + property profile | 4 | 58.35 | 2.37 | 0.09 | Euclidian distance to forest cover + Euclidian distance to the center of the community + herd size |
Global Model (all parameters) | 5 | 58.70 | 2.73 | 0.08 | Forest cover + Euclidian distance to forest cover + Euclidian distance to the center of the community + herd size |
Human influence + property profile | 3 | 58.73 | 2.75 | 0.07 | Euclidian distance to the center of the community + herd size |
Landscape + human influence + property profile | 4 | 59.64 | 3.66 | 0.05 | Forest cover + Euclidian distance to the center of the community + herd size |
Landscape | 3 | 62.01 | 6.03 | 0.01 | Forest cover + Euclidian distance to forest cover |
Landscape + property profile | 3 | 62.58 | 6.61 | 0.01 | Euclidian distance to forest cover + herd size |
Landscape + property profile | 4 | 64.43 | 8.46 | 0.00 | Forest cover + Euclidian distance to forest cover + herd size |
Landscape + property profile | 3 | 66.67 | 10.69 | 0.00 | Forest cover + herd size |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Chinchilla, S.; Berghe, E.v.d.; Polisar, J.; Arévalo, C.; Bonacic, C. Livestock–Carnivore Coexistence: Moving beyond Preventive Killing. Animals 2022, 12, 479. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12040479
Chinchilla S, Berghe Evd, Polisar J, Arévalo C, Bonacic C. Livestock–Carnivore Coexistence: Moving beyond Preventive Killing. Animals. 2022; 12(4):479. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12040479
Chicago/Turabian StyleChinchilla, Skarleth, Eric van den Berghe, John Polisar, Constanza Arévalo, and Cristian Bonacic. 2022. "Livestock–Carnivore Coexistence: Moving beyond Preventive Killing" Animals 12, no. 4: 479. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12040479
APA StyleChinchilla, S., Berghe, E. v. d., Polisar, J., Arévalo, C., & Bonacic, C. (2022). Livestock–Carnivore Coexistence: Moving beyond Preventive Killing. Animals, 12(4), 479. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12040479