Catherine M. Hill

Farmers' Perspectives of Conflict at the Wildlife-Agriculture Boundary: Some Lessons Learned from African Subsistence Farmers

This article outlines the importance of exploring farmers’ perspectives of human–wildlife conflicts because people’s perceptions and expectations shape their attitudes and responses to crop raiding by wildlife. A series of factors that influence farmers’ perceptions of risk are examined to help explain why perceived risk of crop loss to wildlife is often significantly greater than any actual risk. This is explored in the context of (1) changing tolerance for wildlife activity on farms, (2) the implications of past conservation policy and practice for farmers’ understanding of “ownership” of wildlife, and (3) how such issues influence farmers’ expectations of who is responsible for protecting crops from wildlife.

Patterns of crop raiding by primates around the Budongo Forest Reserve, Uganda

Abstract Crop raiding by primates in particular and wild animals in general is a significant source of people-forest conflict around the Budongo Forest Reserve, Uganda. Crop loss to wild animals undermines local support for conservation efforts in this area. Patterns of primate crop raiding were studied over a period of 14 months in six villages (five adjacent to the Budongo Forest Reserve and one that is approximately 3,500 m from the forest edge). Data were collected via a questionnaire survey. Additional information was obtained from the relevant local government offices. Chimpanzees Pan troglodytes, baboons Papio anubis, other monkeys, bush pigs Potamochoeus procus and porcupines Hystrix cristata were reported by farmers to be the major causes of crop losses by wildlife. Of farmers, 73% reported suffering crop damage caused by primates, and 79% considered baboons to be the most destructive of all crop raiding species. Drought, insect pests, poor sowing, plant diseases and accidental fires were other sources of crop losses to farmers, though the risk of crop damage particularly by primates is perceived as the most serious potential cause of losses. Using chimpanzees as a case study, patterns of crop damage across the year are compared with seasonal fluctuations in availability of wild foods.

Assessing the failure of a community-based human-wildlife conflict mitigation project in Budongo Forest Reserve, Uganda

Primate crop raiding is a major cause of human-wildlife conflict around the forests of western Uganda. In an attempt to ameliorate the situation a conflict mitigation strategy was established in villages around the Budongo Forest Reserve in 2001. Live-traps were constructed that allowed the identification of crop raiding animals; pest species could be disposed of and threatened species released unharmed. However, by 2004 none of the traps in the study area were functioning and interviews were conducted to assess the reasons for their decline and local peoples acceptance of the intervention. Forty-one percent of respondents did not believe the strategy was effective and the majority of local farmers did not accept responsibility for the traps. This was because of operational failures in four areas: (1) the identification of key stakeholders, (2) objective evaluation to assess the efficacy and benefit of the intervention, (3) participatory monitoring and evaluation, and (4) long-term funding commitment by conservation agencies. We examine the impact of these four elements upon the sustainability of the live-trap programme and stress the importance of recognizing and reporting failures to develop effective and acceptable mitigation strategies.

Apes in the Anthropocene: flexibility and survival

We are in a new epoch, the Anthropocene, and research into our closest living relatives, the great apes, must keep pace with the rate that our species is driving change. While a goal of many studies is to understand how great apes behave in natural contexts, the impact of human activities must increasingly be taken into account. This is both a challenge and an opportunity, which can importantly inform research in three diverse fields: cognition, human evolution, and conservation. No long-term great ape research site is wholly unaffected by human influence, but research at those that are especially affected by human activity is particularly important for ensuring that our great ape kin survive the Anthropocene.

Chimpanzee responses to researchers in a disturbed forest-farm mosaic at Bulindi, western Uganda.

We describe the behavior of a previously unstudied community of wild chimpanzees during opportunistic encounters with researchers in an unprotected forest–farm mosaic at Bulindi, Uganda. Data were collected during 115 encounters between May 2006 and January 2008. Individual responses were recorded during the first minute of visual contact. The most common responses were “ignore” for arboreal chimpanzees and “monitor” for terrestrial individuals. Chimpanzees rarely responded with “flight”. Adult males were seen disproportionately often relative to adult females, and accounted for 90% of individual responses recorded for terrestrial animals. Entire encounters were also categorized based on the predominant response of the chimpanzee party to researcher proximity. The most frequent encounter type was “ignore” (36%), followed by “monitor” (21%), “intimidation” (18%) and “stealthy retreat” (18%). “Intimidation” encounters occurred when chimpanzees were contacted in dense forest where visibility was low, provoking intense alarm and agitation. Adult males occasionally acted together to repel researchers through aggressive mobbing and pursuit. Chimpanzee behavior during encounters reflects the familiar yet frequently agonistic relationship between apes and local people at Bulindi. The chimpanzees are not hunted but experience high levels of harassment from villagers. Human‐directed aggression by chimpanzees may represent a strategy to accommodate regular disruptions to foraging effort arising from competitive encounters with people both in and outside forest. Average encounter duration and proportion of encounters categorized as “ignore” increased over time, whereas “intimidation” encounters decreased, indicating some habituation occurred during the study. Ecotourism aimed at promoting tolerance of wildlife through local revenue generation is one possible strategy for conserving great apes on public or private land. However, the data imply that habituating chimpanzees for viewing‐based ecotourism in heavily human‐dominated landscapes, such as Bulindi, is ill‐advised since a loss of fear of humans could lead to increased negative interactions with local people. Am. J. Primatol. Am. J. Primatol. 72:907–918, 2010.

Crop protection and conflict mitigation: reducing the costs of living alongside non-human primates

Conflict between farmers and primates increasingly impacts conservation efforts in Africa and Asia. Field crops provide a reliable and readily-accessible source of food for primates coping with habitat loss. However, crop-raiding undermines food security and tolerance of wildlife within neighbouring human communities. Many primates consume crops regularly yet there are few accounts of systematic evaluation of techniques to deter them. Working in partnership with farmers, this study was conducted over two growing seasons within four villages adjacent to the Budongo Forest Reserve, Uganda. Using systematic observational sampling, semi-structured interviews, and focus groups, we (i) monitored primate crop-raiding behaviour prior to and after installing locally-appropriate deterrents, developed with local farmers, and (ii) explored farmers’ initial responses to the methods trialled. Deterrent efficacy was assessed by comparing the frequency and characteristics of raiding events across seasons. Primates were the predominant diurnal crop-raiders; six species were observed raiding. Deterrents implemented included barriers, alarms, repellents, and systematic guarding. Incidence of raiding and crop loss decreased in almost all cases, often by shifting raiding to unprotected fields or adjacent farms. Farmers identified benefits and shortcomings for each deterrent, and considered most to be effective and valuable. Insights from the research directly inform intervention strategies to address crop-raiding issues and extend options to mitigate human–wildlife conflict.

Perspectives of “Conflict” at the Wildlife–Agriculture Boundary: 10 Years On

Previously I argued that prioritizing farmers’ concerns, priorities, and understandings of human–wildlife interactions was central to developing effective human–wildlife conflict (HWC) mitigation, presupposing that HWC is about the costs of coexisting with wildlife. Further experience and the wider literature suggest this is not always true. Identifying and addressing underlying and unresolved tensions among different stakeholder groups is increasingly recognized as key to managing HWCs. However, terms like “HWC” or “crop-raiding” obscure the nature of, and appropriate responses to, such “conflicts.” Additionally, we should recognize how culturally constructed, symbolic meanings of animals feed into discourse around “conflicts” and conservation. Competing constructions of animals reflect different agendas, perspectives, and values, which all contribute to “conflicts” around wildlife.

Crop Damage by Primates: Quantifying the Key Parameters of Crop-Raiding Events

Human-wildlife conflict often arises from crop-raiding, and insights regarding which aspects of raiding events determine crop loss are essential when developing and evaluating deterrents. However, because accounts of crop-raiding behaviour are frequently indirect, these parameters are rarely quantified or explicitly linked to crop damage. Using systematic observations of the behaviour of non-human primates on farms in western Uganda, this research identifies number of individuals raiding and duration of raid as the primary parameters determining crop loss. Secondary factors include distance travelled onto farm, age composition of the raiding group, and whether raids are in series. Regression models accounted for greater proportions of variation in crop loss when increasingly crop and species specific. Parameter values varied across primate species, probably reflecting differences in raiding tactics or perceptions of risk, and thereby providing indices of how comfortable primates are on-farm. Median raiding-group sizes were markedly smaller than the typical sizes of social groups. The research suggests that key parameters of raiding events can be used to measure the behavioural impacts of deterrents to raiding. Furthermore, farmers will benefit most from methods that discourage raiding by multiple individuals, reduce the size of raiding groups, or decrease the amount of time primates are on-farm. This study demonstrates the importance of directly relating crop loss to the parameters of raiding events, using systematic observations of the behaviour of multiple primate species.

Primate Crop Feeding Behavior, Crop Protection, and Conservation

Many species across a range of primate genera, irrespective of dietary and locomotory specializations, can and will incorporate agricultural crops in their diets. However, although there is little doubt that rapid, extensive conversion of natural habitats to agricultural areas is significantly impacting primate populations, primate crop foraging behaviors cannot be understood solely in terms of animals shifting to cultivated crops to compensate for reduced wild food availability. To understand fully why, how, and when primates might incorporate crops in their dietary repertoire, we need to examine primate crop foraging behavior in the context of their feeding strategies and nutritional ecology. Here I briefly outline current debates about the use of terms such as human–wildlife conflict and crop raiding and why they are misleading, summarize current knowledge about primate crop foraging behavior, and highlight some key areas for future research to support human–primate coexistence in an increasingly anthropogenic world.

Quantity Does Not Always Mean Quality: The Importance of Qualitative Social Science in Conservation Research

ABSTRACT Qualitative methods are important to gain a deep understanding of complex problems and poorly researched areas. They can be particularly useful to help explain underlying conservation problems. However, the significance in choosing and justifying appropriate methodological frameworks in conservation studies should be given more attention to ensure data are collected and analysed appropriately. We explain when, why, and how qualitative methods should be used and explain sampling strategies in qualitative studies. To improve familiarity with qualitative methods among natural scientists, we recommend expanding training in social sciences and increasing collaboration with social scientists. Given the scale of human impacts on the environment, this type of nuanced analytical skill is critical for progressing biodiversity conservation efforts.