首页> 外文期刊>Environmental Management >Living with Wildlife and Mitigating Conflicts Around Three Indian Protected Areas
【24h】

Living with Wildlife and Mitigating Conflicts Around Three Indian Protected Areas

机译:与野生动物一起生活并缓解三个印度保护区附近的冲突

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Crop and livestock losses to wildlife are a concern for people neighboring many protected areas (PAs) and can generate opposition to conservation. Examining patterns of conflict and associated tolerance is important to devise policies to reduce conflict impacts on people and wildlife. We surveyed 398 households from 178 villages within 10 km of Ranthambore, Kanha, and Nagarahole parks in India. We compared different attitudes toward wildlife, and presented hypothetical response scenarios, including killing the problem animal(s). Eighty percent of households reported crop losses to wildlife and 13 % livestock losses. Higher crop loss was associated with more cropping months per year, greater crop variety, and more harvest seasons per year but did not vary with proximity to the PA, suggesting that PAs are not necessarily "sources" for crop raiders. By contrast, complaints of "depredating carnivores" were associated with people-grazing animals and collecting resources from PAs. Many households (83 %) engaged in mitigation efforts. We found that only fencing and guard animals reduce crop losses, and no efforts to lower livestock losses. Contrary to our expectations, carnivores were not viewed with more hostility than crop-raiding wildlife. Households reported greater inclination to kill herbivores destroying crops or carnivores harming people, but not carnivores preying on livestock. Our model estimated crop loss was 82 % across surveyed households (highest in Kanha), while the livestock loss experienced was 27 % (highest in Ranthambore). Our comparative study provides insights into factors associated with conflict loss and tolerance, and aids in improving ongoing conservation and compensation efforts.
机译:野生动植物造成的农作物和牲畜损失是许多保护区(PA)附近人民的关注,并可能引起对保护的反对。检查冲突的方式和相关的容忍度对于制定减少冲突对人和野生生物的影响的政策很重要。我们对印度Ranthambore,Kanha和Nagarahole公园10公里范围内178个村庄的398个家庭进行了调查。我们比较了对野生动植物的不同态度,并提出了假设的应对方案,包括杀死有问题的动物。 80%的家庭报告说农作物因野生生物而遭受损失,13%的牲畜遭受损失。更高的作物损失与每年更多的作物月份,更大的作物品种和每年更多的收获季节有关,但并没有随PA而变化,这表明PAs不一定是农作物入侵者的“来源”。相比之下,“掠夺食肉动物”的投诉与放牧动物和从保护区收集资源有关。许多家庭(83%)参与了缓解工作。我们发现,只有围栏和护卫动物才能减少农作物损失,而没有努力降低牲畜损失。与我们的预期相反,食肉动物没有比种植野生动植物更具敌意。据报道,家庭倾向于杀死食草动物破坏农作物或食肉动物危害人类,而不是食肉动物食肉动物。我们的模型估计,被调查家庭的农作物损失为82%(在Kanha中最高),而经历的牲畜损失为27%(在Ranthambore中最高)。我们的比较研究提供了与冲突损失和宽容相关的因素的见解,并有助于改善正在进行的保护和赔偿工作。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Environmental Management》 |2013年第6期|1320-1332|共13页
  • 作者单位

    Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027, USA,Centre for Wildlife Studies, 224, Garden Apartments, Vittal Malya Road, Bengaluru 560001, India,Wildlife Conservation Society, New York, NY 10460, USA;

    Department of Geography, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53706, USA;

    Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027, USA;

    Centre for Wildlife Studies, 224, Garden Apartments, Vittal Malya Road, Bengaluru 560001, India,Wildlife Conservation Research Unit (WildCRU), The Recanati-Kaplan Centre, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Tubney House, Abingdon Road, Tubney, Abingdon OX13 5QL, UK;

  • 收录信息 美国《科学引文索引》(SCI);美国《工程索引》(EI);美国《化学文摘》(CA);
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

    Crop raiding; India; Livestock predation; Mitigation; Park; People; Tolerance; Wildlife;

    机译:作物突袭;印度;牲畜捕食;减轻;公园;人;公差;野生动物;
  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 13:27:50

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号